The Mandir Mirage re. Asif Naqshbandi #77

``Despite all its myriad economic and social problems, at least, at least, Muslims are not persecuted there just because of their religion.``

Sure. So what if more of us are persecuted in worse ways by our fellow-Muslims for other reasons-- at least our RELIGION -- our most important identifier-- is not under attack.

Oh, and don`t bring up the persecution of Pakistani relgious minorities, please-- we`re only happy *we`re * not victims of religious persecution like our hapless Indian brothers-in-faith.

Grow uP!!!

The Mandir Mirage jay (re. 43)

Excellent point!

I would say `binary religious practicing` instead of `binary religion` though.

The Mandir Mirage re. tahmed #27

``I can make no more sense out of [Solitude`s] meandering lecture than I can of Ms. Versey`s article that he has a problem with. You guys are entitled to your points of view, but not entitled to write while half asleep.``

Maybe you`d see the clarity of Solitude`s idea`s if you weren`t reading them half awake. :-)

The Mandir Mirage Solitude:

Good analysis. Great Insight! The problem with people like Versey is that they just love their victim complexes too much to want to contribute realistically to solutions. But what more can be expected from an `educated` imbecile who heaps all actions born of vision and fervour together (on the other board)!

Your `rhetoric` rang true on many points. It is most disappointing to see how easily otherwise sane folks start suffering from tunnel vision when the rhetoric of Islam-under-attack is used.

The Soft Option re. Sadna (#430)

Sadna,

My slight difference of opinion with you on the matter of Kashmir notwithstanding, I found your `rejoinder` both brilliant and compassionate.

One gets the feeling too many of these folks must be missing something in their lives, for them to take such vicarious pleasure in glibly supporting terrorism (as long as it`s not in *their * backyard, of course)

Ghazali On Women In Islam Urstruly (#275 and earlier)

You seem to be saying that the different and sometimes contradictory edicts in the Book are meant for different times and peoples. However, it is not clear how one is to decide which to go by when faced with such dichotomy. Shoud neeyat be enough of a guide to help choose the `right` path in a given time and place? I doubt the neighbourhood moulvi who calls for due punishment of the Ahmedi who dares to give the azaan, or admonishes his congregation to read 4:34 to nip their marital problems in the bud is necessarily acting with bad neeyat.

If common sense is to be used to `recognize` the right edict to follow, then one has to question the need of the edicts in the first place. Would not common sense suffice? Most devout Muslims are attracted to the timelessness and absolute nature of the Quran. Few want to have to use their common sense to make moral decisions. If they are pushed to they will, but with the `readymade` divine word of God at hand, few would take the trouble.

Have you considered that it might be your education and exposure to different value systems that has led you to such ingenious ways of approaching the Quran, whereby you are able to extract the best of it and reject the unpleasant?

I do not doubt that you have the Aha! experience when reading the Quran or its intro and I doubt even less that it addresses some very profound, non-rational side of your Self. But the danger in such experiences is that, in its subjectivity, it often ignores the real danger of differnt interpretations and different effects on others. Prem`s (#275) second-to-last paragraph nicely brings out this point.

(Incidentally, the `Aha` experience, coined by Jung I think, is one in which one recognizes in what one is reading one`s own nebuluos thoughts and feelings-- could your experience, then, not be so much of a process of `recognition`-- valid and exhilirating as it is?)

If hamidm and Shiraz err on the side of selectivity, your failing seems to be the lack of recognition of potential harm that can be caused by having a divine Word that contains ANY undesirable edicts.

What would you say about the `devout` capitalist (or Marxist) who lives a righteous life and attributes it (and his contentment) to the selective following of free-market/communisitc principles (insisting, of course, that common and neeyat must be applied when following the principles)?



On pardigm shifts: Paradigm Shifts may enable one to see things in a whole new way, often enough leading to a feeling of living on a different plane altogether, but I doubt that it will ever justify a `wrong` or reconcile irreconcilables.

That is why, even though all this laborious analyses and intellectualism will scarcely give us the deeper meanings of life, we still NEED it keep from safe from the danger of over-subjectifying.

Ghazali On Women In Islam slink,

you say: ``you can teach a man to repeat that parrotlike after you, but that achieves nothing other than emphasizing the supremacy of man over the supremacy of God, because when people put pressure on you to be `on the right path` they`re doing it because they are concerned with your place in THEIR world.``

Now that`s a very penertrating insight. Never quite saw it that way. Who was it that said that God is exalted when man is Man exercises any/all faculties to the utmost? (Or am I ust making this up?:) )

As for denuding oneself before one can find garments to call one`s own, well, I used to think that way too, but then, must we re-invent the wheel? (maybe in matters of faith we DO need to -- I dunno) Or is there a distinction between knwoing whats out there and believing it?

And how much truth is there to the belief that we cannot `know` unless we believe -- with all the attendent risks of such leaps of faith?

I guess in the end the tree will be judged by the fruit it bears. And THAT`S another can of worms right there.

Ghazali On Women In Islam urstruly (#242)

``Should contradictory conclusions then breed contempt or mutual respect?``

Depends, obviously. Nothing wrong with feeling contempt for beliefs that one feels are degrading. Contempt for the those who hold those beliefs is another matter, though sometimes unavoidable.

``Mutual Respect!!!? C`mon, I thought you were my bigot-in-arms. How disappointing that you should start mouthing these late-twentieth century PC virtues! Next thing I know you`ll be saying all relgions lead to God! Or that men and women are equal. :-)

Sheesh!!

Ghazali On Women In Islam Urstruly (#244)

I must admit you make very good sense on the Neeyat bit there. Thought-provoking. On thinking through it a little, though I find that the question is not always simply a matter of good or bad neeyat (tho there`s no question the latter exists). Could it be that some folks are put off by inconsistencies more than others when it comes to divinely revealed scripture? In other words, could the author of #204 have been more `balanced` were he not asked to force some sort of reconciliation between `good` and `bad` edicts.

I know this demand ticks ME off.

But thanks for prompting me to check my own neeyat here. It was found wanting.

Ghazali On Women In Islam Re. Urstruly (#235)

(If I may butt in here..) Is it conceivable that someone else may deduce diferently from the same ``lesson`` as did you EVEN WITH A `SAAF NEEYAT`?

Or must we simply assume that the `neeyat` was bad when what is learnt (by others) does not fit in with our view of the world?

Moreover, what is to be said of two people, both with saaf neeyats reaching contradictory conclusions from different lessons taught? (As an opponent of value-relativism, I`m sure you`ll have no problem coming up with examples)?

Finally, to what extent is neeyat conditioned?

Lookng forward to your thoughts...

Ghazali On Women In Islam Fuz-zy babe-eh, (#234)

Thanks for saving me the trouble of having to transcribe my thoughts into sentences. Nicely argued!

Simi`s assertion that ``[discussion] promotes confusion and allows people with no knowledge or background to influence Muslims who have little knowledge themselves.`` is weak on two counts:

1) It assumes most of the folks here being influenced have little knowledge (Then again, that`s what Azhar seems to claim too)

2) It is hard to imagine how those with little knowledge but presumably good heads can be influenced by those with ``no knowledge``.

Hiding behind claims of `complexity` or the need for `deeper understanding` is just an attempt to deter questioning of suspect issues. At least some matters, if not all, are pretty straightforward --at least until they are contorted out of shape by scholars trying to sanitize them.

Ghazali On Women In Islam Urstruly (#224)

Now that you`ve given me the pleasure of attaining Mystery status, you really think I`m going to divulge? I really am surprised you haven`t been able to guess tho. I`ve made little attempt to change my style of expression. But this is cool-- I`m still really being myself but the reaction from many are somewhat (hint, hint) warmer.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hamidm,

I`d like to join Fuzair in commending you on your truthful and hard hitting prose. I do long for the day when religion and belief will be free from the mental and emotional shackles of fear.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

kutti or dosti now, urstruly? :-)

Urs

Ghazali On Women In Islam Urstruly (#212),

Thanks for the link. I remember reading that particular posting, but not #192 (from sac) and your #196, both of which I agree with.

I should tell you that we have indeed `met` here before, myself under a different handle. I generally concur with your views but of late I`ve had the feeling you`ve been going too far down the dogmatic line. (maybe this is just a reaction to the wishy-washiness of the abosulte relativists :) )

sac`s #193 on that board pretty much sums up my thoughts and feeling on the matter. There`s a book I think you might be interested to read (probably already have) on the subject of relativist moralism (-ity?) The Closing of the American Mind. There`s a lot there on your hero Nietzche :)

(And Zehra, if you`re out there reading this, please don`t spill the beans:))

Ghazali On Women In Islam re. FOUR WIVES (--AND TWO DAUGHTERS!)

I do not comprehend the moral dilema in having ``relations`` with your daughters. To put it in another way, ``what`s the big deal``?

If Baap Beyti Raazi to Kia karay gaa Qazi, or US Law, or Judge Judy or a liberal ape jumping from tree to tree.

(And don`t give us that liberal-monkey crap about power-imbalance and all that jazz -- just look at our glorious history. If it was good for the goose, it must be good for the goslings :) )

``I also do not think that the US Law of one Spouse at a time is established and driven by any morality-the denominator in this case is the Tax Deduction.``

Oh really?? I suppose the age-of-consent laws, the strictist amongst most Western nations, also has nothing to do with its Puritannical Religious history.

Still think Ur truly gonna enjoy conversations with me?? :-)

Ghazali On Women In Islam tahmed321 (#203)

``You have obviously scraped the bottom of the barrel to come up with these examples. These are exceptions.``

I think the use of extremes to illustrate a point is quite okay. Since we were discussing the issue of respecting all religions, why leave out these ones that some people subscribe to as devoutly as others? Is validity attached to numbers?

``People think about Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism when discussing the world`s great religions, not the KKK or Hubbard`s Church.``

We were not discussing the world`s great religions only. Anyway, the use of the word `great` -- based on sheer strength of following is silly. In different ages and in different times, different religions have enjoyed ``greatness``.

``Since exceptions prove the rule, you have proved my point and I thank you for it and trust that you will be a man and admit it.``

Errr.. what was your point again?? Hey, if it makes you feel good, Okay, I`ll be `man` enough and admit whatever you accuse me of.

btw, the point I was making in #193 was that it is indeed risky to be openly honest when discussing religion. Or SOME religions anyway :)

Ta

Ghazali On Women In Islam Tahmed321 (#192)

``...However, it doesnt take much to be honest when you are writing anonymously. So, I conclude that you are easily impressed``

I am glad you agree that with all those self-righteous, insecure, trigger happy folks around, it`s not easy to even BE HONEST and show oneself.

Love,

you-know-who