Dissing Ideologies Tahmed

Re yor post to me about freedom having to wait will we have no poverty or ignorance -

I know you do not drink, it`s hard to imagine you on the bong - so, exactly what was that post about? Are you arguing that freedom must wait till we are not as poor or as ignorant?

What insult have I heapd on Pakistani families? It seems you have set yourself as arbiter of what they may or may not deem insult - but I suppose I have as much right as you to set myself up as such an arbiter - and my judgement is that freedom is not dependent on how poor or how ignorant someone else judges the aspirant to freedom, to be.

Dissing Ideologies

Dost Mittar

``At best, Hurriyet is a communal organisation...``

This is a rather unfair characterization, more applicable to BJP, for instance. Yet, if Dogras, Sihks and Buddhists representatives can also be included in the dialogue, do you not think this will allow us to change the paradigm significantly?

After all what are the alternatives? With infiltration stopped, the freedom struggle may continue on it`s own, or it may transform itself into a kind of organization ETA did - and clearly whatever the claim the Indian may make after the october elections, the fact that Hurriyet leaders have been imprisoned and that it has judged this process as flawed, will not grant legitimacy to the october elections - it may be that Indian will decide they will ride out any flak - and it may - but this calculus suggests that it uses as a primary proposition, that in the future, the situation and political and strategic imperatives, will be the same as the past and present - this, to me, does not seem a reliable proposition.

Is there any other way that you have in mind that involves the parties to the dispute in an institutionalized process to arrive at final status?

Breaking News: Suicide Bomb in Karachi Hindu fanatics on these boards are busy blaming captive Kashmiris - incredible.

Pakistanis, what`s clear is that we do not know who did this - we have guesses, all incendiary - let`s please be sober, keep our powder dry.

Dissing Ideologies Tahmed

Poverty and Ignorance existed in 1947 as well, should we have not been free?

Indians were poor and ignorant in 1947 - more so than they are now - did they deserve to be free?

Is it OK to oppress, torture, rape and kill poor and ignorant people?

Clearly a rethink is in order. All agree that we have poverty and ignorance - but the continued captivity of Kashmir is the most serious problem between Pakistan and India - how so? because it is a denial of moral legitimacy of both Pakistan and India. To attempt to sweep this under the rug is the equivalent of piling on more dirt and dust, just that it is out of our view (this competes with poverty and ignorance? it is ignorance) - Better to acknowledge a mutual problem and seek a redress that has acceptance among Pakistanis, indians and the captive kashmiri - this way we actually deal with our problems, I`m not suggesting it will be solved over night - but at least we will, all three parties be commited, involved in a process, seeking to resolve it peacefully - if not - then, in one year 10 years, 20 years, we`ll be back to the same violence.

Dissing Ideologies

Dost Mittar

``If I can understand`` - why would you do that to me? - I gave you the benefit of the doubt and hope you will not take that lightly; I will not accept ``If I can understand`` - you are an educated person and I expect your best effort.

Some of the ideas I have expressed in response to your question are also dealt with (although in a entirely Indian context) in a article in ``Hindustan Times``, dated June 14, 2002:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/140602/detide01.asp

An aside on another topic (your post to Shammi about making a deal in Kashmir) - Dost, this not the time to make a over all deal with Pakistan on captive Kashmir - any deal on captive Kashmir must include the captive Kashmiri - for the deal to hold, to be seen as legitimate. What do you think of initiation of an Institutional process of dialogue involving the Pakistan, India and Hurriyet? Of course the entire Hurriyet, that means the release of those leaders held under whatever law or charge. Then proceeding with small agreements to provide for the evacuation of occupation forces and the end to ``armed`` struggle, leading to a ``final status`` for the disputed territory - what`s your thinking about this? especially the institutionalizing the process of dialogue, such an institution can have Almaty group as a observer group

Hamzad Afaqui

Thank you, I have tried to relate the distictions and ideas in the internal discourse of the thinkers whose work I have a small measure of familiarity with. Following these ideas, in my opinion, allows for a more serious appreciation and continues the debates.

Dissing Ideologies Fawad79

You guys are humanist?

Speaking for myself, that`s rather unfair and in my case, certainly not true? All religions are in reality about the welfare, well being of the human but I think I should not accept the label humanist - I`m a very ordinary, mostly lazy, Muslim, trying to figure out what it means, ought to mean (to me).

Why ``membership`` in any religion? I can`t say for someone else, but just as an opinion,Only if you feel the call, the need, or find the intellectual framework interesting - in my case I was interested in religious thought from when I was a teenager, too much of Herman Hesse and Sufi anthologies and also I simply enjoy exploring the structure and the satisfaction of the need. Actually I am entirely too lazy, too anything/everything to be a ``good`` adherent - I just know that something in me responds to it, sometimes (I`m drying the tears as I write)

Refugees of A Refugee Camp

Fawad

Affirmative action????? You acknowledge that they are not really good enough? They really can`t make it on their own?? They are not the problem, it`s the rest of us, who are so comfortable with our prejudices - actually for the most part they are not even prejudices - they more in line with plain ignorance.

No Sir! Just an opinion, but based on some study, what we in Pakistan can do with more of, is interaction - positive interaction - inter-faith groups, social service groups, literary groups and publicity, and most especially a universal national service, to begin, for all, at the age of 18 or 19. After basic and specialized training, these national service trainees would be sent to every corner, every mountain, range, village, jungle, desert - as teachers, as park rangers, as assitants in a rural constabulary, as para-medics. What ends up happening is that first the youthful citizens get to be sober, change from boys and girls to men and women, they actually get to know the lay of their country and countrymen and within the overall discipline and structure of national service, youthful citizens form every nook and corner get to know and have to cooperate with each other. We produce a surplus of workers and national service delays their entry into the job market and training offered in National service creates a skilled worker and an educable and serious student. I have seen this work and I must tell you that as an engine of social interaction in a directed national cause, it creates social mobility. A huge shared national experience, for the national service persons and their parents and family; making better citizens, enhancing national unity, providing a force multiplier, so to speak, to the nation as a whole.

Dissing Ideologies Dost Mittar

I took a great deal of care, I really worked at that post, to point out to you that your question suggests a point of view that cannot be supported, because the ideas you seek to understand exist in a context you have not studied – and that you can learn for yourself the answers you seek. I pointed out to you the ideas of interpretation (point of view) of the need for a guide to provide you context. Why have you chosen to disregard it – I don’t really understand. I encourage you to take this seriously, as I put a lot of effort into this and I should not like to think that you wish to waste my time.

I will offer some clarifications, these are my understanding:

Kufr, Blasphemy, Dar ul Harb, Jihad, to me, are entirely legitimate concepts, As for the so many Hindu to x number of Muslims or women – I am not aware of this as Islam, actually I am plain not aware of anything like that.

I think Fiqh and Shariah are most noble innovations and are integral to the experience of the Deen, Islam, what I find difficult to appreciate is how Fiqh and Shariah are being conceived, as if they were the core of Islam and not it’s periphery. Where my understanding or where the ideas, the conceptions, I find compelling, allow me to identify obscuritanism are, whereas ordinary Muslim faithful, in relation to law delegate their right of legislation to God, in the sense that the laws of a religious society are understood as heavenly, Obscurtanists seek to have Muslim faithful renounce, to abdicate, their right to comprehend divine laws and to harmonize then with prudence and justice. Notice the delegation of the right to legislate but not the abdication to the right to comprehend it (keep this in mind as you reread the first part of my response about your list). Reason in religion, many reactionaries on Chowk assert is an oxymoron – but it is not, it is essential to understanding it. This is not an opinion, it is just a fact; how does one understand the notion of justice or ethics or morality, if not by reason? The Obscuritanist being the reactionaries that they are, reject Reason as they reject liberty: Verse such and such, say such and such. For them context only makes sense so long as it absolves the individual of making choices – indeed choices are of the nature of obligations and duties. Consider the distinction drawn above, the right to comprehend the word of God, after all, are not prudence and justice, expression of reason? Isn’t the attempt to harmonize, itself an expression of reason? Do we not read the word of God, does the conception of the alphabet, it’s teaching and learning have anything to do with reason?

Here the Obscuritanist wants only an automaton – for their conception of Islam is not about “Faith”, it is about Certitude – Islam is a dead religion – all that can be experienced has been experienced, only forms change – all that is knowable is known – Islam therefore is a set of rules and conditions, requiring no experience other than reliving of the past experience. And most certainly Islam is not about thinking for yourself, of your relationship with the Creator.

Ordinary Muslims are called to live in the real world, they are called to make ethical and moral choices – to my understanding, negotiating realty is itself an exercise of reason, To my understanding, ethical and moral choices cannot exist in the absence of Liberty.

I hope you I am conveying to you what I think are the consequences of each of these conceptions both for religiosity and civil society.

Shammi has a post in which he brings up Method in Islam – Method is basic – understanding method is understand the foundation of any particular intellectual endeavour. As you may know, in Islam, induction, is method – that which identifies and differentiates and creates knowledge. You have also mentioned Post modern – so what does it have to do with method?

We are aware of the problem of induction – a new conception of method is gaining ground today, even in Islam, one which allows both for the deconstruction and reconstruction of reality – one that is more humble and perhaps more effective in helping us negotiate reality; one based on the provisional nature of knowledge, of indeterminacy, one which shares in art and science, the bold, imaginative, somewhat mysterious quality of creation. But not entirely. Some think that this means that there are no a priori propositions can be valid under such a scheme, but this is false; values will always exist, even as we do not recognize them as we once did – values are an expression of the human condition. The post modern is built on the conception of method based on the provisional nature of knowledge – the nature of your questions of me, suggest that you have not internalized the response I gave you. “…variety and change” – what might this suggest to the way you understand the questions you have posed? You see the items you noted as how Islam relates with the non-Muslim – may I suggest you also consider how the items you mentioned also relate to the Muslim, to whom these are meaningful? Meaningful?

Now, back to your list – consider again the distinction we made earlier – of our right to comprehend divine law. In quoting Allahmah Iqbal: “The ultimate spiritual basis of all life as conceived by Islam is eternal and reveals itself in variety and change.”

Political Islam? I think it is too early to say – and I think you are not as conscious of your point of view – let me explain, in my opinion, in the Islamic societies or societies where Muslims are a majority, it is my conviction, that the home of ideas,of values, such as liberty, tolerance, pluralism, of a religiosity based on faith – is within Islamic thought – Economic, social and political change is more and more being deposited in the framework of the understanding of Islam. It is for these reasons, I think it is entirely to early to judge political Islam as being irredeemably Obscuritanist or totalitarian or indeed majoritarian – but I would agree that for political Islam to be both constructive and potent on a national scale, a social transformation, a change in the understanding of Islam, a change in values, would have to precede.

Dissing Ideologies Fawad79

``...except the fact that does economics take precedence of religion so if people were well off one day would islam as we know it cease in pakistan?``

Yes and no. Were the peoples of Pakistan economically better off (and if that also means educated) Islam in Pakistan would certainly change, if they continued to be interested in the call of faith.

It`s not about how much money you have or don`t have - it has nothing to do with money - ``Faith`` is call to love, a mysterious relationship of commitment, an act of conscience. It`s not everybody`s cup of tea and different persons arrive to answer this call, in their own way, in their own time. If Pakistanis were economically better off and ``faithful`` - that is, they were conscious of their obligations to others and to their society - needless to say, Islam would not be the same.

If on the other hand, Pakistanis were economicall better off and not interested in ``faith` or in the study of Islam, from a variety of persepectives, were not aware of their responsibility to others - then the same religiosity of emulation would continue.

By the way, notice, who on these boards is most threatened by Islam, as we discuss it. Both the Left and The Right. These two feed off each other and the center. ``Dont`t trust them, whatever they are pushing it`s not Islam...Trust me``. Then of course there are the Hindu Indians, who having cried themselves hoarse accusing Muslims of not be respectful of hinduism, ask accusatory ``questions`` - whose answers they may avail by reading Quran. Paradigm wars, Amigo - nothing to lose sleep over - some persons will want to examine the pointof view persons such as myself put across, others will not find merit in it, still others are threatened by it - either way, the understanding of Islam is increasingly being conditioned by that Hero, that fountain head of Reason and Faith, Allahmah, Mohammad Iqbal Lahori:``The ultimate spiritual basis of all life, as concieved by Islam is Eternal and reveals itself in varietry and change.`` (think about it, the Eternal, the unity, revealing itself in vareity and CHANGE. Is this not most sweet and beautiful? ``A society based on such a conception of REALITY (The Eternal revealed in variety and Change) MUST reconcile, in it`s life, the categories of permanance and Change``. This is clear direction against obscuritanism - is it not? indeed, it is! That is, we must identify that which is susceptible to change and that which is not - whereas the obscuritanist dare not even consider that there exists in life, within an Islamic conception, categories of change. Rejoice, these are glorious times to which we are witness.

Dissing Ideologies Shammi

Strait answer? you mean an answer acceptable to you? What planet are you on? You want answers with a content you decide? Really? Perhaps you are not used to conversing with persons who do not share your point of view?

``Does the Quran require this? Or is it your opinion that you are thrusting down somebody`s throat? Do you realize that you are prescribing a method that runs counter to the sprit of Islam - that there be no clergy, absolutely nobody between the faithful and God? Anyway, try answering Dost-Mittar`s questions first, directly, before engaging (ducking) me.``

No Quran does not itself require a guide to help one study it - so why a guide? If one is coming from with a Islamic context, that is, is aware of the context within which Quran came, a guide would be less necessary - however; if one is not familiar with the context - it is very difficult to make sense of some verses. For instance, if you were a gardner and wished to study a manual to repair computer - it may help you to put the material of the computer repair manual in context, it may even help you if the guide had expertise or understanding of computers.

Is this the equivalent of imposing a point of view? Any, with or without a guide, attempt to study any text, is to bring a point of view to the text. All training is point of view. But already knew this. Right? Wrong?

No one between God and man - no intercessor, certainly. What knowledge do you have of Method and Islam? Consider, how does anyone learn to read or write? One is taught, by a teacher. In the case of a person who has little to no knowledge of Islam - how does such a person learn? He or she can read the material for themselves or they may seek the assitance of a teacher - I don`t know what you do for a living, but presumably, you learned whatever it is you do, someone taught you, whether at school or at work or at both - right? wrong? Same with learning to study Quran.

Dissing Ideologies Hamidm

I resent being called moderate Muslim.

As for letting Sattar2 and anyone else to run around and claim they are Muslims - they can claim whatever they want to claim - it may be the truth for them. And may be truth for me, may not be the same for Sattar and who ever else. Here is where the idea of ``indexicality`` comes into play -the Truth is indexed to a particular confession, to a particular time in history. So please be clear on this issue - there is no competition of ``the truth`` - the multiplicity of ``the truth`` is a given and is understood as ``...The Eternal reveals itself in variety and change...`` Allahmah, Benevolent scholar, Mohammad Iqbal lahori - ``The Reconstruction of Religious Thought``

Please stop playing the hysteric, we may not agree and happily it is not your agreement I seek - I want the conversation to be of a civil, academic, a expository nature, something from which we can actually learn something - No, it does not mean spare criticism, I would like to think I am open to rational criticism. If you shall exhibit insecurity in the face of ideas, you will deny persons such as myself the opportunity to learn something from you. If you are critical of the ideas presented, all I request is that the criticism be on the basis of reason.

Dissing Ideologies

Chowkies - Don`t give up on that shelter just yet.

Mr. Musharraf`s trip to UAE and Saudi: Friend or Foe - that was Mr. Musharraf position to both. Both are unreliable allies, both lack backbone - but do understand which side their bread is buttered.

Just saw press confrence of Mr. Sattar of Pakistan and Rumsfeld -

Mr Sattar: ``Pakistan expects more of America``

Rumsfeld : ``Things have a way of working themselves out on the ground``

My read: If Pakistan does not accept the terms Rumsfeld brings with him - Americans will not restrain the Indians. Will let the Indians work out the ground realities.

Again, back to square one - Pakistanis you want peace with India, prepare for war! If the moral legitimacy of each is unacceptable to the other - and it is - only a massive investment in security (military, human resouce/capital development, economic) and the strict discipline, will allow Pakistan to survive this onslaught.

Messrs Musharraf and Sattar have made it clear, ``this far and no further`` - The American to has made it clear - it is not without leverage both outside Pakistan and inside Pakistan. (Easy BB, Mr. Musharraf is not dead yet - and neither you nor other ``leaders`` are immortal)

Refugees of A Refugee Camp

Fawad

take a second look at this business of positions for people because of their confession or lack of it: Look at what is happening in India, with regard to picking a candidate for President. Both the Hindu nationalist right and the left have picked a Muslim as a candidate. Did they pick the most qualified, most effective - I have several times made the claim that Indians are `johnny come lately`` - they don`t quite get it - the kind who arrive fashionably early at a party. To show case the ``secular`` Indian state, they insist a token ``Muslim`` as President.

You are quite mistaken about what such a message sends to the world - the message is cynical manipulation, it is one of tokenism, of insincerity. The deeper reflection is that they still don`t get it: the ``secular`` state`s representative qualification is his confession. We in Pakistan have enough problems and do without these.

Dissing Ideologies Hamidm

``so whatever it is that tahmed and hobbyty are trying to push, it is not islam - trust me!......``

Fair enough - but what is it that you are trying to push - and why trust you?

Dissing Ideologies Dost Mittar

`` I am particularly interested in those aspects where Islam interacts with the non-islamic world. For example, would you call the following obscurantism?

-the concept of blasphemy

-the concept of kufr

-the concept of dar-ul-harb

-the concept of violent jihad

-the double standard in interreligious marriages

-the concept of 1 muslim man = 2 muslim women = 4 christian/jew men = 8 christian/jew women = 16 hindu/pagan men = 32 hindu/pagan women``

The first step towards understanding is the declaration of ignorance, certainly this question reveals a searching heart as well. As you are interested in gaining a clearer understanding of Islam - may I suggest that you read the Quran, but only with the help of either a guide or sources that will help you put the verses in context. Of course you are an educated person, that is to say you may be educable, and therefore you are conscious of the need for the guide or sources to help you frame the verses. Why do you or anybody else need help with the verses? Because as you know, each person who reads and interprets the texts, brings to the texts, a point of view - and it`s important to be conscious of this point of view and to be conscious that the text has it`s own organization and context. For instance a person with lets say a BA in a particular subject will bring to the text that level of understanding, another person with a Ph.D. in an entirely different field, may bring a very different ``light`` to shed on the subject.

Tahmed has a most excellent post on this subject of Obscuritanism and I encourage you to read it. To my way of thinking, Obscuritanism is defined primary by a dependence on the knowledge, of a point of view, of the distant past. To my understanding, three (3) main features stand out: it`s aversion to legitimacy in the light of present day knowledge, from within Quranic text; this feature also exhibits itself in the propensity to attach the ``label,`` of ``Islamic`` to cultural norms prevalent in a particular time and geography.

The second most striking feature of Obscuritanism, directly related to the first, is the crutch of Fiqh and Shariah, these are of course important institutional innovations, but Obscuritanist use these quite differently - in particular, they use these institutions as it was understood, in a particular time, within a particular ``frame`` of knowledge. The third pillar of Obscuritanism is the emphasis on ``certitude`` and not on ``faith.`` Examine Quran for yourself and challenge this assertion; indeed, what is ``Deen`` without ``Eman``? Also, as you will study, note the descriptions, the definitions of the nature of ``faith`` - you will notice ``faith`` and ``love`` share characteristics such that we may not distinguish between them. The emphasis on ``certitude`` has a definite implication of the religiosity that is promoted - that is to say, a religiosity of emulation. Whereas ``faith`` is the embodiment of love and affection between the Creator and His creation, certitude calls for the surrender of reason, any bonds that exist between the Creator and his creature are defined by obligation and the fear of Hellfire. Again, I encourage you to consider the kind of religiosity this engenders. I encourage you study Quran and Islam most seriously - you must answer these questions for yourself and for the rest of us, as well.

Tahmed

hobbyty #76 I think shankar asked a good question, and it would in fact behoove us as Pakistanis to reflect upon it. I agree with you that what we have in Pakistan is obscurantism, not Islam.``

You should know that I and most everyone in the circle of my correspondence give this question a great deal of thought. It is clear to us, what ails Pakistan, as far as a question of Islam is concerned. We are convinced that the religiosity of emulation that Obscuritanism engenders is great danger to the collective soul (so to speak) of Pakistan and to Islam itself.

The great struggles yet to come is about Islam. ``What does it mean to be a Muslim`` is a question that will face every conscious Muslim - and the answer is not certain - however; in my opinion, if the central element of this answer is not ``faith`` - Muslim and Islam will have become terms alien to most conscious Muslims.

As for your ``buddy`` - I have every intention of treating persons who say they are adults as just that. I shall take your observation of substance over form to heart - and in that vein, wonder if you find deeper substance in ``screw you`` - or just bad form?

Fawad79

Fawad Sahab, is Islam the property of Mullah from Sialkot or Pindi or Larkana or Quetta? If it is, then Pakistanis should have very little problems - The number one problem in Pakistan with regard to Islam is that most people do not read or write! You get a copy of the Quran, what do you do? you wrap it up in fine velvet and place it in a high elevation in some room, where it sits, occasionally dusted - Here is the fact - Quran is a book, it contains the word of God, but it is a book - by treating it with a reverence no book deserves, many excuse themselves from reading it - reverence is for the words of God, not for the book or the language in which His words are printed. - No Mullah is about to say this to the rest of us - us, who know, clergy has no place in our understanding of Islam, but may create a space and legitimacy for itself only as a force for education and the creation of a consensus on issues of ethics and morality. Islam belongs to the conscious, active as opposed to passive, educated, Muslim - that is to say, ``being`` a Muslim is itself an act of conscience, a responsibility. As an exercise, get five or six persons together, tell them about Einstein`s theories and instruct them to tell 5 or 6 other persons - then interview the second group of 5 or 6 persons whom the first 5 or 6 persons instructed - see for yourself how much of the original survives - can you begin to see the danger of the religiosity of emulation (of monkey see monkey do - of the outwardly mask of reverance and piety)

``is he gonna understand why pakistan has to de islamicize in order to re islamicize society....let us take the cases of iran and egypt////``

Most exellent observation: Forgive me if this question seems impertinent:

Is there a guide book to ``Islamization``? Is it in the Quran? With your permission, allow me to characterize how Islamization has proceeded:

As there was no guide book, scholars have attempted to use their best knowledge of Quran and hadith and example, to arrive at various propositions - all entirely human endeavor, right? - what is sacred about human endeavor? is it not subject to change as circumstances and knowledge dictate? Think of the harm being done, when issues that require decades of study and debate are being decided with immediate political considerations? (I had in mind Blasphemy and Hudood ordinances and of course why it`s everybody`s business to think for Qaidianis - Khatme Nabuwat - ofcourse if it`s ended for some, it MUST mean the same for all, even against their will)

You have offered the examples of Iran and Egypt, most apt, in my opinion. A caution, we will no longer be taking about Islam the religion but Islam, the political theories. The case of Iran is most interesting, indeed, the excesses of the religiosity of emulation and outright repression both of the state and the culture it promotes, has driven a good many to view Islam the religion with a jaundiced eye. Indeed; but also Iran offers, in the absence of such a consciousness in Pakistan, a great hope for Islam and conscious Muslims. It is in Iran that scholars such as AbdolKarim Sorush, Mohsen Kadivar and Mohammed Shabestari are producing works that challenge the prevailing religiosity of emulation AND on the political venue these scholars have produced works that posit reason, liberty, democracy, pluralism, tolerance and the consciousness of a rights bearing citizenry. Similarly, in Egypt, however; compounded by the failure of the state to exercise it`s obligation to it`s citizenry. An observation: in all cases where we have the advent of political Islam, we must acknowledge that political, social and economic failure predated political Islam. Therefore political Islam has been forwarded as a solution to problems in societies. Let us be clear, the problem of most all Muslim societies has been that the ideas of Liberty and property rights have never been a value within society. The social failures are an essentially economic failure. Notice the economic models of most all countries that have a Muslim majority - you will see a state planned and controlled economy - we know such economies are fundamentally unstable and it is only with totalitarianism or the most brutish repression that such economies survive. What else? They were all secular! - when the economy failed, the state failed (witness Pakistan) the intellectual edifice (secularism and state controlled economy) failed - the solution, the pendulum swing - but again notice, Liberty and property rights and a free economy are nowhere on the horizon (witness Iran) - Witness Egypt: The wonder of the ancient world lives on the handout of the American taxpayer.

Actually, the direction of thinking in Islam, in my opinion, began to change some 10 to 15 years ago. Thinkers are now even more conscious of the need for evolution, for transitioning away from the religiosity of emulation.

Fawad if you are interested in reading more about this subject, www.seraj.org, under ``what`s new`` link has excellent works of AbdolKarim Sorush. Also ``Reason, Freedom and Democracy in Islam`` Edited by Dr. Mahmud and Ahmad Sadri is available - as is Dr. Sadri himself by email.

You may also be interested in the work of sociologist Robert N. Bellah (``Beyond Belief`` and ``Religious Evolution)and Dr. Karl R. Popper (``The Open Society and it`s Enemies`` and ``The Open Universe: An argument for Indeterminism) .

Fawad - the Mullah any where is unimportant - people losing their ``faith`` or their ``belief`` is sad. Yet if we posit that we live in a ``Open`` Universe where Liberty prevails - we have to accept these eventualities. Hope is that we can reverse what is lost, if that is the will of those who realize their loss, our tools are education. Look for yourself, where ever a Muslim population is relatively better or just educated, the lower the adherence to the call of the Mullah - and of course, the lower the education the higher the adherence to the call of the Mullah - the uneducated`s connection to God - an idea antithetical to my understanding of Islam.

I would like to comment on a general theme between Pakistanis and Indians on Chowk. Both sides (yes, they are for the most part sides) do not accord any ``moral legitimacy`` to the other. Like a dog chasing his tail, we go round and round on Kashmir - how do we make sense of this?

For Pakistanis (most Pakistanis) Kashmir is part of their moral legitimacy, part of their reason for being. It completes the left over of partition and puts a seal to its identity as a homeland for Muslims. For Indians, essential to their sense of their moral legitimacy is their identity as a secular state. holding on to Kashmir even as the Kashmiri do not want this embrace.

This is the REAL problem between us. Indians argue that east Pakistan became Bangladesh therefore the ideas of moral legitimacy of Pakistan are invalid - Pakistanis point out that the creation of Pakistan and Bangladesh are proof of the invalidity of the Indian secular state. Yet these are symptoms of the problem of the denial of each others `moral legitimacy.`` The article on this board suggests that we have many other common problems, lets dump the Kashmiri and proceed to other problems (perhaps we may encounter other problems we can deal with as much pathos and efficacy as we will have done in dumping the Kashmiri) And what next, shall we dump our ``old wife and pain in the neck children`` because we shall want to find common ground with another? where will it end? Again, we are left with the problem of the denial of each others moral legitimacy - If we are honest with ourselves, we of course must acknowledge that problems do not disappear by not dealing with them. War can become annihilation of our civilizations.

So, how can we deal with this problem? A series of compromise solutions, seems to me to be one that will find political acceptance in both population and in captive Kashmir.

But this is what will happen shortly:

``Let`s dialogue``, No! stop cross border terrorism first`` - ``what border, this is a cease fire line`` ``Our patience is running thin``

``OK lets stop infiltration`` - ``Since there is no insurrection, what`s there to talk about, you stay in your part of Kashmir and we will stay in ours, the line of control is the border`` - back to square one!

In other words, both sides know exactly what it will take to normalize but it not going to happen until there are mass consciousness raising efforts on both sides of the divide. Indian ``secularism`` will not survive Kashmir as it once imagined itself. Pakistani ``Islamization`` is already over, a new state and economy is being devised - will it have legs without a deal on Kashmir - fa git ta bow tit.

The issue of the ``moral legitimacy`` of Pakistan and India has become internationalized. You have already witnessed what Indian foreign service officer, writing in ``Hindu`` newspaper had warned us about. The foreign policy of post modern states is dictated by the domestic compulsion - and ``modern`` states such as Pakistan, India and China will find the latitude, their freedom of action, restricted - perhaps just such a restriction will afford the understanding of the need to accept each others moral legitimacy - but I fear it may prove to be more wishful thinking.

Refugees of A Refugee Camp Fawad

A Christian Pakistani as Ambassador to US or anywhere?

Only the most qualified, the most effective, the most competant - These are really my criteria.

We have made a mess of being conscious of and rating Pakistani persons confession.

You are a Pakistani, you are an expert in your field, you are effective, you are a person of conscience - I think these should be our considerations - we must never appoint anyone to such positions because of their confession. After all appointing persons because of their confessionor lack of it, is an acknowledgement that we do not seek effectiveness from the appointee as a representative - such a person would be window dressing - and not the kind of person I would want on my team and can`t begin to imagine what kind of person would consciously agree to be a token.