Pak Tea House » Pakistan » BLUNDER
BLUNDER
by YLH
An example of a collossal miscalculation by our otherwise very cautious founding father:
Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.
The truth is that Pakistani Muslims are incapable of growing up and to hold such expectations from them is to set yourself up for disappointment.
Here is Syed Ali Abbas’ blog:
There have been very few times when I have not found the right words to express my grief, sorrow, anger or passion for something and today is one of those days as I write for my man, Prem Chand – A Pakistani Hindu, a true patriot, a social worker who spent his life trying to uplift the condition of his fellow countrymen, he gave sweat and tears to this land of pure. An elected member of PILDAT’s Youth Parliament, whose fellow YP’s say the following about him:
He greeted muslims with a warm Assalamo alaikum…he sent msgs of congratulations on shab barat and other holy days…..He used “Allah” hafiz to bid farewell…and he swore by this name…I hv been with him….He was more of a sufi who believed in all religions and the good things in them.
And it doesnt even matter if he was that intolerant about religious beliefs, even if he were a staunch Hindu he didnot deserve what we gave him. He was on board EQ-202 Airbus 321, Airblue’s flight to Islamabad which crashed in Margalla Hills leaving 152 dead and the nation mourned (officially for 01 day). He was not travelling on personal visit, he was meant to be present at Youth Parliaments session the next day.
And like said above, he gave his sweat and tears to this land of pure – and what did he get? Some religious bigot wrote “Kaafir” (English: Infidel) on his coffin. (Link) We are no short of these religious bigots whose favorite pass time is to judge and discriminate on Pakistanis on basis of their faith – but this sad incident, which killed 152 human beings was an opportunity for these religious fanatics to show their true face. The poor guy, who was born in a Hindu family and spent his life trying to work for the people of his country was given the title of “Kaafir” by someone amongst us. This particular segment of our society pounces on every opportunity to exhibit their religious fanaticism from the very beginning, when Quaid e Azam (the founder of Pakistan) was labelled as “Kaafir-e-Azam”.
Bear in mind, Pakistan was made because people of Indo-Pak subcontinent felt they were discriminated upon on the basis of their faith – The same we are doing with our minorities.
I would cross-post some of his words here:
I believe in democratic process, because true democracy can solve all problems of state. – Prem Chand.
Prem Chand’s last status update on Facebook was: “Comments Can Make a Person & Comments Can Break a Person.”So Be Careful and Ethical While Giving Comments for Someone.” – He rightly said so. A single word comment on his coffin has shattered many across Pakistan.
I protest against these religious fanatics and I salute Prem Chand – And all the Prem Chands in the making and I confess to the religious minorities of Pakistan – that just because of our silence, just because of our muted response to injustices done to you – we stand here after 64 years. I dig my head in shame, and I vow to fight for you, for us, for the Pakistan we were supposed to have.
Please join this page on facebook as we try to take it from, to pick it from here and voice out for minorities of Pakistan.
Syed Ali Abbas Zaidi
Below is the letter written by Zulqarnain, Prem’s friend:
Its very painful for me to write to defend such gem of a person. But in a society like ours where people are discriminated on the basis of their faith, Its essential to show these religious bigots their real face.
Prem chand was born to a poor family and was its lone feeder. He belonged to Sanghar, Sindh. He was 25 and was married and also had children. He, however, looked younger than his age and we also used to crack jokes on him for this which he thoroughly enjoyed. He certainly was not a “man” and had those boyish looks. He was doing masters from Sindh university, something pertaining to Social work. He not only called himself a social worker but his text messages also bore this signature. The signature was later changed to “YP Minister” when he was made minister for Youth affairs, culture and sports in previous session of YP. This honour was well deserved as he had prepared and presented a comprehensive research report on state of social welfare in Pakistan. He was hardworking, dedicated and sincere. His educational back ground was such that he could not make flowery speeches.
He was not good at speaking English and his Urdu also had that pinch of Sindhi accent but this never deterred him to stand up and speak whenever he wanted. He was a patriot and loved pakistan, worried about it as much as we “muslims” do, brought resolutions, prepared them, asked for help, tried to pinpoint and resolve all the problems that Pakistan faces, spoke against India on water issue and had no qualms on the prospect of going to war with her. I say all this to show that he was “normal”. He was not alien or “Indian”.I have met many people from religious minorities. All of them have that peculiar air about them. they lack confidence, they have fears of the unknown, They are very cautious. Prem Chand also seemed to be the victim of discrimination. Though that did not make him a loner, but it sure taught him to love more. He over tried. tried to be more good to you than u wud expect, tried to make good friends of everyone. Most of the time he lived in the room right next to me during the sessions so he often came over to my room. Thats when I observed this. He would send u text messages just to stay in touch. he wont mind if u didnt reply. I guess, he could not afford to be egotistic.
He was very tolerant in his religious views. We never discussed religion much. Though once I remember a fellow colleague of us talked to him in good faith. He probably wanted to convert him to Islam. Though he never said so. There I came to know that Prem knew much about Islam. He liked Zakir Nayak and comparative studies of different religions. He was interested in Sufism as well. And he wont mind if u asked him questions about hinduism. When interacting with us he would use “muslim” greetings not to prove anything but simply to avoid putting others in a difficult situation.
I still remember the time when we used to hang out. He used to borrow cigarettes from friends and puff away scores of them just for the fun of it. He was not a smoker though. I also remember that prem did not have a FB account. He also did not know how to make one so Hassan Javed (the late youth prime minister) made one for him on his laptop. When the account was made he jokingly asked Hassan to allow him to add Hassan’s female friends as he did not have girlfriends of his own……Thats all I can remember right now hope it helps.
Following is a comment by another colleague of Prem:
I am Muneeb Afzal, a Member of Youth parliament of Pakistan and a Colleague and Friend of Late Prem Chand. An extremely hard-working person he was a symbol of tolerance. My last communication with him was on night before the Air Crash, he gave his greetings to me on ocassion of 15th of Shabaan.
At PIMS fortunately another friend of ours was there when Prem’s Cousin Nanik Das came to search for his body, he quickly hid the tag ‘kafir’ by putting marker lines on it, so that Prem’s family which is already suffering from great grief does not have to bear more hurt. Although later at a memorial session where media was present I criticized the inhumanity and intolerance of those who did this shameful act. I felt this was my duty to my Late friend Prem Chand that i make it clear to the world that we condemn this act of intolerance and Narrow Minded-ness. But a lot of my other colleagues have since objected to my speaking out, believing that my saying this and this news spreading in media would add to hurt of Prem’s family, and in a way they are right too. I would like you all to also keep this in mind as well…
Rest In Peace dear Prem Chand
And to end this blog post, an example of prescience from our founding father:
Pakistan was the biggest blunder of my life.
Filed under: Pakistan
126 Responses to "BLUNDER"
Leave a Reply
PTH biweekly Cartoon
Picture of the Week
-
Sunrise at the Arabian Sea, Charna Island
24 Dec 2011
(4 Comments)
Recent Comments
- kaalchakra
said rex, no problem, my friend. You are a nice fellow.... - kaalchakra said Bin Ismail
Thanks for the response. Fortunately...
- YesSar
said Most of Germanic, Celtic and Slavic are returning... - Raj TOO
said Arab Ki Bund wrote:
- AKB
said @ rajmoot and his like
.
Ugly Dravidians in... - Sachbol
said YesSar
The solution is complete separation betwee... - rex minor said And what a simple but provocative word the anglosa...
- Sachbol said AKB
Has been always right on Qadianis. They are t...
- Raj TOO said Arab Ki Bund:
Muhajirs are t...
- Sachbol said Bi,
So how does no compulsion apply in with POW...
PTH on facebook
”’That is why A A Khalid’s project is doomed to failure.”’
Excuse my YLH I can talk for myself, I do not need any other individual to do so unless of course I hire a lawyer…
In no way shape or form have I ever said that minorities or citizens who have dissenting theological or existential views should be discriminated against. Before our convictions and creeds, we have rights and the notion of honour is bestowed on all human beings by God (Q 17 70).
YLH you can ignore the ulema and ignore the mullahs, you can keep allowing them to maintain their ”religious constituency”, by giving secular answers to quintessentially secular problems, and you know what the mullah will laugh at you (wrong because what you say is right, but its the way and approach of what you say). Using militancy ( you have advocated militant secularism in the past which seems very ominous) is not the answer, since that solves nothing at all.
If one can argue for liberty, rights, pluralism and tolerance using religious arguments in a religious society the chances for fruitful transformation are greater. What prevents you YLH is your belief that religion is essentially ( I will not use the word evil, that is too strong) counter productive, which is fine since religious belief has to be an examined and wilful conviction free from coercion and intimidation.
If I use religious arguments in a very much agnostic society such as France for instance I must be high on drugs, since there is little chance for me to have any real effect on the public discussion, in that case my project is doomed to fail in every sense of the world.
As a participant in public debate, and YLH as part of a minority viewpoint (let’s face it liberalism/secularism/modernism/reformism are all minority viewpoints in Pakistan), we cannot hope to completely change the parameters of the social and civic discussion, (many have tried in the last 60-65 years, the end result is that the public sphere is dominated by mullahs and acidic ulema with no one to challenge them on the religious terms).
Why is it that the radicals and conservatives dominate the religious discourse in Pakistan? Why is it that radicals and conservatives dominate the public sphere in Pakistan? Why? Because there is no opposition to such thinking at all, they are allowed a free ride….
By abandoning the religious discourse and the associative influence of moral/religious language what is the real influence of liberal thought today in Pakistan? Very dismal one has to brutally and honestly say, why? Why for so long, its been so many decades has liberal thought still not taken root in Pakistan?
If we were in France we would discuss topics using secular language and theory and that is good we should do that, however in religious societies (see the Gallup Poll YLH for the sentiments of the Pakistani people, rather than trying to image a reality which does not exist), there is a different approach. This is not relativism, its using different methods to approach the same values and same objectives of liberties, rights and pluralism.
sorry:
”quintessentially secular problems”
read ”religious” instead of ”secular”.
A A Khalid:
“By abandoning the religious discourse and the associative influence of moral/religious language what is the real influence of liberal thought today in Pakistan? Very dismal one has to brutally and honestly say, why? Why for so long, its been so many decades has liberal thought still not taken root in Pakistan?”
A deep question; why hasn’t it? Why has it taken root in the valley of Kashmir?
“If we were in France we would discuss topics using secular language and theory and that is good we should do that, however in religious societies (see the Gallup Poll YLH for the sentiments of the Pakistani people, rather than trying to image a reality which does not exist), there is a different approach. This is not relativism, its using different methods to approach the same values and same objectives of liberties, rights and pluralism.”
I am afraid it is relativism, nothing else. Do you think that Hindu society is not religious, even to I dare say, an insane degree. It took guts for Nehru to push through the secular laws as they affected Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists. I get the feeling that those secular Pakistanis who want a political discourse that includes Islam are somewhat like Vallabhai Patel and Rajendra Prasad; rationalizing their own prejudices.
@ Hayyer
I am afraid AA Khalid is closer to the reality.
In pakistan if you are a religious liberal and in the public’s eye your life is under mortal threat. There are many examples of exiles/ murders. Such is the state of affairs around dogma. I don’t think Vallabhai Patel analogy works here. Times are also different. Religious liberal leaders are the most obvious challenge to the Mullah’s monopoly over the religion. There are only a few of these brave souls unfortunately but they are beginning to get a share of the voice.
Hard secularism gets challenged less by the mullah – everyone just ignores you and thinks you are an eccentric/ idiot. You might get killed for being thought of as a Western agent more than a threat to the order. There are very very few hard secularists in the public domain.
”I am afraid it is relativism, nothing else. ”
I am afraid then if you think there is only path to liberty then you are unfortunately narrow minded (that’s not a value judgement of your character) in this respect.
No one is relativising anything, all that is being said is this we cherish the values of liberties, rights and pluralism but in order to justify these, support these noble ideas, let them take root and grow we must tackle the conservatie and regressive monopoly on religious discourse, and Pakistani liberals/secularists/modernists (whatever nomenclature you may wish to use) have utterly failed in this regard.
I am not trying to argue for some cultural and religious exceptionalism. I am arguing that to establish liberty and human rights we must talk to our societies not only in rational terms but also moral and religious terms and concepts.
Every society has a tradition and a sense of community which needs to be engaged in order to introduce new ideas. The communitarian critiques of MacIntyre, Micheal Sandel and Charles Taylor is illuminating that the concept of the individual in classical liberal thought is too atomistic isolating the individual from the community and tradition at large.
AA Khalid (August 4, 2010 at 12:39 am):
“Every society has a tradition and a sense of community which needs to be engaged in order to introduce new ideas.”
Your efforts may bear fruit.
If it is not exceptionalism what is it? I mention Kashmir for a reason. Muslims constitute over 95% of its population (including the displaced Pandits). The Mullahs do not dictate the political discourse because secular Kashmiri politicians, even the pro azadi ones never gave them control. There is no call for Shariah in Kashmir.
The JKLF ran a mostly secular movement (except to the extent that it connived at the expulsion of Pandits, which is a different story). It was the ISI that funded the Jamaat e Islaami group of the HM to wipe out JKLF cadres and then introduced other fundamentalist groups like the HUM and LeT .
The communal virus in Pakistan is not inherent but injected forcibly. If secular folk in Pakistan seek to arrive at a modus vivendi with the Mullah they are bound to fail. I mentioned the fate of Ghamdi in an earlier post on another thread.
Political leaders may hope that communicating with their voters in an Islamic idiom can moderate the extremist outlook. They are going to fail. Kashmiris are no less religious than Pakistanis but they keep the religious discourse far away.
@ Hayyer
Its not exceptionalism. The great secular political theorists Richard Rorty, and Micheal Ignatieff have rightly said that there should no real metaphyiscal and religious arguments for concepts such as liberty and rights in European societies because there can be little chance of consensus and little chance of such a move having a transformative effect. In the words of Richard Rorty, ”Religion is a conversation stopper”. This is very true for European societies.
However, what other intellectual route can you suggest which will convince Muslims (who take their faith seriously) at large about the virtues of human rights, liberties and pluralism? What other intellectually honest route is left? In Muslim societies not talking about religion is a conversation stopper. We need to keep the conversation and dialogue on rights, pluralism and liberty going and that requires a religious dimension and engagement.
So its only a means for communication, and justification.
The example of Kashmir is a red herring, there is no liberal discourse in Kashmir, no real discussion of rights, no discussion on democratic discourse. It’s religious discourse may be less prone to violence, but that’s not the sign of a liberal political theology.
Non violence is not the sign of liberal theology, even conservatives can abhor violence.
to ylh
You wrote:
“Well said bade miyan… And the one who wins Nobel Prize after being inspired from the Quran is declared non-Muslim by his country.”
So you too are peddling this stuff about kuran inspiring modern physics?!
Which term in the Lagragian of the electro-weak theory (for which Abdus Salam got the Nobel prize) is derived from kuran (and kuran only)? May we know that from your lawyer’s pen?
Khalid wrote;
“…there is no liberal discourse in Kashmir, no real discussion of rights, no discussion on democratic discourse.”
And thanks to islam and the islamic islam-glorifying history-writing it never will be.
1) I have the right to live in a housing complex where it does not smell of meat or fish being cooked or beer/wine being drunk or loud music etc. That is part of my human dignity not to be subjected to abhorent smells or noises. This brings in the necessity and desirability of the caste system.
2) Politicians make laws so that they can win elections with the help of the majority and the majority consists mainly of low-caste and low-class people (not only in the indian subcontinent but all over the world).
3) The kuran (plus hadith and shariah) gives the islamofascists an advantageous position. Hence in the liberal vs. fascist discourse within islam the latter is (will be) the winner. The development in Pakistan proves this – it would have happened so even if Jinnah had lived another 20 years.
4) An ideology that regards a book as divine or unquestionable or final perfect guidance etc. will end up putting the liberal at a great disadvantage and the fascist in a position of authority over him. This what islam/kuran-praisers don’t want to see/acknowledge.
That is part of my human dignity not to be subjected to abhorent smells or noises. This brings in the necessity and desirability of the caste system.
Ahem, the Gandhoo is alive and kicking in India…..
Regards
A A Khalid
“However, what other intellectual route can you suggest which will convince Muslims (who take their faith seriously) at large about the virtues of human rights, liberties and pluralism?”
That is the exceptionalism. To assume that Muslims take their faith more so much more seriously than others that they can only understand human rights, liberty and pluralism through religious paradigms. I don’t believe think that any religious text talks of human rights liberty and pluralism. Religious texts talk of the other life not this one, and some preach some universal moral values.
I know that in Muslim societies agnostics and atheists keep their views to themselves. Especially politicians. But its not as if they are ostracized if they make a strict observance of the faith unless the Mullahs get after them.
“We need to keep the conversation and dialogue on rights, pluralism and liberty going and that requires a religious dimension and engagement.”
You appear to suggest that in Muslim societies it is dishonest to discuss universal human values outside the religious framework. I don’t agree. Indian Muslims in pre-partition India were perfectly able to comprehend a modern political concepts outside of the faith.
To dismiss Kashmir as a red herring can be due to ignorance about the situation there, but it can also be just plain evasion of the point.
Right from 1932 the discourse in Kashmir is a liberal one. India’s interference in the process of J&K’s political development started only in 1953-but neither the National Conference nor even parties in the Hurriyet conglomerate except the JeI ever talk about abandoning secular governance or the imposition of sharia, and even the JeI does not do that.
“There is no liberal discourse in Kashmir, no real discussion of rights, no discussion on democratic discourse. It’s religious discourse may be less prone to violence, but that’s not the sign of a liberal political theology.”
There was a liberal discourse there alright with the exception of this India-Pak plebiscite business, or of the right to secede. In the last two decades Delhi has mishandled the situation repeatedly but it never disturbs the set political discourse, which is democracy and secular governance. The internet has led to some increase in religiosity but not in the abandonment of the secular ideals.
It may be due to the fact that J&K has a substantial non Muslim minority, but even before 1947 when the Muslim percentage was greater no one said that you had to approach governance through Islam. Islam is the answer is a slogan of recent coinage and inspired by lobbies within Islam. I doubt ordinary Muslims jump to this sort of conclusion naturally. You have Bangldesh now as an example. The rise of the Justice party in Turkey can hardly be called a revolt against secular governance. It is the Islamists in fact who want to allow Islamic rules in the face of a severely secular state. As a rule of thumb, you give religion an inch and it takes over body and soul. Isn’t that what happened to Pakistan. If you want to use the exceptionalist argument I suggest using it in reverse. i.e. avoid giving religion even the slightest political space in Muslim countries or they will want to take over the whole shebangs.
“Non violence is not the sign of liberal theology, even conservatives can abhor violence.”
I don’t know what non violence has to do with the argument at hand.
to majumdar
The caste system exists in EVERY human society. Those who outwardly claim not to have it or not to practise it or to have transcended it etc. are often the worst practitioners. Hypocrisy makes things really worse – even those things that are otherwise not bad.
yes in Pakistan there is Casteism of Momins and Kafirs
rationalist (August 4, 2010 at 1:02 pm) says:
“I have the right to live in a housing complex where it does not smell of meat or fish being cooked or beer/wine being drunk or loud music etc. That is part of my human dignity not to be subjected to abhorent smells or noises. This brings in the necessity and desirability of the caste system.”
Hayyer: Think I have said that somewhere before. In my parents’ house there is a group picture of my father from his pre-independence college days. On the top of the picture it says: “Muslim Hostel”. Subsequently I told you and the ‘dashtnaward’ (gods bless his soul) the story of this Hindu family-friend who would not sit on sofa in our house. That was fifty years ago.
These days one of our family-friends have a backyard swimming pool in their house. They have never opened up that pool to any other friends except to those from their own ‘community’. Wana guess what is their religion. One clue. They are neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Jew. Which by the way are most of their children’s friends. So I know where ‘rationalist’ is coming from.
@ Hayyer
I advise you to read ”Liberal Islam – A Sourcebook”, edited by Charles Kurzman and ”The New Voices of Islam : Edited by Mehran Kamrava”. These books are anthologies of writings by liberal theologians and thinkers advocating for liberty and human rights. Hayyer actually read these books, and you will get an insight to the liberal discourse in Islamic thought, then you can make up your mind with a greater idea of what I am talking about.
The problem is Hayyer that once we fear the ”religion”question, other more conservative and fundamentalist preachers will be more than happy to fill the void.
I am not advocating the slogan ”Islam is the answer”. No not at all, I am saying that to correct the injustices in Muslim societies the best resources to mobilise are education and religious discourse. Using this to combine modern intellectual tools with religious scholarship can squeeze the mullahs out completely and allow us to establish the noble ideas of liberty and rights.
” I don’t believe think that any religious text talks of human rights liberty and pluralism. ”
I am not advocating text fundamentalism at all, but reimaging the conceptions of Muslim law and interpretation which underlie the conservative framework which stunts any development towards a more liberal political discourse.
”You appear to suggest that in Muslim societies it is dishonest to discuss universal human values outside the religious framework”
Its not dishonest, it just has a limited impact. You try talking to the French in religious terms and you will have a limited impact. I agree in an ”ideal” world we should have secular and religious narratives on human values, but the best strategy which will have maximum impact is through the religious discourse.
Rationalist,
“That is part of my human dignity not to be subjected to abhorent smells or noises.”
I presume, you don’t use public transport. I guess, most of us can’t afford private limousine or drivers. One is also inclined to assume that your drivers are also vetted with respect to their caste affiliations, etc.
It’s rather rich, your diatribe against Islam, especially since you waxed lyrical about the heinous caste system. I think taking rationalist as your id is probably a weak attempt at dark humor.
A A Khalid:
Thank you for recommending the books. I do not know if they can be obtained in India or whether they are downloadable (awful word).
My views are based on observation in India not scholarship. I have read on the foundations of Islamism in the 2oth century. It does not affect my view that Muslims are not blocked off from the universal values of the enlightenment simply by being following their faith. Mullahs may oppose secularism and democracy in the face of the rule of God as interpreted by the Ulema, but the ordinary Muslim educated in the western tradition doesn’t buy the Mullah’s argument. Indeed the Mullah is an object of derision, and the masjid imams only useful for their functionality.
For the illiterate, or madrassa trained Muslim your sort of discourse may work but it is not necessary. I believe that ordinary Muslims follow their political leaders rather than the mullahs in political matters. The mullah may rant that it is un-Islamic but does he get the votes. It is a matter of developing a political outlook in the face of mullahdom. That existed pre 47 in India. It exists today in Kashmir. I do not use the example of Indian Muslims because they are in a peculiar situation as a result of the historic blunder of supporting a Muslim state which they are no part of. Talk of the sins of the fathers visiting on the sons. What you have in Pakistan is a peculiarly Pakistani disease, which is that the state Islamized a society in the hope of strengthening it and giving it meaning and identity.
Some Muslim leaders may well start out as religious leaders, say Maulana Azad, or make a display of their religion while preaching a purely secular and socialistic discourse, like Sheikh Abdullah, but there are others like Jinnah who while representing their community or speaking to it use an entirely secular vocabulary. The impact of a purely secular address is not limited at all as is evident in Kashmir, or by Jinnah’s success.
PMA:
“On the top of the picture it says: “Muslim Hostel”. Subsequently I told you and the ‘dashtnaward’ (gods bless his soul) the story of this Hindu family-friend who would not sit on sofa in our house. That was fifty years ago.”
What does that show? That Muslims and Hindus could not dine together in those days. Those were the Muslim Pani Hindu Pani days. There are even today some Muslims in Kargil, who will not eat out of a dish used by a non-Muslim. As you said it was over six decades ago.
“These days one of our family-friends have a backyard swimming pool in their house. They have never opened up that pool to any other friends except to those from their own ‘community’. Wana guess what is their religion. One clue. They are neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Jew. Which by the way are most of their children’s friends. So I know where ‘rationalist’ is coming from.”
I suppose you mean that your friend is a Hindu who wont mix with Muslims. Surprising that he is your friend. I wouldn’t be friends with someone like him, and I don’t know anyone in India like him. In the parts of India that I am familiar with, and that is East to North that sort of behaviour would be very unusual.
Inter-dining is common and hardly worthy of comment in modern India. I eat beef and I have two Muslims friends who do eat pork. I am not religious but they are in the sense that they observe the rozas sometimes and attend Eid prayers. India is hardly a paragon of communal harmony, there are tensions and mistrust but the Hindu pani Muslim pani thing is unknown nowadays. The halal meat thing often crops up but it would surprise you to know that Muslims do eat out in modern restaurants where no one knows what is being served. Would it surprise you to know that in the Punjab the McDonalds chain is serving halal meat to Sikhs and the Akalis haven’t made a fuss for feed ‘kutha’ to the Khalsa.
Of course all this has nothing to do with our subject, which is of how Muslim societies should approach secular governance.
@ Hayyer
Yes concerns about mullahdom are valid, but if we can squeeze the mullah’s religious influence by offering a more inclusive discourse the long term effects in terms of citizenship, rights and pluralism could be very fruitful.
Unless we take the religious discourse for ourselves and determine if for ourselves the mullah will be a constant threat.
Why is liberalism or reformism a minority discourse in Pakistan?
What I am advocating does not incorporate the mullah. For one the average mullah is hopelessly ill educated both in the Islamic tradition and other intellectual traditions.
Wherever liberals fear to tread the conservatives will be happy to rush in to exploit the vacuum.
to Khalid
Restore the hindu population component in Pakistan as a start. Then only you can squeeze the mullah. Not before that. Secularism is not possible in a country with 90+x% muslims. Secularism is possible if muslim population component is below 10%. In India appeasement of muslims is necessary for political survival of the various opportunist parties. So secularism in India is going down the drain too.
The mullah is the punishment on Pakistan for having exterminated the hindus.
Hayyer,
“I suppose you mean that your friend is a Hindu who wont mix with Muslims. Surprising that he is your friend. ”
PMA is a closet masochist. He enjoys humiliation by being friends with such folks. Growing up, I thought halal was practiced because it made meat more tender. lol.
Bade Miyan,
PMA is a closet masochist. He enjoys humiliation by being friends with such folks.
Good observations. On chowk he wud be described by his own compatriots as having a “shudder-achhoot” mentality.
Regards
@PMA
Hayyer: Think I have said that somewhere before. In my parents’ house there is a group picture of my father from his pre-independence college days. On the top of the picture it says: “Muslim Hostel”. Subsequently I told you and the ‘dashtnaward’ (gods bless his soul) the story of this Hindu family-friend who would not sit on sofa in our house. That was fifty years ago.
Fifty years ago, and earlier, and later, lots of bizarre things happened. They will continue to happen, as long as South Asia is populated by such an assorted bunch of partially and fully lunatic people.
Example: My mother was visiting her friends, children of a Tamil Brahmin family, of which the father was District Collector, in Madras more than seventy years ago. Midway through lunch, she was urgently asked to gulp down the rest of her food, as their ayah of many years had crossed the verandah in full view of the dining room; the food had to be thrown away as it was now polluted and unfit for consumption by the pious.
Example: Presidency College in Calcutta was originally the Hindu College. During our times, a person who subsequently was an Indian director of the Asian Development Bank asked why M. J. Akbar should be allowed to study there! We didn’t get his point at first; when we did, the looks he got in response shut him up.
Example: In that same college, we went to visit a female fellow-student, without previous warning. We were given water in three different glasses; the Brahmin in one, I in another, our half-English friend in a third.
Right.
That should prove something. Let’s see further.
Example: My father, who was pretty much a volatile Dhaka youngster, used to be bandaged up by his mother before being sent back to the fray in the battles between school-going youngsters of both Hindu and Muslim sides in Dhaka in the 30s. Recently, he finished his memoirs and started his sixth book at the age of 90. When I asked him to define the subject, he said wistfully that it was about three friends and a fourth very close acquaintance whom he missed very much in this old age.
These were Taslimuddin Ahmed, his batch-mate in the IP, who became IG, was nearly shot by Tikka Khan for insufficient enthusiasm and reluctance to cooperate with ‘Searchlight’, and survived to become Home Secretary in Dhaka in Bangladesh; Akhtar-uz-zaman, the nephew of Humayun Kabir, and a frequent house-guest, whom I remember from his squeaky and high-pitched chuckle; Iqbal Athar Ali, who joined the foreign service in Pakistan after independence, and was a high Pakistani diplomat in The Hague, with whom my parents stayed during their visit to Bruxelles, to the annoyance of the Indian Ambassador; and the acquaintance was Hasan Shaheed Suhrawardy.
It did not occur to him till it was pointed out that there was a remarkable pattern on display. At that point, he recovered smartly and claimed credit for such broad-based friendship.
He left out Khwaja Mohammed Kaiser, who presumably needs no introduction to Pakistanis, because it was an impossible friendship to unravel.
These days one of our family-friends have a backyard swimming pool in their house. They have never opened up that pool to any other friends except to those from their own ‘community’. Wana guess what is their religion. One clue. They are neither Muslim, nor Christian, nor Jew. Which by the way are most of their children’s friends. So I know where ‘rationalist’ is coming from.
So do I.
That kind of malice comes straight from the drain, where dregs from every faith belong.
There are bigots (not rationalist), fundamentalists and fanatics in every religion. Also in every camp that holds excessively strong views, extreme views on a matter; the Communists and the Fascists have them too. No faith, not even some of the agnostic or atheistic camps, is free from them.
How can they be quoted as serious evidence in any debate? The moment you ascribe these ridiculous views to the Hindus, you open yourself to attack by the ridiculous, who ascribe these views or worse to the Muslims. Is it difficult to see that both positions are wholly untenable?
Bathplug,
Don’t mean to pull your plug on that one, but..
“In that same college, we went to visit a female fellow-student”
Are you talking about Presidency College, Calcutta. How long ago was it? I am not sure if you are accurate about that one. I made a mistake of going there with my parents. After coming out, they said they needed some water, due to entirely different reasons. I, of course, was excited about the campus, for exactly the same reasons that horrified my parents.
@Bade Miya
1968 – 1971, extended by a year due to lack of classes, leading to resultant gaps in education.
@ Bathplug (August 5, 2010 at 1:53 pm)
“…..Fifty years ago, and earlier, and later, lots of bizarre things happened…..”
Bizarre things still happen.However, in fifty years, a lot of water has indeed flowed through the Indus, Ganges and Jamuna.
Regards.