Questions and challenges to the statements of OSHO

[شمله ور خراساني]

As salaamu aleikoum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuhu,

In various corners of this forum, a person by the name of Osho is typing allot preaching democracy and secularism and rejecting Shari'ah.

Here I would like to pose a few questions and challenge Osho to back his preachings and dogma with references. Or at least a structured and well founded explanation of his views.

Talk is cheap. And sadly, we Pashtuns like to think we know everything. It is therefore a healthy practice to be challenged every now and then.

So here are some questions I would like to see answered by Osho. I would like to see if he actually knows what he is talking about.

And dear Osho, you have proved to be an enthusiastic typist. So take the liberty to answer these questions thoroughly. However, I do want to emphasize that you should stick to answering these questions and not deviating in to philosophizing and making normative statements or posting all sorts of truisms and a priori nonsense.

Democracy:

1: Explain what democracy is.

2: Explain how public representatives can actually act on behalf of the voters and not follow their own desires.

3: What can you say about a situation where a society decides to legalize sex with 3 year old children and allow people to sodomize 3 year old children because "the people" have voted for legislators in favor of legalizing sex with 3 year old.

4: What do you know about the power of the lobbyists? It is an inherent aspect of a democracy. So what do you have to say about lobbyists?

5: What do you think of the power the bureaucracy has over the decisions taken by the legislature and implementation of laws and policies? Does that in any contradict your democratic dogma?

Isn't Democracy as dogmatic as believing in different castes in a society? Yes/No and why yes or why not.

Secularism:

You appear to be a fervent proponent of secularism.

1: Give us an example of a secular society that is actually secular. That is, a society where the laws of the land are not based on religion.

2: Isn't rejecting influence of religion in the government by itself not a sign of dogmatic beliefs of some sort?

[Badlun]

I am really sorry for being late to respond to this post because of my job and studies.

One thing I wana make it clear at the outset that here I am not interested in having a MUNAZIRA/apologetics kind of discussion. I share what I know and I learn from others. Its not a win or lose sitiation but we should make it a win-win situation. I keep my mind open and learn from others and the same I request from other friends that just give a try to understand what the other says and may not make a rigid approach that what I say is the final truth and the other one is totally in the wrong.

I ll try to respond to the above mentioned questions one by one and I ll post my comments as the time allows me.

[Badlun]

In bold are the questions/comments of my friend

In various corners of this forum, a person by the name of Osho is typing allot preaching democracy and secularism and rejecting Shari'ah.

Yes I promote the idea of democracy and secularism in Pashtuns but I dont reject Sharia. Any one can prove copying my words where I have rejected Sharia.

Yes I consider Sharia only for religious issues not for secular issues. From religious issues I mean faith, worship and morality. From secular Issues I mean, culture, society, politics, economics, philosophy, psychology, social sciences, natural sciences, law, mathematics, technology etc etc.

[Badlun]

Here I would like to pose a few questions and challenge Osho to back his preachings and dogma with references. Or at least a structured and well founded explanation of his views.

I ll try to be systematic and will give references where I quote some one else. And any one can contradict, criticize, improve , amend my personal opinion or ideas by his or her personal ideas or opinion.

Talk is cheap. And sadly, we Pashtuns like to think we know everything. It is therefore a healthy practice to be challenged every now and then.

If Pashtuns can talk better, can communicate better then its some thing positive. At least we can express ourselves. Now communication is gold as before silence was gold. Challanging soem one in a positive, constructive way is healthy but not to humiliate the other.

So here are some questions I would like to see answered by Osho. I would like to see if he actually knows what he is talking about.

I dont claim to be omniscient and I dont know the whole encyclopedia of knowledge by heart but whatever I know I ll try to share it with you.

And dear Osho, you have proved to be an enthusiastic typist. So take the liberty to answer these questions thoroughly. However, I do want to emphasize that you should stick to answering these questions and not deviating in to philosophizing and making normative statements or posting all sorts of truisms and a priori nonsense.

I am not a typist. For your information I am on an executive post in a multinational company and have 3 people who type for me in my job. I dont like these kind of passing judgement about the private life of a person. We should be interetsed in what one says not what he is.

I would like to clarify it that the questions you asked are of theoritical nature and these are not mathematical formulas to which I ll reply in digits. Still I ll try to be to the point and may not beat about the bishes.

[Badlun]

Democracy:

1: Explain what democracy is.

Democracy is the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives . Democracy is a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them. In Islamic or other religious societies the religious aspects of life like faith, worship an dmorality may be goverened by the religious injunctions as described in the holy scriptures or other religious books.

Democracy is a political government carried out either directly by the people (direct democracy) or by means of elected representatives of the people (Representative democracy).

Etymologically the term is derived from the Greek: "rule of the people",which was coined from (dêmos) "people" and (krátos) "power", in the middle of the fifth-fourth century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC.

Even though there is no specific, universally accepted definition of 'democracy', there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes: equality and freedom.These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to power. and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution

Mainly taken from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

[شمله ور خراساني]

I have not read all your comments yet, and I don't have time at the moment because I have to finish some readings for tomorrow's class.

But I am responding here only to your quotes from Wikipedia.

If you rely on Wikipedia to answer these question's then don't bother at all. We are not in a kindergarden. Use proper academic resources.

[Badlun]

Again the same mistake. Name or source is important but not the material. If you have to refute any thing taken from Wikipedia then reject it, criticize it with valid arguments and with references from better sources than wikipedia.

Your questions are of kindergarten type,,,,,whats democracy, what do yoiu think I should study for it the Political philosophy from Plato to Friedrich Hayek?????and then give you references from their works for just the definition of democracy?????

[شمله ور خراساني]

Again the same mistake. Name or source is important but not the material. If you have to refute any thing taken from Wikipedia then reject it, criticize it with valid arguments and with references from better sources than wikipedia.

Your questions are of kindergarten type,,,,,whats democracy, what do yoiu think I should study for it the Political philosophy from Plato to Friedrich Hayek?????and then give you references from their works for just the definition of democracy?????

Can't you do any better than Wikipedia?

Come on. You talk allot. This is your chance to convince us that your preaching is based on knowledge. If you rely on wikipedia you will be ridiculed.

[Zari]

i think osho is chinese...

[Master Khan]

i think osho is chinese...

hahahaha, A chinese guy on a Pashtun Forum

[Zari]

hahahah...well osho sounds chinese.....
and nwadays alot of chinese r trying to convert other ppl to there culture and traditions....

[شمله ور خراساني]

i think osho is chinese...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6UMT94jNGI

[Badlun]

2: Explain how public representatives can actually act on behalf of the voters and not follow their own desires.

Practically in this world no body can do everything by himself or herself. You always have to select some representative, attorney, lawyer, deputy, agent, assistant , vicegerent etc who can act on your behalf. You cant reach everywhere yourself and also you cant do everything yourself. You must have some one else to act in your place where you cant or does not wish to do it yourself.

If your representative does not work as you wish , you can change it and nominate some one else in his or her place.

The same happens in democracy. A common citizen cant run a government or cant legislate . He has to be represented by some one else. The prophet of Islam also used to send his representatives or envoys to other places and other people. there used to be a council of ministers or advisors to reperesent the general public.

How does the representative performs his or her job, is not the problem of democracy or the people who choose their representatives. If the reps act as the their choosers wanted then he or she will have a new chance if not and act as his or her own wishes then better reps will be selected.

This is the beauty of the checks and balances and accountability of democracy. This is what practically going on in most of the non muslim world and even in many Non Arab Muslim countries. Even the Pashtun Jirga system is representation of the Pashtuns by their leaders. Otherwise then we have to stop these jirgas too.

Practically the representatives do take care of the wishes of the electorate as they have to face them again.they are usually capable people and know well their job.

I dont see any better and practicable political system than this. If there is one then I would like to know that. As earlier said representation include democratic elements, the opportunity for all citizens to hold representatives to account at the end of the term and to dismiss them if their performance in office is judged unsatisfactory.

[Badlun]

Can't you do any better than Wikipedia?

Come on. You talk allot. This is your chance to convince us that your preaching is based on knowledge. If you rely on wikipedia you will be ridiculed.

As I earlier said If you have to refute any thing taken from Wikipedia then reject it, criticize it with valid arguments and with references from better sources than wikipedia.

I am not writing here a research paper nor I am a blind imitator that just I should refer to others and give their references. These are discussions for sharing and learning. If I quote some one then I ll have to give the reference.

On the authenticity and importance of Wikipedia , one can discuss but for just giving a definition I dont need refer to books on political science or political philosophy. I find wikipedia handy for simple stuff. But its not just the name of wikipedia which you may not dislike, but refute what wikipedia say. can you give a better definition of democracy than the one I quoted from Wikipedia?

If you are so fond of references on scholarly research articles on the definition of democracy and academic discussions then please see here for the definitions of democracy.

http://www.la.wayne.edu/polisci/kdk/seminar/sources/collier3.pdf

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/about_us/meet_us/roger_pielke/envs5000/week12/schattschneider_semisovereign.pdf

http://www.ghandchi.com/92-democracy.htm

http://www.democracyweb.org/elections/history.php

If you read the above referred articles then you will come to the conclusion that such kind of discussions suit an academic world but where for forums like these , we need simple definitions for the learning of all as here we dont represent reseachers but general Pashtuns who may learn and share instead of doing research on the definition of Democracy.

Thats why I deliberately keep my discussion in a simple way for the benifit of all. Yes if we can make here a special group of research scientists and political analysts then we will have all discussions on the pattern and standards of research and the style which is given in the above two articles.

If you are fond of just ridiculing others then ridicule me by refuting my arguments and references by better counter arguments and better references.

[Badlun]

3: What can you say about a situation where a society decides to legalize sex with 3 year old children and allow people to sodomize 3 year old children because "the people" have voted for legislators in favor of legalizing sex with 3 year old.

Democracy in one or other shape is being practised in the modern word since few centuries but in all these years never a case has been seen as youn are describing above. Thus its practically impossible that a society will become so corrupt that it will ask its political reps to legislate for legalizing sex with babies or minoir age children.

All democracies in the world have constitution and almost all constitutions guarantee fundamental human rights and doing sex with a child is against any standard of human rights. Moreover there are always laws which prohibit sex with those who are not adults and there are severe punishments for this.

No legislation can be made against constitution or an established law and amending constitution or a law needs often two thirs majority in parliament and i dont think that human as a race will be so down graded that two third majority of legislators will vote for legalizing sex with a 3 years old baby.

The separation of powers or Trias Politica is a model for democratic governments. The government or the ruling party never has unlimited legislative powers which are being checked by judiciary or opposition.

This is very strange that marriages and sex with minors is very common in Muslim countries and even many consider it a Sunna as they quote that The prophet contracted marriage with a minor of 9 years hazrat Ayesha!