Mutazilah its pashtoon relevence by ScimitarXEdge

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Was AUTHENTIC TRUE ISLAM found? and whats the martyr count?

I think Edge is correct in some regard. Widen your worldview though... is the authentic American around? You have your Ron Paul/Rand Paul republicanism that I subscribe to that hearkens back to the constitution (equivalent of their divine revalation) and the word and deeds of their founding fathers (their sunnah)... yet you also have Sarah of Alaska and you have Ricky Santorum and Opportunist Billy Boy of Arkansas and Obama and the each of the mullahs of Americanism.

It appears that the question of us finding the authentic American is ever more pressing because it appears that the inauthentic American is destroying the world via reaping instability in foreign lands and his environment. Moreover, the authentic or inauthentic American actually does have an arsenal or nuclear warheads that threatend the viability of all life.

Where there are human hands, there are differences. Where they are human minds there are walls of separation my friend.

[Baygham]

I think Edge is correct in some regard. Widen your worldview though... is the authentic American around? You have your Ron Paul/Rand Paul republicanism that I subscribe to that hearkens back to the constitution (equivalent of their divine revalation) and the word and deeds of their founding fathers (their sunnah)... yet you also have Sarah of Alaska and you have Ricky Santorum and Opportunist Billy Boy of Arkansas and Obama and the each of the mullahs of Americanism.

It appears that the question of us finding the authentic American is ever more pressing because it appears that the inauthentic American is destroying the world via reaping instability in foreign lands and his environment. Moreover, the authentic or inauthentic American actually does have an arsenal or nuclear warheads that threatened the viability of all life.

Where there are human hands, there are differences. Where they are human minds there are walls of separation my friend.

Then stop pretending to have absolute knowledge, ie, Islam
(BTW I am not talking about you, I am talkin about muslims in General and specially the wheelers and dealers of religion, my spite is with them not the commoner, who is equally abused, whether he admits it by shouting like me, or stays quiet and pretends all is glory and great).

Say, Islam is just another religion, and I am a follower of Islam. I respect and love that culture and am proud of it. Some of my fellow brothers don't respect my point of view as much and don't see the positives as I do. I am OK with that and desire that we all live in harmony and work on something that promotes that. As equal citizens of any region, state or culture. We don't believe in discrimination and exploitation based on religion. We don't force religion down others who don't share our beliefs.

Can you do that? If not might as well join the wheelers and dealers as you are abetting them, might as well get paid for it. And this silence is not without a price, your fellow brothers and sisters who believe a little different are being exploited and you are part of that exploitation.

[Baygham]

There is no "true Islam" or "untrue Islaam" there is only Islaam, which itself what is True. the hyberbolic misrepresentations and grasping for straw here by Baygham are simply irrelevancies.

Whatever contention Shamla and I have or he has with other are not with the fundamentals, but how we approach the fundamentals. Shamla prefers a more rigid approach, myself prefer a balance of intellectual inquiriy rooted in foundational relationships.

The Islam that so and so follows is not a different Islam, it's merely a different level of understanding. To me Shamla is not following the "wrong" Islaam, he's following a superficial understanding of it, he's on level 1 where as others like Wrayun like myself who are more apt for addressing nuances are on level 4, and others maybe on level 8. I'm using the analogy of levels to describe that each of us are all right on certain contexts, it's just some of us choose not by Islaam's dictation to emphasize certain contexts more than others.

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

[maneatinglizard]

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

I think you aren't at any "level," because it is quite clear from the few posts that I've read of yours that you not only don't understand Islam, but you don't even understand what you're trying to say, what you want, and who you are.

You're like a blind animal in a cave. Even if you had eyes, they wouldn't help you get out of the mess you're in.

[graveyardofempires]

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

TOBA TOBA TOBA
da se awrem

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Baygham Khan,

Salamoona,

I don’t think that you are as free in spirit as you say… I mean I consider myself religious but not necessarily endowed with knowledge of my religion as well as I could be. I do my best to say my prayers and read Al Kitab, etc yet you appear to dwell on religion much more than I do. However, it seems that as free as you say you are you (and Toramana to an extent) are not free from whatever it is that haunts you. The reason I come to this conclusion is that as Alchemist noted, Edge and I tend to touch on the historical human experience and cite revolutions and encapsulated concepts. Yet you see religion behind any ideology that smacks at the hand of occupation and have what appears to be a very emotion response to it. Its almost like you and the religion are conducting a complex dance and she is the tango partner you just cannot get out of your mind.

You ignore what Dalia Mugahed and Jon Esposito, in their study “What a Billion Muslims Really thing” termed the vehicle through which the Islamic nations register their political and ideological language, motivation, and action.

YouTube - Who Speaks for Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think[/URL]

It is as anecdotal and non evidence based as ignoring the southern tradition of bible thumpin and American Patriotism as a galvanizing force.

Despite recognizing that interventionalism is occurring you demand that the Pashtun not react. Its like saying to a cell: don’t react to thyroid hormone. It is like telling an American in the aftermath of the twin towers destruction: lets analytically think about why 9/11 happened and not resort to jingoism. You saw how well that went for Richard Gere at that concert Paul McCartney put on: that fireman asked Richard Gere if he could punch him in the face.

You are conflating two concepts: Insurgency against occupation vs Religious hypocrisy and the judgemental tyranny that follows from it. The two concepts can be mutually exclusive. One does not need to be an alim or even literate in Arabic script to utilize the galvanizing vehicle of religion and defensive Islamic warfare. My suspicion is that you do this to tie the hands of your people from using that one modus operandi that has always worked to deyolk them since Mir Wais Neka’s time.

In place of it, you offer nothing that is evidence or history or civic studies based. As an example, you previously cited up that same oft cited “success story” of Bacha Khan and Ghandi in other threads but conveniently ignore the concurrent exploits of Muhammad Jauhar and the murder of Lord Mayo. You gloss over the insurgencies of Taurangzai, Faqir e Ipi, and Mullah Powindah. These were instrumental in economically and militarily exhausting the Royal British Empire. You forget how when Bacha Khan attempted to bring Nehru to Wana the Ahmadzai threatened him but told Nehru he could leave in peace under the code of melmestia.

So when that offer lacks sense you instead offer secular democratic insurgency fueled by education and development. Yet once again, you ignore the educated individual that says: Baygham Khan… why do we study the natural history of disease? Why do we follow the pathology of Cirrhosis? Why not withhold treatment during sepsis? These questions sound taunting because such an individual knows that natural history of American Imperialism at home and abroad. He cites to you Tecumseh and his insurgency and the oft violated treaties that the Europeans made with the Natives of this land. He has seen with his own eyes Indian reservations and the death and destruction of a people, wholesale. He notes to how civil rights was enshrined in the constitution, yet it took the civil disobedience and rage of Malcolm X (Mullah Powinda) alongside the African-American Bacha Khan (Martin Luther King) to actually secure those rights. So he asks you… why Baygham Khan would we ever trust your proposed pathway when we know the natural history of this disease?

The common retort is the canard of Arab Imperialism that I am steadily debunking in this thread and shall continue to do so:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/political-talk-11/arab-imperialism-occupation-13535/

And finally, remember that comment I made to you about circular questions? You are asking a Muslim: “So though in your belief system you believe that God sent a divine message to be followed by man… what’s the deal compadre, can we replace that with some Baygham derived laws? It’s a cool deal… you can go to art fairs and drink or not drink make love or make art etc.” It’s the equivalent of asking the Christian: So you believe that Christ’s kingdom shall manifest on earth? He answers, “Yes.” He also believes mans laws ought to not contradict Gods laws. You go on to tell him that abortion is something he just has to accept because it makes sense to you… he looks at you confused about how you did not just hear how he accepts “Render unto Ceaser that which is Ceasers and render unto God what which is his” but he does not accept “Render unto Ceaser that which is Gods.”

So instead of something practical you ask us to subvert the will of the people, which per well powered polls with large sample sizes, does not accord with what you want for the people:

http://www.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sppu...0and%20America

“For example while large majorities support the principle that will of the people should be the basis of authority for government; majorities also support the notion that shari'a should be the basis for government and that a group of Islamic scholars should be able to vet laws.”

The usual retort from Toramana Wrorre is about how the caliphate failed and that the three caliphs had multiple assassination attempts. So what? What about this list of assassination attempts against sitting and past US Presidents?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...mpts_and_plots

Do these attempts and successes descredit the American system? Does John Wilks Booth’s success at murdering Lincoln discredit his policy ipso facto? Does Gabriel Giffords death devalue the constitutional American system?

For that matter, you ignore the spirit of informed Islam which appears to show that the Prophet himself buttresses a view that folks like yourself ought not be harrassed by folks like this Tablighis:

Here is a hadith from Bukhari that shows you Islam in its pure form was not this craziness you experience today:

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 68:
Narrated Ibn Mas'ud:

The Prophet used to take care of us in preaching by selecting a suitable time, so that we might not get bored. (He abstained from pestering us with sermons and knowledge all the time).


Volume 1, Book 3, Number 70:
Narrated Abu Wail:

'Abdullah used to give a religious talk to the people on every Thursday. Once a man said, "O Aba 'Abdur-Rahman! (By Allah) I wish if you could preach us daily." He replied, "The only thing which prevents me from doing so, is that I hate to bore you, and no doubt I take care of you in preaching by selecting a suitable time just as the Prophet used to do with us, for fear of making us bored."

So instead brother, with the evidence at hand, it becomes the reverse question of what you asked:
With your lack of proof of Arab Imperialism in the Afghan Russian War… With your lack of historical proof to buttress your proposals… with clear antithesis to the natural order of what the man on the ground wants… why do you assist and abet those that kill, maim, destroy, and brutalize your people in the name of subverting their right to direct their own destiny? Are you ready to disavow self motivated and opportunistic/parasitic intervention that continues to enslave your people and destroy them?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

Once again, you are asking a Muslim to debunk his own theology simply because you want him to. This concept of God consciousness (or taqwaa), also found in the Judeo Christian tradition is tempered with God's attributes of mercy and forgiveness. So most of us that do our best to follow Islam appear to be less tormented than you are... your words do not evidence freedom but rather the work of a frenzied mind that needs soothing relief.

So the Muslim starts his day with "bismillah arrahmaan arraheem" confirming that God is merciful and gracious.

And when he reads surah baqraa he must ignore your request because on page 1 the Quran says:
Zalikaal Kithaabau laraybaa fihi hudalil mutaqeen" that translates to "this is the book-- in it is guidance sure without doubt to those that are God consciouss"

Your request is like asking a constitutionalist like Ron Paul to ignore his sense of civic justice.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

Rather it appears that you are under the severe effects of the ailment underlying the Christian concept of "original sin"... a concept that thankfully, we Muslims do not have to carry the burden of. This concept has broken the strong mind of many an theologan.

Our religion teaches us that the father and the son do not carry eachother's sin.

Instead the Quran hearkans back to the concept found in the New Testament's parable of the Prodigal Son. In it, Christ imparts what God truly was revealing through his mission: the sinless man is no better than the repentent sinner.

The Muslim believes in the ever flowing grace of God and believes that when he earnestly does tawbaa, even if the sin is repeated, God gives forgives him and renders the repentent sinner equivalent to the sinless man.

This is exactly why the Islamic doctrine eliminates an intermediary or priesthood between Man and God. The need for a crucifixion of an inerrant, perfected man is irrelevent because all come to God and are able to be forgiven and become the equivalent of that theoretically.

Cheer up brother! Its a spring day and the sun is shining. God is not hiding in the shadows or watching you with binoculars... he has given you free will and his forgiveness is unending. Hell and Heaven are destinations that need not be burned or put out... they are reminders of eternal justice, not fire and brimstone!

[Baygham]

Baygham Khan,................ Despite recognizing that interventionalism is occurring you demand that the Pashtun not react
.......

As long as humans live on earth, in man made nation states, including pashtoon land, outside intervention will occur. I dont know where you got that idea that I say that pashtuns should not react. All I am saying is that not only should pashtoon react, they should react in a coherent manner and not get exploited by one outside force against another. The basis of this coherent method should be, to only think of the well being of the pashtoon nation and not get distracted and in the process exploited in outside wars and conflicts that will bring no prosperity but further increase already unbearable suffering. If america is against pashtoon nation, pashtoons should fight them, if pakistan is they should fight them, same for arabia, iran, russia and everyone else. Some will be more after our destruction some less, so instead of fighting the whole word, we focus on whats the path of least resistance and adopt a clear vision as individuals and as a nation.
With that doctrine in mind, and taking ground realities in perspective, I think pashtoons should aid america in what ever it wishes viz a viz the pakistani/arabic sponsored jihad and fight those demons first. Once that is achieved and if america turns around on pashtoons and we have no further use for them, like against china or russia/ iran. Than by all means, let the hounds loose. But as they say in pashtoo, "dha azal na awal ma mrra" we should not self detonate (which we are doing).

You are conflating two concepts: Insurgency against occupation vs Religious hypocrisy and the judgemental tyranny that follows from it. The two concepts can be mutually exclusive. One does not need to be an alim or even literate in Arabic script to utilize the galvanizing vehicle of religion and defensive Islamic warfare. My suspicion is that you do this to tie the hands of your people from using that one modus operandi that has always worked to deyolk them since Mir Wais Neka’s time.

Present situation is more complex and simple paradigm of kufar and islam will not work. Just like in Mughals time the yousafzai could not rely on kufar and islam to wage war against mughals. Now some of our enemies are indeed muslims. We should sit back and in a relaxed manner see the pros and cons of who we should fight and for what. Knowing america inside out, I am not afraid or worried about american imperial goals in pashtoon land. I can however see tremendous opportunities in taking a ride on the american bandwagon. Similarly knowing the religious wheeler and dealers and their pakistani and arabian sponsors, I see no good ever coming out of that and that even with a few hundred honest souls they can be defeated from pashtoon land.

“For example while large majorities support the principle that will of the people should be the basis of authority for government; majorities also support the notion that shari'a should be the basis for government and that a group of Islamic scholars should be able to vet laws.”

the large majority may support 'bachabazi' what do I care, Sharia cannot form the basis of any human habitation that I want to live in and so I dont want to wish it on my people. Those that wish sharia should point to a place on this planet where sharia is present and then emigrate there, why experiment with my watan for that.

So instead brother, with the evidence at hand, it becomes the reverse question of what you asked:
With your lack of proof of Arab Imperialism in the Afghan Russian War… With your lack of historical proof to buttress your proposals… with clear antithesis to the natural order of what the man on the ground wants… why do you assist and abet those that kill, maim, destroy, and brutalize your people in the name of subverting their right to direct their own destiny? Are you ready to disavow self motivated and opportunistic/parasitic intervention that continues to enslave your people and destroy them?

to have imperialism you need an imperial army. Arabs have, was about to say some thing rude but will control myself, no such thing. What they do have is a capacity to throw a lot of money to do a lot of damage to impoverished people. I dont see an arab fighting an american in Qatar, UAE or saudia. Why than the poor in yemen are being slaughtered. We are proxy battle fields for their imperial designs but having no army to carry those ambitions they carry that through impoverished third parties who get slaughtered for them. The reason the west tolerates this is because they do provide safe passage of oil at a suitable rate, a lot cheaper than it will take to mine it with a population uprising against and not working. Thus the western armies are not in charge of actual extraction of oil. They know they will pay a trillion for it and a little uncertainty will bring that money back to NewYork. So in reality they have the whole region for free.
to fight the demons in their heads for being used like the Biatches that they are, the arab elite wash their anxieties through these pseudo channels, where they themselves remain humble servants and others die for their honor.

In short, pashtoon should only fight for themselves. First we must delineate what is ours and what is not in our favor. A short example of a cause worth fighting and dying for will be
Improving socioeconomic conditions
integration into global economy
modernization of infrastructure
improved human rights and freedom of expression
improved protection of minorities and women
decrease potential for exploitation from outside intervention.

A list of what we should not direct energy at and thus never engage in.
Arab isreali conflict.
american obsession with iran
pan islamic jihad and ideology
paki establishment sponsored elements
cartoons in denmark
american imperial track record or its lack of a track record.
The health of sarah palin and keeping a track of what she says.
killing pashtoons for land in heaven and for hurs.
The debate for or against gay marriages in USA, or for that matter in kandahar.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

As long as humans live on earth, in man made nation states, including pashtoon land, outside intervention will occur. I dont know where you got that idea that I say that pashtuns should not react. All I am saying is that not only should pashtoon react, they should react in a coherent manner and not get exploited by one outside force against another. The basis of this coherent method should be, to only think of the well being of the pashtoon nation and not get distracted and in the process exploited in outside wars and conflicts that will bring no prosperity but further increase already unbearable suffering. If america is against pashtoon nation, pashtoons should fight them, if pakistan is they should fight them, same for arabia, iran, russia and everyone else. Some will be more after our destruction some less, so instead of fighting the whole word, we focus on whats the path of least resistance and adopt a clear vision as individuals and as a nation.
With that doctrine in mind, and taking ground realities in perspective, I think pashtoons should aid america in what ever it wishes viz a viz the pakistani/arabic sponsored jihad and fight those demons first. Once that is achieved and if america turns around on pashtoons and we have no further use for them, like against china or russia/ iran. Than by all means, let the hounds loose. But as they say in pashtoo, "dha azal na awal ma mrra" we should not self detonate (which we are doing).
Present situation is more complex and simple paradigm of kufar and islam will not work. Just like in Mughals time the yousafzai could not rely on kufar and islam to wage war against mughals. Now some of our enemies are indeed muslims. We should sit back and in a relaxed manner see the pros and cons of who we should fight and for what. Knowing america inside out, I am not afraid or worried about american imperial goals in pashtoon land. I can however see tremendous opportunities in taking a ride on the american bandwagon. Similarly knowing the religious wheeler and dealers and their pakistani and arabian sponsors, I see no good ever coming out of that and that even with a few hundred honest souls they can be defeated from pashtoon land.

the large majority may support 'bachabazi' what do I care, Sharia cannot form the basis of any human habitation that I want to live in and so I dont want to wish it on my people. Those that wish sharia should point to a place on this planet where sharia is present and then emigrate there, why experiment with my watan for that.

to have imperialism you need an imperial army. Arabs have, was about to say some thing rude but will control myself, no such thing. What they do have is a capacity to throw a lot of money to do a lot of damage to impoverished people. I dont see an arab fighting an american in Qatar, UAE or saudia. Why than the poor in yemen are being slaughtered. We are proxy battle fields for their imperial designs but having no army to carry those ambitions they carry that through impoverished third parties who get slaughtered for them. The reason the west tolerates this is because they do provide safe passage of oil at a suitable rate, a lot cheaper than it will take to mine it with a population uprising against and not working. Thus the western armies are not in charge of actual extraction of oil. They know they will pay a trillion for it and a little uncertainty will bring that money back to NewYork. So in reality they have the whole region for free.
to fight the demons in their heads for being used like the Biatches that they are, the arab elite wash their anxieties through these pseudo channels, where they themselves remain humble servants and others die for their honor.

In short, pashtoon should only fight for themselves. First we must delineate what is ours and what is not in our favor. A short example of a cause worth fighting and dying for will be
Improving socioeconomic conditions
integration into global economy
modernization of infrastructure
improved human rights and freedom of expression
improved protection of minorities and women
decrease potential for exploitation from outside intervention.

A list of what we should not direct energy at and thus never engage in.
Arab isreali conflict.
american obsession with iran
pan islamic jihad and ideology
paki establishment sponsored elements
cartoons in denmark
american imperial track record or its lack of a track record.
The health of sarah palin and keeping a track of what she says.
killing pashtoons for land in heaven and for hurs.
The debate for or against gay marriages in USA, or for that matter in kandahar.

As I noted, I need not repeat myself with the points I administered... the most telling statement by you was: "Sharia cannot form the basis of any human habitation that I want to live in and so I dont want to wish it on my people." In your world, its a me, me, me world. You ignored the point that you are subverting the will of the people, people, people (them, them, them). Its no different than saying to any nation: "democracy and secularism... oh crap, you did not vote the way I wanted... man I gotta get my drone game on."

We are trying to get you to understand (as you have admitted in other areas) that the ground level as you call it, does not endorse your goals. However, you seek to force them to do so.

Also, someone needs to be on the other end to accept that Arab money. It appears, and I will build on that case in the other thread, that the Pashtuns asked, accepted, and utilized that money to lethal affect against the Russkies. You cannot subvert history. Moreover, Iraq is an occupied battlefield... Saudi is an occupied country with bases on the Hijaaz, Qatari bases do exist, Egypt had strong military relations with the US. You chose to malign the Arabs without considering, once again, as I have repeatedly asked you to do, to consider the facts. Now, if the Arabs have done as the French did when they funded the American insurgency, I request you call the French by the same terms as you wished to call the British. If the Arabs were as willing to bardaash this equation... why was Osama Bin Ladin so willing to raise his army and flee his homeland in the first place? Why is Iraq burning? For that matter, why is Abdullah of Saudi so afraid of the Egyptian insurrection?

Regarding the Mughals... you would do well to remember that the historical facts are the opposite... that insurgency failed. In general, the Muslim mindset across the globe under the nascent concept of ummat, finds even nominal affinity compared to the idea of accepting an occupying Christian force. History proves this per the extremely successfull insurgency against shiah iran and Christian Gurgin by Mir Wais and the failed insurgency against Aurangzeb.

So you merely buttressed my point that this is, unfortunately, a world wide insurgency that America has bought to her doorstep with decades of foolish interventionalism. The primary source evidence, from the words of Faisal Shahzaad to the Underwear Bomber to the Taliban to the Niger Delta Rebels to the Somalian Insurgency all cite anger towards policy and interventionalism as the binding tie. In fact, Doku Umarov cited the same reasons verbatim... I hardly see an Arab hand in molding the Chechyaan insurgency. In fact, the only Arab leader to have great hold was a Yemenese named Omar Al Khattab (as you cited Yemen as an exploited Arab state)... so that was the exploited working with the occupied defeating your definition again.

As I noted, you can shrug off history regarding Yankee incursions in Latin America and the damage done there (that spawned Che Geuvara's insurgency) and the yolk thrown on the Indians and the African Americans... but simply brushing it under the rug and not addressing it does not make it less real. History is a pesky thing to deal with brother.

[Baygham]

As I noted, I need not repeat myself with the points I administered... the most telling statement by you was: "Sharia cannot form the basis of any human habitation that I want to live in and so I dont want to wish it on my people." In your world, its a me, me, me world. You ignored the point that you are subverting the will of the people, people, people (them, them, them). Its no different than saying to any nation: "democracy and secularism... oh crap, you did not vote the way I wanted... man I gotta get my drone game on."

We are trying to get you to understand (as you have admitted in other areas) that the ground level as you call it, does not endorse your goals. However, you seek to force them to do so.

Also, someone needs to be on the other end to accept that Arab money. It appears, and I will build on that case in the other thread, that the Pashtuns asked, accepted, and utilized that money to lethal affect against the Russkies. You cannot subvert history. Moreover, Iraq is an occupied battlefield... Saudi is an occupied country with bases on the Hijaaz, Qatari bases do exist, Egypt had strong military relations with the US. You chose to malign the Arabs without considering, once again, as I have repeatedly asked you to do, to consider the facts. Now, if the Arabs have done as the French did when they funded the American insurgency, I request you call the French by the same terms as you wished to call the British. If the Arabs were as willing to bardaash this equation... why was Osama Bin Ladin so willing to raise his army and flee his homeland in the first place? Why is Iraq burning? For that matter, why is Abdullah of Saudi so afraid of the Egyptian insurrection?

Regarding the Mughals... you would do well to remember that the historical facts are the opposite... that insurgency failed. In general, the Muslim mindset across the globe under the nascent concept of ummat, finds even nominal affinity compared to the idea of accepting an occupying Christian force. History proves this per the extremely successfull insurgency against shiah iran and Christian Gurgin by Mir Wais and the failed insurgency against Aurangzeb.

So you merely buttressed my point that this is, unfortunately, a world wide insurgency that America has bought to her doorstep with decades of foolish interventionalism. The primary source evidence, from the words of Faisal Shahzaad to the Underwear Bomber to the Taliban to the Niger Delta Rebels to the Somalian Insurgency all cite anger towards policy and interventionalism as the binding tie. In fact, Doku Umarov cited the same reasons verbatim... I hardly see an Arab hand in molding the Chechyaan insurgency. In fact, the only Arab leader to have great hold was a Yemenese named Omar Al Khattab (as you cited Yemen as an exploited Arab state)... so that was the exploited working with the occupied defeating your definition again.

As I noted, you can shrug off history regarding Yankee incursions in Latin America and the damage done there (that spawned Che Geuvara's insurgency) and the yolk thrown on the Indians and the African Americans... but simply brushing it under the rug and not addressing it does not make it less real. History is a pesky thing to deal with brother.

Nobody in yousafzai land or the peshawar belt wants mullah omar. They have a vague concept of sharia, that could mean anything and could be easily morphed into all the things that we need. Nobody knows what sharia is, let alone who will implement it and who will be the khalifah(try writing a two page sharia based constitution and lets simulate its effects in time). Afghanistan is war torn country with rampant PTSD, the people wishing for flashbacks to stop will do what ever promises to stop them. If sharia was to deliver than the 10 years under taliban would have delivered something, what did it deliver, name one parameter of human progress. Kandahar can keep sharia, we dont need in pakhtunkhwa, thankyou very much. If it comes to that than might as well make the durand 'pookh' and a few meters tall. Interestingly nobody in kabul wants sharia either but that does not mean they want something good.

The only difference between you and I is that I am willing to accept any solution to get us out of this quagmire, except Islamic sharia law, which for us has been tried and tested and discarded.
You will accept anything and everything as long as the muslim umma/islam paradigm of ultimate divinity is not shattered.

This is an insurmountable impasse and hence reflected in our stance.

One thing to clarify. The yousafzai did not surrender to the mughals and to this day occupy the same resources they did in mughal times without getting on the muslim umma / khalifa bandwagon.

[Alchemist]

Nobody in yousafzai land or the peshawar belt wants mullah omar. They have a vague concept of sharia, that could mean anything and could be easily morphed into all the things that we need. Nobody knows what sharia is, let alone who will implement it and who will be the khalifah(try writing a two page sharia based constitution and lets simulate its effects in time). Afghanistan is war torn country with rampant PTSD, the people wishing for flashbacks to stop will do what ever promises to stop them. If sharia was to deliver than the 10 years under taliban would have delivered something, what did it deliver, name one parameter of human progress. Kandahar can keep sharia, we dont need in pakhtunkhwa, thankyou very much. If it comes to that than might as well make the durand 'pookh' and a few meters tall. Interestingly nobody in kabul wants sharia either but that does not mean they want something good.

The only difference between you and I is that I am willing to accept any solution to get us out of this quagmire, except Islamic sharia law, which for us has been tried and tested and discarded.
You will accept anything and everything as long as the muslim umma/islam paradigm of ultimate divinity is not shattered.

This is an insurmountable impasse and hence reflected in our stance.

One thing to clarify. The yousafzai did not surrender to the mughals and to this day occupy the same resources they did in mughal times without getting on the muslim umma / khalifa bandwagon.

he came to prove that islam is divided but ended up proving that pashtun nationalism is divided....tsk tsk tsk it must be so frustrating to be a pakistani american...they call it cognitive dissonance. look it up.

[Baygham]

he came to prove that islam is divided but ended up proving that pashtun nationalism is divided....tsk tsk tsk it must be so frustrating to be a pakistani american...they call it cognitive dissonance. look it up.

actually its ABCD, ie American Born confused Desi.
some manifest, the hostage syndrome, like sodo-mized madrassa pupils become subsequent supporters of the system.
in Vienna syndrome, expatriates yearn for a land that never actually existed in the form they remember.

As far as cognitive dissonance is concerned, a musalman in 21st century is in that state, you dont need to come to america for that. What is really damn frustrating is to keep this damn laptop dry in the whirlpool

[Baygham]

he came to prove that islam is divided but ended up proving that pashtun nationalism is divided....tsk tsk tsk it must be so frustrating to be a pakistani american...they call it cognitive dissonance. look it up.

pashtun nationalism is not only divided, some may say it does not even actually exist in a coherent form.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Consider me at level 100.

At that level God is not a frightening beast (baww). Like rabia, you have burned heaven and put out the fire in hell. Yet still, you don't lie or cheat, you don't exploit or get exploited. Sleep comes in seconds. Demons don't chase you day and night. You have no obsession about how others are having sex or how you can infuse Allah into them. You don't panic with the thought of God. You can even joke about him, fully assured that you will be fine.
The only thing that does bother you is to see others agitated and in pain over something so trivial and easy to overcome. You shout and shout 'hey guys whats all the ruckus about'. But nobody listens, rather, they get mad.

I am told at level 150, you stop giving a rat's a s s. I hope I get to it one day, true nirvana, the ultimate sage. Life though wonderful at 100 is still a touch sad.

Rabi'a's "burn heaven and put out hell" wasn't somehow a denial of moral iimperative, but a denial of personalistic motives rather than the big picture. Many people misunderstand this as they do other Sufi literature and just think the Sufis somehow threw caution to the wind and used the idea of deeper spiritual consciousness as a license for loose morality. We know that's not what they intended by the lives they lead outside of their poetry.

You missed the whole point entirely and hence the variables that define your vision of enlightenment appear to be modeled on the most superficial notions and characterized by the most erratic and juvenile of impulses, reared on lack of responsibility, pacifying indulgence, and self denigrating egocentricism, the battle cry is that of a snotty brat that yells at it's parents " it's my life and no one can tell me what to do, not even God, even desecrating themselves in the process." the tragically misguided product commercial brainwashing.


My sense of moral duty to Justice has difficulty allotting a rank of 100 for such banal thinking and if this mentality deems Nirvana as this state of negligent apathy and indifference, it appears to be an even more sorry condition; reflective of those who have abandoned dignity in exchange a state of numb pacification. Insomuch as I am concerned, this is decay , the opposite spectrum of enlightenment

Anthropologically religion was mankind's connnection to nature and beyond that it was connecting Nature to the more primeval reality that surrounds it; and because of that everything that deals with human life had some relatuonship since those connections dlineated what we do with our resources our bodies and each other in relation to our natural faculties the conscious reawakening to the instinctual; of course each item with different priority levels. Hence something as societally significant as sexuality has very important and valid rules of engagement, as does war, economics, and even the principle of the Creator since that's what relates all things together at it's most essential core.

a person without understanding this fundamental premise can never be at level 1 , never mind level 100, misquoting Sufi literature out of context and theatrics won't somehow feign for genuine serious holistic search for Truth.

I would have to agree though, it is a burden, life itself is some trap, our choices have existential and possibly transcendental consequences, heck having to actually use our brain and put thought into anything is a problem, why can't we just pacify ourseleves waste precious resources for poker tourmenants and technocracy or whatever desperate pathetic diversion society manufactures that we don't really need anyways, and then for God's sake, no pun intended, we have to actually use that brain with all those grievous thoughts for thinking about God or morality so that society functions the way it's supposed to, who needs that? or other burdensome things like the role our existence plays, why we're here, problems, what and having to always be conscious of things outside of one's own dysfunctioning scope of reality, heck Truth is a burden, it worries some people sometimes, and sure it might interfere with Photography class, but the this elusive claim of a worry free life as happiness is really a veil for cowardice and the cowardly in their avoidance of worry only prove they're the ones most afraid of living.