What does calling another Muslim a Non-Muslim make you?

One word that comes to your mind with intrigue. Qadiyani, doesn't come easy for its existential uncertainty in Pakistan. Yet, despite what the constitution says about them in derogatory terms, they are determined to stay in this country that has dogmatic laws made to appease the Saudi-funded and military promoted religious might. Irrespective of the fact that despite having the demeaning laws, the final determinism of persecution is based on mob vigilantism that makes the work of law enforcing authorities quite ineffectual, hence leaving our minorities completely vulnerable. But there's nothing like sheer determinism of survival in Pakistan, a country which is literally succumbing to the heralding dogs in green turbans and long beards or the chatterbox Aalim scholars who come on TV in their best designer Kurtas to publically denounce others as Wajib ul Qatl for following their beliefs. Even more shameful is it that citizenss of Pakistan can't have their ID Cards unless the sign the statement calling Ahmedis as non-Muslims. Imagine the social humiliation a Qadiyani actually goes through every time he/she sees everyone signing the piece of paper condemning them in order to be a citizen of Pakistan? As if our righteous Muslims did not scream "discimination" whenever they were to que up for special registration at American Airports.

While the mind remains boggled with religious onslaught and the vigilante mob tyranny, it gets even harder to understand what drove our society to ex-communication of an entire segment, calling them kaafirs and relegating them with status of a minority.

"We don't like to be called a minority" Says Tabinda*, a defiant young Ahmedi woman and a scholar with whom I made my initial contact for my research on minorities. "the state has endorsed us with this title, and as a protest, we refrain from voting in general elections"

Imagine that: an entire segment is not casting their votes and still no one feels bothered by their dismay with the government that calls itself "democratic"? The roots of evil lie in the 1973 constitution by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto which officially called them Non-Muslims. Zia ul Haq then came with his double fanged poison, passing an ordinance in 1984 that actually persecuted them for praying in public along with other "muslims", were forbidden to give azaans, and were even forbidden to build "minarets" (pillars) of the mosque. Stating that any act of Islam practiced by them is "Un-Islamic", hence Islam is forbidden for them . Confusion doesn't even end there with the ridiculous laws that have been over-enthusiastically presented and passed by the president, it keeps on living and thriving without expiry or introspection as it thrashes to indirectly exterminate a 0.25 percent of the population. Pressured by the Tehreek e Khatm e Naubuwat movement that started with their calls to denounce Ahmediyya on a social level, eventually boasted about the Government bowing down before their demands. Their mission worked in socially outcasting them. Often times have I heard about people using Dettol and chemical cleansers everytime they learned that an Ahmediyya person has paid homage them a homage by accident or by fate.

Where is this hatred really stemming from? So much so that an important international Pakistani physicist, the Nobel Winner Dr. Abdus Sallam has been deprived of national recognition and pride because of his Ahmedia connection? They did not even spare the respect of his gravestone. Instead, the schools in Punjab mainly mount portraits Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan, the known plagiarist and a convicted thief who's being presented as a role model.

To understand the degree of hatred here is not surprising for anyone trying to understand bigotry, but once one finally comes to know the basis of this hate is most shocking. The Ahmediyas are not technically Kaafirs. They believe in the finality of the Prophet Muhammed. They take Ghulam Ahmed Mirza as a reverened reformer, just like mainstream Muslims here have faith in our Sufi Saints. They don't even have a seperate Kalima, I witnessed that at a Friday sermon I attended at their "Ibadat Gah" which I would like to call a Masjid that it rightly deserves. The only technical difference they have with other major sects of Muslims is over the Resurrection of Christ. So where are they really committing the "Shirk" as propagandized by the Khatm e Nabuwat proponents? And declaring anyone who believes in Allah and his Last Prophet, to be a Kafir is a form of Shirk itself. This makes an entire Government of Pakistan living in an act of sin, something that needs to be challenged at the court and in the parliament, only if there are any conscientious takers.

Are we headed for racial terrorism now?

With Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik still fresh in our minds with his anti-multiculturalism manifesto, it is but natural to question the direction the UK riots will take sooner or later. In the beginning it was merely reported as a peaceful protest by the relatives of 29-year-old Mark Duggan, who was shot dead on Thursday night by police in the Tottenham area of North London. Later it turned violent as the African Caribbean community protested against the police killing. By the third day clips of both white and black youngsters prowling the streets, mugging and robbing, were all over the internet. And by Tuesday we have reports of the brown people getting together to protect their worship places. Why did the Sikh in Southall West London feel the need to stand guard in front of the Gurdwara? Or Muslims feel the need to protect Mosques?

The rioting in London has become the most discussed topic and it seems that the English mob spirit is not much different than the mob spirit in Pakistan, which has me in a quandary of sorts. I know that shouldn't be the case, because supposedly all human beings are the same and must be treated equally without any discrimination on the basis of color or creed. But despite all these noble ideas, I find it strange to get accustomed to news coming from the ‘tame’ West which can match the reports coming out of Pakistan on some level.

While reading accounts of the situation from bystanders or affectees and the details of what the security agencies plan to do has a striking resemblance to what happens in Pakistan every now and then. The broad difference between the two is that when the same happens in Pakistan, it can easily be dismissed under the garb of Islamic terrorism and its repercussions.

Though terrorism is a part of the problem it is not the 'only' one. There are many other evils that ail the society at large, a major one being unemployment. Currently developed countries are facing an alarming increase in the unemployment rate (UK 7.7% and US 9.1%); however countries like Pakistan have already been battling with this issue. Pakistan’s unemployment rate is quoted at 15% by Google, forcing many people to migrate to greener pastures.

The same working class who is unable to make ends meet in their native country thrives and gets better with time, ultimately financing and sponsoring many of their relatives to their adopted country. They run local businesses, drive trucks, taxis etc and meanwhile keep developing their network, so much so that they end up creating a mini Punjab, or Gujrat in countries like UK, US, Australia etc. This has always created resentment among the native populations of the developed countries. Granted that many natives of these countries are secular in their approach and respect diversity, but still many are around who are far more aggressive and who carry the torch of hatred. In reality the number of haters could actually even be higher, but due to the secular nature of their governments, they are reigned in.

Only two years ago reports had started pouring in about widespread targeting of Indians in Australia which was cited to be random and not racist in nature by many. I fear with the rising unemployment within the native populations of these developed countries, resentment towards brown people will increase. Since we are more in number, and provide cheap labor not just when we live in developed countries, but also when work is out sourced to us, we are a much likely target to vent out frustration at than the local police.

Why Conscience is more important than Reigious Dictates

(By religion I mean the one that trickles down to us through its man-made interpretitions)

Religion becomes politically necessarry to justify any act of goodness or, evil. Please, don't forget that the Vaticans backed Hitler during second world war. The sub-servience of the blacks by white rulers in South Africa had been justified through biblical references--and then it was the same Biblical references that later condemned such apartheid.

However, I don't think religion is necessarry to make an independant judgement on moral/ethical issues. I think it is more of your conscience and your own relativity to the environment that counts, for a man, in my view, should be defined more by his core, not his religion, because religion blinds a man from seeing evil he's committing in the name of religion.

An implication is that it is because of RELIGION do people keep themselves from committing evil. Is it not? I disagree.

If you look at it more closely, it's basically a heed your "conscience" is giving to what it feels right, otherwise, had I considered anD accepted my Holy Book, I could have become a jihadist who kept the self from having free thoughts.

Second assertion why religion is important is because it can give you some moral guidelines in an otherwise "materialistic" world. If one wants to cite examples where land expansionism and greed for more catapulted bloodshed, then he/she must consider reading history one more time. The Crusades throughout the history had been the prime reason why there'd been so much chaos around. In fact, religion itself had been quite materialistic and goal-oriented. Why? it's a about the Holy Treasury! more the followers, more powerful it becomes. There's no such thing as an unmaterialistic religion. If there is such a thing, then that's spiritualism and mysticism. That has nothing to do with dictates of relgion. It follows its own course and remains quite personal.

The third assertion is the moral codes. As I mentioned earlier, morality is nothing but a personal judgement and that too depends on how you relate yourself to your environment. However, hegemonic dictates of morality have proved to do more wrong than good. There are times when the circumstances run stronger than predetermined moralistic impositions by the society. It is, but ony a religion that gives no respectable place for homosexuals, illegitimate children, women who have fornicated, or have even been raped in some cases, infidels, heretics, sense of good humor, freedom of speech, lifestyle and thought.

Never under any circumstances can you find two people who can think alike, because they have their own convictions. What they seek is not a judgemental religion to lead a civic life in a given society. They need secularism that can ensure that nobody oppress them, transgress into their personal liberties and that their right for protection is well-guarded.

Not all ideologies are evil, or even the practitioners/ followers of it are necessarrily evil. However, the very concept of religion,which otherwise wouldn't exist without it's propogation is what I find evil on two counts:

1) When it tries to propogate its righteousness and absolutist judgementality against those not falling within its realm. (Which reliegion doesn't say that only its followers will go to heaven while its non-believers will rot in hell?)

2) The second inherent trait of it is "preaching", which in my view is taken in two ways; 1) brain washing by using fear tactics (fear of doing something that can result in God's curse/punishmment) and 2nd is Authoritarianism; failure to comply can result in one geting ostracised from the community, or even punished by death in some cases.


As for people like Desmond Tutu as concerned, yes, I admire him a lot, not because he used Bible as a justification to help bringing down the apartheid in South Africa, but because his intentions were much stronger than the religion itself to bridge the gap. But what if Desmond Tutu were a segregationist himself? Then his use of religion to propogandize in favor of apartheid would have been equally justified. It was the conscience of the man, and intentions based on it that helped South Africa move in the right direction.

The question is, why can't this all be done without having to rely on religious beliefs? Are people really that naive that they cannot feel, think and relate themselves with their reality without having to rely on some sort of divinity about it?

Something's been stopping them to take such a "risk' to think independantly. That fear of reblliousness against an orthodox is caused by none other but religious brainwashing.

When business is the priority

So I prayed the Sunni way today at the mosque. As the mullah said 'allah akbar' I saw the kids around me raise their hands, hence I followed suit. With his voice reverberating through the loud speaker, even if I could have remembered something of the Shia prayer I learnt as a kid, my mind went totally blank. I could not for the life of me remember how to pray. On top of that I had never attended a prayer at the mosque even during my 'muslim' days, let alone a 'jamaat', so it was damn confusing. I just did the situps and kept following the kid on my left. However, when she raised the finger of her right hand, I was bummed, checked the kid on the right, and she was doing the same. I have seen it happen a lot throughout my life, coming from a mixed family, but today, everything seemed so funny that I had to force myself to look at the butt of the lady right in front.

She wore a floral dress with a lot of sequins and lace. Almost all the ladies and girls had nail polish on their feet, which was a relief to some extent. And the room smelled of sweat mixed with the smell of biryani and some odd perfumes.

Work takes us many places, and some of the places may just not be for us. I went to the mosque today to distribute flyers and to network within the Muslim community. I thought of it as a fun occasion with free food. Never crossed my mind I will end up praying. So anyway... since I prayed, there are a few important questions to answer.

Who did I pray to?
The butt of the lady right in front of me.

What did I think of while praying?
Of course not god, rather I could not even think much with the mullah blaring in the mic.

How did it feel?
Hilarious. I could not stop laughing and had to bend my face so that my chin touched my chest and nobody could see my laughter.

Will I do it again?
For business, if I have to, I guess I will.