Society, Women and Behashti Zewar

[VCheng]

Last time, I remember my Lord and your Lord granted all of his finest creations the ability to distinguish between right and wrong and to decide whats best for them. One thing Muslims and specially Pakistanis need to learn, you don't need to teach or enforce everything. Humans have awarded a brain that is capable of free critical thinking, don't limit it. Zia didn't make anyone a good Muslim or even their prayers respectful in the eyes of God by closing down shops forcibly or using stick carrying low level enforcers, fear might be the best motivation for doing something but it isn't effective at all.

Free thinking is the death of prescribed dogma. If it takes hold as you advocate, who will follow the purveyors of established religions?

 

[Secur]

@Secur - I am too lazy to go through all those long posts so tell me whats being discussed here !

And whats your position on the issue so that I may take an opposite position !

The entire thread is based on the criticism of a famous religious book written specially for guidance of women (though it isn't limited at that). One side points out that the book is largely irrelevant today because most don't even understand the complicated Urdu used in the book and since nobody bothers anymore to consult these texts. Also, that the criticism isn't valid which it fails to consider the historical context and the time constraint. Me, I side with the idea that the basic ideas of the parts which are criticized are wrong irrespective of the time they were/are written in, that there can be no compromise on them. And that any reformer should rise above that and not start agreeing with the wrongs of the same person or era, which he's trying to correct.

Why am I not surprised?

These Mubarak Ali illiterate can't say directly otherwise they have issues with Quran too.

What is the problem with certain people to always associate criticism of Mullahs, seminaries, sectarianism, radicalization, extremism and religious terrorism to an underlying problem with religion or God?

Argument for the sake or argument is one thing otherwise I personally fail to understand why we are discussing a book that is neither being read nor practiced these days. The Urdu of the book is so classical that not many Pakistanis coming out of our royally screwed up education system can really read and understand its contents. Tradition of reading books (let alone thick religious books) is on its last breaths or in-fact already dead. Now Beheshti Zewar -type books are either found in libraries of old parrots like me or in the public libraries where nobody get them issued. Bottom line is, this book is not affecting the society so why are we discussing something that has become irrelevant both in its teaching and its influence?

Mate, it is still relevant for a certain crowd (surprised that you didn't mention it), not to mention that it was in service for a large period of time and affected society before. I agree with the rest of your post.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Why don't we establish first whether the treatment and rights and duties of women as described in BZ are relevant and applicable to today, before talking about Islam at large? I also posted three very relevant questions earlier based on the content of the book. How would you answer those?

fair enough. Let's start with specific chapter from the BZ itself and not mumbo jumbo Mubbarak ali stuff.

 

[VCheng]

fair enough. Let's start with specific chapter from the BZ itself and not mumbo jumbo Mubbarak ali stuff.

Sure, you can pick a chapter as you'd like.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Sure, you can pick a chapter as you'd like.

I though you had issues and thus attacked BZ.

 

[VCheng]

I though you had issues and thus attacked BZ.

I have not attacked BZ or Islam anywhere at all in this thread, as elsewhere. I have merely said that the book is outdated, and needs to be reviewed if it is to keep its primary source of Islam relevant, that is all.

 

[FaujHistorian]

I have not attacked BZ or Islam anywhere at all in this thread, as elsewhere. I have merely said that the book is outdated, and needs to be reviewed if it is to keep its primary source of Islam relevant, that is all.

outdated chapters? sections?
may be they are not outdated. Just not applicable to you in person perhaps.
They may be still valid for camel or goat herder communities of today in 2015.

 

[VCheng]

outdated chapters? sections?
may be they are not outdated. Just not applicable to you in person perhaps.
They may be still valid for camel or goat herder communities of today in 2015.

Does that sound like an attack on those who chose to follow BZ still?

 

[FaujHistorian]

Does that sound like an attack on those who chose to follow BZ still?

OK. Good.

Looks like we are done here.

p.s. onto a new behas bara-i behas

 

[VCheng]

OK. Good.

Looks like we are done here.

p.s. onto a new behas bara-i behas

That is not my call. @Secur did try to make an important point with his OP, it is a pity that what followed was anything but, given the membership here.

 

[FaujHistorian]

That is not my call. @Secur did try to make an important point with his OP, it is a pity that what followed was anything but, given the membership here.

quoting from Mubarak Ali is a lazy @rrse thing.

Reading the subject matter yourself is hard, very tough.

Our lefti revolutionaries are easily inflamed by such Mubarak Ali ramblings. Nothing new.

 

[VCheng]

quoting from Mubarak Ali is a lazy @rrse thing.

Reading the subject matter yourself is hard, very tough.

Our lefti revolutionaries are easily inflamed by such Mubarak Ali ramblings. Nothing new.

Lefties? The inflamed parties here were definitely far more "righties" than lefties!

 

[FaujHistorian]

Lefties? The inflamed parties here were definitely far more "righties" than lefties!

OK.

 

[VCheng]

OK.

Smart, very smart. Just another way to get this thread shut down.

 

[Zarvan]

The entire thread is based on the criticism of a famous religious book written specially for guidance of women (though it isn't limited at that). One side points out that the book is largely irrelevant today because most don't even understand the complicated Urdu used in the book and since nobody bothers anymore to consult these texts. Also, that the criticism isn't valid which it fails to consider the historical context and the time constraint. Me, I side with the idea that the basic ideas of the parts which are criticized are wrong irrespective of the time they were/are written in, that there can be no compromise on them. And that any reformer should rise above that and not start agreeing with the wrongs of the same person or era, which he's trying to correct.

Why am I not surprised?



What is the problem with certain people to always associate criticism of Mullahs, seminaries, sectarianism, radicalization, extremism and religious terrorism to an underlying problem with religion or God?



Mate, it is still relevant for a certain crowd (surprised that you didn't mention it), not to mention that it was in service for a large period of time and affected society before. I agree with the rest of your post.

Because those who are criticizing are basically after religion as they are afraid to say many things directly so they come up with indirect way of abusing and lying.