Monday, December 9, 2019

New Tork Times on Ertugrul

I have already given the link earlier.

The writer is William Armstrong, an editor at Hurriyet Daily News.

The article was published on May 14, 2017.

On the occasion of  Reccep Tayyip Erdogan's US visit the author diverted from dry political analysis to present the political status from the point of view inspired by the 'bombastic' three seasons of popular Turkish television show Dirilish-Erutrul (Resurrection Ertugrul). The 'loaded' tagline was National Awakening.

This chimes with the spirit of the age after Mr. Erdogan framed the constitutional referendum in April as a struggle against enemies of the Turkish nation and domestic traitors.

Apparently the Turkish mood, and even US political mood, can be adjudged by the popularity of their TV shows. Ever since emergence of Erdogan's party coming to power the TV shows are their prime exports.
 The first season featured a Turkish campaign against Crusaders in Anatolia, the second season battles against the Mongols, the third season war with the Christian Byzantines.
Not only the political temperature but national mood is captured by the shows.
At the end it is a bitter culture war between religious conservatives and more secular-minded cultural elites. It is not Islamization but nationalism and corresponding aspirations. It is also an exercise in political legitimization and it is an escape to virtual reality from harsh reality. Erdogan expertly exploits the public mood for political gain using poetry and songs.







Another Dilemma : Current Events vs Past

I have been bogged down for quite some time by the twin issues of the Muslims in India today and the Muslim in the world in general.

Both of these issues are extremely nerve wrecking as of now. So far my personal capabilities and capacity has proved to be inadequate to have an over overall compass of both of these set of problems.

In fact I have not been able to complete the overall historical assessment of either of these problems.

In overall assessment of the situation of the Muslims today in India my corner stone is HM Seervai's book on Partition of India: Legend vs Reality.

On the corresponding issue of the state of the Muslim community the world over my preferred book is Orientalism by Edward Said.

Sadly I have  not been able to get a grip over the over all view presented in these books. Let alone the microscopic details.

And then let us not forget the extremely fast changing current affairs both in India as well as the world.

In this regard friends would say that first of all I must finish my overview of Seervai and Said and they are absolutely right. The pesky problem is the sheer deluge of both domestic, that is India, and world news inflow.

So kindly pray that I can come to grip these problems. The programme at the moment can be summarized as - Seervai-Said-Current Affairs.

Indian Scientis on NRC

Source : The Wire

A group of Indian scientists and scholars from within and without the country have released a note of protest against the draft Citizenship Amendment Bill, expected to be tabled in parliament on December 9. The Bill proposes to grant citizenship to Indians on the basis of religion as well as passively excludes Muslims, and has triggered protests around the country and from various civil society groups as a result.
The scholars’ note, shared in full below, also calls attention to this aspect of the Bill and states that it violates the spirit of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. Over 750 scholars from around the world have signed the note, including the directors of three major research institutions: Sandip Trivedi (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai), Rajesh Gopakumar (International Centre for Theoretical Sciences, Bengaluru) and Atish Dabholkar (International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Italy).

TV Rajeswar on Emergency

This is old link but still very relevant even today where former IB Chief TV Rajeswar had told that RSS backed Indira Gandhi on emergency.

How to Solve the Micro-vs-Macro Conundrum?

Sometimes while dealing with a complex issue with some extensive length and breadth we face the dilemma of whether to present a microscopic view of the issue giving the details of the parts or whether to present a macroscopic view and outline the overall contours of the problem.

This is what I am calling the Macro-vs-Micro Conundrum.

At the logical level there is no solution to this puzzle. Microscopic details are essential and important and hence these must be given. Macroscopic view is important because that that is the only way to encompass the problem and hence that is what should be presented. The end result is that we can not decide which view to present.

Even pragmatism does not offer a way out.

A pragmatic person would say that either you give the macroscopic view with some microscopic details or you give the microscopic view and quickly move towards the macro view. In both of these approaches we are still left with an additional problem - how much details to include. Practically we have failed to solve the problem.

Someone might add that the amount of details that must be included will be decided by the individual problems. This is certainly a good suggestion but it is already demanding additional details to solve the problem.


Edward Said in his book offered a solution to this enigma. There might be many other solutions but Said's solution has struck me as an elegant as well as pragmatic one. In his book Orientalism he used the personal circumstances as the tie breaker between the two alternatives. So when you are besotted with the undecidable issue of choosing the requisite amount of details between the two approaches then use your personal circumstances to decide the amount of details to be included.

Of course in this case also we shall end up deciding on the case to case basis and in that sense it is on par with the earlier suggestion but we do have now a very robust paradigm to use for tie breaking.

Wednesday, December 4, 2019

AG Noorani on Army and Rule of Law

  AG Noorani has got a very powerful article here in the Frontline on duties of an army in face of possibility of wrong being committed in the area under its protection.


BBC Tone of Reportage

When the US has started talking to the Taliban in Afghanistan shouldn't the BBC tone of presentation reflect that?

One argument against this is that the second phase might just start and till there is a final settlement between the US and the Taliban is reached upon the world and hence BBC can not change the tone, attitude and the push of their reportage.

The trouble with this argument is that the reportage from the outset must have been unbiased - that is supposed to be BBC reputation.

But let us look at what is the current BBC attitude. A group of news items are collected under following headline:

What happened to previous Taliban hostages?
It is difficult to change this presentation but one thing is sure that here the negotiating party is not being given the same legitimacy that is expected for open attitude talks.

 The headline in the More on This Story are :

Story of Timothy Weeks

BBC has covered the story of Timothy Weeks in this report.

He is an Australian academic released by the Taliban in prisoner swap. Here is one of his quotes:

"I don't hate them at all," he said. "And some of them I have great respect for, and great love for, almost. Some of them were so compassionate and such lovely, lovely people. And it really led me to think about... how did they end up like this?"
Yet the BBC presentation on this news and the related items is completely different. The headline of the above report itself is:
Timothy Weeks recalls Taliban hostage ordeal - 'I never gave up hope'...
It is not as positive as the sentiments expressed in the earlier quote. Indeed any captivity can not be anything but an ordeal yet the mood of the headline does not match the sentiments of the captive about the Taliban.

One explanation for the softer sentiments of Mr Week will be the Stockholm Syndrome. This too leaves two points unanswered.

Firstly BBC is blowing a different trumpet from US. We remember Tony Blair as UK Prime Minister making a world tour, including India, in support of US President George Bush's agenda in Iraq. The same attitude is not reflected in BBC headlines and reports now that US has been talking to the Taliban. When you are talking to an entity, here Taliban, then you have to have a public posture of not being biased when you go to the talking table.

It is true that it is the US and not the UK who is talking to the Taliban. But this leads to a worse problem - that there is serious division in the west about the status of Taliban. Either it a legitimate agency to talk to or not.

Clearly we are seeing a shift in the US policy towards whom they, the US, were calling the terrorists till yesterday. Such policy shifts are huge operations and it takes time to turn all the relevant wheels.

The second unattended question regarding negative portrayal of Taliban is the larger question - there is the western (US, UK, BBC) narrative about the situation in the Muslim lands. This narrative is that they, the west, are dealing with the terrorists. I am sure there will be the narrative of the so called terrorists.

I am calling so called terrorists because either the Taliban are the terrorists and hence completely condemned or they are respectable enough to hold talks with.

All this still leads an uncovered frontier and that is most important - what is the Muslim narrative of these issues. After all these are the Muslims who have their interests at stake in all this. Does the Muslim World accept the west as the unanimous global policing agency or not? Do they a have their own take on the matter?

As a result should we expect BBC to change the tone, attitude and presentation of their news about Afghanistan?

Wednesday, June 19, 2019

Lectures of Late Dr Israr Ahmed

13-018 Allama Iqbal Aur Hum By Dr. Israr Ahmed (part 1/3)


Qayamat Se Pehle Azeem Jangain(WARS)| Dr Israr Ahmed 




Dr. Israr Ahmed | Greater Israel |


08-009- Islam Aur Bar-e-Azeem Pak-o-Hind (America 1994) By Dr. Israr Ahmed



13-016 Bar-e-Azeem Main Islam ki Amad By Dr. Israr Ahmed (Part 3/3)





Thursday, May 9, 2019

Laws of Argument

1. Thou shall not attack the person’s character, but the argument itself. (“Ad hominem”)

Example:  Dave listens to Marilyn Manson, therefore his arguments against certain parts of religion are worthless. After all, would you trust someone who listens to that devil worshiper?

2. Thou shall not misrepresent or exaggerate a person’s argument in order to make them easier to attack. (“Straw Man Fallacy”)

Example:  After Jimmy said that we should put more money into health and education, Steve responded by saying that he was surprised that Jimmy hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenceless by cutting military spending.

3. Thou shall not use small numbers to represent the whole. (“Hasty Generalization”)

Example:  Climate Change Deniers take a small sample set of data to demonstrate that the Earth is cooling, not warming. They do this by zooming in on 10 years of data, ignoring the trend that is present in the entire data set which spans a century.

4. Thou shall not argue thy position by assuming one of its premises is true. (“Begging the Question”)

Example:
Sheldon: “God must exist.”
Wilbert: “How do you know?”
Sheldon: “Because the Bible says so.”
Wilbert: “Why should I believe the Bible?”
Sheldon: “Because the Bible was written by God.”
Wilbert: “WTF?”
Here, Sheldon is making the assumption that the Bible is true, therefore his premise – that God exists – is also true.

5. Thou shall not claim that because something occurred before, but must be the cause. (“Post Hoc/False Cause”).

This can also be read as “correlation does not imply causation”.
Example:  There were 3 murders in Dallas this week and on each day, it was raining. Therefore, murders occur on rainy days.

6. Thou shall not reduce the argument down to only two possibilities when there is a clear middle ground. (“False Dichotomy”)

Example:  You’re either with me, or against me. Being neutral is not an option.

7. Thou shall not argue that because of our ignorance, the claim must be true or false. (“Ad Ignorantiam”).

Example:  95% of unidentified flying objects have been explained. 5% have not. Therefore, the 5% that are unexplained prove that aliens exist.

8. Thou shall not lay the burn of proof onto him that is questioning the claim. (“Burden of Proof Reversal”).

Example:  Marcy claims she sees the ghosts of dead people, then challenges you to prove her wrong. The burden of proof is on Marcy, not you, since Marcy made the extraordinary claim.

9. Thou shall not assume that “this” follows “that”, when “it” has no logical connection. (“Non Sequitur”).

Similar, but the difference between the post hoc and non sequitur fallacies is that, whereas the post hoc fallacy is due to lack of a causal connection, in the non sequitur fallacy, the error is due to lack of a logical connection.
Example: If you do not buy this Vitamin X supplements for your infant, you are neglecting your her.

10. Thou shall not claim that because a premise is popular, therefore, it must be true. (“Bandwagon Fallacy”).

Example: Just because a celebrity like Dr. Oz endorses a product, it doesn’t make it any more legitimate.

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Karen Uhlenbeck

Article in NYT

RJLipton

Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Role of Ulama in Realizing Unity : Mufti Rafi Usmani Sahab DB

Part 1   Part 2   Part 3   Part 4   Part 5

Part 1

(1) Speaking in Ebrahim College, refers to presence of some  Maulana trained in Darul Uloom (Karachi)

(2) Some people of Maulana Tahir-ul-Qadri too are present

(3) Muft Sahab praises this and starts a discourse on unity of Ummah.

(4) Cites the example of past differences over whether eating crow is allowed.

(5) Complains that more than Islam we have our sects and Masalik on our tongue.

(6) Though the Qur'an says that do not be divided.

(7) There were difference in past among Sahaba RA, Taba'aeen, Fuqaha, Muhaddiseen, Mutakallimeen and Sufees.

(8) This did not lead to depletion of mutual respect, honour, love.

(9) Today our mutual difference has turned into a dispute and enmity.

(10) Our enemies have added fuel to it though we may not realize it.

Part 2

(11) We are the followers of Rasoolallah SAW and Sahaba RA.

(12) And if we talk of Ulama of Deoband then it is not because we love Deoband.

(13) Deoband was an idol to worship.

(14) We love the Ulama of Deoband because they were proud their slavery to Rasoolallah SAW.

(15) I, my father, my grand father and many earlier generations are from Deoband and I used to write my name as Muhammed Rafi Deobandi and in enthusiasm even had it printed on letterhead.

(16) When my father handed over the Darul Uloom administration to me on the first day he instructed me not to use the Deobandi title.

(17) It smells of sectarianism.

(18) Khalifa of my father maulana Abdus Shakoor Tirmizi wrote a book Aqa-id-e-Ulama-e-Deoband and asked my father to critique it and write the foreword.

(19) My father asked to change the title for Deoband is not a new sect.

(20) Deoband means following the Sunnah of Rasoolallah SAW. The distinction of Ulama-e-Deoband was that they tried to revive even the smallest of Sunnah of Rasoolallah SAW.

(21) Their love and respect for Rasoolallah SAW was such that a scholar like Maulana Muhammed Qasim Sahab Nanotwi RA, whose knoledge was so deep that even today big scholars find it difficult to penetrate his books, was presented by some a pair of shoes of green colour. He refused to wear these for the colour of Green Dome was the same.

(22) Today Deoband has been made an idol.

(23) I have a speech that is published whose title is that the Maslak-e-Doband is not a sect but it means to follow Rasoolallah SAW.

(24) So there is no need to write a new book on the Aqa-id of Deoband. To know the Aqa-id of Deoband pick of Aqeedat-ut-Tahawi and Aqa-id-e-Nasabi and the like.

(25) Whatever is written there that is the Maslak of Deoband.

(26) They were proud of their slavery to Rasoolallah SAW and Sahaba RA and that is real thing to be proud of.

(27) Barbar of Maulana Rashid Ahmed Gangohi RA's barber visited Saharanpur. Maulana Khalil Ahmed Saharpuri RA was a Muhaddis of gigantic proportions who exegesis of Abu Daud is published even today in the Arab world and elsewhere.

(28) Maulana Khalil Ahmed Saharnpuri asked this barbar about the way Maulana Gangohi used to do a certain act of Sunnah.

(29) Today we have made Maslak an idol and do not attend each other's functions.

(30) Our family came to Pakistan eight months after partition and my father used to go in the car or taxy to the functions that fetched Barelwi and Shia scholars and everyone used to speak from the same stage.

(31) Same was true in India. After Partition Satan has divided us so much that we do not go to each other's functions and we have separate Masajid for Deobandi, Barelwi, Ahl-e-Hadith, Shia and Sunni. Not a single Masjid for Muslims.


Part 3


(32) Our Elders did not teach this. They taught that there is only one Deen. Deen dear to Allah SWT is Islam.

(33) Another confusion is that Islam is considered a Mazhab, religion. No where Qur'an calls Islam Mazhab, it calls it Deen.

(34) A few details about the distinction between Religion and Deen.

(35) Business, employment, judiciary, society, administration lie outside religion but not Deen.

(36) On duty in PIA flight and air hostess offers liquor.

(37) Hazrat Usman Ghani RA not doing reduced prayer while visiting Makkah though he was permanent resident of Madina and Hazrat Abullah Ibn Masa'ood praying behind Amir-ul-Mumineen in spite of difference of opinion so as not to create dissension.

(38) Anecdote of Hazrat Abdullah Ibn Masa'ood advising people to pray individual prayers when the Khateen of Ummayad administration missed Sunnah timings for making long speeches. To avoid controversy in open.

Part 4

(39) In Madina the current practice is to pray two units of Witr and then separately pray one unit. People asked me about this. I researched. I tell them that I pray behind the Imam of Harmain Sharifain.

(40) I also tell you silently that I do my personal revision later on. (But do not create open dissension.)

(41) That we follow Hanafi Fiqh does not mean that this a a distinction of Truth and Falsehood from other Fiqh.

(42) My father used to call this difference in the spirit of being right but with a chance of being wrong. Other Fiqh were not right but did have chance of being so.

(43) My father used to say that in those matters where Ijtihad is unavoidable no option is undesirable or excluded.

(44) These issues are rather important for the Ulama to remember.

(45) Ghair munkar par nakeer karna khud munkar hai. To criticize the noncritical is criticical.

(46) This visit to Britain has pained me due to divisions of Ummah.

(47) The same thing is there in Pakistan. Even then Ulama of different Masalik can come together to work together for common problems. This includes Wifaqs of different ideologies - Deobandi, Barelwi, Jama-at-e-Islami, Ahl-e-Hadith, Shia.

(48) Islamic Ideology Council was formed in the times of Ayyoob Khan. There differences there too but these people come together in critical issues.

(49) This is not a good omen that there are differences here. I have been told that there are even regional differences too.

(50) In 14 days I have spoken in various places Birmingham, Dewsbury, Nottingham, Sheffield and where you have.Youth has been meeting me. they want to act on Deen, to live a pious life. But our Maulwis do not want them to be pious.

(51) Even the Ulama have created a chaos of different opinion. Youth complains about it. They are asking questions, not out of criticism and mockery but out of genuine concerns and fear.

(52) Is this a service to Deen? Your youth is growing up in such confused atmosphere.

(53) The new generation wants to live and die like Muslims and want to know the Islamic way. What they find is is that while visiting a Mosque they come to hear allegations of Shirk on others and Kufr on others.

(54) My request to honourable scholars is to sit together and erase these disintegrating forces.

Part 5

(55) Need of the hour is to talk with wisdom.

(56) My respected father used to say that in the Ummat the number of points on which everybody agrees are so large and in the Ummah the deviations are so vast in numbers that you can spend a life time and these will not be exhaust. Yet we focus on differences and talk not of common interests.

(57) Ulama have the youth entangled in these issues of difference.

(58) One reason behind this is that at least in Pakistan the Imams are not real scholars.

(59) For example there is a Maulwi who has memorized the points about criticism and refutation of Barelwi Maslak. But he can not talk of any other issue.

(59) Among the Barelwis too there are people who specialize in criticizing Deoband and they do not take pains to prepare any other issues and topics.

(60) These Maulwis have memorized a few couplets and a few jokes and can not talk about anything else.

(61) These people are like Urdu poet Mir ChirkeeN (who used scatological references only).

(62) One popular couplet of ChirkeeN.

(63) I request you to have mercy upon the coming generations (and avoid differential issues). Give them positive and beautiful teachings of Islam, the teachings of moderation.

(64) Tell them about unity. Dua.