I do not agree with this. Sufism came to transoxania and Khorasan (Afghanistan) around the 9th century when what is now Pakistan was part of the Saffarid or Samanid rule (at times by Abbasids)... so it came to that geographic locality first then spread to other parts. It has spread but it is a local flavor of Islam.
Fail to understand the relevance. What is the point? Origin of Sufism or its role in what is now Pakistan?
I agree this is indeed a perception but there is no reason it cannot be changed. The change can begin with the middle classes.
Perception can not be changed easily. Not difficult to figure why.
Agree, but it was our invention. Why are we avoiding this reality just because it is inconvenient to the mind of the average Islamist fanatic today?
Not terribly important. Jeeta hai Roomi, Hara hai Razi - Iqbal.
These will become inconsequential when secularism is imposed. The issue disappears like water under a bridge. It should actually be inconsequential-these questions because it is not the duty of the state.
Imposed? Loaded word.
Those questions are extremely important. Secularism is just a shortcut then if you think that imposing it would do the magic trick. Avoiding these questions has brought confusion and pain. Ignoring these questions is not an option.
I could write a book here. But suffice to say that Pakistan suffers from a crisis of identity. Imposing secularism would at best be a try to freeze the situation. This would not work.
I am including a piece of my post in some other thread:
"Yes, there is some geographical logic behind Pakistan, it largely being based on River Indus, but this geographical factor works in a round-about way (Muslim majority populating Indus and its tributaries). But this geographical factor is not strong enough to bind this country together. The Eastern borders are not defined by any geographical feature. The Western borders are also open to interpretation. Three ethnicities are shared with three neighbors (Punjabis with India, Pashtuns with Afghanistan, & Baluch with Iran & Afghanistan). The difference between different ethnic elements are enough to tear apart this country, once Islam is taken out of equation.
Perhaps now you can begin to understand how can a strategist set about to tear this country in a couple of decades. One simply has to discredit the role of religion in Pakistan's internal and external dynamics - this being accomplished to an uncomfortable extent. The other process is to fan the apathy into hatred in ethnic terms - a process well under way. "
Source:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...disliked-everywhere-else-6.html#ixzz2K9VdVX5Z
You describe yourself as a nationalist, and an activist to boot. Now let me ask you a rather pointed question: Being that you are a Pakistani nationalist, can you please tell me what this nationalism is based upon? Has there ever been a country by this name? or having this border? or having this specific composition (ethnic, geography, politics)? It would be pretty dumb to define your identity in terms of something that was created artificially only a few decades ago. Why was this country even 'created'? It seems to have failed in its third decade of existence. Why place hopes and dreams in something which is pretty meaningless in itslef; has no history, no precedent, no existence even save but a few decades ago. Why be so committed to something which has no basis upon which to place its existence?
Havi, when you divorce Pakistan from Islam, the above questions become imminently relevant. I know the oft repeated bit that "Pakistan was made for Muslims, not Islam". I have no problem with that either. But when you impose your 21st century sensibilities upon our country, we run into problems.
So what is wrong then...? We just do not know who we are. Our crisis is that of our identity. The whole world is going in a certain general direction, but we are rooted to a spot. Our ego gets hurt when we hear others talking about us. Oh of course, we need all what everyone seems to have: modernity, freedom of expression every which way, the supposed sanctity of consensual sex between two adults, the GLBT rights, abolition of death penalty, & more similar stuff. Looking at Pakistan which does not give us what we think is our birthright is a source of irritation. What can make it all right for us? Is there some way? Some shortcut?
There are no short cuts. There is only a way of toil, sweat, and maybe tears. We must do what the two earlier generations did not do. Their concerns were different. We can not turn away. There is nowhere to turn to. It is not good enough that the generation that made Pakistan had a general idea of what they were doing. For them identity did not quite matter. They had achieved something phenomenal. But they did not tell us what it meant.
You know the economic growth that Pakistan has had, the technology we have acquired, the weapons we made, are all pointless. For we do not know what all this is about? What all this is for?
Havi, I would very much like to know how you define your identity. Why you think it is of any worth to be known as a Pakistani?
If we divorce Islam from Pakistan, we strike at our reason to exist as a separate country. We might as well rejoin India. If today's troubles make us look here and there to find a shortcut solution to our problems, then we are not worthy of this country.
Seriously? Prophethood in the 21st century? Nation of Islam? lol. Far too much, Chak Bamu. Its never happened in last many years.
Claims of prophethood after its been sealed has to do with psychological trouble. Find out about Rashad Kahlifah. He declared prophethood only about three decades ago. I remember some of his followers heckling any interfaith discussion that caught their attention. Every country and culture has such nutcases.
Hate for the Ahmedis has to come up somewhere. Lets just let everyone practice in peace. They are more of the victims than those who have magically oppressed others or hurt the sentiments of others. Mir Zafarullah Khan was an Ahmedi and was called Jinnah's son. If you are going to be racist then leave this.
How was I hateful? Please tell me. I just pointed to the fact that Qadianis call us Muslims as Kaffirs (and they have been doing so since the beginning of last century). It was mentioned as an illustrative example. How is that racist? Seeing that most Qadianis are Punjabis like myself, how can I be acting with racism? I just raised a valid concern and you just side-stepped the issue and took a parthian shot while doing so.
They can pray as they wish, they can live as they wish, but I would certainly object to hypocrisy if they themselves or someone on their behalf calls them Muslims. They are full citizens of Pakistan and they contribute as part of society. If they are targeted by terrorists, I would be just as upset as you. But please let us dispense with hypocrisy here. This issue is especially sensitive for me because an inviolable religious principle is involved.
You still have not answered my question though. What to do when someone just gets up and declares himself a prophet and gathers a following. The state being secular in your hypothetical case would do nothing. And of course people can not take law into their own hands. Are we going to have Qramatians, Druze, Yazidis and such like calling us kaffirs and be fine with it? (There, I did not say Qadianis, Happy?)
These are very trivial concerns but our minds have not learned to look beyond them yet. Concepts of ethnicity and sect are embedded in our minds like gobar in a jute gunny sack. But the gunny sack with the help of a good handler can release itself of its gobar eventually.
Not trivial sir. But then let us agree to disagree on this point.
Sect-bazi is for Mullahs. Let them have it. They would not know what else to do. Ethnicity is important to some people and as a subservient part of identity, there is no harm in it. But I am worried about 'handler'. Is it a-la-Musharraf? I hope not.