How to free Pakistani society from Mullahs

[ravage]

Re: How to free Pakistani society from Mullahs

@diwana

Finally, you came out behind the bush. You do know there are a lot of mullahs who are doing their job sincerely and not in to politics
directly or indirectly. Now if they are given the chance they would bring sense to any menace created by fake ones.

I know there are a lot of mullas who are not into politics directly or indirectly. That is the appropriate position for mullay. Bear in mind that when I say politics I refer not to any political party, but politics broadly defined, i.e. “The activities associated with the governance of a country or area.”, where governance includes matters such as law, foreign policy etc. Im glad we agree that mullay should have much less of a role in such matters. I think you spend a lot of time talking about not to take things literally, well I think you do people who bash mullay a disservice. We only bash mullay to the extent that they share in our sad domestic and foreign politics (see post number 1).

Here is what I have said repeatdly, instead of b*****ng mullahs as evil group or class of individuals one need to think mature way.

See, heres your confusion again. In discussing Iqbal’s dim view of mullay our own perspectives on them are irrelevant. you repeatedly, to put it politely, rape language, just because you want Iqbal to say what you believe.

LOL. I can say spare me from the definition but as a gentleman I’ll say, thanks for the time exlaining.

No problem at all, I am an educator. I hope hereon you will not try to claim that mullay are not a class.

Becayse snyne with AS little brain siize as pea would know Iqbal did not mean ALL mulahs, nor he meant thise mullahs who are well educaated.

No, he was talking about Mullay in the abstract i.e. as a class. I agree that he did not mean ‘ALL’ mullahs (i told you you’d come back to this banal point). With reference to him not meaning mullay who are well educated, well thats just your speculation.

This is the part where he says mullahs are the reason for gharait e deen. And iin his opinion a positive role of mullahs.
Glad to see you got the point funally that he did not have any such idea of ‘typical mullahs’.
Like I said as well, there ARE no typical mullahs.

There is no doubt Mullay can play a positive role. Lead namaz, conduct marriages, give good spiritual lectures on personal development etc etc. That being said there is a gulf between what Mullay can do, and what mullay as a class do. And this is where the many shairs I posted give an indication on what the perspective of Iqbal was, and what he believes Muslims must do to develop themselves. (i.e. develop themselves, deny mullay the role of religious gateway to Allah). He inherited the profound skepticism his European influences had of the clerical class, evident in the many quotes I’ve provided.

With respect to this showing he had no idea of typical mullay, Im afraid your logical skills suck as bad as your mathematical skills do. You cannot draw an inference from him opposing the removal of religious institutions entirely that he did not decry the power mullay currently had as arbiters of Godliness on the world. All through his ash’aar on mullay, he speaks of them categorically (look that word up).

Notice that in responding to your shair, I could just have said ‘oh he was referring to that minority of minorities that is good’. But I am not a dishonest debater. I do not extrapolate from the evidence I offer, beyond what the evidence itself compels. You on the other hand post one thing after years of goading, and then say things like ‘i’ve proved xyz’.

Never meant to when gave example. Merely refuted your assertion that he was somehow thinkng of a typical role by mullas as being fruitles , negative or harmful. And this was a strong evidence.
Like I said, minority or mahority was never meant to be proved, it was the false notion of typical mullahs which was refuted by me…succesfully.

Here is an example of what you do. Refute is a synonym for proof. You have offered evidence for one, specific thing. He did not want the removal of religious institutions from the Muslim world. This cannot be conflated with proof for any of the following:

1. He thought most mullay were not ‘fake’
2. His poems on what mullay do are limited to a small segment of badly educated/fake mullay
3. He didnt think that investing religious endeavour and authority in the hands of mullay was a bad thing

These are the points at issue. This is what has been granted so far:

1. His poems do not mean that ALL mullay are ‘fake’ (a diversion you like to walk on every so often, on your own, alone, unprompted)
2. He thought mullay have a role to play in Muslim society (not a minority or anomaly as I would claim if I were following your debating style, but as a class)

How limited that role is, and what the impact is when mullay exceed their role in society is what concerns me. At his time, and indeed in our own, mullay have vastly exceeded the role they should play. This is what Iqbal wanted to reverse. This is what the OP wants to reverse. This is what you should want to reverse. Whether you want to call them ‘fake’ mullay while you’re at it is fine by me.

Already showed your trial of statistics by using median or typical value was incorrect in defining typical mullahs. Refer to post 51. All you answered was it was in my head () where evil mullahs lie.

Your troubles with statistics would require a herculean effort that is beyond me to fix, evident by your definition of symmetric distributions and your cluelessness on what a median is in them. Nevertheless please bear in mind that despite the obvious advantage I can take by exploiting your weaknesses in that area, it is you who keeps trying to post about distributions, outliers, normality and skewness, each time to hilarious effect. I have consistently used median, where I have, interchangeably with typical. That, is a reference to typicality, a way to talk about the class of mullay, of the representative mullah, in general, not a re ference to any hypothetical or real distribution or curve of mullay.

You have not yet given correct understanding of the completer shayr. And asking me how yo are incorrect..

Deen e Kafir Fikro Tadbeer e Jahad
Deen e Mulla Fi Sabeelillah Fasaad

Here in my understanding he is usng fi sabeelollah as pun to add wth fasaad against what usually religious people say fi sabeelillah jahad. He says others are doing true jahad like going against their enemies while these fake mullahs are busy in creating fasaad among themselves.

Nothing to do with intellectual and technological endeavor as you said twice. You do know he was for khilafat movement?

So was Gandhi, so what. At that time khilafat movement was a very anti-colonial movement, with significant ties to the general non-cooperative movement. Wrt the shair, You read jahad literally. I read jahad as endeavour (which includes the science of warfare). Read shikwa to note that he did not limit himself to envying the west’s prowess at war.

But you could not do that in last two discussions we had and before this you said you did not want to answer me calling me troll. Just could not come up with the answer. Remember?

It is true that you have a way to keep coming up with bad answers and illogical responses that eventually wear down the patience of any rational person. I admit that I will only do this so long as I enjoy it.