Beat Meaning In Urdu - Beat Definition English To Urdu
How to say "beats me" in Urdu
Google Translate
He Came Here To Beat Me Meaning In Urdu - He Came Here To
Beats me - Idioms by The Free Dictionary
beat me meaning in urdu
beat me meaning in urdu - win
A Sermon on Truthfulness
Assalaamu 'alaikum w w I present a translation of a part of a sermon of Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih II r.a. on truthfulness, in which he mentions the exaggeration of numbers of members, apart from other things. The sermon is dated 18th August 1950, and is recorded in the Al Fazl newspaper of 5th September 1950. The relevant portion of his sermon on 'Truthfulness' is from pages 4-7. The original Urdu sermon can be found here: https://www.alislam.org/alfazl/rabwah/A19500905.pdf: Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih II r.a. states: "... The reality is that this (following) question is a very important question, and we should always keep focussing our attention on this point that by means of Ahmadiyyat, a light of God descended, but what benefit have we gained from this light? For example, there are 5 or 7 main things about which I think that they are indicators of morals. And it is our obligation that we strive to instil these things within us. Of these is one thing which in reality is a sign of a believer, that is, truthfulness. I see that members of our Jama’at do not fully understand it’s importance. They will speak, albeit with ignorance, heedlessness, or lack of knowledge, and their speech is not 100% truthful. They mix in a measure of falsehood in their talk in order to beautify it. They will exaggerate when mentioning the signs of God the Most High. When mentioning the membership of the Jama’at, they will exaggerate. When mentioning the wrongs done to them, they will exaggerate. Someone will have slapped them 10 times, yet they will declare 12. Whereas to prove someone as a wrongdoer, what difference does it make to mention 10 or 12 slaps? If someone has slapped another even once without justification, his wrongdoing is established. But they are not satisfied with this and begin to exaggerate. Or they will say that such and such a person beat them so much so that they left them half dead. And they will try to exaggerate in this manner. I remember, that when I went for the Hajj, because I was young at this time, Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih I r.a. wished that Abdul Hayy Arab should also accompany me. His desire was that by staying in Egypt, I should complete my Arabic studies, but this desire (of his) could not be fulfilled. Abdul Hayy Sahib Arab was a resident of Iraq and had become an Ahmadi from the Shi’ites. And the Shi’ites have (a habit of) exaggeration (in them) somewhat more than the Sunnis. In Jeddah, we were staying at the residence of Seth AbuBakr Sahib. An Arab merchant came to visit us there, and Abdul Hayy Arab began to do tabligh to him. … I was reading a book when I suddenly felt as though Abdul Hayy Sahib Arab had become excited and passionate, and the Arab merchant was sitting in great fear. What had happened was that Abdul Hayy Arab Sahib was relating to him the account of (Pundit) Lekhram and was stating that Hadhrat Masih Maoud a.s. had specified a particular year, month, day and time when this person would be killed, and no worldly power would be able to save him. Because all the Aryas (i.e. Hindus of the Arya Samaj sect) knew of this prophecy, the police had surrounded Lekhram’s premises on this day and stopped the entry and exit of people into the premises. When the prophecied time came, and Lekhram was hidden in his room, and there was no possibility of anyone killing him, suddenly the roof split open, and an angel came down with a sword and split his belly and killed him. The Arab merchant, under the influence of this account, became pale faced and fearful that if he now rejected this account, an angel would descend and split his own belly also. When I heard this account, I said: Abdul Hayy, you lie even in tabligh? He began to say: Wasn’t there a prophecy? I said there was indeed a prophecy, but God had said that he would be killed within 6 years, and you claim that a specific year, month and day was prophecied. And the (actual) events are that a person went to Lekhram, the doors were open and his wife and children were present, and he inserted his dagger (in Lekhram’s belly) and disappeared. Though the word angel was used, it meant that as an angel is not caught, neither will he be caught. Then I said that you say that the roof split open and an angel descended, whereas this is a complete lie. You also say that the police had surrounded the premises with a guard, whereas this is also a lie. He began to say that when they would have become aware of the prophecy, would the police not have placed a guard? I said that this is not an issue of ‘would have’. The issue is what actually happened. The point is that even in tabligh, lies are told. In the same way, when they have to inform others about the membership figures of the Jama’at, they will say that we are 10 laakh (i.e. 1 million), or 12 laakh (i.e. 1.2 million) or 15 laakh (i.e. 1.5 million). When people ask me, I say I do not know. Perhaps they have already conducted a census. Whereas, whether it be 10 or 10 laakh (i.e. 1 million), the real thing to determine is whether there is truthfulness within the Jama’a or not. Does it present true teachings or false ones? If we are ten persons, and God the Most High is supporting us, then this is the proof of our truthfulness. Which additional thing can be proven by 10 laakh (i.e. 1 million members)? Whereas the truth is that even if we are few, but are doing the tabligh of Islam in the whole world, then this will become another clear proof of our truthfulness. Let us assume that we are 20,000, but we have 4 or 5 mission (house/s) in America, 10 or 20 in West Africa, 5 or 7 in East Africa; in the same way, we have a mission open in Syria, and in Lebanon. And our mission was open in Mauritius, and now a missionary is going there again. … Thus, there is a fault in the members of our Jama’at that they don’t manifest complete truthfulness, but begin to exaggerate, the result of which is that they become lazy in tabligh. They say that a spider weaves a web and becomes trapped in it’s own web. In the same way, some members of the Jama’at will at first lie by saying that our numbers are 15 laakh (i.e. 1.5 million), and then begin to estimate that if everyone gives 2 rupees, it becomes 30 lakh rupees (i.e. 3 million rupees); in this case, what loss can there be in my not giving alms? Thus, first he himself told a lie, then himself excused his nafs that my there is no loss if I don’t give alms, and thus ended all his responsibilities. … The truth is that though we have never conducted a census, our estimate is that the membership of the Jama’at is about 2 laakh (i.e. 200,000). We don’t see more than this. It is possible that if we include the foreign Jama’ats, this number may reach 3 laakh (i.e. 300,000), and the maximum number beyond which there is no room is 4 laakh (i.e. 400,000). But now, by continuing to exaggerate, when some members of the Jama’at talk of their numbers, they claim to be 25 laakh (2.5 million). Some time ago, someone asked me what the membership figure of the Jama’at was. I gave him my estimate of 2 laakh (i.e. 200,000) in the Indian subcontinent, upon which he said that such and such a missionary gave me a figure of 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million). I wrote a note to the missionary in question asking him as regards when he had conducted a census of the Jama’at, and if you did so, why didn’t you inform me of the membership figure of 25 laakh (i.2. 2.5 million)? He replied that 25 years from today, it was being said that our membership is 10 laakh (i.e. 1 million). In this time, would the membership figures not have increased by this much, that the Jama’at increased from 10 laakh (i.e. 1 million) to 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million)? Thus, because an error was made 25 years ago, it was assumed that now the Jama’at will have reached 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million). Or, put it this way, he thought that if truth progresses, why should falsehood not progress? It should also be made to progress. I wrote back to this missionary that this is a complete falsehood. If other people tell lies, a missionary should not tell lies by emulating them. The reality is that nothing else has the power which truth has. It is incumbent on us that we either say that we don’t really know the membership figure of the Jama’at, or give that number which is closest to our estimate. I have told you that my estimate is about 2 laakh (i.e. 200,000); now if this estimate is correct, and the number of Jama’at members is indeed 2 laakh (i.e. 200,000), keeping this number in mind, the pain which will arise in my heart, will not be the pain which will arise in my heart keeping a figure of 25 laakh in mind. This figure is so large that if our Jama’at actually reaches 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million), it would bring about a very big revolution. The figure of 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million) means that our number is half that of the Sikhs, but because we have greater organisation within us, for this reason, certainly, if our Jama’at reaches 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million), we would be able, by the Grace of Allah, to do that which the Sikhs, despite being 50 laakh (i.e. 5 million), have not been able to do. But now, because of the lie which is told that we have reached 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million), rather than benefitting from this, two drawbacks arise from it. Firstly, the one who says this, ceases to do tabligh, because he says (to himself), 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million) people are doing tabligh, so if I don’t do tabligh, so what? The second drawback is that such a person becomes lazy in giving alms (chanda), because he thinks to himself that 25 laakh (i.e. 2.5 million) people are giving alms, if I don’t give alms, so what? In a similar way, many other drawbacks arise, from which his faith also declines. The tabligh of Islam and Ahmadiyyat also suffers a loss. Thus, you people should always adhere to truthfulness in your speech, and not even approach falsehood. ..." Do you think this sermon is appropriate to point out to those who exaggerate membership figures? Wassalaam
The 6th anniversary of the murder of Lareeb Khan. A look into the court trial and the role of the Jama'at Part 1: The testimony of the Murrabi counseling the family
CW: "Honor" killing. The events described might be disturbing and trigger traumatic memories for people, particularly survivors of past abuse and violence Six years ago on the night between January 27th/28th 2015 Lareeb Khan, a 19 year old prospective dental nurse, was murdered by her parents. The horrific incident occurred after months of domestic violence and abuse, that persisted for some time because the parents had become aware of her daughter having a boyfriend (Raheel), who is also a member of the community. They eventually decided to murder the daughter after they found out she has stolen condoms. Between 2 and 4 a.m. the parents went into their sleeping daughter's room, where the father strangled her while the mother was watching. After the daughter died, she was put in a wheelchair, with which she was driven away from the home and then thrown down an embankment. I will go through the court proceedings as recounted by reporters present at the trial. A more complete account of all of the trial days and questioning can be found here [1]. The topic I am trying to investigate here is not, if "honor" killings are permissible in Islam or the Ahmadiyya community. They are not.
And when one of them is informed of [the birth of] a female, his face becomes dark, and he suppresses grief. He hides himself from the people because of the ill of which he has been informed. Should he keep it in humiliation or bury it in the ground? Unquestionably, evil is what they decide. (An Nahl 16:58-59)[2]
"They will have lost who killed their children in foolishness without knowledge and prohibited what Allah had provided for them, inventing untruth about Allah. They have gone astray and were not [rightly] guided." (Al Anam 6:140)[3]
That's almost a trivial question. Especially in the Ahmadiyya community who does not believe, unlike other sects of Islam, that sexual interactions outside of marriage deserve a capital punishment. I think it is fair to say that no Ahmadi scholar would ever argue or try to justify the notion that such a killing would be permissible within Islam. But looking at this issue just through a theological lense around this one question, misses the complexity around the interplay between culture and religion and pressures that are created within those, which then, in extreme cases, can lead to this outcome. Large parts of the trial are concerned with the question of the involvement of the mother and the sequence of the events. The father initially had claimed that he was attacked by his daughter. He rescinded this claim after the police presented evidence contradicting him. For a full understanding of the context, all of the testimonies and the evidence presented and anyone interested in that can read it in the original source, but the family drama side of this story is also not the focus of these posts. In these posts I will focus on the involvement of the Jama'at and the question how much the doctrine and structures of the Jama’at contributed to creating a climate and pressures which then lead to this horrific incident. I will also talk about the utter failure of the crisis management by the Jama'at once they were informed about the physical abuse Lareeb was subjected to. The fact that religion played a substantial role can already be seen at the interrogation by the police:
The policeman then asked the mother what would have happened if the community had known about Lareeb's premarital sex: "Mrs. Khan:Then they would have spoken badly about us, maybe we would have been expelled from the community and expelled."
Since it's a lot of testimony I have spilt it up in three parts: This part will focus on the testimony by the Murabi who was appointed to counsel the families. A second post will look at the testimony of the National Amir of Germany Abdulla Wagishäuser (posted here) A final post (posted here) will look at the closing pleas of the prosecutor, the defense and the verdict of the judge and what they think the role of the Jama'at was. All quotes are taken from this recounting of the trial [1]. So let's get into it:
At the end of this day of the trial, the witness Tahir was heard, who claims to be an "Imam" and works as a teacher and interpreter (Urdu and Bulgarian); an interpreter must be called in to give his statement. He is from Pakistan. This interrogation turns out to be extremely exhausting, also for the audience, as it is clearly shaped by the wish of the witness to portray himself as “clueless” and therefore to answer questions with sentences that do not address the question. He confirmed that he knew Lareeb and Raheel and that he had received an email from Lareeb, in which she stated that she was beaten and badly treated at home.
The email was read on the first trial day as the evidence was submitted to the court:
"My mother began to hit me, so that I am still in pain. She banged my head against the wall and insulted me ... Father tells everyone that the boy is following me. We didn't do anything bad, just talk. He never touched me. I am checked 24 hours a day, they (the parents) stand in front of the class until I finish school. They forbade me to continue studying.If my parents find out that I've written this email, they'll kill me.It really has become very extreme. Please reply to the following address “
He then has invited everyone for an interview, and in the presence of the parents, Lareeb had declared that she had never been beaten.AFTER that he then went into an adjoining room with Lareeb, where she confirmed that her parents had not hit her; the mail was not from her. When asked by the judge, “And was that true?” The witness replied: “I believe what she told me,I have no reason to doubt.His job as an imam is to know the truth;he had also said to Lareeb that she should respect her parents." The judge insisted: "It was a very detailed description of a very specific issue - who else could have known and written that?" The witness:"Maybe she didn't tell me the truth."* The judge's question: “The 2nd mailwas sent from your PC and to from your email address. Did you dictate it?" Answer: "She didn't want to send it from her own mail account." "Why? Were you the intellectual originator of the mail? The question remains unanswered.
Here the 2nd email, as presented during the evidence collection:
It was then read from the emails Lareeb had written to Abdullah Wagishäuser. The second email said: “My father is in a leadership role and cashier of the membership fees. You must know him very well. Mama is responsible for how to read the Qur'an correctly. I also work at the national level (of the community). I would never write that my parents beat me.I ask that we always stay in the Community."
Question: "Why should Lareeb write something different in the 2nd mail?"Answer: "I wasn't sure." The judge pointed out that it is quite illogical to send those involved to Wagishäuser if the mail was not written by Lareeb. Question:"What did the parents say?" Answer:"That they hadn't hit Lareeb."
This entire exchange is so infuriating. It shows a tremendous incompetence and gross negligence. It blows my mind that he can sit there and under oath claim that "he saw no reason" why the initial email could be true. Domestic abuse is such a delicate issue to deal with. Usually victims remain silent for a long time. Research shows that the outreach for help is usually communicated with very subtle signs. Victims blame themselves and are reluctant to come forward. It is important to create an atmosphere of trust. It is very common that victims who do not feel safe will go back on their testimony. Research [4] around abuse shows:
Victims, especially adult victims, recant their testimony because they’re afraid of retaliation, especially when abusers are frequently not incarcerated and still have access to the victim. ... This may be difficult to understand – how can a person love someone who hurts and abuses them? But studies show that victims cite loss of love more frequently than fear, ... Child victims are commonly asked to testify in presence of their abuser. Research suggests that loyalty to family members, or fear of their reaction to abuse allegations, may contribute to denials, recantations, and reluctance to disclose. .
Given those facts experts in the field who work with abuse victims are very careful when they talk to a potential victim. The victim must be given time to share their experience. Their self-esteem needs to be strengthened. And it is important to provide and convince them that the necessary steps to ensure their protection will be taken. Given how subtle the cues they usually work with are, Lareebs first email is in comparison the equivalent of someone screaming at the top of their lungs and begging to be heard and asking for the system to protect them. I can only imagine how much strength it took to open up like that and reach out. If this outreach is not taken seriously many victims go back to silently enduring the abuse. As the research [4] shows:
A victim who encounters disbelief and skepticism (i.e., victim-blaming) when attempting to make a report will have no reason to report future abuse.
Which is exactly what happened after that counseling meeting, Lareeb stops raising the issue of abuse with the community in any substantial way. Murabi sb. said in his testimony that he is regularly consulted in cases of domestic abuse and marital issues. Given that fact, it is astounding that he is unaware of basic facts about the behavior of victims of abuse. If he lacked the expertise to handle such a sensitive topic, why did he not delegate the matter? If the Jama'at would have taken the accusations seriously, they could have made a more substantial effort to involve and delegate to civil authorities, law enforcement and medical or psychological experts. As the court testimony by the her doctor shows, a medical examination was made just a few weeks after this counseling session:
family doctor, who reported that abdominal pain and significant weight loss were an issue again and again, and then a radiologist who in July 2014 diagnosed a 4-week-old head trauma.
More instances of abuse were documented:
According to Lareeb, the father had strangled her in October with the mother standing by his side.
When asked, she [Lareebs younger sister] said that the parents were very strict, ... She was often beaten by her mother, usually with a stick,
She had shown him [Raheel] her burned hand in December and said that the mother, who had seen Lareeb typing on the smartphone, had pressed that hand on the stove and said, “Now you can see if you are still able to write"
For the abuse are obviously the parents responsible. But I think it is fair to ask if the gross mishandling of the issue by the Murabi enabled it continuing for months after Lareeb had already reached out to the Community for help. I have a very hard time believing that anyone, even if they lack expertise, would have made those obvious mistakes. Given the testimony, it is much more plausible to me, that they never took her cry for help seriously. Why else would you invite the victim of the abuse with her abusers and confront her infront of them about it? The stark difference in language between the first and second email raises serious issues about what the intention of that counseling session was. Instead of providing her a safe space to come forward he reinforced the (patriarchal) power structures by making it about "respecting the parents". He also seems to use their involvement in the Jama'at to give this authority a religious dimension. The final sentence seems to imply that threats of excommunication were made. Why else would it have been mentioned in the second email? I can’t even imagine how much pressure was put on her. If we think of someone experiencing abuse and violence, then reaching out, then being essentially blamed for it by implying that her lack of respect for her parents is what was the cause of her problem. It is very clear from his testimony that he never really believed her nor took the accusations seriously. Why would he expect her to open up to him? Just because, after preaching to her about the important role her father had in the community and the importance of respecting parents, he talked separately to her in an adjoining room? Ridiculous. The sheer incompetence is offensive. Even if we take the Murabbi at his word, which I don't, there should have been consequences for such negligence. He should no longer be in charge of any counseling or have any authority within the Jama'at. I agree with the judge that it is very suspicious that the second email was not sent from Lareeb’s account. It seems to me that she was pressured into recanting her first email. If the Murabbi wrote it or made her write it does not make much of a difference. The fact that it was sent from his laptop and account of the Murabi is what’s important to note here. If someone else had made the false claims in the first email, why would she be reluctant to correct that and set the record straight? She wouldn't. This might be speculation on my part, but I cannot bring myself to believe that the Murabbi was that ignorant to miss such obvious cues, clearly indicating the abuse was real. If there was no abuse why was the second email even necessary? It seems to me that it was important for them, that the accusations were recanted. He made her feel that her reacanting was put on record. It is essentially written as an apology by her while reaffirming the importance of the Jama'at. It is a common tactic to silence victims of abuse by making the victim feel they cannot trust their experience and therefore no one else will trust and believe them if they come forward. Sending the second email and contradicting her initial claim seems like an attempt to make it more difficult for her to reclaim that she was abused. Since it could be made to seem that she was flip flopping by going back on the second statement. It seems like an attempt to make her less believable, while eroding her self-confidence and willingness to come forward again. Which, as said above, is exactly what happened. The judge raised the same issue about the authorship of the second email:
The judge then referred to the 2nd email from Lareeb, in which she had withdrawn her allegations: "One would think the parents should be convinced not to hit and Lareeb should not be convinced not to blame the parents."
Murabi sb. had no answer to the question about the authorship of the second email. Which is very revealing. The next part of the testimony the rules for consent in the Jama'at were evaluated:
The witness was then questioned about the punishment that had been imposed on Raheels' parents. Judge: "Why have they been punished?" The witness:"The punishments are the result of their own actions." Judge: “Which one?” The witness: “In the first meeting I suggested that Raheel's parents should give their consent to the marriage, but they both said no. Then I spoke to Raheel.In Islam, the man does not need parental consent." Now the judge was confused: "What was the problem if in Islam the man did not need the consent, the parents of the woman had consented - what then prevented the marriage?" The witness said: "Raheel had said that he wanted his parents' consent, without which he would not marry." Judge: "Why then was Raheels mother also punished?" Then it occurred to the witness that he had nothing to do with the punishment. He remembered that at a meeting Raheel's mother had said to Lareeb that she would not be accepted into the family. The judge's question: “Now Mr. Khan is said to have killed his daughter and he says that himself. Why?"Witness: "This is very painful". Question: "Why did he kill her?"Answer: “It has nothing to do with Islam. Maybe that has something to do with the culture of Pakistan and India. The father told me he never hit her and he won't hit her. " Question: "Was the Raheel family pressured to consent to the marriage?"Answer: “We can only ask. The caliph wanted the marriage. Wedidn't exert any pressurewe just wanted to convince. " In response to the public prosecutor's question, the witness stated that the caliph's advice was binding, i.e. an instruction, but that as an imam he could only give advice. The witness then talked around the subject of "consent to marriage": The man doesn't need approval. The woman “actually” has the right to give her own consent. The woman “should” tell her parents what she wants, who should then give their consent. "If the parents disagree, the community tries to convince the parents to respect the lady's opinion. Either the parents or the community must give their consent. If a woman does not adhere to this, she has punished herself, she is then (as the judge put it) "out of the system."
I think this is one of the most crucial points in this whole tragedy. I get that it's difficult to understand for outsiders. But the fact that women in the Jama'at are not granted the right to decide whom they want to marry without approval by a male guardian creates a religious tool that gives fathers the leverage to impose their views on the daughters. The pressure that a son feels to seek the approval of his parents can be called a cultural thing, not necessarily connected to the Jama'at. But daughters don't get that luxury. Her consent is not considered sufficient. An approval by a male guardian is mandatory. She risks getting kicked out of the community if she goes against this imposed patriarchy. Even if the reasons for the rejection by the father are cultural and not connected to Jama'at doctrines, this rule combined with a general notion for obedience and respect of the father gives him a religious mechanism to enforce his will (I've written about this problematic rule in more detail here)
Judge: "What happens to women who have premarital sex?" Witness: "In such cases we ask for marriage." Question: "Are there any penalties for this?" Witness: “You punished yourself with it. That can be different from case to case. " Judge: "Then describe different cases." Witness:"There is an investigation, if it is determined that a woman has sex of her own accord, then she no longer has anything to do with the community." Question:"So she is being cast out? "Answer:"Yes." Question: "And the family members?" Answer: "They have nothing to do with it." Question: "But Raheel's mother was punished?" Answer: "The mother was always there when we talked to the family." The question was asked again about the penalties: Who determines the penalties? Answer: The caliph in England. The prosecutor was astonished: The caliph in England determines the punishments worldwide? Answer: "We send the report, the caliph decides." Judge: "Are khans trained in Islam?" Witness: "If the daughter has done something, the parents must not be punished." Judge: "How did Ms. Khan come up with that?"Witness: "Ms. Khan must answer that herself". The witness was unable to answer the question about their state of mind: "They sometimes cried, but then it was all right again.A major conflict was not apparent. When asked how the community reacts when people live together unmarried, the witness said that such cases exist and the rules for them are: "They are excommunicated if they are not married." However, the parents did not told the witness about the intimate relationship: “Maybe they were ashamed. The defendant kept saying thathe couldn't say what the daughter had done, that he was ashamed." "So Ms. Khan's fear [of being excommunicated] was unjustified?" Here the witness made it clear: "If the parents know that the daughter is having premarital sex and keep it a secret or do not ensure that the young people get married, then they would have been cast out." The prosecutor then asked about the ban on contact between Raheel and Lareeb imposed by the community, which the witness confirmed: "Lareeb and Raheel had been spoken to, also that they should not meet again until the marriage, in order not to injure their parents; but the young people would not have adhered to that."
In this final part of the testimony we see the usual apologist dance around the question of excommunication. The Murabi first rejects the notion of the parents being punished if the daughter has sexual relationships outside of marriage. It seems to be an attempt to play down the role of the pressure created by the Jama'at. In the end of the examination he eventually confirms the fears of excommunication that was present in the mind of the parents. It is clear that being shunned and exiled from the community was a substantial factor to have motivated them to do what they did. The rules are not in doubt. Why would a Murrabbi initially pretend that the Jama'at didn't add any pressure? It seems to be the notion that they don't think of it as a punishment that is being imposed by the Jama'at. For them, it is something that people apparently bring on themselves. A mindset, that also can be seen in a conversation I had with a different Murrabi in regard to this question:
"Excommunication is not a real sanction, but a means of purification. It does not genuinely apply to those who do not belong to the people mentioned above who want to belong to the community. By virtue of their will, they have already catapulted themselves out of that congregation, whether expressed or not. The excommunication is at point just a formality." [5]
So, for them it's not the Jama'at leveraging the social connections of their members by threatening and imposing punishments and excommunication, it's the members that are kicking themselves out by living or condoning living outside the narrow margins that the Jama'at allows for. I will talk more about this topic in the next posts (posted here), since the testimony of National Amir sb. is centered around this question as well. https://preview.redd.it/v6rkhpkiqwe61.jpg?width=669&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb05127a55b38f41809d8db318f8d0fb57615895
Mental inferiority of women: Rational Religion’s poor research & an Ahmadi woman tying herself in knots
I thought this deserved a new post because it relates to a discussion on an old thread that’s not as visible any more. It shows how people don’t bother to do their research and how they can get themselves into quite a mess with sloppy apologetics. Rational Religion Someone on this subreddit shared a link to this article by Rational Religion: Here is the English translation of the relevant passages in Essence of Islam: Passage 1: The answer is that men and women are not equal. Universal experience has shown that man is superior to woman in physical and mental powers.There are exceptions, but exceptions don’t make the rule. Justice demands that if man and wife want to separate, the right to decide should lie with the husband. Passage 2: Just as Islam does not approve of a woman marrying without the consent of her guardian, i.e., her father, brother, or other near male relative, likewise it does not approve of a woman to separate from her husband on her own. It orders even greater care in case of divorce, and enjoins recourse to the authorities to protect her from any harm she may do to herself on account of her lack of understanding. page 314 and 316, The Essence of Islam - Volume III According to Rational Religion, when Mirza Ghulam Ahmad talks about the mental inferiority of women he is talking about psychological resilience, not intellect. If you read the original Urdu version of Passage 1 that is being referred to in the Rational Religion article Mirza Ghulam Ahmad says “Mard jismani and ilmi taqaton main auraton se barh kar hai” (see page 286 Chasma e Marifaat, Volume 23 Roohani Khazain. Men are superior to women in their jism (body) and ilm (knowledge). “Ilm” refers to knowledge, not psychological resilience. In Passage 2 he talks about women causing themselves harm on account of their “nuqsaane aql” if they were allowed to divorce without recourse to authority (see page 289 of the same book). “Aql” refers to a persons intellectual capabilities, not psychological resilience. Anyone who is familiar with Urdu might already know these words as they are not uncommon. If you don’t understand Urdu you can ask an Urdu speaker and they will confirm that both the words “ilm” and “aql” are related to the intellectual realm and not the psychological/emotional realm or a person’s ability to deal with stress. (Dictionary definitions: ilm and aql) The point about women being weaker in terms of psychological resilience is something that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad believes as well and this is covered elsewhere (there’s a passage in Malfuzat I think where he talks about women being less courageous). This particular passage from Chasma e Marifaat, Volume 23 Roohani Khazain, however definitely talks about intellectual capabilities. I’ll give Rational Religion the benefit of the doubt here that they haven’t done their homework in reading and properly understanding the original Urdu and are simply using their creativity to interpret this passage and it’s not that they are being dishonest and know that Ahmadis read/share their articles without bothering to actually look at the original sources Further discussion After correcting the person who had shared the article she did not continue with this line of argument about ‘psychological resilience’. She instead seemed to adopt a new argument about the lack of ‘educational opportunities’ that women have historically had as an explanation for women’s inferiority in knowledge. I raised a few questions about the implications of her newfound position but she wasn’t able to answer any of these questions as she clearly hadn’t thought her new position through properly. Here are my questions: “1)Women need to be protected from any harm they may do to themselves because of their ‘aql’ and their inferior ‘Ilm’. You think this is a result of not having educational opportunities historically. Does that mean that women who have acquired superior ilm and aql because they have had educational opportunities are exempt from these rules and if so please provide your evidence for this? If not, why not? 2)What about men who have not had the required educational opportunities that are needed to have sufficient ‘Ilm’ and ‘aql’ to be able to make a decision about divorce, what is the rationale for them?” She seemed to realise that the ‘educational opportunities’ argument that she had introduced herself to try to explain differences in knowledge between men and women was problematic. After we had concluded this discussion she went on to edit her previous comment to suggest that my framing of the issue was incorrect as education doesn’t support a woman with divorce. The funny thing with that is that it wasn’t me that had brought up ‘educational opportunities’ in the first place and you can see from my questions to her that I’ve always questioned whether education is relevant to a person’s ability to divorce! It is Mirza Ghulam Ahmad that made the connection between knowledge and ability to divorce autonomously and she was the one who made the connection between knowledge and education. She also made the erroneous assertion that if the Jamat believed in women’s intellectual inferiority there wouldn’t be educational achievement awards for women. She didn’t seem to realise that it’s perfectly possible for contradictory positions to exist i.e. for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to have believed in the 1800s that women were intellectually inferior and for the present day Ahmadiyya Jamat to celebrate the achievements of women because they are savvy enough to know that telling women that they are stupid in this day and age isn’t really going to help their cause. Two of her arguments had completely flopped now so she started beating around the bush and talking about the vulnerability of women in divorce proceedings and their need for protection from oppressive and manipulative men. Remember the purpose of the discussion was to see how she reconciles her belief that there are no intellectual differences between men and women with what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has said about women’s “ilm” and “aql”. If “ilm” and “aql” are what make a woman incapable of making this decision on her own, we accept that these relate to intellect not emotions and if educational opportunities cannot give women the “ilm” and “aql” that is needed, how else could you explain these differences other than that women by their nature are inferior in “ilm” and “aql” i.e. are intellectually inferior? Whilst this discussion wasn’t really about divorce proceedings as it is the background context to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s words I will briefly address her comments about this simply for the sake of completeness. To her point about protection, anyone (male or female) who is married to an oppressive or manipulative person and feels that they need support in divorce proceedings should absolutely be entitled to have the choice to have an advocate, bodyguard or whatever else it is they need with them. I’m not sure anyone would argue with that. Making support available for vulnerable people and giving them the choice to have that support is however quite different to the proposition here which involves a paternalistic setup for women specifically. Where a female initiates a divorce “khula” it will always be referred to an authority and the judge will “summon the husband and ask him why the wife should not be allowed to leave him” and “if he finds the complaint is justified, he would decree dissolution of the marriage”, if he doesn’t find the complaint justified then it would follow that he can refuse to grant her the divorce in order “to protect her’” (see page 316 The Essence of Islam - Volume III). A man’s right to divorce “talaq” however is absolute and not qualified in the same way. A man does not need to submit his grounds for divorce to an authority and even if an authority was involved they cannot prevent him from exercising his right to divorce, because a man has enough “ilm” and “aql” to be able to make this decision on his own. Anyway she was now clearly desperate to get away from having to discuss the actual point at hand (women’s inferiority) and instead wanted to opine on how wonderful and just the Islamic divorce system is. By the end you can see that she is totally confused, rambling and has got herself into quite a mess. If you’re interested in this back and forth you can read it for yourself: Superior Mental Powers of Men I think it might be easier to just accept that the Ahmadiyya belief is that God made women inferior in both intellect and emotions to men, rather than trying to make your religion fit your own notions or those of society around you, because that will only leave you looking like a headless chicken who is easily cornered in the end. An urdu speaking Ahmadi man on Twitter once sent me an article about the size of women’s brains relative to men’s brains as evidence that supported his beliefs. I suspect that’s what you would get from someone who has actually read the original books of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and who didn’t feel the need to be evasive about his more controversial views. Is it better to be dishonest and have a palatable position or to be honest and have an unpalatable position? I don’t really know. I think this is a dilemma that believers who dip their toes into the waters of religious critique face. I’m just grateful I don’t have to deal with the mental torment of picking one of those any more because they are both pretty rubbish in my opinion. Edit: For archiving purposes screenshots of the discussion mentioned above can be found here: Archived discussion on inferior mental powers of women
What happens if your holy words legitimise sexual slavery as punishment of being kafir, treat marriage as sale of a woman's sexual parts,advocate enslaving of non-Muslims & their conversion?Listed a few cases of Jihadi Romeos/Sexbased communal-crimes/Communal Gendercrimes from last 4-5 months.
These cases are exclusively from last 2 months & other than top 4, rest all are from UP because I only went through Navbharat Times & that only reports for UP
The ulama asserted that slavery was a divine punishment for not being a Muslim. In the words of az-Aziz b.Ahmad al-Bukhari "servitude is a vestige of obstinacy in refusing to believe in one God". Al-Sharif al-Jurjani stated that slavery in Islamic law was a "penalty for unbelief." Islamic law and Sunni ulama recognise two categories of concubines: War Captives:These are originally free non-Muslims who are captured in battle. The entire population of a conquered territory can be enslaved, thus providing women who are otherwise rare on the battlefield. This paves the path for concubinage. The Muslim military commander is allowed to choose between unconditionally releasing, ransoming or enslaving war captives. If a person converted to Islam after being enslaved, their emancipation would be considered a pious act but not obligatory. Islamic law does not allow enslavement of free-born Muslims. Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly. Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the qiblah, utter the shahada and perform wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. Sexual slavery of women was viewed as both a male privilege and a privilege for the victor over the defeated. Islamic legal texts state that sexual pleasure was a male privilege over women. Men were permitted to have as many concubines as they could afford. Some men purchased female slaves, whereas Muslim soldiers in the early Islamic conquests were given female captives as a reward for military participation. This not only increased military participation, but also served to rapidly spread Islam & denude the existing population as the sexual slaves could be easily coerced to convert. In traditional juristic understanding, it is the male's ownership of a woman's sexual organs which makes sex licit in Islam. This is why the woman is called aurat meaning vagina in Urdu. Meri aurat literally would translate to "my vagina." Islamic jurists describe marriage as a kind of sale where the wife's private parts are purchased.
-When you have religion instructing you to use sex/sexual violence as a means of conversion of kafir girls, there will be consequences..particularly in the not progressive areas. -There is a psychology of seeing the winning of the girl of other community as a means of conquest & FU to the community- happens with blacks vis-a-vis whites, lowercaste vis-a-vis uppercaste, Muslims vis-a-vis Hindus. Girls are reduced to their caste/religion. This is why a Hindu boy having affair with a Muslim girl gets murdered, and why a Muslim boy marrying a Hindu girl is encouraged. (Here's a sample: https://twitter.com/core_collapsed/status/1319968535989243904) -Indian law itself says that if you marry a Muslim & don't convert, you literally have no rights on property or anything.https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/stop-romanticising-interfaith-marriages-blindly-marrying-muslim-men-has-serious-legal-consequences-for-non-muslim-women. Plus the practicalities of orthodox regressive Muslim society means the female will have to give up her religion. -In the lower sections, mosques & madarssas pay to marry Hindu girls. Another video where the boy after being beaten by Bajrang Dal confesses he is Muslim & faked his identity to trap Hindu girls.Later on in, police station, he confessed his maulana gave 2 lakh rs, for doing love-jihad, there are around 40 people like him who is doing these thing in his madarsa. (https://www.reddit.com/IndiaSpeaks/comments/jml5wm/lovejihad_case_uttar_pradesh/) There are multiple videos from UP about this. Plus the dominant human trafficking mafia in India is Islamic (because of Pakistan & Bangladesh). Now this second part is my conjecture, but I'm hard pressed not to think that if mosques pay for marrying Hindu girls, why wouldn't they pay for trafficking Hindu girls. This was the same mindset in medieval India. It was the kafir women & kafir men from India who were mostly sold as slaves in Middle East & Central Asia, not Islamic ones. -Specific targeting of minor girls as POSCO doesn't apply to Muslim if the predator can convert the minor Hindu girl
Summary
Love Jihad/Jihadi Romeos/Communal Gendercrimes
Specifically targeting and converting Hindu girls to Islam either through subversion (Muslim guy changes to a Hindu name) or coercion (rape). Also involves blackmailing tactics such as making videos in compromised situation with the girl in order to finally submit to the Muslim guy's demand. Specific targeting of underage girls. Post marriage, these girls get converted to Islam, changes name, and break ties with her family. The intention is to make as much as babies as you can with these women. The girl either stay in her new religion and family or sometimes are thrown away after their role of baby making has been fulfilled.
Endgame?
Islam is an expansionist cult, with the motive of conquering world through its (Muslim) soldiers. For soldiers, you need more women to churn out more children. But there is a limit to a number of Muslim women.
Solution?
Use kafir women as a vassal to overcome your issue.
Repercussions?
Little to no in the West and other non-Islamic countries because you are a minority and have a tacit support from leftists of said countries. You also have a victim card at your expense to paint any person questioning the belief of your cult as an 'Islamophobe'.
Power of the lobby advocating lovejihad
Apart from all the adverts and movies, where you obviously almost always have a Muslim guy-Hindu girl pairing, the lobby is as powerful as to push for removal of chief of National Commission of Women because she tweeted against love jihad. On the very same day when Nikita Tomar was murdered for refusing to convert, no less.
What happens if your holy words legitimise sexual slavery as punishment of being kafir, treat marriage as sale of a woman's sexual parts,advocate enslaving of non-Muslims & their conversion?Listed a few cases of Jihadi Romeos/Sexbased communal-crimes/Communal Gendercrimes from last 4-5 months.
These cases are exclusively from last 2 months & other than top 4, rest all are from UP because I only went through Navbharat Times & that only reports for UP
The ulama asserted that slavery was a divine punishment for not being a Muslim. In the words of az-Aziz b.Ahmad al-Bukhari "servitude is a vestige of obstinacy in refusing to believe in one God". Al-Sharif al-Jurjani stated that slavery in Islamic law was a "penalty for unbelief." Islamic law and Sunni ulama recognise two categories of concubines: War Captives:These are originally free non-Muslims who are captured in battle. The entire population of a conquered territory can be enslaved, thus providing women who are otherwise rare on the battlefield. This paves the path for concubinage. The Muslim military commander is allowed to choose between unconditionally releasing, ransoming or enslaving war captives. If a person converted to Islam after being enslaved, their emancipation would be considered a pious act but not obligatory. Islamic law does not allow enslavement of free-born Muslims. Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly. Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the qiblah, utter the shahada and perform wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. Sexual slavery of women was viewed as both a male privilege and a privilege for the victor over the defeated. Islamic legal texts state that sexual pleasure was a male privilege over women. Men were permitted to have as many concubines as they could afford. Some men purchased female slaves, whereas Muslim soldiers in the early Islamic conquests were given female captives as a reward for military participation. This not only increased military participation, but also served to rapidly spread Islam & denude the existing population as the sexual slaves could be easily coerced to convert. In traditional juristic understanding, it is the male's ownership of a woman's sexual organs which makes sex licit in Islam. This is why the woman is called aurat meaning vagina in Urdu. Meri aurat literally would translate to "my vagina." Islamic jurists describe marriage as a kind of sale where the wife's private parts are purchased.
-When you have religion instructing you to use sex/sexual violence as a means of conversion of kafir girls, there will be consequences..particularly in the not progressive areas. -There is a psychology of seeing the winning of the girl of other community as a means of conquest & FU to the community- happens with blacks vis-a-vis whites, lowercaste vis-a-vis uppercaste, Muslims vis-a-vis Hindus. Girls are reduced to their caste/religion. This is why a Hindu boy having affair with a Muslim girl gets murdered, and why a Muslim boy marrying a Hindu girl is encouraged. (Here's a sample: https://twitter.com/core_collapsed/status/1319968535989243904) -Indian law itself says that if you marry a Muslim & don't convert, you literally have no rights on property or anything.https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/stop-romanticising-interfaith-marriages-blindly-marrying-muslim-men-has-serious-legal-consequences-for-non-muslim-women. Plus the practicalities of orthodox regressive Muslim society means the female will have to give up her religion. -In the lower sections, mosques & madarssas pay to marry Hindu girls. Another video where the boy after being beaten by Bajrang Dal confesses he is Muslim & faked his identity to trap Hindu girls.Later on in, police station, he confessed his maulana gave 2 lakh rs, for doing love-jihad, there are around 40 people like him who is doing these thing in his madarsa. (https://www.reddit.com/IndiaSpeaks/comments/jml5wm/lovejihad_case_uttar_pradesh/) There are multiple videos from UP about this. Plus the dominant human trafficking mafia in India is Islamic (because of Pakistan & Bangladesh). Now this second part is my conjecture, but I'm hard pressed not to think that if mosques pay for marrying Hindu girls, why wouldn't they pay for trafficking Hindu girls. This was the same mindset in medieval India. It was the kafir women & kafir men from India who were mostly sold as slaves in Middle East & Central Asia, not Islamic ones. -Specific targeting of minor girls as POSCO doesn't apply to Muslim if the predator can convert the minor Hindu girl
Summary
Love Jihad/Jihadi Romeos/Communal Gendercrimes
Specifically targeting and converting Hindu girls to Islam either through subversion (Muslim guy changes to a Hindu name) or coercion (rape). Also involves blackmailing tactics such as making videos in compromised situation with the girl in order to finally submit to the Muslim guy's demand. Specific targeting of underage girls. Post marriage, these girls get converted to Islam, changes name, and break ties with her family. The intention is to make as much as babies as you can with these women. The girl either stay in her new religion and family or sometimes are thrown away after their role of baby making has been fulfilled.
Endgame?
Islam is an expansionist cult, with the motive of conquering world through its (Muslim) soldiers. For soldiers, you need more women to churn out more children. But there is a limit to a number of Muslim women.
Solution?
Use kafir women as a vassal to overcome your issue.
Repercussions?
Little to no in the West and other non-Islamic countries because you are a minority and have a tacit support from leftists of said countries. You also have a victim card at your expense to paint any person questioning the belief of your cult as an 'Islamophobe'.
Power of the lobby advocating lovejihad
Apart from all the adverts and movies, where you obviously almost always have a Muslim guy-Hindu girl pairing, the lobby is as powerful as to push for removal of chief of National Commission of Women because she tweeted against love jihad. On the very same day when Nikita Tomar was murdered for refusing to convert, no less.
What happens if your holy words legitimise sexual slavery as punishment of being kafir, treat marriage as sale of a woman's sexual parts,advocate enslaving of non-Muslims & their conversion?Listed a few cases of Jihadi Romeos/Sexbased communal-crimes/Communal Gendercrimes from last 4-5 months.
All these cases since last 4-5 months. This list is incomplete as I simply grew tired of adding.
The ulama asserted that slavery was a divine punishment for not being a Muslim. In the words of az-Aziz b.Ahmad al-Bukhari "servitude is a vestige of obstinacy in refusing to believe in one God". Al-Sharif al-Jurjani stated that slavery in Islamic law was a "penalty for unbelief." Islamic law and Sunni ulama recognise two categories of concubines: War Captives:These are originally free non-Muslims who are captured in battle. The entire population of a conquered territory can be enslaved, thus providing women who are otherwise rare on the battlefield. This paves the path for concubinage. The Muslim military commander is allowed to choose between unconditionally releasing, ransoming or enslaving war captives. If a person converted to Islam after being enslaved, their emancipation would be considered a pious act but not obligatory. Islamic law does not allow enslavement of free-born Muslims. Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly. Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the qiblah, utter the shahada and perform wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. Sexual slavery of women was viewed as both a male privilege and a privilege for the victor over the defeated. Islamic legal texts state that sexual pleasure was a male privilege over women. Men were permitted to have as many concubines as they could afford. Some men purchased female slaves, whereas Muslim soldiers in the early Islamic conquests were given female captives as a reward for military participation. This not only increased military participation, but also served to rapidly spread Islam & denude the existing population as the sexual slaves could be easily coerced to convert. In traditional juristic understanding, it is the male's ownership of a woman's sexual organs which makes sex licit in Islam. This is why the woman is called aurat meaning vagina in Urdu. Meri aurat literally would translate to "my vagina." Islamic jurists describe marriage as a kind of sale where the wife's private parts are purchased.
Specifically targeting and converting Hindu girls to Islam either through subversion (Muslim guy changes to a Hindu name) or coercion (rape). Also involves blackmailing tactics such as making videos in compromised situation with the girl in order to finally submit to the Muslim guy's demand. Post marriage, these girls get converted to Islam, changes name, and break ties with her family. The intention is to make as much as babies as you can with these women. The girl either stay in her new religion and family or sometimes are thrown away after their role of baby making has been fulfilled.
Endgame?
Islam is an expansionist cult, with the motive of conquering world through its (Muslim) soldiers. For soldiers, you need more women to churn out more children. But there is a limit to a number of Muslim women.
Solution?
Use kafir women as a vassal to overcome your issue.
Repercussions?
Little to no in the West and other non-Islamic countries because you are a minority and have a tacit support from leftists of said countries. You also have a victim card at your expense to paint any person questioning the belief of your cult as an 'Islamophobe'.
Power of the lobby advocating lovejihad Apart from all the adverts and movies, where you obviously almost always have a Muslim guy-Hindu girl pairing, the lobby is as powerful as to push for removal of chief of National Commission of Women because she tweeted against love jihad. On the very same day when Nikita Tomar was murdered for refusing to convert, no less. https://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbai-news/after-ncw-chief-s-tweets-plea-in-bombay-hc-seeking-her-removal-from-post/story-MHlD708a3W7apC5NNiPTOI.html With input from u/HumanPrint. As already mentioned, this is barely one-third of the cases from the last 4-5 months, the whole list will be triple this and if extended over time, it will be even longer. Please help me in compiling and adding additional cases in the comments which will be added in the post.
What happens if your holy words legitimise sexual slavery as punishment of being kafir, treat marriage as sale of a woman's sexual parts,advocate enslaving of non-Muslims & their conversion?Listed a few cases of Jihadi Romeos/Sexbased communal-crimes/Communal Gendercrimes from last 4-5 months.
All these cases since last 4-5 months. This list is incomplete as I simply grew tired of adding.
The ulama asserted that slavery was a divine punishment for not being a Muslim. In the words of az-Aziz b.Ahmad al-Bukhari "servitude is a vestige of obstinacy in refusing to believe in one God". Al-Sharif al-Jurjani stated that slavery in Islamic law was a "penalty for unbelief." Islamic law and Sunni ulama recognise two categories of concubines: War Captives:These are originally free non-Muslims who are captured in battle. The entire population of a conquered territory can be enslaved, thus providing women who are otherwise rare on the battlefield. This paves the path for concubinage. The Muslim military commander is allowed to choose between unconditionally releasing, ransoming or enslaving war captives. If a person converted to Islam after being enslaved, their emancipation would be considered a pious act but not obligatory. Islamic law does not allow enslavement of free-born Muslims. Most traditional scholars require the conversion of a pagan slave-girl before sex, even through force if necessary. They require a conversion of these women before sex can take place. Many traditions state that the female captives should be coerced to accept Islam if they do not convert willingly. Hasan al-Basri narrates that Muslims would achieve this objective through various methods. They would order the Zoroastrian slave-girl to face the qiblah, utter the shahada and perform wudhu. Her captor would then have sex with her after one menstrual cycle. Sexual slavery of women was viewed as both a male privilege and a privilege for the victor over the defeated. Islamic legal texts state that sexual pleasure was a male privilege over women. Men were permitted to have as many concubines as they could afford. Some men purchased female slaves, whereas Muslim soldiers in the early Islamic conquests were given female captives as a reward for military participation. This not only increased military participation, but also served to rapidly spread Islam & denude the existing population as the sexual slaves could be easily coerced to convert. In traditional juristic understanding, it is the male's ownership of a woman's sexual organs which makes sex licit in Islam. This is why the woman is called aurat meaning vagina in Urdu. Meri aurat literally would translate to "my vagina." Islamic jurists describe marriage as a kind of sale where the wife's private parts are purchased.
Specifically targeting and converting Hindu girls to Islam either through subversion (Muslim guy changes to a Hindu name) or coercion (rape). Also involves blackmailing tactics such as making videos in compromised situation with the girl in order to finally submit to the Muslim guy's demand. Post marriage, these girls get converted to Islam, changes name, and break ties with her family. The intention is to make as much as babies as you can with these women. The girl either stay in her new religion and family or sometimes are thrown away after their role of baby making has been fulfilled.
Endgame?
Islam is an expansionist cult, with the motive of conquering world through its (Muslim) soldiers. For soldiers, you need more women to churn out more children. But there is a limit to a number of Muslim women.
Solution?
Use kafir women as a vassal to overcome your issue.
Repercussions?
Little to no in the West and other non-Islamic countries because you are a minority and have a tacit support from leftists of said countries. You also have a victim card at your expense to paint any person questioning the belief of your cult as an 'Islamophobe'.
Power of the lobby advocating lovejihad Apart from all the adverts and movies, where you obviously almost always have a Muslim guy-Hindu girl pairing, the lobby is as powerful as to push for removal of chief of National Commission of Women because she tweeted against love jihad. On the very same day when Nikita Tomar was murdered for refusing to convert, no less. https://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbai-news/after-ncw-chief-s-tweets-plea-in-bombay-hc-seeking-her-removal-from-post/story-MHlD708a3W7apC5NNiPTOI.html With input from u/HumanPrint. As already mentioned, this is barely one-third of the cases from the last 4-5 months, the whole list will be triple this and if extended over time, it will be even longer. Please help me in compiling and adding additional cases in the comments which will be added in the post.
Author : Arundhati Roy MELODIOUS and BRAVE I was reading and thinking- I will never find something like this again… The style of writing and story building and revealing- all mesmerized me in the most unique way. Arundhati Roy’s writings can constitute a genre themselves. The name that came up to my mind for this genre is- ‘Arundhati’. If you try to focus on one story of this book, you wouldn’t find any. There are a number of stories, each scattered here and there. All the pieces assembled together looked like life. Life is more of an interaction of stories than a single story with a single protagonist. The first character we find here is Anjum (also my namesake!). Is Anjum a he or she? We can’t say, neither her mother could say when she was born-
In Urdu, the only language she knew, all things, not just living things but all things - carpets, clothes, books, pens, musical instruments - had a gender. Everything was either masculine or feminine, man or woman. Everything except her baby. … Was it possible to live outside language?
So, we meet Anjum, whose most prominent identity in the society where we live would be a hijra. She is a hijra before she is anyone else. She lives with other hijras in Khwabgah, the House of Dreams. Does living in Khwabgah make its residents happy?
‘No one’s happy here. It’s not possible. Arre yaar, think about it, what are the things you normal people get unhappy about? Price-rise, children’s school-admissions, husbands’ beatings, wives’ cheating, Hindu-Muslim riots, Indo-Pak war - outside things that settle down eventually. But for us the price-rise and school-admissions and beating-husbands and cheating-wives are all inside us. The riot is inside us. The war is inside us. Indo-Pak is inside us. It will never settle down. It can’t.'
The never-ending Hindu-Muslim riots in this sub-continent got a prime attention in this book. Anjum being not only a Hijra but also a Muslim encountered such a riot whose effects would not leave her for many years.
She tried to un-know what they had done to all others - how they had folded the men and unfolded the women.
The book gives us a different picture of Kashmir other than the picture of the heavenly flower valley that comes in our minds. In this picture we see less of divine landscape and more of graveyards. Tombstones grew out of the ground like young children’s teeth. Another never-ending fight of India - about this land of Kashmir, caused a lot of young Kashmiris’ deaths. Families of young boys seek their sons day after day, waiting to receive the dead bodies when they hear of their deaths. Some were delivered in sacks, some in small polythene bags … notes pinned to them by the quartermasters of death said:1 kg, 2.7 kg, 500 g. On one of the tombstone we would read the following prose that would be imprinted in our minds-
Ab waha khaak udhaati hai khizaam Phool hi phool jahaan thay pehle . Now dust blows on autumn breeze Where once were flowers, only flowers.
Another tombstone, relatively small, of a four years old girl who used to ask for bedtime stories to her father, held that child’s adorable appeal and how she refused to buy ‘the witch and the jungle’ story.
Akh daleela wann Yeth manz na khan balai asi Na aes soh kunni junglas manz roazan . Tell me a story, There wasn’t a witch And she didn’t live in the jungle
How does a father function after burying his four years old daughter? Does life go on the same? Kashmir wouldn’t be pictured the same to me ever. We see post 9/11 reactions. Arundhati described the Afghan families who fled from their land after post 9/11 attacks and came to Old Delhi-
By December Old Delhi was flooded with Afghan families fleeing warplanes that sang in their skies like unseasonal mosquitoes and bombs that feel like steel rain.
How Arundhati juxtaposes words that don’t come to our minds instinctively but suit completely for the description. Her most unique writing style... I started my review with two adjectives, one of which was ‘brave’. This is why-
Gujarat ki ka Lalla had swept the polls and was the new Prime Minister. People idolized him, and temples in which he was the presiding deity began to appear in small towns. A devotee gifted him a pinstriped suit with LallaLallaLalla woven into the fabric. … He popularized the practice of mass yoga in community parks. At least once a month he visited a poor colony and swept the streets himself.
If you live in India or any neighboring country, you probably know this LallaLallaLalla fabricated suit wearing person and many more things. Writing in this bold manner throughout the book makes it brave. Not a story was merely a story. Each one was very much un-story. We come to know about another major character - Tilo, Tilottoma. Everything about her was so unconventional and raw. I could see Arundhati’s own shadow on her. Tilo wrote a bunch of stories (they were also unstories) and titled the collection as ‘The Reader’s Digest Book’. Each of the unstories asks the reader one or two questions with or without options. These questions reflected a sense of mockery which can only come from a person who saw a lot of things, knew more things than one should know (probably she tried to un-know things like Anjum?). One such question was-
Q2: What is the acceptable amount of blood for good literature?
The melancholy of this question answers why Arundhati chose to write unstories instead of a conventional story with a conventional hero who solves all problems by all possible unconventional means. The city was a character itself.
Skyscrapers and steel factories sprang up where forests used to be, rivers were bottled and sold, fish were tinned, mountains mined and turned into shining missiles. Massive dams lit up the cities like Christmas trees. Everyone was happy.
Also the streets of the city-
All day long the roads were choked with traffic. The newly dispossessed who lived in the cracks and fissures of the city, emerged and swarmed around the sleek, climate-controlled cars, selling cloth dusters, mobile phone chargers, model jumbo sets, business magazines, pirated management books (How to Make Your first Million, What Young India Really Wants)... The passengers looked out of their car windows and saw only the new apartment they planned to buy, the Jacuzzi they had just installed and the ink that was still wet on the sweetheart deal they had just closed. They were calm from their meditation classes and glowing from yoga practice . . . . . . . . Fiercely competitive TV channels covered the story of the breaking city as ‘Breaking News’. Nobody pointed out the irony. They unleashed their untrained, but excellent-looking, young reporters, who spread across the city like a rash, asking urgent, empty questions; they asked the poor what it was like to be poor, the hungry what it was like to be hungry, the homeless what it was like to be homeless. ‘Bhai sahib, yeh bataaiye, aap ko kaisa lag raha hai…?’ Tell me brother how does it feel to be…? The TV channels never ran out of sponsorship for their live telecast of despair.
Sad truths surrounded me as I turned page after page. Arundhati brought the adivasis, the movements on arising issues in Jantar Mantar (the Shahbagh of Delhi) and told us the lives and deaths of people who sleep at night on the pavements of the cities where dogs, goats, cows and humans share the same bed. The shattered pieces of stories interacted with each other like double-decker flyovers. I fell in love with the characters. Anjum, Saddam Hussain, Tilo, Azad Bhartiya - they became a family to me I could not think of before. I am a fan of realistic literature. The Ministry of Utmost Happiness will always stay with me as a reality. I want to thank Arundhati for writing it. I loved you too while I was falling in love with your book.
Beat Meaning in Urdu Translation is "peatna" and Beat synonym words Amaze, Baffle, Bewilder, Bushed and Cadence. Similar words of Beat are also commonly used in daily talk like as Beaten, Beating and Beatnik. Pronunciation roman Urdu is "peatna" and Translation of Beat in Urdu writing script is پيٹنا. Google's free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages. 305 synonyms of beat from the Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, plus 462 related words, definitions, and antonyms. Find another word for beat. Need to translate "beats me" to Urdu? Here's how you say it. This baffles or puzzles me, as in I don't know how he does it-beats me! This term originally may have alluded to a winning poker hand. It may also be related to the even earlier usage of beat for "astonished" or "at a loss." [Slang; mid-1800s] Beat me meaning in urdu. نہیں جاننا؛ نہیں سمجھنے کے لئے. میں نہیں He Came Here To Beat Me meaning in Urdu: واہ مجھے پییتنی كے چکر میں یہاں آیا - Vah Mujhe Peetne Ke Chakkar Me Yaha Aya meaning, Definition Synonyms at English to Urdu dictionary gives you the best and accurate urdu translation and meanings of He Came Here To Beat Me and Vah Mujhe Peetne Ke Chakkar Me Yaha Aya Meaning.
let me know meaning in urdu (Ask any translation in ...
Learn what do you do meaning in Urdu. How to answer it in English in this English Urdu speaking course. Meaning of what do you in Urdu is aap kia kertay hain... Meaning of English word beat in Hindi and Urdu with how to use beat in sentences with translation in Hindi and Urdu. We learn the meaning of English word bea... Freelance writing in Pakistan is something I'm extremely passionate about. And why wouldn't I be? As a Pakistani freelance writer who makes over 100,000 Rs p... Coronavirus Kya Hai in Urdu/Hindi MUST KNOW Symptoms, Diagnosis & Treatment Oladoc#Coronavirus (COVID-19)is a name given to a family of viruses that ca... This Hindi new story and Urdu story is about a witch story. Husband and wife lives in a city they plan to visit the village for picnic. One day they reach to... Learn the meaning of English word entire in Urdu, Hindi in this English Urdu dictionary and translation lesson. You learn to speak three English sentences using... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue This video will show the meaning of let me know Namaskaar Dosto, is video mein maine aap Intel ke i3, i5 aur i7 ke baare mein bataya hai, inme kya difference hai, aur aap kaise i3, i5, i7 ko compare kar sa... Video shows what beats me means. I don't know; I have no idea.. Beats me Meaning. How to pronounce, definition audio dictionary. How to say beats me. Powere...
![[Hindi/Urdu] i3 Vs i5 Vs i7 Explained in Detail ...](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/zz2ll6lMDjk/default.jpg "Freelance writing in Pakistan is something I'm extremely passionate about. And why wouldn't I be? As a Pakistani freelance writer who makes over 100,000 Rs p...")
