Friday, March 29, 2024
11:57 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > General > News & Articles > Dawn

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Monday, August 25, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default "Past Present" By: Mubarak Ali

Ascetic sense


The history of Sindh has been interpreted differently from time to time. Before 1947, in traditional history writing, Sindh was referred to as Babul Islam or ‘Gateway to Islam’ given that this was the first territory conquered by the Arabs in the subcontinent (711 AD). However, Islam was confined to the borders of Sindh and could not spread to other parts of the subcontinent. After 1947, in Sindhi nationalist history writing, this concept was challenged and Arab rule was described as ‘Arab imperialism’, as its influence managed to damage local tradition and institutions.

In the following phase however, Sindh was called the land of the Sufis. This meant that the teachings of those Sufi orders who settled in Sindh transformed the society to a peace-loving and a non-violent one. To the people of Sindh, it is a matter of pride to belong to a land that so many Sufi orders made their homeland. The question is whether the teachings of the Sufis are an advantage or just an obstacle to the progress of the society? Sufism has become a part of Sindhi nationalism which, along with the emergence of certain symbols from culture and traditions, was required to inspire people to struggle for their rights. Sufi shrines have become cultural centres and the teachings of the Sufi saints are highlighted and projected as a solution to most social problems. It is seen that successive governments and the ruling classes have promoted this culture to keep people occupied in seeking spiritual solace in a peaceful and subdued manner.

Historically, the Sufis did not challenge political authority nor resist oppressive rule. On the contrary, their policy was to keep their disciples away from politics. Nizamuddin Auliya (d.1325), the respected saint of Dehli, accepted money from Khusro Malik, a usurper, who had become the king after assassinating Qutbuddin Mubarak Shah Khilji (1320). Acceptance of the gift meant recognition of a ruler who betrayed his patron to become a king. When Ghiyasuddin Tughluq (1325), after overthrowing Khusro Malik, assumed kingship, he demanded Nizamuddin Auliya to return the money which was given to him from the State treasury. His reply that he had already distributed the money among his disciples is indicative of the compromising attitude of the Sufis. Amir Khusro (d.1325), the poet and disciple of Nizam-uddin Auliya served as a court poet to different rulers while the Sufis from Suhrawardiya remained close to the rulers and accepted gifts without any hesitation.

When the people of Sindh are asked to be proud of the Sufis of the land, it is in the interest of the ruling classes as they do not want the people to challenge their status or privileges nor to be disobedient to their rule. It is also in the interest of the sajjada nashin or the families of the Sufis to retain their status quo and not to disturb the old order. After independence, the influence of the families of the Sufi saints increased and their social status strengthened. They joined political parties which were conservative in their outlook. In case of military rule, they readily co-operated in order to retain their status and privileges. The policy continues to the present day. It is easy for them to win elections because their loyal disciples vote for them blindly. They have widespread influence in their areas and no government can implement a policy without their consent. They not only dominate politics but also control the social lives of their followers.

In fact, it is not a matter of pride to belong to the land of the Sufis but an illusion that the people of Sindh should get rid of. In the teachings of the Sufis, there is nothing to help them respond to the challenges of the modern time. It is a global world and the society needs to be equipped with modern knowledge and technology instead of outdated and rusted teachings of the Sufis. New knowledge is required with the change of time. The past cannot be revived. One should look forward to the future for progress and advancement. Obedience makes people stagnant, while resistance makes them active in responding to the problems of the present day.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, August 24th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
farhana butt (Saturday, October 03, 2015), fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014), saba zahid (Monday, June 20, 2016)
  #2  
Old Sunday, August 31, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 31-08-2014

Role reversal


It is seen through the annals of history that communities or groups with little or no political power are persecuted, discriminated and suspected as forces of destabilisation. Hence, the ruling classes victimise them and reduce them to a state of humiliation and submission, and any resistance on their part is crushed brutally. Sometimes these oppressed communities acquire political power which alters their status, behaviour and attitude. Intoxicated by political power, they forget their past and assume the rule of oppressors against their opponents and hostile elements. As an example, we can discuss two communities which have transformed their character after acquiring political power and authority. The first example is that of the Christian community. In the early days, Christianity spread from the Eastern Mediterranean throughout the Roman Empire and beyond. The Christians were a peaceful, humble, submissive and non-violent community which endured hardships and suffering at the hands of the Roman authorities. They were tortured and executed in case of refusal to pay homage to the Roman emperor. Their most prominent apostles — Saint Paul and Saint Peter — were executed by the authorities for refusing to give recognition and respect to temporal and spiritual Roman authorities.

When the city of Rome was burnt during the reign of Nero (54 to 68AD), the people accused Emperor Nero of having caused the devastation, claiming he set the fire for his own amusement. In order to deflect these accusations and placate the people, Nero laid the blame (for the fire) on the Christians so they became a victim of people’s hatred. They were thrown in front of wild animals which was an entertainment practice among the Romans. However, the number of Christian converts increased gradually which strengthened the community, making them powerful enough to play a political role. In 313AD, emperor Constantine converted to Christianity which suddenly changed the role of the Christian community in the Roman Empire. Christianity became the state religion, the officials were granted financial support and churches were built throughout the empire. Once the Christian community had state support, it turned against the pagan institutions and their deities. Their temples were destroyed, their philosophers exiled and all traces of old Roman religions were eliminated. As Europe gradually became Christian, the church became strong and oppressive against heretics who were tortured and burnt at the stake. As oppressors, the church used the same methods and tools which had been used against the Christians in the pagan Roman period.

The second example is that of the Jews, who were expelled from Jerusalem after the demolition of temples by the Babylonian king Nebuchad*nezzar. He arrested their nobles and took them to Babylon in 598BC, in what is known in Jewish history as the Babylonian Captivity. Cyrus, the Persian king, (530AD) then allowed them to return to Jerusalem and to rebuild their city and temples. However, during the Roman period, Jerusalem was destroyed again and the Jews were expelled from the city. Since then, they settled in different countries as a minority. They were tolerated by the Muslim rulers, who allowed them to devote their energies in conducting business as well as to contribute to religious knowledge. On the other hand, they were persecuted in European countries and were expelled from England, France, Poland and Spain. In the 11th century when a crusade was declared against the Muslims, the crusading army first attacked and slaughtered the Jews who were settled in the Rhineland, a name for the several areas of Western Germany along the Middle and Lower Rhine. It became customary that the Jews were the first ones to be accused and held responsible for any number of crises, following which the public was allowed to attack them and loot their property. In Germany, they resided in ghettos which were isolated from the majority. They were not allowed to engage in any business outside the ghettos and it wasn’t until the French Revolution that the Jews were granted equal status as citizens.

However, despite political, social and industrial progress, anti-Semitic sentiments did not die in the European society. They emerged with full force during the Nazi period when Hitler launched a policy of pure Aryanisation and planned to exterminate the Jews. Millions of them were killed in gas chambers; the genocide is known by the Jews as the Shoah, the holocaust. After facing discrimination and persecution in Europe, the Zionist movement was launched by some Jewish leaders for a separate homeland for the Jewish people, as a permanent solution. In 1917, Balfour, the foreign minister of England promised to facilitate the foundation of the State of Israel in Palestine, which was declared in 1948 as an independent State. Since then, the State of Israel has been slaughtering, killing and massacring the Palestinians to get hold of their properties and land. Millions of Palestinians, terrorised and forced to leave their homeland, took refuge in other countries. In the war of 1967, Israel occupied east Jerusalem and Golan Heights and the Israeli forces have occupied and controlled the West Bank ever since. It withdrew its occupying troops and settlers from Gaza in 2005, but maintains a full blockade of the territory, where Palestinians are constantly harassed, killed and treated like an occupied nation.

Israel has not learnt a lesson from history. It follows the apartheid policy which failed in South Africa. It also built a great wall to confine the Palestinians in the narrow land space as prisoners. Although there are many thinkers, philosophers and noble laureates among the Jewish people, there are only a few voices against Israeli injustices and the persecution of the Palestinians. Perhaps, the Israelis would like to follow the American policy of reducing the native Indians to a non-entity after massacring them and occupying their land. Today those natives live in reservation camps isolated from the rest of the American society. The Israelis also want to exhaust the energies of the Palestinians and confine them in an area surrounded by check posts which makes it impossible for them to move freely. This is how the oppressed become oppressors by ignoring the past and refusing to learn from history. Lord Acton is correct when he says that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Perhaps it is true that the only thing we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, August 31, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
farhana butt (Saturday, October 03, 2015), fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014)
  #3  
Old Sunday, September 07, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 07-09-2014

Past present: Mind over matter


In the 16th century, Europe confronted religious, social and political conflict. This is not necessarily a bad thing as historians believe that conflict is a leitmotif of change. It awakens society from slumber and stagnation and leads to the creation of new ideas and thoughts with the passage of time. When Martin Luther challenged the Catholic Church and its outdated institutions, the church became divided. In turn, the Catholic Church launched the Counter- Reformation with an aim to reform the church and restore Catholicism in Europe. In 1618-48, the Thirty Year War ravaged Germany along with other European countries like Sweden, France, Spain and Austria when the Roman Catholic Church attempted to curtail the activities of the Protestants, sparking a rebellion. At first the Catholic Church authorities underestimated the extent of the Reformation but when they realised that the movement was spreading from one country to another, they decided to take action to defend and reform themselves. The Inquisition, which was a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Roman Catholic Church, took harsh steps against heretics to check any deviation from faith in order to retain its unity.

From the time of the Greek philosophers to the present day, faith and knowledge have been in a love-hate relationship
The most effective challenge that the Church faced was the emergence of new knowledge which contradicted the Holy Scripture, the very basis of their faith. Until now, the Catholic Church firmly believed in the Ptolemaic idea that the earth was stationary while sun revolved around it. When Copernicus (d.1543), the Polish scientist presented the heliocentric theory that the earth revolved while the sun remained stationary, the Catholic Church responded with fury. The manuscript by Copernicus was included in the index of prohibited books, which was published by the Church mentioning the books which were not allowed to be read by devout Catholics. The argument of the Church was that in the Old Testament, Joshua prayed to God to let the sun remain in the sky until the war was over. The interpretation being that if sun was stationary why would Joshua pray for it to stand still? On this basis of it, it was considered heretical to oppose it. Despite the opposition by the Church, scientists and philosophers continued to discuss this issue. It was a time when Italian universities were academically active and Italian aristocrats and nobles were also interested to learn about nature and to unfold its mysteries. The first philosopher to face the charges of heresy was Giordano Bruno (d.1600) who propagated his idea that earth moved and there were a number of galaxies behind the sun. The Inquisition arrested him and tried him as a heretic. It was the practice of the Inquisition to torture its prisoners and force them to plead guilty. Giordano Bruno endured the torture but refused to reject his ideas. Finally, he was taken out of prison, paraded in the streets as a heretic and burnt at stake.

In 1610, Galileo a prominent scientist and philosopher published Sidereus Nuncius presenting his startling astronomical observations in which he recorded the phases of Venus and the moons of Jupiter. With these observations he promoted the heliocentric theory of Copernicus. Galileo’s initial discoveries were met with opposition within the Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be formally heretical. Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, Galileo was tried in 1633 for heresy and sentenced to indefinite imprisonment. He was kept under house arrest until his death in 1642. The insult and humiliation did not dampen his spirits. He continued to work, and secretly sent his new manuscript on the theory of motion for publication to France. He also received some visitors such as Thomas Hobbes, the English philosopher, and Milton, the English poet, despite the strict ban. Towards the end of his life he became blind and died in 1642 while still under house arrest. The Church hence closed all doors for the creation of new knowledge, relegating the Catholic world into backwardness. On the other hand, Protestant countries free from such religious restrictions created new knowledge and progressed politically and economically.

Though many scientists and philosophers were condemned by the Church, the new knowledge discovered by them overpowered the extremist religious views and transformed the world. In 1992, some 350 years after his death, the case of Galileo was reopened by the Catholic Church and Pope John Paul acknowledged the error on part of the Church authorities and declared Galileo right in his views. This was a triumph of knowledge against faith, even if it came several centuries too late.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, September 7th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
farhana butt (Saturday, October 03, 2015), fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014)
  #4  
Old Sunday, September 14, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 14-09-2014

Past present: Can’t be choosers

In traditional history writing, marginalised groups are excluded from the mainstream of history and treated as ‘history-less’; their contributions to society are not recognised. In a class based society where there is a large gap between the rich and the poor, beggars emerged as a dependent class relying on the benevolence of rich people. Since all religions encourage charity (highly praised and considered to be a quality favoured by God), this concept has also been used to maintain the domination of the upper classes and to curb the bitterness and hard feelings of the very poor against the exploiters. The ‘beggars’ are groups that are contemptuously treated and looked down upon by the society. Whenever they are mentioned in historical narratives, they are used to project the image of wealthy people as their benefactors. According to the German philosopher Nietzsche, moral values of kindness and pity assert the superiority of upper classes towards the subordinate section of society. There are various kinds of beggars. Seneca (d.65AD) the Roman philosopher, points out that there were professional beggars in the Roman Empire. It was the practice of their leaders to kidnap children, break their bones and deform their bodies in order to get the attention of the people who would pity them and try to compensate by giving them a decent amount of money as alms. Charles Dickens also talks of professional beggars during the Victorian age of England, when organised beggar groups existed whose activities were to beg and hand over money to their bosses, who in return looked after their welfare.

This practice has continued to the present day. There are gangs of beggars who try to get the attention of people in all sorts of ways to extract money from them as charity. We find beggars simply everywhere especially in markets, hospitals, mosques and shrines appealing to people to give them alms either in the name of religion or out of pity. In classical Greek philosophy, there was a movement known as cynicism, the followers of which retired from worldly matters and survived on begging. One of its famous founders was Diogenes (dc.323BC), who possessed nothing but a clay pot for drinking water. One day he saw a boy cupping his hands to drink water from a river. He broke his clay pot and from then on decided to drink water just like the boy did at the river bank. He lived all his life on charity. In some religions, begging is encouraged in order to allow people to express their piety. In Buddhism, Bhikshu, the male and Bhakshan, the female are not allowed to own a private property or have any connection with the material world. Saint Francis of Assisi (1181–1226) was an Italian Catholic friar and preacher. In 1204, Francis had a vision that directed him back to Assisi, where he lost his taste for worldly life. On a pilgrimage to Rome, he joined the poor in begging at St. Peter’s Basilica. The experience moved him so much that he decided to live in poverty. Upon his return home, he began preaching on the streets, and soon amassed a following.

In the 16th century Holland and Belgium, better known as the United Provinces, resisted the rule of Spain. During the struggle, a delegation of the United Provinces approached the lady Governor of Spain in order to present some of their demands. When the petition was presented to her, one of the advisors asked her not to accept their demands because they were beggars. When the delegation returned without success they became known as beggars and the word became a symbol for their struggle against Spain; going up on their banners as a symbol of resistance. When the navy joined the rebellion they became known as the ‘sea beggars’. Thus the word ‘beggar’ exploited the emotions of people in their fight for liberation against Spain. In Europe, begging was not condemned during the medieval period. However, after the industrial revolution, begging was denounced and society urged people to work and earn their livelihood through labour. In some European countries begging is banned by law. In case of Pakistan, begging is widespread. Those who neither have financial support from their family, nor a source of income, resort to begging. On the other hand, there are professional beggars who exploit people emotionally and adopt begging as a source of livelihood. Begging also flourishes in our society because of the feudal culture. The rich and wealthy feel proud to provide food to poor and hungry people. Through such acts, they earn themselves a good reputation in society. But charity cannot eliminate poverty and transform the society to one that is prosperous and flourishing. Begging can only be eradicated from the society when the state takes the responsibility for education, health, employment and welfare of the people.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, September 14th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
farhana butt (Saturday, October 03, 2015), fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014)
  #5  
Old Monday, September 22, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 21-09-2014

Past present: The dishonoured dead


We are the Dead.
Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
— John McCrae, in Flanders field

On July 28, 1914, when World War 1 began, it was welcomed by the European public who mistakenly thought that it would solve political and economic crises. They believed that the war would be over within a short span of time and the soldiers would be home in time to celebrate Christmas. However, it did not end as people expected but continued for more than four years, resulting in an immense loss of lives and hitherto unparalleled destruction. When it ended, a stunned and decimated Europe asked many questions. Writers, artists and filmmakers expressed their views on the horrors of the war. An interesting book titled Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning by Jay Winter dealt with a number of questions. After the war ended, soldiers would typically be buried where they fell on the battlefield, but some of the families of the dead soldiers preferred them to be brought home to be buried in their hometowns and villages. Their argument being that they did not like to leave the bodies in a foreign country among strangers. Instead, they preferred the bodies to rest in ancestral graveyards near their families. On the other hand, there were those who wanted the soldiers’ bodies to be buried along with those of their comrades in a common graveyard which would become a symbol of unity. A long debate between the government and the war-affected families continued over the issue. In the end France agreed to send back dead bodies of the soldiers to their native towns and villages where they were reburied. The American government also decided to shift and ship the dead bodies of the American soldiers to their hometowns. The British government could not implement it because of the heavy expenses it entailed so their dead soldiers remained in war cemeteries in the land where they had died.

A large number of soldiers from the subcontinent also lost their lives though not for their country, but for the colonial powers who ruled them. They remained unnoticed by their colonial masters and their sacrifices remained unacknowledged. In the memory of its dead soldiers, the British government built a memorial for unknown soldiers at Westminster Abbey. This model was later adopted by most of the European countries to commemorate the soldiers who died during the war. France built triumphal arches as a symbol of victory. Although the war was over, these governments wanted to keep the memory of war alive as a continuous process to remind people of the nation’s glory and success. All those countries that participated in the war built statues of the generals and soldiers to be erected in public spaces in recognition of their sacrifices. In Germany, the statue of Hindenburg; the general who fought in the battle and earned a reputation as great strategist, was made of iron. So impressed and awed were the Germans by his generalship, that they would purchase small replicas of it as mementos. While governments throughout Europe made efforts to promote war hysteria by building war memorials thereby creating sentiments of nationalism and patriotism, on the other hand there were writers and artists who wanted to highlight the horrors of the war and its meaninglessness. Käthe Kollwitz was an artist who lost her youngest son, Peter, on the battlefield in World War I in October 1914. He was buried in the German war cemetery in Belgium.

She visited the cemetery along with her husband, which had barbed wire boundaries that left just a small space for entrance. When they entered inside the cemetery, they found many graves of dead soldiers. Each grave had a plate with a number, the name of the soldier and a yellow wooden cross erected at the head of the grave. They found the grave of their son and stood in silence remembering the good days that they had spent together. It was the sad moment for parents who had lost their young son. She plucked three flowers from a nearby bush and placed them on the grave. By the end of the year she prepared drawings for a monument to Peter and his fallen comrades; but she destroyed the monument in 1919 and began again in 1925. The memorial, titled The Grieving Parents, was finally completed and placed in the Belgian cemetery of Roggevelde in 1932. Later, when Peter’s grave was moved to the nearby Vladslo German war cemetery, the statues were also moved. It shows how the war is seen by the common people as a personal loss and not as glory, which is a completely different viewpoint from that of the government. A French filmmaker screened a film showing that one night the dead soldiers came out from their graves and visited their towns and cities only to discover that nothing had changed and everything went on in the same way as when they were alive. Their wives and friends were enjoying music and danced with other male companions. Their questions as to why were they urged to die for a nation and a country without any cause and why did they lose their lives over nothing remain unanswered.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, September 21st, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014)
  #6  
Old Sunday, September 28, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 28-09-2014

Past present: Deeply regret to inform you …


During and after the First World War, families of soldiers at war would be in a state of anxiety to find out whether their loved ones had been killed in the battlefield or were still alive. In France, it was customary for the mayor of the town to inform the families about the death of their relatives. When he came out of his office, the family members stood in front of their houses, waiting to see which door would he stop at to deliver the news of the death of a soldier to his family. In England, the government informed about the death of a soldier by sending a letter to the aggrieved family. Again, the families would go through an ordeal when the postman passed through the streets and stopped at one front door to deliver the letter announcing the death of a loved one. In case of an officer at war, information would be given by telegram. It can be easily understood how the families would suffer daily as they dealt with mixed feelings of hope and fear. The families whose members were killed in the battlefield would react strongly against the war. While the government highlighted their sacrifices for the country and the nation, the families’ views would differ. In Australia, at a school celebration when the national anthem was played, one girl refused to comply and stand up for the anthem. When the teacher asked her about her action, she replied that her class fellows’ fathers were there to participate in the celebration but her father was not here because he was killed during the war. Therefore, she was not willing to honour the national anthem. A widow also expressed similar views. According to her, it may be a matter of pride that her husband’s name was among those who sacrificed their lives for the country and were on the honour list placed at the mayor’s office, yet she was not happy because there was nobody to support her financially. In Germany, thousands of widows and orphans lost their husbands and parents. The pension which was granted by the German government was hardly enough for their survival. This is how the common people experienced the consequences of war. There was no sentiment for nationalism or patriotism but a sense of loss for their beloved ones, who departed from their families after leaving a few pleasant memories.

The anti-war sentiment was depicted in a novel All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque. When the novel-based film was screened, it created anti-war feelings among people. Political activists set up an anti-war museum in Berlin displaying the horrors of the war. Generally, anti-war feelings prevailed throughout Europe because nearly every family was affected by the war and fully realised its most terrible impact on the society. Some family members could not accept the death of their relatives and wanted to contact their spirits in order to get some comfort. Many spiritualists emerged who claimed to call the spirits of dead soldiers. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the famous detective short story writer whose character ‘Sherlock Holmes’ became very famous, was also among those who were in contact with spiritualists because his son and brother were killed in the war. This situation continued up to 1930s and then gradually ended as by the time people had compromised with reality. The First World War created a strong response among writers, artists and filmmakers. They showed the horrors of war and propagated for peace. However, the efforts of the intellectuals failed and again the ruling classes won by resorting to go to war in order to resolve their differences and assert their hegemony. The result was the Second World War which was more horrible than the first one. It indicates how the ruling classes mobilised the emotions of people to accomplish their political and economic motives. Every war leaves behind unanswered questions as to who was right and who was wrong. If soldiers sacrifice their lives for a wrong cause, how are their sacrifices justified? Who is to be blamed: the government, the ruling classes or society itself? Who is going to compensate for the loss of their lives? How should it be treated in terms of history writing?

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, September 28th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
fraz bandesha (Monday, September 29, 2014)
  #7  
Old Sunday, October 05, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 05-10-2014

Past present: Bound and gagged


The progressive German writer Bertold Brecht (d.1956), after experiencing the tyranny and despotism of the Nazi dictatorship, expressed his feelings against the brutalities of the Nazi Party and its workers in one of his poems. He wrote how one day he saw the Nazis burning books which were considered to be against the ideology of the party. He was disappointed that his books were not among them. Traditionally, repressive states, ruling classes, political/religious parties and influential individuals have restricted the circulation of literature which was believed to be against their belief and ideology. In the early period of history, publication of books was limited; therefore it was easy to ban books that challenged the status quo. The situation radically changed after the invention of the printing press, when the number of publications increased and it became difficult for the state and its agencies to control their circulation. At this stage an attempt was made to ban literature which opposed conservative traditions and values. It was argued that these books would create anarchy and disorder in the society by disturbing the existing system. Since the conservative elements were not ready to change and implement new ideas, it was propagated that new concepts and thoughts were anti-state and must be crushed. When Martin Luther (d.1546) launched his campaign against the Catholic Church and its corruption, the printing press helped to disseminate his ideas and the church, despite all its resources, could not control his widespread influence among the people.

Before Luther, those who raised their voices against the church were easily eliminated because their ideas remain confined and could not get an opportunity to reach the majority. In 1493, the church started to publish a list of the titles of books that were considered contradictory to its teachings — it was known as the Index. It was revised every year and after reading the newly published books, the church authorities added names of authors and their writing which were believed to be critical of the Catholic faith. When a new ship would arrive at the harbour, the church authorities checked it thoroughly for banned books which if found would be destroyed. Later, when the Christian world was divided into the Catholic and the Protestant sects, the books published in the Protestant countries were also banned and included in the Index while the Catholics were advised not to read the books as they would pollute the purity of their faith. During the Enlightenment, the French philosophers, thinkers and writers started to publish books which condemned the corruption of the church, religious extremism, sectarianism and mismanagement of the government. When these writings were banned by censorship authorities, their popularity would increase. To fulfil the increasing demand of the readers, printers would publish these illegally and booksellers sold them secretly. Some of these books were published outside of France and smuggled into the country. When Napoleon came to power in France, he imposed strict rules of censorship. All newspapers and magazines criticising his policies were banned. The result was that the number of publications in France was greatly reduced. The same policy of censorship continued after the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 by the European leaders who wanted to restore the old system and control new ideas.

Metternich (d.1859), the Austrian chancellor, issued the Carlsbad Decrees in 1819, prohibiting the publication of books which contained liberal and progressive ideas. He also asked authorities of the universities to check the kind of books students were reading. He wanted to wipe out all traces of the French Revolution and revive the values of the ancient regime. The policy of censorship is not only implemented by the government authorities but religious and conservative parties also persuade state authorities to censor books that they considered obscene and vulgar. Saadat Hasan Manto and his short stories were condemned by conservative circles who demanded a ban on these. They approached the court seeking implementation of the ban. Interestingly, when some of his short stories were included in text books, they were edited and ‘objectionable’ material was deleted from his works. Another example of censorship is the view point of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (d.1943), the author of Bahishti zewar (Ornaments of Paradise). His book includes a long list of novels, short stories and poetry collections particularly romantic verse forbidden to young girls. He also advised that unmarried girls should not be allowed to read Sura Yousaf. The maulana’s concern was that the process of modernisation could disturb Muslim society. Throughout history, conservative forces have tried to control the growth of new ideas, yet they have failed because society remains in process of constant change. New ideas are required to fulfill the needs of the time. At present, new technology has rendered all methods of censorship useless. The internet, Facebook, Youtube and other forms of social media break all boundaries and are accessible to almost all people. Censorship has become a matter of the past, which is no more relevant to the present. This is a radical change which has paved the way for the propagation of creative knowledge and its access to the people.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, October 5th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old Sunday, October 12, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 12-10-2014

Building blocks


Monuments and buildings reflect the maturity, aesthetic taste and creative capacity of a society. Every age has its own character, values, norms and a sense of utility. By observing historical buildings, one can easily trace the past hidden in its architecture. New buildings either carry historical tradition or may deviate from the past and express modern day innovation. There are different types of buildings; those which represent the political domination of the ruling classes, which include forts, palaces, mausoleums and gardens. There are religious monuments such as temples, mosques, churches and shrines. The third type belongs to the common people — for instance their houses that cannot be preserved for a long time. Only buildings and monuments built on solid foundations can survive and these carry the past within their structure. Since it is the task of historians to unravel the mysteries of the past, some buildings become historical symbols which people feel proud of. Being reminders of past heritage, these monuments are preserved, conserved and restored to their original condition. After partition, Pakistan inherited two types of cities; those which belonged to the medieval period and others which were built during colonial rule. The differences between these two types of cities are quite obvious. The old cities are surrounded by walls with a number of gates. The streets are narrow and houses are congested. On the other hand, the colonial cities are built on the basis of modern town planning with wide and open thoroughfares along with footpaths and trees on both sides. In the centre of the city, there is a clock tower around which are markets and shops. After independence, the structure of the town started to change, which lead to their distortion. Take the example of Lahore, which is the only city that we have inherited with buildings and monuments of the Mughal period as well as colonial buildings. The latter are mostly public buildings, each representing their individual character.

We have failed to maintain the original structure of Lahore and distorted it by constructing buildings which have no relation with the past. An example is the Minar-i-Pakistan which is built as a carbon copy of the Eiffel Tower. In its disappointingly shabby and grotesque surroundings lie the Badshahi Mosque and the Lahore Fort. There was a time when Lahore was known as the city of gardens but slowly and gradually most of the gardens have disappeared and only the names remind us of their glorious existence in the past. The city of Lahore further deteriorated with increase in population and consequent increase in transport issues. In the absence of adequate public transport, people are forced to own cars, bikes, scooters and bicycles while commercial transports like auto-rickshaws are noisy and cause pollution. Consequently, the flow of traffic increased manifold and to facilitate that, the administrative authorities of the city have widened the roads by demolishing footpaths and cutting down trees. Instead of constructing an underground metro system, a network of flyovers and underpasses has been built which does little to solve transport problems. In addition, these flyovers have distorted the beauty of the city further disfigured by builders who have constructed commercial plazas for financial gains without any civic thought and planning. In the new settlements, there are roads without footpaths and it appears that there are no pedestrians in the city that need to be catered to. These localities seem to be reserved only for those who rely solely on their own private transport. This is the case in every large city where the landscape has been distorted by constructing high rise buildings which reflect our immaturity, intellectual bankruptcy and lack of aesthetic sense. In Islamabad, which is a relatively new and modern capital city, buildings such as the parliament house, supreme court, president and prime minister houses and the secretariat represent political power. One expects these new buildings to reflect the ambitions of a new nation but unfortunately, neither do they bear the past tradition of the Mughal era nor the designs of the colonial period. There is no creativity in the architecture and no sense of beauty in the design. It indicates not only the destruction of populated cities but the devastation of our society and its culture. If we continue to build our cities following the same trend, our historical consciousness and national identity will be truly lost.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, October 12th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old Sunday, October 26, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 19-10-2014

Reassessing the Mughals


Every society has a collective memory of its past, but each generation interprets it according to their present perspective. Sometimes, the past may be rejected as an obstacle to future progress, but at other times it is used as an inspiration for a struggle against present weaknesses. History shows that when a country is colonised, its people and resources are used to further strengthen colonial power. After acquiring political power in India, the East India Company was surprised at the widespread popularity of the Mughal Empire. Although, the Mughal Empire was in the process of decline and the emperor had lost his authority, the people of India were still loyal and respectful to him. Nadir Shah, who occupied Delhi after defeating the Mughals in 1737, failed to replicate the glory of the Mughal rule. He left India with the looted treasury of the Mughals while the dynasty remained intact. Likewise, Ahmad Shah Abdali invaded the subcontinent several times, but had no aspirations to rule it. He looted and plundered, forcibly married a Mughal princess and left for Afghanistan along with the acquired wealth and the family of his newly-wed wife. This gave the Marathas an opportunity to oust the Mughal emperor and to plant their candidate on the throne, but they still preferred to rule in the name of the Mughal emperor. Following the same tradition, the East India Company recognised the emperor as the legitimate ruler of India and paid homage to him. Even though the company had political power, the Mughal emperor remained popular among his subjects. Therefore, in the first phase, the company ruled in the name of the Mughal emperor, posing as the inheritors of the Mughal Empire and retaining nearly all its institutions and etiquettes.

However, the policy and the attitude of the company changed when it gained power and decided to create its own administrative set-up to get recognition as the legitimate rulers of India. At this stage, the Mughal past was denied and portrayed as despotic and oppressive. The idea behind the motive was to convey a message to the people of the subcontinent that the company had liberated them from a tyrannical rule and established a benevolent and enlightened government. The company further propagated their campaign through history writing. The British historians published a series of books on the Sultanate and Mughal history, distorting it in order to prove that the Muslim rule was tyrannical and biased against the Hindus. Elliot’s History of India: as told by its own historians I(1848) is one of the series of history books which condemned the Mughal past but justified the British rule. The Mughal past was again interpreted differently during the freedom movement against the British Raj. The historians of the subcontinent, under the influence of nationalism, glorified the Mughals whose rule culturally integrated the Hindus and the Muslims as one community. Their argument was that the Mughal rule created a pluralistic society in which there was no religious discrimination. It was the basis of their popularity which had strengthened their empire.

In the 1920s, history was communalised and historians on both sides condemned as well as admired the Mughal past. There was also a conflict in history writing between secularist and religious minded historians. To the secularists, Akbar was a ruler who ‘Indianised’ the Mughal Empire and laid down the foundations of religious tolerance and communal harmony. During his reign both the Hindus and the Muslims shared administration and contributed in the expansion of the empire. But according to the Islamist historians, Akbar was the cause of the Mughal decline as he appointed the Hindus on high posts, depriving the Muslims of their high status. They admired Aurangzeb who deviated from the policy of Akbar and introduced religious practices, which alienated the non-Muslim subjects. In Pakistani history writing, Akbar has no place while Aurangzeb is regarded as a pious ruler, admired and projected as the best emperor. There is a need to reassess the Mughal past in view of our present situation. We must try to understand why their rule flourished for such a long period (1526-1857). The reason for its continuity and popularity was its policy of religious tolerance and providing opportunities to talented people to play their role in administration, irrespective of their creed, caste and ethnicity. It respected the local traditions and preserved their values and institutions. Marginalised communities can only be assimilated into the society as long as there is religious tolerance.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, October 19th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old Sunday, October 26, 2014
Nayyar Hussain's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Larkana
Posts: 185
Thanks: 27
Thanked 34 Times in 26 Posts
Nayyar Hussain is on a distinguished road
Default 26-10-2014

When democracy fails


After de-colonisation, most newly-independent Asian and African countries were unable to stabilise democratic institutions and traditions. The system in these countries further weakened and became vulnerable when armed forces intervened and overthrew democratic government to establish military dictatorships. Another factor that has remained significant in the failure of democracy in such countries is the role of politicians. With their mediocrity, corruption and lack of vision, they plunged the country into disorder and chaos. Based on this situation, liberal western intellectuals often argue that certain countries were granted independence while their leadership was still immature and unskilled in politics. They argue that during the colonial period, there was peace, prosperity, law and order in these countries. As these countries became independent and their socio-political situation rapidly deteriorated, these intellectuals urged the old colonial powers to either reoccupy these countries or to make arrangements to restore the democratic system. Although politicians and leadership can certainly be held responsible for the decadence of the system, the seeds of a system that negates democracy were sown during the colonial rule. After the Indian war of independence in 1857, the British government promoted and strengthened the feudal system in order to control the rural population with help from the landlords who were granted special privileges and powers to raise their social and political status in society. In turn, they collaborated with the government against the interest of their own people. The British government supervised them and kept a check on them so they could not deviate against the policies of the government. Pakistan inherited the feudal system which gained power and strength since there was no longer the check and balance of colonial governance over their conduct. These feudals have played a negative role in Pakistani politics since independence. During democratic rule, they formed political parties, participated in elections and became a part of the ruling classes.

In case of military government, they supported every coup in order to preserve and protect their privileges and properties. Army officers who are granted property after their retirement also became landlords and as their interests became common, both made efforts to strengthen feudalism. Presently, feudal lords control state institutions for their own benefit as most of the leading families are members of the parliament, holding ministerial portfolios. They use this power to enhance their influence and prestige in the society. Nearly all political parties are dominated by feudal lords who are so powerful that a common person does not have the courage to contest elections against them. In political parties as well as in the ruling circles, there is no space for ordinary people to participate or challenge them. Some feudal lords exercise even more power and control as spiritual leaders of their community. Their disciples have no alternative but to vote for them. Therefore feudalism is an impediment in the way of democratic institutions and their growth. Moreover, contesting elections has become so expensive that common people stand no chance of participating in the electoral process. It is common knowledge that electoral candidates have to pay large amounts as ‘donation’ to the party in order to obtain a ticket. The whole process is undemocratic and against the spirit of democracy. Another cause for the failure of democracy in our country is the institution of the bureaucracy which we have also inherited from the colonial rule. Bureaucratic institutions such as police, secret agencies, judiciary, and government officials were trained during the colonial period to control people by using coercive methods. They were not pro-people but against them. For example, in case of strikes and demonstration, the colonial police would crush them brutally, a practice which continues to the present.

Secret agencies used to check the conduct of people and those whose activities were suspected to be anti-government were imprisoned and tortured. Nobody would be appointed on an important government post without the clearance of these agencies. At present our government follows the same exercise. All these bureaucratic institutions are used for the interest of the ruling classes and not for the welfare of the people. All respective governments have retained these institutions and use them to subdue and crush any opposition which challenges their power. Therefore, the existence of these bureaucratic institutions is also a major cause for declining democratic traditions. The Pakistani leadership has created confusion by building the political structure of the country so as to make it an ideological state. Whether democracy is according to our religious tenets or not remains a debate. Does nationhood include non-Muslims within its orbit or not? In the absence of Pakistani nationalism, regional sub-nationalism is becoming a strong source of identity. As a result, central authority has weakened and there is no binding force to unite different provinces under one state rule. There is a need to end feudalism, tribal leadership and the hold of powerful individuals from political parties. Common people must be provided opportunities to participate in political activities. Only their inclusion in mainstream politics would strengthen democracy and save the country from corrupt, dishonest and mediocre leadership.

Published in Dawn, Sunday Magazine, October 26th, 2014
__________________
"I am still learning."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Nayyar Hussain For This Useful Post:
fraz bandesha (Tuesday, October 28, 2014)
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mubarak falls into coma in Sharm al-Sheikh DESPOT News & Articles 1 Tuesday, February 15, 2011 01:55 PM
Analysis: Military coup was behind Mubarak's exit Xeric News & Articles 0 Saturday, February 12, 2011 11:26 AM
Robert Fisk: Exhausted, scared and trapped, protesters put forward plan for future Call for Change News & Articles 0 Sunday, February 06, 2011 12:42 AM
Making the Quran your reference point Last Island Islam 0 Thursday, November 01, 2007 04:21 AM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.