From: hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Quoting out of context: Why patience wears thin?
Date: 14 Apr 1992 12:59:43 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: pageboy.cs.utexas.edu

Netters must have noticed that I become irritated when one tries 
to quote out of context. The recent "out of context" quotation of
Maudoodi's position vis-a-vis minorities is a typical example of
how such "half-truths" can easily malign the impression. 

I am sorry for my
scathing replies. I just wanted to make it as a test-case
that people be more cautious later on. I neither
have the great patience of Maudoodi (who never used to reply
further than clarifying his position) nor his fore-bearance,
for he thought such debates to be wastage of time.
(I am therefore not going to reply to any further remarks on
  this topic, except reproducing my earlier postings)

Here are the reasons and lessons to be learned:

1: Quoting out of context is a form of "half truth". A "half-truth"
   is more vicious than a complete lie. It is vicious because it
   makes the reader draw wrong conclusions from incomplete data.

2: There is a whole history of vicious anti-Maudoodi campaign based
   only on such "half-truths". For typical examples see "Fitnah-e-
   Maudoodiyet" and other such titles and then read Maudoodi's
   books from where the references are taken out of context. (So,
   one should be careful while using the same trick again. He is
   bound to get a calculated measure for measure)

3: People who had quoted out of context and gave "kufr-ka-fatwa"
   to Maudoodi included such names as "Shafi Okarwi" and
   "Ghaus Hazarvi" (to see their ignorance, just listen to 
   their tapes or read some of their pamphlets). They were 
   simply ignored. No one listens to them any more. Few
   would even recognize their names!

4: While researching Maudoodi about 12 years ago, I went through
   most of such allegations and the referred works. 
   I found that 99.9% of all such allegations are based on
   "out-of-context" quotations.
  
5: I am surprised at the "erudition" of such (so called) scholors,
   who are prepared to give their opinion without proper research.

6: Maudoodi's works contain books which range from such
   scholorly and difficult books (like "Musala-e-jabr-o-Qader,
   which I couldn't read beyond a few pages) to such logical
   and simple books that are equally inspiring to graduate
   students and equally appealing to the 7th graders (like 
   "Khutbaat"). In such cases,
   where the "target audience" varies so much, not all the
   relevant information can be put in one place. 

7: One must be very careful about mentioning the opinion of
   scholors from isolated texts. Scholors whose works exceed
   more than hundred in number, and include such diversity as
   given in (6), must be read in their entirity before forming
   any view about their opinion.

8: My experience tells me that Maudoodi had a much better grasp
   of the real insight of Quran than such critics. 
   Secondly, his logical
   exposition left very few vulnerable spots. See for example,
   his opinion on this "minority relation" case. Although Arindam
   thought that Maudoodi was completely cornered. 
   However, he had overlooked the most fundamental of all reasons:
   belief and conviction (Appendix contains that posting).

Lastly, I would give another example of such "beautiful" replies
beyond which "reason" can do nothing except to throw up his arms 
in dispair:

When Maudoodi married into a very mod, elite and non-hijab-taking
family, the conservative ulemas criticized him as to how he can
 marry such a mod woman, given all his claims to Islam and purdah.
He replied: "If I can't change my wife, how do you expect me
		to go ahead and change whole world!"
   
============
APPENDIX showing the immaculate logic of Islam
==============


Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Re. Maudoodi and Minority relations: Who is right and wrong?
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
Keywords: 

In article <1992Apr11.020425.26587@menudo.uh.edu> mece1e3@Jane.UH.EDU
writes:
>  Irfan wrote:
1: >>	The question in front of Maudoodi was what will be your
   >>	treatment of minorities in `M' if `N' is persecuting the
   >>	Muslims and treating the Muslims as  ASHOOTS & MALEESHS.
   >>

2: >>	His answer was, whatever the treatment of Muslims in `N',
   >>	even if  they are treated as ASHOOTS & MALEESHS, we can not
   >>	and will not sacrifice our "principles" and start
   >>	persecuting the minorities in `M'!!!!!!!!


>Well Maudoodi faced another question. Will you please tell what's his
>answer, taking into consideration his whole philosophy.
>
>Question: Will you accept muslims being treated in N as the others were being
>treated in M?
>If the answer is no: Maudoodi is a hypocryte;
>If the answer is yes: then what arguement do you have on the Israel's current
>treatment of Arab citizens (if you have any)
>>
>Arindam
>

Thank you Arindam. I like your style of asking directly what ever
is on one's mind. Instead of Mr. Arshad Husain's hyperbolic
way of quoting out of context, and making the readers draw
incorrect conclusions by feeding them half-truths.

If you think a little more closely on 1 and 2 above, you will see
all the answers you are looking for.

The only possible ambiguity is the word "principles" (in quotes
in the answer 2 above). By "principles", Maudoodi meant whatever
is obtained through Quran and Sunnah.

Maudoodi very clearly explains the whole thing in "Rassail Massail-I",
"Tarjumanul Quran"-1944, and "Islami riyasat" 1967:

You see we, Muslims are responsible for our own actions. We
are not responsible for other's actions. Everyone is
responsible for one's own actions. Because
we are Muslims, our actions must subscribe to Quran and Sunnah.
Quran and Sunnah explicitly tells us what the "treatment of
minorities" in an Islamic State `M' should be. So, based
on these principles, we the Muslims, will treat our minorities
in `M', the way Quran and Sunnah has told us.

What a non-Muslim state (Israel or any other) does with their
"minorities" is another issue. Just because we fear that
a non-Muslim country `N' will persecute Muslim minority,
is  never going to dissuade us, the Muslims, from treating our 
minorities according to Quran and Sunnah. However, if
'N` does persecute its minorities, then its stature in the
world will decrease and people will come to abhor them
like the regimes of Saddam, Hitler and Changez Khan.
Eventually, their regimes will become only chapters
of history.

We are confident that world will soon realize who is more
just, balanced and safeguarder of human rights. If we are
found to be lacking in justice and fairplay, then obviously,
in time, our ideology will be defeated and we will be left
with no state. If however, other states (Israel, USA or any
other) are found to be lacking in justice and fair play,
then the whole world will soon realize who is more just and
who must be followed. They will follow us and we will ultimately
prevail. In this world and in the hereafter it is always
the good that prevails over evil. Eventually, we will see
evil driven away and good prevailing.