HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cavus@CAE.WISC.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: 'ICAZ-I QUR'AN.  PART 8.
Date: 15 Aug 92 21:02:46 GMT

Esselamu Aleykum.

ON THE INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  QUR'AN.  PART  8.

This TWENTY  NINTH  LETTER  consists of nine parts.  This is the
first part containing nine remarks.

In the Name of Allah the Merciful the Compassionate  "The seven
Heavens and the Earth, as well as whoever is in them, glorify
Him." [Al Qur'an 17:44]

Eighth Remark:  We should first mention a truthful rule about this matter. 
There are two rights (huquq): personal rights and general rights.  The latter
is called 'Allah's huquq' (Huququllah).  Hence, some of the matters of the
Sharia are related to individuals, and some of them concerns the whole Muslim
Umma, and thus are called the Islamic signs (shiar).  Since these Shiar have
connection with all the Muslims, all the past and future Muslim Umma has a
share in them.  Therefore, without the consent of the whole past and future
Umma, changing them would be a blatant assault to those general rights.  The
smallest matter of Shiar, even if it is at the degree of sunnah (i.e., not 
farz), is extremely important.  As they are all directly related to the Islamic
world, they are the chains which link the majority of Muslims since the time of
Prophet (Asr-i Saadet) till the end of the world.  Those who help to break,
destroy, and distort that lightful chain must consider that they are making a
very bad mistake.  If they have a least amount of consciousness, they should
tremble before they do anything!

will continue in$aallah

C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C* 
These translations are from the Risale-i Nur Collection of Bediuzzaman Siad
Nursi (RA) which consists of a total of 134 books in Turkish and few in Arabic.
Tranlators are a group of  students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and
Case Western Reserve  University-Cleveland.  All correspondence should be
directed to the e-mail address appering in this posting.  We are posting these
translations part by part but if anyone is interested we can send the whole
topic to personal e-mail addresses.  These topics have also appeared in the
weekly letter "Droplet  -  From The Vast Ocean Of The Miraculous Qur'an"
published and distributed in the Islamic Centers of Madison-WI and Cleveland-OH
after every Friday-Prayer.  Thank you.  The Talabat-un Noor.
C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    C*    
Xref: sparky soc.culture.pakistan:14013 soc.culture.indian:29012
From: sadhal@alhena.usc.edu (Sati Sadhal)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: USA and the Gulf War
Date: 21 Aug 1992 10:42:58 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: alhena.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug21.091658@IASTATE.EDU> jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed A Khan) writes:
>
>
>I was pleasantly surprised to hear the Americans finally acknowledge
>that the real and only purpose for American participation in the Gulf
>war was to safeguard their source of oil by preventing one nation (one man)
>from getting control of 2/3 rd. of the world oil reserves. 
>


There have been many more untruths. First of all, Iraq and Kuwait do
not have 2/3 of the world's oil. The whole Middle East does, not
counting the untapped US resources. 


[stuff deleted]

>I just wanted to bring it to the notice of those apologists who have been
>valiantly trying to defend the alleged *noble* intent of the US which guided
>their war against Iraq.
>
>
>
>--Javed.
>
>====
>What has been the biggest joke since the birth of democracy ?
>
>  The United Nations.
> 

They first said that the war was for democracy. Well, at the end,
neither Kuwait nor Iraq is a democracy.

Then they said it was for oil. The price of gas has gone up 30%
in the last 6 months.

Finally they said that it was for jobs. Unemployment is higher 
than ever in the last 10 years.

Now, again, it may be for re-election.
   ........ I wonder if I can successfully project from
	the three previous failures.

				S S Sadhal




Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: arkay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Abdur Khan)
Subject: Re: Asma Jhagir: Human Right Activist
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 23:13:39 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.214609.3985@engr.uark.edu> aq0@engr.uark.edu (Amer Qureshi) writes:
>ahussain@prism.poly.edu (Arshad Hussain) writes:
>
>>>From: myadav@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Mahesh Yadav)
>>>
>
>THE INTERESTING RESULTS WERE...........
>
>after that story was aired....
>
>a) a PAKI dude who was about to marry an AMERIKAN had to sign up
>   a pre-nuptial agreement that, she would not go to waten-e-aziz
>   with him.
>
>b) many cool PAKI dudes lost their AMERIKAN sweet hearts.
>
>c) now RAFEY ABDUR KHAN would know, why is so to find a BLONDE.

this dirty underhanded tricks to spoil my reputation, thankfully not alot
of women read this newsgroup or i would sue for lost skirmishes.

sahibzada rafay khan[]

>
>Amer[why ask why, try a brunette] Qureshi.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Re: Contradictions of (so called) upholders of rights
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:38:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.185034.700@sol.cs.wmich.edu> sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani) writes:
>Most men wont even (for a single second) entertain the thought of
>females having second husbands, but they expect females to take it
>in the cloak (sp?) of motherhood, mother is important, heaven is
>under mother's feet, etc, etc. I simply think this whole idea smells
>to high heaven of sexism. Men got away with it so far, but now women are
>standing up and demanding that this sexist laws be removed.
>I think when women get real freedom (economic, social), then 
>these laws will dissovle very quickly, Islam or no Islam.
>
>regards,
>
>-Naveed
>
>

And further, when these sexist attitudes are removed, people will 
suddenly find hadiths and surahs that actually call for an 
equal treatment of both sexes !! So you see, religion can never 
ever be sexist. ;-)


regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|   LIFE'S COMPLEX - IT HAS 
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)   REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS  
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Polygamy & Polyandry.
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 20:58:15 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.154739.18892@bernina.ethz.ch> nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik) writes:
>
>And on that last point, might I ask how can modern day freedom-thinkers
>justify banning polygamy? 
>
>-Nadeem Malik (nadeem@p.igp.ethz.ch)

I for one would not condemn polygamy *IF* it was done with the consensus of 
all involved. However, given the fact that most cultures are still matriarchal,
polygamy that enjoys religious sanction is highly abused among the illiterate
(It is only theoretically that the first wife  is supposed to be consulted 
about another wife (and that too under extreme circumstances) but we all 
know what the reality is). Under such circumstances, the very purpose of 
permitting polygamy as preached by Islam is defeated. 

On the same note, it would be impossible to justify why polyandry should be 
banned (as per Islamic prohibitions). It seems illogical as to why the same 
logic that applies to polygamy (extreme conditions etc.) cannot be applied to 
polyandry. Either condemn them both or accept them both but a one sided stand
only speaks of the sexist hipocrisy of Islam (sorry...Islamic INTERPRETATION).

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|   LIFE'S COMPLEX - IT HAS 
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)   REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS  
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.
From: ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu (Arun K. Gupta)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: RE: How can we help Boznia ?
Date: 18 Aug 92 07:53:51 GMT
Organization: Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Check Maulana Maudoodi's book on Islamic government. He says that
an Islamic state is permitted but *not obliged* to help Muslims
fighting in another country. The state *is obliged* to accept
refugees and provide humanitarian assistance.

Thus, insofar as you subscribe to Maudoodi's ideas, it is somewhat
contradictory to demand from the US (intervene in Bosnia) what you
cannot demand from an idealized Islamic state.

-arun gupta
ag3L@andrew.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: aim@ocf.berkeley.edu (Ali Mirza)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Where to go for best Indian food in the Bay Area/LA ?
Date: 19 Aug 1992 23:27:32 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: ocf.berkeley.edu


Where is the best place to go for Indian/Pakistani food in SF/Berkeley/LA?
Since this subject has probably been discussed to death many times over on
the network, I would apprecaite direct replies to my account.
Thanks.
From: a9@btr.BTR.COM (a9  a9@btr.com)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Invitation: Farewell Party for FZ
Summary: junk food
Keywords: scp, fz, cz-101
Date: 22 Aug 92 11:07:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: BTR

[this is a serious invitation]

How about a party for FZ at my place? I think I will be a perfect
host for his party - since I dont know him. But seriously, a friend
of a very close friend mentioned his name to me when he was coming
to California. Too bad, i could not meet him earlier (I always wanted
to meet "legends" since my childhood).

Please RSVP if you are interested. (and if we are not out of luck, we
may even get FZ to attend too!).

When: Sat August 29 (or Sunday) [pick your pref. date (this or Sept 5,6)]
Where: Satan Clara/Sunnyvale, CA  [Near Central Expressway]

Food: Lots of munchies, crakers, snappers and similar junkies PLUS vegetables!
Drinks: Strictly non-alcoholic (as an exception we can serve Nyquil for those
        who can produce doctor's prescription).

The maximum occupancy limit is 76 persons (provided half of us can
stand on one foot). If there are more, I can reserve the club house.

Restrictions: 
  - Fire code does not allow dancing inside buildings
  - Due to the availibility of a real piano there is a serious risk that you 
    may end up listenig to FZ's "musical" talents
  - If you get intoxicated by caffine, Surgeon General will not be responsible

let's keep our fingers crossed (the way they are) and hope FZ will accept
this invit.

-ashar
a9@btr.com

Glossary:

FZ: Farrukh Zafar
junkies: An assorted mix of different substance that is almost edible
Fire Code: American interpretation of Islamic Law
SCPians: See junkies

PS: this posting is going out to everyone mainly because it will help people
    in the East Coast and Newzealand to do early travel arrangements and also
    because distribution "ba" does not always work properly.
From: sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Pakistan send troops to Somalia via US aircraft ?
Summary: Salute to Pakistan Govt.
Date: 14 Aug 92 22:25:15 GMT
Organization: Western Michigan Univ. Comp. Sci. Dept.

In article <1992Aug14.211023.26459@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>, vu0208@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (!) writes:
> In article <1992Aug14.151325.29361@oakhill.sps.mot.com> fmbutt@engage.sps.mot.com (Farooq M. Butt) writes:
> >I just heard over CNN that the United States is assisting the deployment 
> >of Pakistani troops to Somalia this morning.  The update was in the 
> >form of a "newsflash" so there was not much more info.  Does any one
> >have some light to shed on this or is this some slip of the tongue 
> >on CNN's part ?
> >
> >-- 
> >Standard High-Tech Disclaimer: NOTHING  in the above article has the slightest 
> >relationship to reality. If any reality correspondences are found, please 
> >notify me IMMEDIATELY. Any threats, abuse or stupidity of any kind is purely 
> >UNintentional. These are MY Opinions NOT my employer's.
> 
> 
> You heard it right.. Somalia is in a famine currently, and US would
> send some food and medicine but pakistan has contributed some 5K
> soldiers to distribute it there.
> 

I Salute the Pakistan Govt. for taking a very timely action.
The situation is Somalia is completely out of hand. People are
dying on the streets. I saw an ABC report, I was crying to see
humanity reach this low level. People are just dying, their eyes
are so hopeless, their bodies are so weak. They dont think about
anything but food.

Something has to be done, but the countries in need are far too
many and relief agencies are overwhelmed, as it is.

TOO MUCH SUFFERING...

May Allah[swt, Yaweh[swt], Jesus[swt], etc help us all.

regards,

-Naveed
From: samaddar@siemens.com (Sumitro Samaddar)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Woody Allen Joke
Date: 21 Aug 92 14:55:32 GMT
Reply-To: samaddar@siemens.com

arkay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Abdur Khan) writes:

>Why would polygamy prevent such an act ??????????
>Polygamy is about sex and more sex. For men to have four
>bodies to play around with but that will not stop them from 
>playing around with a fifth one.
                       ^^^^^

That's right. That brings the question why Islam puts a limit of
4 on the number of wives. If X can do just justice with 4 wives,
Y may be able to do so with 7.

Sumitro
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: usman@leland.Stanford.EDU (Usman Hameed)
Subject: Re: SOUTH ASIAN SPORTS ACHIEVEMENTS
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 19:31:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.202630.4478@leland.Stanford.EDU> arkay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Abdur Khan) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.173920.11971@leland.Stanford.EDU> asiddiqu@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ali Siddiqui) writes:
>
>Usman bhai,
>
>the riddle is simple " captan jee" .........................
>

Oaaaayy!!!!   Kaptaan ka bachcha meray sai panga leyta hai.
ChHor dey mujhay, mein is ki khopri thikh karuN.
Rafay, aik do bouncer tau kharka issay.

Just kidding Captain Crunch.

Usman
From: patrinr@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: PAKISTAN AND INDIA
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:59:18 -0600
Reply-To: Narasimha Rao Patri
Distribution: world
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <1992Aug16.204128.17842@uceng.UC.EDU>, mghayalo@uceng.UC.EDU (Manoj Ghayalod) writes:
> In article <1992Aug16.160657.3041@memstvx1.memst.edu> self writes:
>>In article <Bt2Bw3.MED@ecf.toronto.edu>, obaidr@ecf.toronto.edu (OBAID ARIF) writes:
>>> In article <8eXP2O600VogAF4Wpz@andrew.cmu.edu> ag3l+@andrew.cmu.edu (Arun K. Gupta) writes:
>>>>
>>>>Pakistan will never make a complete break with India.
>>>>After all their cricket team needs somebody to beat :-):-)
>>>>-arun
>>> 
>>> 	C'mon Arun! You know better than that. Pak. does not need a 
>>> cricket TEAM to beat India.....Wasim and Waqar are enough. :-) :-)
>>> 
>>> Arif
>>> 
>>       Trying to be modest, eh? You very well know that it takes just
>>  ONE Paki umpire to do the job.
>>
>>  Patri Rao
>>
>>
> Yes we are sore losers.  Pakistan won the world cricket cup, they beat
> England and we were so scared of their team that we did not allow them
> to come to India (remember Bal Thakrey threatening to destroy the pitch).
> But no "We are the champions of the World", you guessed it right, Fredrick
> Mercury was also an Indian.
> 
> Manoj
> 
  No need to get hysterical, Manoj. Sure, the Paki's have an enviable 
  cricket team & nobody denies the fact that they are the champions. 
  I was just trying to give credit where it is due. What I fail to 
  understand was the need for you to digress & cite totally unrelated
  events. The likes of Bal Thackeray are present the world over, 
  unfortunately. Surely you cannot generalise an entire nation based on 
  a single individual or a small group. Have you forgotten that Sunil
  Gavaskar went to Pakistan to participate  in the celebrations after the
  recent world cup? This was despite the plea from Mr. Thackeray not to
  do so. Do "sore losers" act in this way? Please do not condemn yourself
  and others for no reason. For all we know you might not be that bad. 

  Patri Rao

  P.S. Is it inevitable to link sports with politics?  
 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: asiddiqu@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ali Siddiqui)
Subject: Re: SOUTH ASIAN SPORTS ACHIEVEMENTS
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 17:39:20 GMT

>>>In article <1992Aug12.021132.3838@leland.Stanford.EDU>
>>>usman@leland.Stanford.EDU (Usman Hameed) writes:

>In article <1992Aug12.220626.29863@leland.Stanford.EDU> asiddiqu@leland.Stanford
>.EDU (Ali Siddiqui) writes:

>>Ali, who is this Shaukat guy?

>>Usman


As I say in my posting, he/she is the unknown and the known. I suspect he/she
is "doctoring" with other peoples accounts at Stanford.

But do not worry Brother Usman, I am close at his/her heels :-). Nobody enters
this school unless they fulfill the "quota system" requirements :-).


Ali.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: kmubarak@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Kamal Mubarak MD)
Subject: Re: archived articles
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 23:48:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.043942.12615@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> bholu@nyx.cs.du.edu (
Bholu) writes:

>(Dr. K [eagle-eye] Mubarak please note the NOT in the above para)

Noted.

Kamal.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.afghanistan,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.india,soc.culture.asean,soc.culture.india,soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.african
From: hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Contradictions in Secularism
Date: 17 Aug 1992 11:07:30 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: pageboy.cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Aug14.004412.3811@sol.cs.wmich.edu> sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani) writes:
:In article <l8l9tfINNeu8@pageboy.cs.utexas.edu:, hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder) writes:
:: 
:: And so has democracy and secualrism. It has killed thousands
:: and millions this century. Have you forgotten Vietnam, Korea,
:: World wars, Stalinism and Communism. Have you forgotten that
:: the prim champion of secularism was "communism". In fact, more
:: people have been killed under this "religion" than any other
:: religion.
:
:I dont think killing in those cases have anything to do with 
:secularism, they are direct of US foriegn policy which tried
:to oppose USSR, whereever it could to become number one in the 
:world. It has nothing to do with secular vs. anything. It was
:a cold blooded war and cost million of lves and I don not support
:any part of it.

Similarly, extending "your logic" as above, the responsiblity of
killings and wars of the yester years can be very easily
explained not to lie on the shoulders of "religions". Thus to
make an arguement that "religions", some how, are "more" 
responsible for "killings" than "secularism" is faulty.
:: 
:: :The simple fact is life would be very peaceful if we acknowledge
:: :that there are thousands of religions in this world. 
:: 

Well, no one says that thousands of "religions" (secularims
among them) do not exist. There is not sufficient justification
to claim that some how "religions" are not allowed to
coexist. The people who don't allow others to coexist live
as much in the democratic secular nations like USA (don't forget
Vietnam and Korea and Iraq) as in Churches of Spain (Inquistion,
conquestidora ..) as in the tribes of Mongolia (Halaku Khan and
Chenghis Khan) as in Turkey and Egypt.



:: In short world has seen more deaths, destruction, and killing
:: in this era of democracy and secualrism than any other
:: period of history.
:
:Just because `democracy kills' we should allow religions to kill
:as well.
:

Not at all. But putting the blame on "religions" alone is being
extremely unfaithful to history of secularized nations.

Let me direct the debate into a more productive avenue:

Let's first agree that there "are" always some who
are bent upon exploitation and destruction. Now the question
is which system has more effective controls, built in, to
prevent such exploiters and perpetrators of destruction.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan
From: sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani)
Subject: Re: Contradictions of (so called) upholders of rights
Summary: What happens if all of us pursue our Gods will !
Organization: Western Michigan Univ. Comp. Sci. Dept.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 23:45:03 GMT

In article <l956gbINNmf9@pageboy.cs.utexas.edu>, hyder@cs.utexas.edu (Syed Irfan Hyder) writes:
> In article <1992Aug17.211203.1012@sol.cs.wmich.edu> sherwani@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Naveed Sherwani) writes:
> >
> > We must look at things from everybody's point of view. I always
> >take neutral (non-religious) point of view on this issues. Since
> >I do not think that I can impose on others what my Gods say. 
> 
> So, you will opt for "neutrality" for its own sake.
> I go for what is "right". I am looking for "truth" __ the ultimate
> "truth". It doesn't matter from which platform 
> it comes. (my religion or your religion, or his/her  religion)
> 
Irhan Bhai:

 I am a peaceful fellow, who would prefer to live and let live in peace.
We cannot allow people to EXERCISE their religion on others due to
following example.

It happened in Karachin some ten years ago at Quaids mazar.
Well if I remember correctly, there was a guy, who was stopped minutes before
he was going to sacrifice his son, because he claimed that he was told
in his dream that he must sacrifice his first born.
Police stopped him from achieving his ultimate union wiht god.

Now from the platfrom from his son, it is good that police stopped
him because, he was the one who was going to die. On the otherhand,
from man's perspective it was disaster.
Now should any body have the right to stop the man or not ?

In other words, your ultimate truth stops, where my nose starts,
whatever your ultimate truth is, could be total trash for me.
In a world, where everyone is looking for ultimate truth and acting
upon and naking others follow it, would be a terrible world.
As a result, we propose a differnt model, which allows you to
find you ultimate truth but you cannot not impose it on others,
until they want it without pressure.
If you feel that ultimate truth is unique, then your message should
be so powerful, that poeple will folk to you, you dont have use force.

[Abusive Language against my religion (LOGIC) deleted... Just kidding :-) ]

regards,

-Naveed
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan