[Reader-list] Brahminical dominence ?

[Pawan Durani]

Interesting tale of Kab-bin-Al Sharaf

"*QUOTE FROM BUKHARI VOLUME 5, #369
*"Narrated Jabir Abdullah: "Allah's messenger said "Who is willing to kill
Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His apostle?" Thereupon Maslama
got up saying, "O Allah's messenger! Would you like that I kill him?" The
prophet said, "Yes". Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing
(i.e. to deceive Ka'b). The prophet said, "You may say it."

Maslama went to Ka'b and said, "That man (i.e. Muhammad) demands Sadaqa
(i.e. Zakat) [taxes] from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to
borrow something from you." On that, Ka'b said, "By Allah, you will get
tired of him!" Maslama said, "Now as we have followed him, we do not want to
leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want
you to lend us a camel load or two of food." Ka'b said, "Yes, but you should
mortgage something to me." Maslama and his companion said, What do you
want?" Ka'b replied, "Mortgage your women to me." They said, "How can we
mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the Arabs?" Ka'b
said, "Then mortgage your sons to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our
sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people's saying that so and
so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great
disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you."

Maslama and his companion promised Ka'b that Maslama would return to him. He
came to Ka'b at night along with Ka'b's foster brother, Abu Naila. Ka'b
invited them to come into his fort and then he went down to them. His wife
asked him, "Where are you going at this time?" Ka'b replied, None but
Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Naila have come." His wife said, "I hear
a voice as if blood is dropping from him." Ka'b said, "They are none by my
brother Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should
respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.

Maslama went with two men. So Maslama went in together with two men, and
said to them, "When Ka'b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when
you see that I have got hold of his head, strike him. I will let you smell
his head."

Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing
perfume. Maslama said, "I have never smelt a better scent than this." Ka'b
replied, "I have got the best Arab women who know how to use the high class
of perfume." Maslama requested Ka'b "Will you allow me to smell your head?"
Ka'b said "yes." Maslama smelt it and made his companions smell it as well.
Then he requested Ka'b again, "Will you let me (smell your head)?" Ka'b said
"Yes". When Maslama got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions)
"Get at him!" So they killed him and went to the prophet and informed him."




On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net>wrote:

> Pawan,
> Here is my attempt at a straightforward (even if slightly lengthy) answer
> to your question.
>
> The prophet known as Muhammad to his followers is reported (according to
> the ahadith and seerat-bigoraphical accounts) to have condoned, if not
> endorsed the assasination of at least seven satirical poets, namely, Al Nadr
> bin al Harith, Uqba bin Abu Muayt, Asma bint Marwan, Abu Afak, Kab bin al
> Ashraf, Ibn Sunayna, an anonymous Bedouin, a singing girl belonging to
> Abdullah bin Katal.
>
> These are cases that may be seen as being roughly comparable to the murder
> of Shambuk for his act of speaking/ reading the vedas, at the orders of the
> character called Rama. Both are narratives of acts of violence consequent
> upon acts of reading/speaking something deemed offensive. They may be seen
> as attacks on the freedom of speech, and justly so.
>
> Of these seven, reports of the murders of poets and performers, reliable
> textual evidence (as in a hadith that is considered to be reliable in terms
> of its isnad or  transmission) can be found for just one, that is for the
> murder of Kab bin al Ashraf. The others have numerous problems of exegetical
> authenticity and verifiability, so let us stick to what can be said with a
> certain degree of certainty.
>
> Let us suppose that the man called Kab bin al-Ashraf was indeed killed for
> his speech. If that is the case, I would have no hesitation in saying that
> the conduct of Muhammad demonstrates arrogance unbecoming (in this instance)
> of a prophet committed to a vision of life based on peace and compassion. I
> would have no hesitation in saying that exactly as in Rama's execution of
> Shambuka, such an act would be, in my opinion, best described as - stupid,
> arrogant and unwise.
>
> However, before jumping to conclusions, let us remember that the quran
> speaks in more than one voice with regard to contempt, and about the efforts
> by satirical poets to ridicule the prophet with their utterances. Allah
> explicitly commands Muhammad to be patient towards those who speak ill of
> him. In verse 28 for instance, we hear the following, and I quote : *"When
> (the righteous) hear vain talk, they withdraw from it saying: 'Our deeds are
> for us and yours for you; peace be on to you. We do not desire the way of
> the ignorant'. . .O Prophet (Muhammad), you cannot give guidance to whom you
> wish, it is God Who gives guidance to whom He pleases, and He is quite aware
> of those who are guided."* (28:55-56)
>
> Muslims are also taught the tradition of the woman who would regularly
> throw trash on the prophet as he walked down a particular path.The prophet
> never responded in kind to the woman's abuse. Instead, when she one day
> failed to attack him, he went to her home to inquire about her condition and
> good health.
>
> So there are as many reliable accounts of Muhammad's forgiving nature as
> there are of his vengeful, aggressive nature. A lot depends on what you
> choose to believe.
>
> I am not a believer, so I do not need to make this choice. I am just as
> willing to say that if the stories about vengefulness are taken at their
> face value, then the conduct of the prophet can best be described as
> unbecoming and arrogant, just as arrogant and unwise or stupid as Rama. If,
> on the other hand, the stories about compassion, liberality and forgiveness
> are to be believed, then, the prophet can be seen as an exemplar of how a
> person should deal with hostility. Whatever be the case, I do not think that
> the lives and reputations of interesting and exemplary men and women (and I
> would count Muhammad as one such person, even though I am not a believer)
> are diminished by the retention of our ability to be critical of them.
>
> As far as I know, Muhammad is not worshipped in the Islamicate tradition as
> a deity. He is neither god, nor the son of god. he is merely god's
> messenger. His actions are shown to be that of a mortal, (not divine) being.
> They are exemplary, but in the end, fallible, even if he is seen and
> portrayed as the best of men. He doubts himself, his followers are reported
> on occasion as disagreeing with him. There is debate, disagreement,
> discussion and dialogue.
>
> As far as I know, the Hindu traditions that encode the worship of  Rama the
> king of  Ayodhya also deify him. In their eyes, he is god. And god can do no
> wrong.  Rama's occasional deviance from justice and ethics (such as in the
> case of the slaying of Bali by deception) are in fact pointed out as
> instances of divine exception, of the fact that one cannot judge gods and
> men by the same ethical criteria.
> God is not seen as capable of making mistakes and errors of judgement.
> Otherwise he would not be divine. If Rama made mistakes he could not be
> divine. If he is divine, he cannot make mistakes.
>
> Since I am not a believer in his divinity. I am free to see that he makes
> mistakes. If you are a believer in his divinity, then that choice is not
> available to you.
>
> And so, I can see that if Muhammad endorsed the assasination of Kab, then
> that was clearly a mistake, an error born of arrogance, maybe even
> stupidity. The difference is, In the case of Muhammad, I do not have to be a
> hypothetical unbeliever to see this.
>
> In my opinion, It is perfectly possible to be a believing Muslim and to be
> critical (notwithstanding what fundamentalists and idiotic zealots may tell
> you) of some of Muhammad's actions, just as it is possible to be
> appreciative of the vast majority  of them. Muhammad himself is reported to
> be admitting to the fact that occasionally he is in error. This is pointed
> out to underscore the fact that he is mortal, not divine. His mortality and
> his imperfections (arising from his humanity) are central to the Islamic
> faith. To deny him his imperfection would be to attribute divinity to him,
> and nothing can be closer to heresy than to attribute divinity to a human
> being, no matter how expemplary that human being is or can be.
>
> I hope you have an answer to your question by now.
>
> best
>
> Shuddha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  IInder,
>
>
>  My question has still been left unanswered. Let me repeat it again ...
>
> " Would you dare to use the same language if we quote something from Holy
> Quran and refer Prophet Mohammad [ pbuh] .
>
> Lat time i asked you the same question , i heard you had wet pants.
>
> Pawan
>
>
> On 4/23/09, Inder Salim <indersalim at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I see it again through the eyes of a poet, here, valmiki himself, who
> was not a favourite with the ruling elite of  Dashratha's Kingdom,
> but was deeply documenting all the happenings inside and outside the
> palace. There was indeed political infighting between different wives
> of the King Dashratha, and that has obviously let his 14 years exile
> in the forests.  How come,  the pregnant Sita was helped by the poet
> himself. It is all the great compassionate heart that brings out such
> a fantastic human end to an epic, which is full of motherly love.  I
> believe, the poet Valmiki was transformed into a pregnant himself, and
> that is why we all the reasons to respect the poet, the great valmiki,
> the untouchable...
>
> Shamuka , say,  imaginary character, but untouchable like the poet
> himself,  who was killed for no fault of his. And i believe the poet
> has all the rights to express himself though a protagonist or a
> character,
>
> See, Ved Vyas must have been a really romantic poet, and that is why
> there is a long documentation of Krishna's adolescent life with other
> village girls.
>
> so nothing derogatory about writing about it, if one has the sense of
> humor and reasoning intact.
>
> with love and regards
> inder salim
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Pawan Durani <pawan.durani at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Shuddha,
> I am just curious . Would you dare to use the same language if we quote
> something from Holy Quran and refer Prophet Mohammad [ pbuh] .
>
>
> Lean to respect religion and faith.
>
> Pawan
>
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:33 AM, Shuddhabrata Sengupta <
>
> shuddha at sarai.net>wrote:
>
>
>  Is this character called Ram or Rama not the same arrogant king who
> once killed a scholar called Shambuka
> because he was found studying the scriptures. The crime being that
> Shambuka was an untouchable and so could not touch the scriptures,
> even with his mind.
>
> Would I want to live in a society where kings slaughter scholars for
> the crime of their curiosity?  No, I would not. I touch a lot of
> stuff with my impure mind, and I want to live safe from stupid kings
> who don't know better. I think we ought to be grateful that Ram Rajya
> is as yet a distant dream of a lunatic fringe. Lets hope it stays
> that way.
>
> best
>
> Shuddha
> On 22-Apr-09, at 2:27 PM, Venugopalan K M wrote:
>
>  "..."As to Rama Rajya, let it be remembered that Rama was kshatriya
>
> king who administered his subjects wth care and concern for public
> opinion. A doubt about his own wife as expressed by a subject made him
> take the harsh step to send his wife to the forests when she was
> pregnent, to the Ashram. Todays leaders do not care for the public
> opinion as much as they did , but generate public opinion thru media
> and other means for their agendas, is my perception".."
>
> But that is excatly what I would rather take objection to not just
> your concept of 'Rajya' but also its iconic hero, Ram.
> Please excuse me when I say that this vulgar expression  of
> "prajahitham"(public opinion) against a poor woman  is nothing
> different from its newer versions of  "hithams" of Sri Ram Senes!
>
>  While it is repugnant to humanity, seen even  by the standards of
> ancient monarchy  it is much more unacceptable to the standards of
> human rights  of our age. It would be a grave instance of atrocity
> perpetrated against women with impunity by the kings in the name of
> 'public opinion'. What sort of king was he to grow suspicious of the
> chastity of his queen lived in forced exile , and yet to take recourse
> to 'public opinion' (most probably manufactured) to justify throwing
> her to fire? What bloody business this poor dhobi family had to
> suspect Sita as a bad woman? In my understanding, this is nothing but
> projection of source of one's own ill feeling to  someone else,
> skulking away from taking up the  moral  responsibility. The kind of
> relationship the king had with the queen, perhaps might have gone to
> deep trouble even otherwise.
>
> Well, this tendency to dupe people by spreading cock and bull stories
> about dharma in an effort to justify the most grotesque violence
> against women and the lower caste people might be part of the essence
> of Ramarajya of the past as well as the present, and this is what many
> people call Brahmanism.  Whatever you call this, you are supporting
> this and suggesting that 'Rama Rajya ' would help us cure of our ills.
> The headache is yours and not of others who don't want to believe
> these parables over laden with instruments of moral policing.
> Regards,
> Venu
> .
>
>
>
> 22, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Rajen Uppinangadi
> <rajen882uppinangadi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>     Venu;
>
>   Such general sweeping comments do not hold water in pluralistic
> society
> like this free India. To condemn the "brahminical" thinking itself is
> absurd, as brahminical way of thinking is for "sarve jana sukhino
> bhavanthu,
> in Vasudaiva kutumbakam.
>
>   While it is true that in every faith, the women are subjugated,
> denied
> education and are less privileged with rights and the accent is
> more on
> their duties, it is absurd to say that hindu way of life
> encourages such in
> equality, for if it was so, gargi and maithreyi would not have had
> the place
> in the arguments for the society.The marad killings would not have
> happened
> when children and women were massacred in your backyard of Kerala.
> Shah Bano
> case would not have been the instance to talk about where
> livelihood was
> denied for a woman.Compared to other faiths, hindu way of life has
> exceptional place for women in modern living, unlike taliban which
> shoots
> down the couple if found walking together, the mullas would not
> proclaim
> fathwas for the saving of a father for raping his own daughter. With
> changing times, it is reforms that have taken place in hindu way
> of life
> from within religion rather than outside, thanks to persons like Raja
> Rammohan Roy, Jyothi Phule , and many other reformists, in modern
> times even
> Ambedkar has contributed his might to reforms in the way society
> treats the
> oppressed. But the political will to reforms in society has to
> come from
> within the society as no amounts of laws can change as seen in
> Dowry act,
> and the dowry menace is flourishing in all faiths.In fact, the roman
> catholic weddings in Kerala are notorious for the wedding and
> lavish dory
> angle to them, as clergy would bless the couple who part with
> substantially
> dirty, obscene amounts for such blessing of an arch bishop, as was
> told to
> me by a bishop friend.
>
> So, to generalise the menace of oppression only to one way of
> life, hindu is
> not only reflects the general trend of condemning whatever is
> hindu, as
> brahminical. As to Rama Rajya, let it be remembered that Rama was
> kshatriya
> king who administered his subjects wth care and concern for public
> opinion.
> A doubt about his own wife as expressed by a subject made him take
> the harsh
> step to send his wife to the forests when she was pregnent, to the
> Ashram.
> Todays leaders do not care for the public opinion as much as they
> did , but
> generate public opinion thru media and other means for their
> agendas, is my
> perception.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajen.
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Venugopalan K M
> <kmvenuannur at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Rajen,
>
> By adopting such a position on Brahmanical and Brahmanism, one
> will stand
> to lose the very usefulness of this important concept. As you
> were stating
> it has less to do with propagating hate than understanding the
> exceptionally
> institutionalized and ritualized  hate in the social and cultural
> life of
> India.
> This is sure to  raise lot of other questions: Why, for example
> after the
> happening of the Khairlanji in September 2006 {almost the entire
> people of a
> village participate in the act of parading naked,raping,
> (women),killing and
> mutilating the bodies of the 4 victims who were members of a
> dalit family
> (converted to Budhism) }, the entire media kept silence for about
> one month?
> So , an understanding of  Brahmanism together with  Brahmanical
> ways of
> thinking,  not only does not talk of  Brahmans as persons but
> more as a
> collective and  typically  negative attitude. It is characterized by
> defending privileges with respect to the ascending order of caste
> and
> denying equality; significantly women of all castes are
> automatically
> considered inferior to their male counterparts(this is also seen
> in every
> other religion; but practices of cruelty to widows ,women not
> giving birth
> to to male offsprings, not able to consummate marriage etc,etc
> are viewed
> with special contempt in the brahmanical Hinduism).The extremely
> negative
> attitude to change or reform is a direct result of a desire to
> protect the
> system of privileges to the exclusion of others. These are
> generally what
> are considered as traits associated with
> Brahmanism.Unfortunately, majority
> of victims of this system of heirarchy are ideologically co-opted
> to it;
> they are not expected to doubt the system which is has been
> taught to them
> as divinely ordained.They are expected to just obey  without
> grumbles and
> get better off in the future birth.(Chathrvarnam maya srushtam
> guna karma
> vibhagasa- The system has been created by me according to your
> past karma
> and your qualities and just do your caste-ordained duties-this is
> the
> message of Bhagvan in Gita (Ch IX verse 32 ?..I don't remember it
> correctly)
> I'm not suggesting that every person believing in the Hindu
> scriptures and
> the Gita would support mass murders and ritualistic killings of
> dalits as
> happened in khairlanji..not that the media always will attempt to
> cover up
> such incidents.To be certain, in the media controlled by the
> upper caste
> Hindus,there is always a tendency to underplay the unpleasant
> factors
> related with caste. Gandhi was a great admirer and interpretor of
> Gita and
> yet he was assassinated by Godse, who was a fanatic adherent of
> Brahmanism.But even Gandhi believed in a Ramarajya of his own
> notion..so are
> the less enlightened 'Hindu' masses  to a greater or lesser
> degree in
> denying equality to women and lower castes, the very victims of
> discriminations included.Then, not to speak of the tendency to
> resist
> reservations and to monopolize knowledge and power by a minority.
> Certainly,
> the print media dominated by the upper caste plays a significant
> role  in
> perpetuating the bias against the under privileged.The internet
> and the
> electronic media at a more globalized level, are able to
> challenge this
> privilege of the upper caste elites in  significant ways.
> Regards,
> Venu.
>
> Regards,
> Venu.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Rajen Uppinangadi
> <rajen882uppinangadi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
>     Venu,
>
>     List is at times, makes up for the surprise packages for all
> with
> undertones of "caste"  and is casted with caste as theme of
> hate, if one
> post talks of twice born as brahmins, another talks of brahminical
> domination of media, which are again myths to say the least, if
> otherwise it
> is meant to be "learned" are brahmins, knowledgeable   "caste",
> then may be
> it is acceptable but still as we strive for togetherness above
> the caste and
> faith conundrums of hate, it is really ammusing that of all you
> start with
> this theme of hate on the basi of caste.?
>
>   To illustrate, Mr. Kancha Illayya, regular columnist, who
> takes up
> issues of oppressed is a brahmin by his domination in media with
> the issues,
> just as sage Vishwamitra who gave the most potent manthra,
> Gayathri, is
> brahmin by his work, not by birth.? But contrary examples are
> also are
> visible in society, where by birth some are brahmins, but
> behaviour is that
> of worse than  anyone, like the Dr. Murli manohar Joshi, in his
> acts and
> utterances.? Again, a journalist and lecturer in Physics., Dr.
> Joshi, who
> blindly follows the rituals without knowing the reasons behind
> such rituals,
> is again worse off even as brahmin born, as birth does not give
> the right to
> oppress others.? For example, the meaning of twice born is that
> once the
> child is born, at the tender age of around 12 years, he is vowed
> to go for
> higher studies to Benares, and the trip being in olden days,
> hazardous, it
> was presumed to be secong birth to undertake such a long journey
> for
> education, times have changed with chools imparting education at
> hop, skip
> and jump distances from homes these days.?
>
>   As to media and media houses, most of them are run atleast in
> Karnataka
> by Idigas, or theeyas, or known in slang as toddy tappers, so
> the education
> has changed everything, let us come out of this caste fixation,
> judge the
> works rather than the caste.Visual media channels are again run by
> individuals who know how to run the business with trps, news is
> not what
> viewers want, but what the channels dish out as views in news in
> this age of
> info-tainment. Otherwise how do you explain the anchors and
> their behaviour
> with type of presentation of "news" compared to western media,
> where anchors
> are better dressed with least exposure of made up face and bodies.?
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajen.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://venukm.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://venukm.blogspot.com/
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> Raqs Media Collective
> shuddha at sarai.net
> www.sarai.net
> www.raqsmediacollective.net
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
>
> subscribe in the subject header.
>
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> http://indersalim.livejournal.com
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>  Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> Raqs Media Collective
> shuddha at sarai.net
> www.sarai.net
> www.raqsmediacollective.net
>
>
>