Comments on: The Silence of the Lawyers Movement

By: ambi

ambi — Sun, 03 May 2009 02:13:00 +0000

Are there any prominent Hindus in Pakistani national life? Journalists, actors, politicians, musicians? Surely there must be Hindu and Sikh musicians in Pakistan? Especially Punjabi singers, in India and England there are so many Sikh singers and musicians. One thing that unites India and Pakistan and seems to be the only thing unaffacted by respective suspicions or chauvinism is music, I am surprised Pakistani music scene does not seem to any prominent have Hindus or Sikh artists. Unless I have missed them, can you let me know if there are any.

By: omar ali

omar ali — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 23:30:30 +0000

Qalandar,
I absolutely agree with you about this “buffer” and “people of the plains” and other kinds of geographic determinism. That was not my opinion. As a geneticist with some interest in this subject, I do think we should pay more attention to how greatly the peasants outnumber the various nomadic warriors who loom so large in history. Dr. Cavilli Sforza wrote somewhere that if you look at the genetic heritage of the current population of China or India, you find that the genes of the famous invaders (mongols, turks, etc) are the proverbial “aata mein namak”. In that sense (and that limited sense only) the “people of the plains” do indeed swallow up the various high profile invaders who arrive without their women and whose genes sink into the vast numbers of peasants that they enslave….

By: » The complicity of Pakistan’s elites in the Taliban’s rule Talk Islam

Sat, 25 Apr 2009 12:24:32 +0000

[...] Chapati Mystery.) [...]

By: Desi Italiana

Desi Italiana — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:17:58 +0000

Just wanted to quickly jump in here without having read all of the comments, but there is the Hindu population in Balochistan. I had read the Pakistan Human Rights Commission’s fact-finding report on Balochistan where attacks against Hindus occurred. Of course, non-Hindu Balochis also have gotten attacked, and I do not know if the Hindu Balochis are targeted for their religion. I haven’t read the report in a long time, so there might be some information in there about this.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:13:52 +0000

Someone had emailed me a report on the situation of “scheduled castes” in Pakistan; if you’re interested, I can send it along to you (in fact, if anyone wants it just email me at qalandar4ATgmailDOTcom..

By: Conrad Barwa

Conrad Barwa — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:04:25 +0000

Q, – I think Wiki should be broadly accurate; in so far as any demographic data on Pak is accurate. So it seems that Sindh is the partial exception, huh, I knew Karachi had some old segments of the community but I didn’t know that there were rural areas where there would be so many Hindus.

I know of the ‘Dalit’ problem in Pakistan – as an aside VT Rajshekar recently was in Pakistan as a state guest to extend some lectures and engage in some Hinduism-bashing :D – but I didn’t realise that they were classed as Hindus. I think a Dalit has been elected as a Senator for the first time in the last elections; but from my understanding they don’t readily identify themselves with Hindus, or unproblematically as Muslims either.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:11:50 +0000

Omar Ali: Thanks for posting that link. I will confess that I tend to be skeptical of what many “non-resident” desis tend to say, not because they are “abroad” but because so many tend to be drawn from social classes which tend to see “the people” as a kind of undifferentiated mass, a “them” that reacts to stimulus but seems incapable of any serious reflection. In fact one finds this attitude “back home” as well. Second, I am unpersuaded by the opinions that take the “long view” to say that Punjab has historically been a “buffer” state, etc. (one sees variants on this sort of thing with discussions of “plains-dwellers”, “warrior races”, etc., basically a resurrection of Raj-era stereotypes). I don’t think Punjab seemed like a buffer to the Mughal Empire, it would have been the very “core” (Lahore was, at a certain point, the capital of the empire; Delhi is geographically indistinct from Punjab; just to take two examples). [I do not mean to suggest that community self-image cannot lead to new social realities -- presumably if Sikhs and Pathans see themselves as a warrior-community, and in light of various socio-economic situations do end up joining the armed forces in great numbers, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy -- but that if we take these sorts of sweeping characterizations as given, then we can't think further.]

My sense is closer to the paragraph beginning “My own opinion…” than those offered by the people you spoke to…

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:58:41 +0000

PS– yes, I do not like Imran Khan one bit (his post-1992 avatar has been deeply distasteful, and even in cricket commentary he’s a whining sort, and for the longest time very reluctant to give credit to any Indian players, or to Miandad, etc.; cuts a poor commentary box figure in comparison with Ramiz Raja), but he was a supreme athlete. I had the privilege of seeing him live at Sharjah stadium several times in the late 1980s, and even though he was towards the end of his career, it was still a treat.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:46:39 +0000

I suspect the vast majority of Hindus in Sindh are Dalits, and/or “tied to the land” in rural areas, which probably adds to their “invisibility.” I will tell you that in Karachi, many of the younger Hindus whom one encounters because they are domestic workers, have ambiguous names (that this is a recent development and not a reflection of a certain cultural orientation is shown by the fact that the older parents tend to have very recognizable names), and in one instance it was several visits before I ever learned that my relative’s cook was Hindu.

I don’t know how reliable the tables in this Wiki piece are (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Pakistan), but it claims that according to the 1998 census, Hindus constitute 7.5% of Sindh, and considerably more than that in some districts of Sindh (40+% in Tharparkar, 18+% in another district).

By: Conrad Barwa

Conrad Barwa — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:02:16 +0000

Conrad: never said he was a great batsman: my point was that once his batting and captaincy abilities are added to his great bowling, his position as one of the greatest cricketers seems even more secure.

Fair enough Q, I am not a cricket afficianado so I can’t comment too much on this. He wouldn’t make my top XI, but this might be because I detest the man and let my personal animosity get in the way here.

On the minorities, I don’t think size is the most relevant issue: the percentage of Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan is not too different from the percentage of Christians or Sikhs in India

Sikhs are a tiny minoirty in Pakistan 0.4%, hindus are a bigger at 1.85%; in India Christians are 2.3% and Sikhs 1.9%. Apart from politics and ideology; the spread and concentration is much more visible in India – from the NE, to the chotanagpur plateau and Kerala there are regions and localities where Christians are either the majority or make up a significant minoirty group. sikhs of course have their own state. I get the feeling that the spread and concentration is much less in Pakistan, you wouldn’t get many places, aside from maybe some urban areas where you could say that Hindus come near being a majority. christians may be more visible because they get trapped in certain ‘dirty’ or undesirable jobs.

Still you wouldn’t know that there are 3million+ Hindus in Pakistan, so I guess other factors must be at work here as well.

By: omar ali

omar ali — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:46:51 +0000

My article about what is happening in Pakistan:

http://wichaar.com/news/294/ARTICLE/13790/2009-04-23.html

Comments?

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:03:04 +0000

On the minorities, I don’t think size is the most relevant issue: the percentage of Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan is not too different from the percentage of Christians or Sikhs in India. [I don't mean to suggest that this "difference" is entirely explained by political ideology; perhaps much is simply attributable to social/caste/class factors.]

By: Conrad Barwa

Conrad Barwa — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:13:51 +0000

Also, Imran Khan was a great bowler but not a great batsman. Q, you should be ashamed of yourself for turning this into a cricket thread :D

By: Conrad Barwa

Conrad Barwa — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:06:01 +0000

They are small minorities and some like the Hindus make an effort to blend in. Sikhs of course are more prominent and there is a long history of Sikhs in the NWFP region as well as Afghanistan. My parents tell me fond memories they have of attending the colourful mass wedding ceremonies that the community used to hold in Kabul in the 1970s.

Pakistani Christians are probably more visible, they seem to run afoul of the blasphemy laws more often tha other religous minorites (non-Muslim anyway) and NGOs and acitivists working with the brickmakers unions and on bonded labour have long been aware of the disproportionate presence of Pakistani Christians in this sector.

By: Rashmi Talwar

Rashmi Talwar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 08:32:18 +0000

What about Hindus…??????????

Sikhs and Hindus in Swat were both included in the imposition of Jazia …what about Hindus ..is there no news of them .
Both these communities make up a tiny inch of land of Pakistan …shd not the Pak govt protect these tiny gems and whatever is left of the other tiny gems of communities in Pakistan .
Rise !!!!! this is the time of crises of all humanity and u cannot be just mute and blind to the hordes of evil slowly creeping in Pakistan to devor it completely and spread to the rest of the world

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:38:38 +0000

On the Naim piece, quite frankly religious minorities have long been all but invisible to Pakistani liberals and civil society (compare the reactions of liberals to ill-treatment of Ahmedis with the blank stares one often gets when one speaks of Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan). This is not due to overt animus, but to an “absence”, an absence that speaks volumes. In terms of Pakistan’s public life, its religious minorities simply do not register, and are politically irrelevant — the example Naim cites is telling, with newspapers writing of Sikh visitors from India while seemingly unaware of Sikh co-citizens…

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:21:25 +0000

btw, yes man, thanks to you now I feel guilty about making this of all threads a cricket thread. wtf.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:10:55 +0000

PPS: My bad: the 43 was in the 3rd test of that series, a match Pakistan lost (they should have won, but the non-neutral umpire refused to give Dujon out in WI’s 2nd innings, which would certainly have put an end to WI’s record of remaining unbeaten at home since 1973, and unbeaten anywhere since 1980 — Pakistan had a 1-0 lead in the 3-test series), and it took nearly three hours.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:04:52 +0000

PS: I recall Gavaskar, a man who knows a thing or two about fast bowling, once saying that Imran at his peak was the best fast bowler he had ever played against or seen. From a man who played against Lillee, Hadlee, Wasim, not to mention the relentless West Indian battery, and who has been a commentator since retirement (when the likes of Waqar, Donald, Ambrose, McGrath, Bishop, etc. played), that’s saying something.

By: Qalandar

Qalandar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:02:10 +0000

Re: “How “good” was Imran Khan? Is Brian Lara considered a better cricket player? Is Imran considered one of the best ever, or only one of the best ever for Pakistan?”

John Woodcock, in his 1998 “ranking” of the 100 “finest” cricketers of all time, ranked imran in the top 15 all time (lara and sachin were in the 20-30 range; wasim and miandad were probably 50-60, and waqar was in the 80-90 range if I remember correctly). Obviously no list can be above critique, but my point is that Imran Khan is not just considered a great Pakistani cricketer — for anyone who is an informed cricket fan, Imran is easily — easily — one of the greatest fast bowlers since world war II (hard to compare the earlier period, the game was so very different), and this despite losing two years at his peak due to a stress fracture. As an Indian cricket fan, one knows only too well his mind-boggling returns in a 6-test series on dusty pitches in Pakistan, when a line-up composes of Sunny, amarnath, vengsarkar, and (albeit at the twilight of his career) Vishy was mauled out of sight: 40 wickets in 6 tests on THOSE pitches! Gulp. Factor in his batting ability (not just the flamboyant lower-order hitting, but his ability to knuckle under: I am thinking of a marathon, five hour, 43 that was invaluable in helping save a test match in the Caribbean in 1988; ODI-fans will not forget a valiant 57 in the 1987 World Cup semi-final, when Dickie Bird incorrectly ruled him out, not his 1992 World Cup final innings), and his captaincy, and there can be little doubt that as a cricketer, he is one of the Immortals. Yes, he was an asshole, and rumored to be fastidious to a fault when it came to selecting unorthodox batsmen (i.e. he wouldn’t pick then), and he probably treated Shoaib Muhammad far more shabbily than that gifted test match batsman deserved, but on balance, he would be in my personal all-time test XI.