Tuesday, November 14, 2017


By Saeed Qureshi

Going through the Bible (old testament) one comes across such descriptions and narrations that defy the perception that the holy books revealed by God to its chosen representatives on earth can contain highly immoral, lecherous and sleazy material. In Bible the sex and lewd incidents has been abundantly mentioned in graphic details. The female human body has been portrayed with rich and florid diction. The sex stuff that one finds in the Bible is mostly attributed to the prophets who were against the vices of their own times.
Now with the seductive or enticing narration of body parts of women, the Bible cannot be treated as the word of God or the inspired word of the divine power. God cannot reveal on the prophets unchaste and dirty material that instead of reforming the morals of the people would further push them towards moral morbidity and licentious behavior.
To say that God makes people fall into adultery (Amos 7; 16, Isaiah) is a statement that cannot come from God. It must be the figment of some one’s mind to attribute such insinuation to God who encourages goodness and piety instead of debauchery and obscenity. Several other observations and remarks that were uttered by the prophets are so morally questionable that their very reading makes a nauseating feeling.
The descriptions of women’s breasts, the songs of Solomon and psalms of the David, the story of two prostitutes, eating dung and drinking piss, the commands to Ezekiel and a surfeit of descriptions about sexual activities are utterances or writings of such persons who would not treat unbridled sex as a sin or violation of social and divine law.
The passion for sex and mindless and blind indulgence in sexual activities were traits of a pagan society such as the Romans whose vulgar and unabashed sexual bouts were part of that society. But since religion is attributed to God and the holy men are supposed to be the custodian of the moral code sent by God such obscene stuff makes a mockery of those pious teachings that are at the core of all the religions. Somewhere in the history, some people made it a part of religious literature. Now David or Solomon are the prophets of God.
Yet in the Bible, their poetry and general conduct is laden with sex and lustful enjoyment. The brash sexual manifestations were practically available in the form of large fleet of wives and concubines they kept in their palaces. It means that besides being the believers in one God and acceptance of morality as virtue they would deviate and breach it as much as they could or else the parameters and perceptions of morality as far as sex was concerned was very permissive.
But interestingly if a common man of present times, when society is so liberal and sex is abundantly free in several societies, makes such lustful and pornographic statements in writings, he would at once be labeled as immoral and of unworthy conduct. But on the contrary the prophets who should have been symbols of self-denials and far away from the mundane pleasures were steeped into such lecherous activities up to the neck. On top of it these activities and pronouncements are sacrosanct and part of the holy writings and scriptures. What if the people start following in the footsteps of these profligate prophets and make a mess of the moral fiber of a society?
Why not judge a holy book whether Quran, Bible or other religious books on the basis of their contents? We practice and follow a section or selected portion of these holy books and leave the rest as if it didn’t exist. A holy book should be all clean and embodiment of stuff of piety for men and women alike. Even if the prophets that we believe have strayed from the recognized moral path and maintained some sort of equilibrium between their good and bad acts then we should not go only for their good act but take exception of their wrong doing. If a prophet of God who is guided by God shows by his conduct propensities for sex and womanizing and adultery then we should not blame the ordinary people for such indecent pursuits and drives. Then the line that divides the pagan rulers from the religious messengers is eliminated as both seem to be sailing in the same boat.
While Islam believes in polygamy up to four wives, the sex is a part of the Hindu religion. Those women who are infertile go to the temples to pray before the symbols of human sex organs for cure or removal of their infertility. But to have concubines means no holds barred situation, to satisfy one’s wild desires sexual urge. In Islam in the early stages Bandis (maid servants) a euphemism for concubines and chattels was in vogue. The Muslim stalwarts depending on their social status would keep scores of such maid slaves with whom they would have extra marital or marital relations but they were treated equal to the regular wives. It was in fact a way to bypass the condition of four wives. Those women who were brought from the conquered territories would be taken or possessed as Bandis and it was perfectly in order to do so from moral, social and religious point of view.
 In the Shia sect of Islam, a temporary wedding called Muta is allowed that legitimizes intercourse with any woman who agrees to be a temporary wife. This injunction of temporary marriage was the result of the sex needs and fulfillment of sexual desires of the warring soldiers who were away from their families and wives. But while it would satisfy the lust and sexual desires of the victorious soldiers, for the women folk of the vanquished nations, it would spell disaster, as they would be treated as the mere objects of providing sexual pleasure.
Can prophets be immoral as mentioned in the scriptures? However, in the scriptures, the apostles and prophets have been described as being involved in vulgar sex pursuits. Those who have read the scriptures would bear this contention out that the description of some of the aspects of ancient prophets painted them as morally bankrupt and lascivious. Going by the character sketches of the prophets and kings who were from the line of Abraham and who believed in one God, it surmises that they were very lustful and indulged excessively in sexual pursuits to the extent of being totally being unchaste and indecent. Take for instance the example of King Solomon who built the magnificent temple at Jerusalem. He is mentioned to have 700 wives and 300 concubines. Notwithstanding his mythical wisdom and belief in one God, with such a huge crowd of women folk he would be deemed as someone completely immersed in pleasure making and excessively indulging in sex. It is also written in the Old Testament that Prophet Solomon worshipped false God s in his old age (1 Kings 1:9-10). It is also stated that his wives too believed in other gods (1 King 11-3).     
About prophet David, it is written in the Bible that he committed adultery with the wife of his neighbor and before that he got him killed her husband by sending him to a battle. Thereafter he married her (2 Samuel 11:3-5). David according to these scriptures danced naked before the people (2 Samuel 6:20). David’s son committed incest with his father’s concubines. David’s son Amnon committed rape and incest with his half-sister Tamar (Genesis 19:32-36). Prophet Judah, the father of Jewish race committed incest with Tamar who was his daughter in law (Genesis 38:15-18). About Prophet Noah it is written that he was a drunk and was seen naked by his son Ham in the tent (Genesis 9:21)
It is written in the old testament(Bible) that the two daughters of Prophet Lot the nephew of Prophet Abraham committed incest with their own father who was very old. They carried child from their own father (genesis 19:32-36)
Samson the legendry hero of Jews is mentioned to have slept with a prostitute (Judge-1). Besides he killed 30 men (Judge 14-19)
One of the sons of Prophet Jacob Rueben lay with one of his father’s concubine (genesis 35-22).

Talmud’s Filthy Contents

·       The holy book of Jews Talmud contains such stuff as “all gentile children are animals”
·       “Adam had sexual intercourse with all the animals in the garden of the Eden” (Yebamoth 63 a)
·       “A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a Jewish priest. (Yebamoth 59b)
·       “Gentiles prefer sex with cows”
·       “Jews may use lies to mislead a gentile”
·       “Jesus was strangled after being lowered into the dung” (Sanh 56a, 106b)
·       “Jesus limped on one foot, was blind in one eye, practiced enhancement by way of member, committed bestiality with an ass and was a fool who did not know his bestiality”

Now these are only a few quotes from the Jewish holy book. No person with an iota of sensitivity and decency can accept this absolutely filthy and obscene stuff as gospels or inspired words of God or utterances and acts of apostles. These have been written or added by the people who were filled with hatred against their religious rivals. This also shows that the writers couldn’t understand that God cannot utter or command such dirty diction.
With such derogatory and rather putrid material no book or literature can be termed as the word from God of at least from the civilized human beings, let alone by the prophets. There is so much of hatred and venom in these holy books against the followers of the other religions that the stinking invectives and vituperation is used to degrade the opponents.
Now those who read such stiff don’t understand or realize that God or for that matter any prophet cannot use such filthy language or indulge in hideous sexual pursuits. Such remarks are written by the biased and extremely prejudiced fanatics of the religions. But in the heat of writing such vilifying material they give a very negative and wrong picture of God besides of their own faith as well as apostles. Such nauseating substance cannot make one to believe that God can stoop so low as to abuse the believers of a religion other than the Judaism.
The use of Indecent and intemperate language in the holy books of Jewish faith emits an impression that crazy zealots were the authors of such abhorrent stuff. Such teachings would not generate sympathy for these religions. On the contrary they would lead to aversion, repulsion and repugnance for such a religion.

Khawaja Asif’s Visit to Washington D.C, Looks Promising

By Saeed Qureshi
The Foreign Minister of Pakistan Khawaja Asif is concluding his three days’ official visit (Oct 4-6) to United States today. During his stay in the US capital Mr. Asif met with three most important members of the Trump Administration. One is the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the other is US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. The third important person he met is the Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. These crucial meetings came after the newly elected president of United States, Donald Trump accused Pakistan for "being a safe haven for terrorist organizations".
It surmises from the statement of the Rex Tillerson given after the parleys that a lot of misunderstanding between Pakistan and USA has been cleared. Mr. Tillerson in his comments paid tributes to Pakistan for playing a historic role in curbing the militancy in Afghanistan as an ally of the United States.
After his meeting with Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif, Secretary Tillerson said, he believed the United States has a reliable partner in Pakistan. He said Pakistan’s role is critical for the long-term stability of South Asia. In his brief remarks to the media, Secretary Tillerson expressed concern about the future of Pakistan’s government, stressing that Washington wanted a stable government in Islamabad. He stated “Pakistan’s relations with the US are extraordinarily important”.
Khawaja Asif also met with the US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis who said that the United States would try "one more time" to work with Pakistan in Afghanistan. "We intend to work with Pakistan in order to take the terrorists down. I think that's what a responsible nation does," Mattis said at a media briefing. Khawaja Asif held another meeting with US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster.
In his meetings with the US National Security Adviser McMaster and Tillerson, he emphasized that Pakistan has a "diminishing" influence on the Taliban, who were its one-time ally.
Refuting the allegations that Pakistan maintains close connections with Taliban he said that “You want us to sniff them out, we will do that. You want us to take action against them, whatever action you propose, we will do that (but) these hollow allegations are not acceptable," Khawaja Asif told the journalists.
It seems that after their meetings with Pakistan’s foreign Minister, the new American administration had revised its hasty opinion about Pakistan and branding Pakistan as a scapegoat for her failures in Afghanistan. It also surmises that the visit of Mr. Khawaja has been effective in reversing or tone-downing the adverse American opinion about Pakistan.
What was most admirable is his eloquence in English and courage that he displayed for strongly refuting president Trump’s misrepresentation of the historic role that Pakistan played as an ally of USA for ten years in Afghanistan. Khawaja exuded enormous confidence, knowledge and fluency in clearing the fog of mistrust that has been developing after the advent of a Republican president with a peculiar mindset in the White House.
Later in a session with the media, Mr. Khawaja answered a host of questions that encompassed US-Pakistan relations, the erroneous perception of America about the role of Pakistan in Afghanistan and in dealing with the Taliban and other militants, the Pak-American bilateral relations, the Afghan Refugees in Pakistan, the Religious educational institutions(Madrasas) and their role in Pakistan. In that press conference that continued for 20 minutes, Mr. Khawaja was not evasive but gave detailed answers to all questions that needed clarifications.
Answering a question about Afghan Refugees in Pakistan and the allegation of their being involved in terrorism, Mr. Khawaja said that they are not involved in terrorism and were our brothers and sisters. However, he called upon the United States to resettled these uprooted people because it was due to American war in Afghanistan that such a huge refugee influx in Pakistan took place.
About Taliban and their present role, Mr. Khawaja stated that now the leading factions of Taliban including the Haqqani faction were in Afghanistan and both Afghan government and Taliban are trying to hammer out a constitution which he indicated was a positive development.
He alluded to the visit of Pakistan COAS General Bajwa to Afghanistan and hoped that the process peace in that country would move forward. He said that a road-map to restore peace in Afghanistan was underway as all the underwriters were aiming at that coveted goal.
Answering a question about the presence of religious Madrasas in Pakistan and their role in fomenting unrest and terrorism, Mr. Khawaja answered that their role was patently positive like NGOs.  They were educating millions of students, providing them food and shelter and other amenities.
About peace in the region, he emphasized that it was not incumbent upon Pakistan alone to engender peace but for all the regional states to undertake that mission. He patently meant India, China Afghanistan and Russia and Iran as well.  
He said that there have been low and high stages in bilateral relations between America and Pakistan. He emphasized that during the cold war periods of 50s, 60s,70s, Pakistan and USA were close allies. There have been alliances and pacts between the two countries.
About the continuance of democratic order in Pakistan, the foreign minister opined that leaving the past behind we can now vouch that Pakistan is on the road to a stable democratic path. He cited the period of the past ten years and argued that there have been elected representatives and democratic governments in Pakistan.
He said that in Pakistan now we have independent judiciary, parliament and assertive media which were playing their roles strengthening a democratic culture. He pointed out that there have been four military interventions in Pakistan patently abetted by the United State. He maintained that now democracy was premised on firm footing and Pakistan actually entered into a civilian threshold in 2013.
To follow up the process of normalizing relations between America and Pakistan, the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson would be visiting Pakistan later this month.