my lineage

Several years ago, while i was in Pakistan visiting my relatives, i was shown a book that contained the lineages of the various prominant families of Badaun, India. It contained the lineage of my paternal grandfather's Siddiqui family, and my maternal grandfather's Abbasi family. As i was trying to find sources of inspiration for naming my unborn baby boy, i remembered that i had a copies of the lineages. maybe they had some good names.



While going through them I was thinking about how the knowledge of ones lineage has slowly become irrelevent. My mother mentioned a time in Badaun when, at the tail end of marriage processions, the barber would be reciting the lineage of the family. If the prospective bride or groom could not provide a respectable lineage there would be no marriage.



Now if that's not an incentive to forge a lineage, then i don't know what is. But, I'm sure they had means of determining if it was legitimate since so much pride and honor was at stake. And of course, since the only way to be sure was to marry in the extended family, thats what they did most often. I was told by an uncle that Siddiqui's married Siddiqui's. This does not mean first cousins, according to the lineages that i saw, Siddiqui's have been in Badaun since the turkish conquest in the 1200's. My paternal grandmother(dadi) and my paternal grandfather(dada) were both Siddiqui's, I've seen both of the lineages and they meet about 8 generations up.



But these traditions started coming to an end after the partition. Many muslims left Badaun, And have have lost touch with the knowledge of their forefathers. Not to mention the changes in society that place less value on lineage then in the past. My own father had little knowledge of this stuff growing up in pakistan. He moved to the US and we grew up even more distant.

We've also decided that we can find our own marriage partners. My father had no priority of marrying into Siddiquis. Both of my sisters have married outside of the family. It happened by chance that my wife is half Siddiqui.


So what about my lineage... regardless of whether it is authentic or not, it exists. and, my interest in it probably grew out of the search for identity and self worth that children of all minorities go through. how cool would it be if its true that i am a direct desendent of the closest companion of prophet Muhammad, the first khalifa. And that my name is not based on his city of birth or residence (Makki), or his tribe (Qureshi), or his clan (Taymi), but was a title that was given to him by the Prophet (as-Siddiq). and I have determined that since I have tracked down this information, I now have the responsibility to pass it on to the next generation of my family here in america. To tell my kids what i wish ad been told to me: "You are not the person that is ridiculed in school. They don't know you. But you know who you really are, right? You are Maha! You are a Siddiqui! You are a Muslim! Be proud of it!"

loyalty

the fact that I am actually writing this entry in a blog may be considered an example of overthinking the situation. what is the situation?
...employee loyalty
...employee morale
...employee discipline

there people who were loyal to my father.
they were loyal because he had what i believe are the three things that are prerequisites to loyalty:
1 - money (the means to help)
2 - compassion (the willingness to help)
3 - power (the ability to help)

i think 'A' becomes loyal to 'B' when 'A' goes to 'B' for help and 'B' helps without a second thought. 'A' may become more loyal if 'B' helps again before 'A' even comes to 'B' again. 'A' is not only aware that 'B' can help when help is needed, but also becomes aware that 'B' cares for 'A'.

the help can come in the form of any of the three things:
-money can help one pay for survival,
-compassion can help one feel respected,
-power can help one with protection,

sometimes the idea of loyalty does acknowledge a high and low relationship. where the loyalty is directed towards the one above. so what about the loyalty directed towards the one below.... below in position/rank or below in economic status. can i look at the relationship as equal but with different responsibilities? no. because the reality is that the power is involved. one person has power over the other.

while equality in everything is an attractive idea, it is not reality. if all individuals were equal, would we have no need for help, if all was equal, who would we turn to for help. anyways... all is not equal, so the more important discussion is about compassion, not equality. the moral responsibility of those with means and power to help those without means and power. the idea that what you have is on loan from an even higher power than you, and you can't take it with you when you die, so do some good with it. especially if the higher power likes it when you do good, and it will lead to people being loyal to you..... i'm rambling...

anyways, back to loyalty. can i, in my high position be loyal to someone with a lower position than me. kind of, i suppose, if loyalty to the one below you means that you will use the means at your disposal to protect him/her as well as help him/her with money. and thus closing the circle... when you need protection or assitance the loyalty will manifest in the one below you and he/she will protect and help you. and you will know that person is loyal when you give an order to do something and it is followed.

so what if one of the three, money, compassion, power, is missing?
well, since the process is kicked off by 'A' going to 'B' for help, then 'B' can only be of limited help. you might get a thank you. but you won't get loyalty.

loyalty can be to a person, or to a group of people, but what about a corporation? if the corporation's only concern is profit, then no. people will not be loyal to it. but if the corporation is compassionate and provides protection in the form of health care and liability, maybe. but i think people are really only gong to be loyal to the person at the corporation that pays them, assists them, and protects them, rather then the corporation as a whole. because people know that there is still a person that is making the decisions.

most of our employees were loyal to my father, not his company. and without my father, i have to earn their loyalty the old fashion way. paying them, treating them with respect, and coming to their side when they need me. I think i'm already compassionate, probably too compassionate. I can give those whose loyalty i need a raise, and I can fire a couple of people i don't need to demonstrate my power.

Firing people as a demonstration of power can backfire, the best demonstration of power is to protect a person from real physical harm, and if that is not possible then maybe real financial harm. maybe they are about to be fired and overrule it. or maybe they are about to be sued and i pay for an attorney to defend them. maybe that is why loyalty to a corporation or even to the head of a corporation will always be kind of limited.