Discussion Board
Watch this board

Total 9683 messages Pages    <<  < Newer  | 261 | 262 | 263 | 264 | 265   Older >   >>
a r rahman was not born muslim
by Rock Hitler on Feb 27, 2007 09:24 AM  Permalink  | Hide replies

t gr8 composer a r rahman was not born muslim .....he conv to islam after his fathers death...he'a a HINDU BRAHMIN by birth....he got his talent from his father...a musician...plz dnt provide wrong facts..A. S. Dileep Kumar is his birth name

    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:a r rahman was not born muslim
by Ahmad on Feb 27, 2007 03:56 PM  Permalink
The great indian poet-philosopher of the times Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal (Sare jahan se achchha Hindositan Hamara...) was also Brahmin earlier... Who forced this gr8 philosopher for conversion..









   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:a r rahman was not born muslim
by Shahryar Pax on Feb 27, 2007 05:24 PM  Permalink
I am afraid you are mistaken - Mohammad Iqbal is a nonentity as a philosopher!



Only the Pakis honor him as Allama!

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:a r rahman was not born muslim
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 05:17 AM  Permalink
Muhammad Iqbal's grandfather Sahaj Ram Sapru, a revenue collector, had embezzled funds and when his embezzlement was discovered the Afghan governor, Azim Khan, gave him the choice of death or conversion to Islam. Sahaj Ram Sapru chose Islam and moved to Sialkot in the Punjab.

It's interesting that you should raise this, it actually explains exactly the sort of thing the article is talking about.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
Message deleted by moderator
History of India
by nadia sani on Feb 27, 2007 03:39 AM  Permalink  | Hide replies

I am amazed at the comments from Muslims taking umbrage as if they are being personally insulted and of Hindus replying with equally ridiculous notions!
This is an exhibition on a historical period in the 1600s not yesterday not 10 years ago! I suggest you read the article properly, understand it then comment.
Aurangzeb's cruelty does not mean that all Muslims today are cruel, nor does it mean that Hindus and Muslims cannot survive together. We used to live quite happily until recent political interests started creating divisions among the people.
As Indians I repeat, we share a common history. There have been no end of cruel kings, emperors, rulers, dictators in the world irrespective of religion or race. If we can read history books without getting upset or reading insults where none exist, the world would be a better place.
I suggest that whoever can should go and see the exhibition then comment. If the contents have been wrongly interpreted then say so, if you understand more of that period and start thinking about what it meant to your motherland and ancestors, whether they were Hindus who were persecuted by Aurangzeb, or Hindus who converted to Islam by force or by choice. Think about where we have come today.
If Aurangzeb had been wise probably we would not have been colonized by the British. Where might we be today with all the wealth we had? This is constructive retrospection (looking back), not the meaningless insults and divisions you are fomenting with senseless comments.





    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:History of India
by biju nair on Feb 27, 2007 07:41 PM  Permalink
It seems those who are participating have very little knowledge about Islam as revealed by Islamic Holy Book and practically demonstrated by Prophet Muhammed by his own life and expeditions.

Read Holy Quran and Hadiths care fully and completely and understand the narrations analetically .

I would say Aurangzeb was a true Muslim. I would rather say Osama bin laden , Ayman Al Sawahiri, all Al Quida followers and all Islamic Jihadis are true Muslims.

Can any body prove otherwise on basis of either Holy Quran or Hadiths?


Biju

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 06:41 AM  Permalink
Since you are so keen on harmony, I suggest you watch this, UK "Despatches" documentary. This is the future you can look forward to.

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MSFbhIG-sk&eurl=

Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoi5DWt3b0w&eurl=

Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_TjzCcTkE8&eurl=

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:History of India
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 10:35 AM  Permalink
Hello whatever your name is, because i don't u to address you any more as secular. Nobody will become secular by just having a screen name as secular. You look like extremist hindu bigot. I've been seeing, you are posting these links every where. What's your point? What do you want to prove? Your intention is to create hatred against muslims? That's your soul purpose in your life?


Now I'll post some links. Go thru these links. In these links you can find hindu extremist vinay katiyar says he wants establish sanathan dharma on the whole world. He claims even mecca & madina too. What do you want to say about this?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9101562255306616976&q=hindutva

http://video.google.com/videop lay?docid=-8817218285615987893&q=vhp

It's not my intention to create hatred against hindus here. All i want to prove is there are extremist on all both sides. If we encourage them, they gonna do more harm to this world and you are encouraging them posting these on the website. you are really bigot not secular.

   Forward   |   'Report abuse' disabled by moderator
RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 11:32 AM  Permalink
You have been hailing Dr. Zakir Naik like a man worthy of worship. You've actually quoted him and posted links to his moronic claims. He is as bad as the clown in the latest video link that you've posted here. Then you have the temerity to claim some sort of moral high ground. Pathetic.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Hansum Hunk on Feb 27, 2007 11:55 AM  Permalink
Mr.Secular Indian,i donno y u r wasting ur energy explaining all these things (as one of our friends said) to third grade citizens.
Third grade in the true sense,they dont respect their mother land,they dont respect the major religion preveailing in the motherland,when they dont 1st two things automatically get that status which they are enjoying.
Im a Hindu and have many Hindu friends who are citizens of pakistan and live there.They are pretty close to me but i have never seen them talking badly abt their motherland or muslims.It doesn't mean that pakistan is looking after them well or muslims there in pakistan are very secular,itz abt their culture which a person gets by practicing a tolerant religion(Im sure Hinduism is most tolerant of all despite what insane people here say).Finding one person talking emotionally abt hinduism can happen but itz not ubiquitous.I challenge any muslim here to swear the same abt islam.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 11:22 AM  Permalink
Regarding the videos:

The guy is a lunatic and he is a Hindu so what, where does he claim that he has been instructed by God to spread Hinduism and kill non-believers where you find them. You will find it's the Hindus who will make the most noise about the sort of crap he is preaching. I wish I could say the same about the Muslims.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 11:31 AM  Permalink
See, he has not been instructed by God to spread hinduism, but still he talks about spreading hinuism. This shows how fanatic he is. What are you saying. don't you see that video how people were listing? r u blind?

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 11:35 AM  Permalink
Sure he is a fanatic, which part of my post couldn't you read. The point you miss is the guy who made the documentary is a Hindu. Yes there are fanatic Hindus but where do you find the religious sanction and people justifying their actions because God has instructed them so. You have stopped making sense.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 11:33 AM  Permalink
See, he has not been instructed by God to spread hinduism, but still he talks about spreading hinuism. This shows how fanatic he is. What are you saying. nobody will listen to his crap? don't you see that video how people wearing saffron flags were listing? r u blind?

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 11:39 AM  Permalink
Are you stupid ? Yes there are Hindu fanatics, yes they have equally fanatic followers but they are not claiming to go on a rampage claiming that God has asked them to go and kill all non-believers. It's like Hitler he was an idiot but he wasn't exactly driven by Christianity, though it wouldn't be difficult.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:History of India
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 11:18 AM  Permalink
No expose your lies and claims. Why are you afraid of of facts suddenly ? Fortunately for you the links no longer work. The documentary is a blue print of Jihadists at work. I think every one should at least look at the facts and make up their own minds. Facts seem to be in short supply here.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator. | Hide replies
RE:Can Islam be Transfromed? I doubt...
by biju nair on Feb 27, 2007 07:49 PM  Permalink
Ali Sina's articles and the sites hosting those are blocked by Islamic Countries through ISP filtering.



Truth is bitter for Muslims.



Biju

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Dongre MC on Feb 27, 2007 12:30 AM  Permalink  | Hide replies

what the hell the author wants to achieve by raking up the well known facts?. all the religions were ill-tolerant and cruel at certain point of history.the religious beliefs will undergo gradual changes as the economic base gets changed.

it is my firm belief that you hate Islam because it is not undergoing or accepting changes as you want it to be. you hate one when you are afraid of one!

the present threat to mankind comes not from Islam but from the captalist-profit mongers like Mr.Bush and co. it will be of utmost help if the author exposes the deeds of multi-national companies instead of harping on grand-ma tales. these old tales takes you nowhere but only adds to increase the seperation of hindus and muslims in India. this is the politics of Sangha-parivar and i wonder what politics Mr. Author is pursuing afterall?

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:13 AM  Permalink
This is not a question about which is more evil: terrorism or MNCs. The issue is about articles such as these promote hatred between teh communities, and that widening chasm building more stereotypes.

From fanatics to religious bigots, you now have another weapon to beat the Muslim: Aurangzeb defenders. Another tool to help you equate Muslims with terrorism. That is the danger.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:40 AM  Permalink
Bigotry is there in every religion. Hindu bigotry doesn't attract international attention as much as Islamic one, is because Islam is a global religion.

The imperialists have always supported undemocratic Islamic regimes for their own interests. For the vast populations of these undemocratic countries, the only outlet allowed was anti-Americanism. If fringe elements have taken that to extremist lengths, they feel they have a rationale.

Yet, this post is not in defence of them. I am just explaining the beginnings of Islamic terrorism.

In India, the scene is entirely different. You cannot equate whats happening outside India with the Muslim mindset here. By fostering Hindu-Muslim understanding, both communities have a huge model to show the world. This is a great opportunity that is hardly addressed by the Aurangazeb article.



   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 02:14 AM  Permalink
Here's some education: Islam has no such thing as hierarchy. God is supreme and everyone else is equal. Even the prophet is only a messenger.

There is thus a clear distinction between the Creator and the Created. The hierarchy of the mosques or the kings that practised and chose to propagate the religion through the sword were fundamentally political in nature.

Equality, one of the key principles of democracy, is then deeprooted in Islam. Its set of rules and individual discipline should be seen in context of a chaotic Arabia, when Islam took its birth.

For a practising Muslim, who believes in his faith, does five times Namaz and charity as the religion requires, I dont see any reason why it should not coexist with a democratic setup.

Moderate muslims are silent here, because there is a severe shortage of informed leadership in this country. The orthodox bigots does all the talking, and the Hindu Right responds in kind.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by nadia sani on Feb 27, 2007 02:51 AM  Permalink
For Heaven's sake, how short-sighted and ignorant you people are! No one is talking about today's situation. The question is regarding an exhibition on Aurangzeb.
You cannot change history. If you are so concerned then learn from the disastrous period. You Muslims also descended from Hindu forefathers, probably Auranzeb killed your ancestors when they did not convert, so someone in the family did. That is the truth. Look beyond appearances with an open mind.
Just because one is Hindu, Christian or Muslim doesn't mean that you overlook every dastardly deed done by someone of your religion! It is because we are so narrow minded that there is so much suspicion and hate today. We are all first and foremost Indians. This is a piece of our history whether you like it or not.
The ONLY question is why you will not allow an Indian to organise such event and why you accept a foreigner doing it.


Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by nadia sani on Feb 27, 2007 04:43 AM  Permalink
Layman, Yes I have not in France and no I was not, and this IS the issue.It's people like you are India's worst enemies.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:01 AM  Permalink
Your humanitarian message is an enlightened one and if possible the best way forward for India to grow. But I can't see how you can reconcile an ideology that claims to be the exclusive franchisee holder of the truth. Lets for a moment forget the loonies in Afghanistan, lets talk about Pakistan. Pakistan started out with an approx. population of ~15% Hindus. by 1991 it was down to 1.5%.

Look at Kashmir, what about the Kashmiri pandits, refugees in their own homeland.

So I agree with your noble sentiments but I find it hard to see how it's going to come about. I would love to be pleasantly surprised and proven wrong.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:07 AM  Permalink
Why isn't Saudia Arabia a paragon of democracy ? You can't get more Islamic than that. Islam flourishes in plural society but a plural society by definition can't flourish under Islam. It's not a symmetric relation.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by biju nair on Feb 27, 2007 07:56 PM  Permalink
My Dear Dongre,



I would advice you to read religious/Holy books of all existing world religions and find out which one of them(there is only one) which spits venom at non believers of their own religion.



Then tell the world which religion is a threat to world peace and mere existance of human kind.



Biju

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 12:44 AM  Permalink
I agree, Dongre. By harping on grand-ma's tales which already form part of the deeply rooted stereotypes, the intention is clear: To deflect focus from the issues that really affect us, and further widen the dangerous chasm between the two communities.

We do have very intellectual learned souls here, defending the author's right to fully use the freedom of the internet. Yet, sitting on a preachy pedestal, they find attempts by a few hardcore apologists for Islam to explain things in rhetorical English, unpalatable. So much for informed debate!

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by nadia sani on Feb 27, 2007 02:41 AM  Permalink
This is history whether you like it or not. If you are so silly as to apply it today then you are probably exactly the type of person that you are warning us about!
What Gautier has done is nothing extraordinary. What irks is that a foreigner can go to the Chief minister and get permission to do what he wants in our country whereas an Indian would never even get an appointment or be ignored.
Therein lies our weakness. That Aurangzeb and indeed Shah Jehan himself were horrendously cruel we all know. Indian muslims should take an interest in pre-Muslim period as that is their past too. If we learn this then I can say that the exhibition has worked. Though why it should be in Delhi is a mystery. Another query, did Gautier avail himself of Indian expertise (no mention is given) or is it merely the same old foreign interpretation of Indian history that is being dished out as being the learned truth under the auspicies of the Indian government/ agencies?
Certainly I know French history, but I doubt that I as an Indian would be allowed to set up an exhibition in Paris on its aspects. That is the second lesson to be learned.


   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier's article on aurangajeb
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 04:53 AM  Permalink
Good points but why worry about the French they are quite well versed in their own history. They are quite aware of their place in the world. There is a lot more to be done in India and if a foreigner is doing it for us. We should thank him, learn from his efforts and do something ourselves.

A good topic in France would be their involvement in Algeria and Vietnam.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator. | Hide replies
RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 12:06 AM  Permalink
Agreed, that Islam had several violent conquests in its march across the globe. But Islam was much more benign that the Church that ruled most of the Western world then.

Your argument that all Muslims in India are products of forced conversion is sentimental trash. Kerala, to just give an example, never was the target of teh early Islamic invaders and yet, it has a substantial Muslim population. To equate the Taliban kind of followers with devout Muslims would be really unfair. And what is your remedy if the Muslims dont agree to your idea of eradicating Islam. Massacre?



Well, Layman, you are not so Lay, after all !!!

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:12 AM  Permalink
Sure Islam was better than the church, but how does it condone the deaths Indians because of Islamic zealotry,
secondly how is it even relevant to the Indian context.

But Kerala was the target of Tipu Sultan:

1. Letter dated March 22, 1788, to Abdul Kadir: "Over 12,000 Hindus were honoured with Islam. There were many Namboodri Brahmins among them. This achievement should be widely publicised among the Hindus. Then the local Hindus should be brought before you and converted to Islam. No Namboodri Brahmin should be spared. "

2. Letter dated December 14, 1788, to his army chief in Calicut: " I am sending two of my followers with Mir Hussain Ali. With their assistance, you should capture and kill all Hindus. Those below 20 may be kept in prison and 5000 from the rest should be killed from the tree-tops. These are my orders."

3. Letter dated January 18, 1790, to Syed Abdul Dulai: " ...almost all Hindus in Calicut are converted to Islam. I consider this as Jehad."

Maybe Mr. Gautier should hold another exhibition on Tip u Sultan.


   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:18 PM  Permalink
You seem to rely a lot on Gautier's judgment, although he does not reveal the basis for his informed thoughts. Selective reading of history to suit your argument is the natural ploy of all intellectual discourses.

I dont contest your reading on Tipu Sultan, although I would suggest you enlarge your reading minus a jaundiced vision of all that is Islamic.

I referred to Kerala's isolation as far as the early Islamic invaders are concerned. Kerala had much stronger relations with the Arabs, and one Tipu Sultan was not responsible for total conversion. For your info, there is much more informed debate happening out there in Kerala, and sociological studies do not prescribe to your oft-repeated letter proofs.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 01:49 PM  Permalink
Forget Gautiers judgments, why not just stick to the facts. If reading and quoting facts is "a jaundiced view of history", then so be it. I prefer facts not fairy tales or opinions. Yes, Kerala had Muslims that converted to Islam because it appealed to them, I don't deny that. The issue is forcible conversion, what's so difficult to understand about that. All this was in response to some lame justifications for what Aurangzeb did not an end in itself.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 02:45 PM  Permalink
Correction, I never said "jaundiced view of history." I said: "jaundiced vision of all that is Islamic." And a perusal of your earlier posts quite adequately proves that.

Plus, your statements in other posts about the presence of Hindu zealots as well doesn't sound so convincing. There have been many posts in Aurangzeb's defence. But browse through the venomous anti-Muslim posts that went as a trigger. I guess what the pseudo secularist on the edge is waiting for is just a push to jump on the zealot's camp. Aurangzeb, although I am hardly a defendor, was just an excuse for the anti-Muslim tirade. Try questioning the very basis of Brahmanical concepts and check out how a true secularist changes his colour.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 05:24 AM  Permalink
OK, I stand corrected on "a jaundiced view of History" and substitute "jaundiced vision of all that is Islamic". It still doesn't change anything, yes I have a jaundiced view of Islam, but how does that make it "non-secular" or unfair, given the exhortations of the Koran and the the punishment of death that is prescribed to anyone that challenges it, what else can one conclude.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 05:29 AM  Permalink
Yes, there are Brahmins that defend the caste system and/or the Manu smriti. Yes there are people of higher caste that kill dalits and make their life miserable. These things are accepted as faults and every effort is made to fix it. Why aren't these (reforms) things happening in countries like Saudia Arabia, the model of the perfect Islamic way of life ? The primitiveness and the lame justifications are all that I hear.

If you want to compare the two then please play fair.

Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 12:53 AM  Permalink
The Sachar committee report has indicated the acute backwardness of Muslims in India. But in Kerala, where the Muslim literacy level is much above the national average, there are indeed movements to question several un-Islamic concepts that had crept into the religion.

Majority of HIndus are not fanatics, I agree. But if you go through the 800 plus posts here, you will find very few posts with perspective. And that is the danger. When informed, the so-called learned souls keep within them the stereotypes.



   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:54 AM  Permalink
I do have issues with Muslims about the narrow male-centric interpretation of the Islamic laws practised here. I am all for reform to give Muslim women the rights they have in the Laws.

You do have Muslim women build a separate mosque for them, women fighting for their legitimate rights.

I agree that there is lack of adequate space for dissent in Islam. But that space cannot be widened by narrow, often prejudiced demands from the Hindu Right.

India is a democratic country, and every state is as democratic or undemocratic as its citizens want it, Hindu, Muslim or Christian. The Indian Muslim, I dont think, has any issue with democracy or secularism. The Muslim majority Kashmir, run by the Congress National Front government is as secular as any state government.





Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 02:34 AM  Permalink
Religion is one thing, and the bigots who misuse it is very different. What you require is a transformation of people's mindset.

As for Kashmir, dont give too much credit for the Army as it is only an arm of the government. I suppose you are aware of the political motive behind trifurcating Kashmir on Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist lines. Dividing people on religious lines is not secularism, I suppose!

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Its a Pity that we still praise those Mughal Aggressors
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:16 AM  Permalink
This is really for Unsung Humanist:

Islam is just to easy to misuse by bigots, in fact it's a marriage made in heaven. If the Koran was a real person it would be diagnosed with a bi-polar disorder. One passage claims "to you yours and to me mine", then suddenly it proclaims "kill non-believers where you find them". It's this mendacity that perhaps appeals to every two bit thug.

Forward   |   Report abuse
Rebuild the temples.
by Vivek Gupta on Feb 26, 2007 11:44 PM  Permalink  | Hide replies

All the temples should be rebuild on which which mosques we build and central government should make the funds available for the same. All the mosques should be removed from holy sites of Hindus and rebuilt to their original glory.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 26, 2007 11:58 PM  Permalink
I suppose that will solve India's poverty, its grossly imbalanced economics, bring back to life hundreds of farmers who killed themselves, benefit millions denied even basic healthcare. All that they require is God's darshan. Who are you trying to fool, Mr. Gupta. What is your agenda. If reclaiming the "original glory" is your scheme of things, should that be at the cost of development???

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Chankya Pandit on Feb 28, 2007 03:49 AM  Permalink
To: Unsung 'Humanist'

i will start by revealing your true self as your smirkness, leftist chauvinism, pretenciuosness, self-righteousness and unconditional illogical one-sided 'islamic humanism' is so obvious its embarassing. You speak exactly like any indian communist, your posts are testament for that. that shows your agenda here. everyone has an agenda and thats why they are here. wont you agree that you are here for your 'commi sickular agenda' too? who are you trying to fool here 'Mr Leftist'? i and everyone else can see how badly your heart bleeds for 'certain issues'.

As for the poverty, helping farmers commiting suicide, basic healthcare, economy and whatnot that India/Bharat needs and should/could/would have-these are issues which a society nation deals with on a regular continuous level, and there will always be things to be done. indian government is dealing and will deal with these issues. governments come and go, but the Hindu people and nation of Bharat as a collective entity needs answer, and they deserve the TRUTH thats being intentionally destorted and hidden behind the walls of sickularism minority appeasement etc. at the end of the day, India is a Hindu majority country (and thats why secular), and record MUST be set straight viz a viz its past. and if India is developing so fast, its Hindu economy, if you please. no one is saying stop development and build temples on their original places(kashi ayodhya mathura and more). they can happen in parallel.
the bigger picture is here of identity and national character. japan is japan, coz of its inherent japanese culture and ethos, so are other countries like china russia rome or saudi arabia. likewise, India has its very own culture and heritage(land of indic religion-namely sanatan dharma, buddism, jainism, sikhism). realising that to be its orginal identity and learning the 'true nature' of islamic rule in India is not only important, but becomes very relevant in the present geo political scenario. its a moral obligation upon every indian to pass on 'history of india as it was'. Lord Hari's Darshan surely is the 'original glory' as you put it. why should not it be? we are not atheist communist from china, for Lord Rama's sake. we will have ayodhya mathura kashi , just like muslims have their makka, xians have their vatican, sikhs have their golden temple in amritsar. its only justified to the majority of people. israel is the homeland of jews, so is India homeland of Hindus(incld. jain,buddist,sikh). muslims and christians are over privilleged guests alongwith communists like you.

PS-muslim majority state of kashmir has passed and imposed shariat law in kashmir. i wonder why!

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:24 AM  Permalink
No it won't but it will restore to the Hindus what was theirs and make them feel safe in their own country and then they can go about fixing the problems you have highlighted. Safety first progress will follow. It's quite obvious actually. After 1000 years of being attacked by every free loader and self-righteous Islamic zealot that doesn't give a toss about the lives and culture of the Hindus but only covets their wealth, don't you think you should cut them some slack regarding their paranoia.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 01:27 PM  Permalink
Now, please dont foist insecurity on Hindus. They are quite adept at getting along with life unless dooms day theorists like you take on the role of moral crusaders. Where were your self-righteous Hindu zealots when the freedom struggle was at its peak. Tossing Gandhi to the grave may be your idea of free-spirited contribution to the nation's future. Instead of harping on 1000 years of victimhood, allow the rest of the country to progress in peace. I guess with inward thinkers like you, that shoudl be big challenge.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 01:56 PM  Permalink
Right. it's like the old joke about being raped. Hindus should just accept and enjoy it. Good advice. The people who killed Gandhi are no heroes of mine so your point is irrelevant. If the Islamofacist agenda was not being enforced from Kashimr to Kanya Kumari we wouldn't be wasting time on this message board. The killing in the name of Islam is still an unfortunate reality. You want to wish it away fine.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 07:23 PM  Permalink
I drew your attention to the Naxalite menace, because that really is a symptom of our times. Urban growth alongside rural deprivation. And that really is the issue that requires our attention. Not stoking up old flames to vitiate the communal atmosphere further.
You blame all your insecurities arising out of the new world economic order on imagined enemies. It's like Hollywood dishing out "Aliens" movies and "Independence Day" backwaas, deflecting attention from real problems of global imbalance of wealth.
Come on, why do you want the Muslims to remain in the ghettos. On one side you want them to be part of the mainstream, on the other you constantly remind them of their past, keep them insecure by rubbing in teh guilt of Aurangazeb!
Would you be comfortable with a second class citizenry at your beck and call. THats how I see it. For centuries, the Muslim rulers illtreated Hindus. So, its payback time. Keep them down !!!1

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 03:14 PM  Permalink
Just as you dont subscribe to the ideology of Gandhi's killers, I don't defend terror of any kind. But I guess the least you could do is to acknowledge that terrorism was not God's deliberate curse on one form of mankind. I agree innocents are killed by terror, but how do you confront it. By fostering the victimhood complex of the majority. How does that achieve semblance of order. If someone feels insecure, you dont show him his place, make him feel guilty of what someone did centuries ago. I guess if you trust in Indian democracy, just accept Muslims as Indians and that would be a very good start. I guess once you are shaken by the lurking Naxalite menace, you will stop shedding crocodile tears.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 05:49 AM  Permalink
Unsung Humanist,

I actually have some sympathy for the Naxalites, not their ideology but their cause, the neglect and exploitation of the the poor in India. But I oppose their methodology and find it incumbent to remind the urban and well heeled to spare some thought for the plight of the rural poor of India. As far as I'm concerned Marxism shares the same fascistic tendencies as Islam, just a different Allah. Having got that of my chest. Regarding the Muslims guilt trip wrt to Auranzeb and the likes of him, which pretty much sums up 99% of the muslim rulers, there is none. If they were to acknowledge the true danger of their literalism as has been demonstrated time and time again by their leaders, I will be surprised the Hindus will say AHA now you must pay for all your past sins. What irks Hindus is this constant denial, which leaves the suspicion in their mind that if these guys increase in numbers they are going to do the same thing again. It's just that simple. No amount of sophistry on your or my part is going to change this basic desire for self preservation.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 27, 2007 04:36 PM  Permalink
It's not about others being an Indian and treating Muslims do. These ideals are not working. When Gandhi couldn't change these guys, how can mortals like you and me do it, unless you believe you are capable to do it. If you think that way, all power to you. But your arguements are not enlightening in that nature. The point is, Muslims must reciprocate. They didn't for so long and these equal treatment, and Indian constitution is shoved at people instead if someone wants to enforce things for people to change. When Islam and Muslims don't accept and reciprocate to criticism, it's hatred they spread which is evident all around us. No one is terrorised because you bring up the issue about Naxalites. I know what they are. spineless bunch, and hide in forests and tribal belts, away from federal rule of law. India is too big for them and Indian army too strong than what Mao had to deal to dethrone Kuomintang in '40's. And yes, dalits must be empowered and others must be empowered and by doing so, Hinduism will go through changes that we will not be able to comprehend now. Nevertheless, they must be empowered and reforms must take place and thrust must be given in that direction. Islam, and negotiating with it will not help future. You can try if you are a romantic, but reality is scary with the way these people want to recede to crude customs and the most scary part is, the educated bunch among them encourage it the most. Most Hindus are acting like dummies instead, towing the wrong line by pandering to Muslim bhai bhai which will backstab. Hindus must learn to be proud people to save themselves and their civilization. Act according to the changing times. Not befriending and hiding behind tolerance when the ideologies around are bulldozing inch by inch every moment to uproot and change your ways for being the same. Learn from History. There is a time and place for using tolerance and peaceful negotiation, and at other times you will be looked at as weakling if you use it. The other will pawn you. He understands you, but his cause is relentless because of his affection to his age old traditions. That is how i see it.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by Secular Indian on Feb 28, 2007 05:36 AM  Permalink
Unsung Humanist,

If I sound harsh/rude in my replies to you, I apologize, my tone unfortunately has been made (more) shrill with the Shenidh character. Now with niceties out of the way, What are the terrorist holding in their left hand when they are shooting with their right hand the Koran. Why because there is ample justification in the Koran for the righteousness of their cause to absolve them of any unethical or immoral conduct. They are after all brining India into the fold of Dar-Ul-Islam, its their duty. I can't bring myself to wish it away as much as I would sincerely like to.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Rebuild the temples.
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 27, 2007 07:41 PM  Permalink
you didn't get my point i think. read my post again. I said Muslims must reciprocate. That is how it works. Hindus have been compromising for too long. You can't expect great life in India when you befriend Islamic states which treat minorities as subhuman. World across. In India they follow this perverted form of secularism, which was btw taken from western thought where they give importance the traditions of the majority and not hand out everything like they do it here in the alice in the wonderland called India. Indian secularism isn't suigeneris. About pay back time, i guess there are all elements living in a society. You display hypocrisy by pandering to muslims all the times, those pay backers will take over India. The way i see it, muslims must change themselves and others should worry about their cultures and people...like the genocide and forced conversion of millions of Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan over the last few decades. You keep appeasing the Muslims like Gandhi did in Khilafat times, then Muslims will not change for few more millenia and by then you will see Shariah rule across the world(sab peaceful cultures baad mein jayengi). Rational people must be able to see it when it is coming.

Forward   |   Report abuse
The truth about Aurangzeb
by ajay sathyanarayan on Feb 26, 2007 11:13 PM  Permalink  | Hide replies

Hi Mr.Kumar,
I too have spent some time reading the replies and post replies etc. Here, you are talking about Hindus and Muslims , one being a broad minded and other being a static .. It's good to know that we had a cruel ruler in Aurangazeb, but that wouldn't qualify Islam to be cruel. I know that terrorism is the scourge which is mainly led by followers of Islam. We still contend that Hinduism believes in Peace and Islam in Violence.

As far as I can see(since I am just 25 years old), since I came to understand this world and people around, no religion is great. We just need a reason to attack other religions. We tend to incline towards some religions and go to the extend of favoring them. Islam or Hindu, it doesn't make difference when you know that we have communal riots are still quite common in our own country.

We haven't done anything great to co-exist, let alone the Muslims. We are as bad or as good as they are. We have categorised Islam religion in such a way that indirectly we have given the thrust for them to terrorise the humankind.

I fully agree with one of the commments that not all Muslims are terrorists and would like to add that not all Hindus are peace lovers.

HUMAN KIND and PEACE is more than Hinduism or Islam...It's a dangerous world now as hatred seems to be spreading like a plague...

God help...

    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:The truth about Aurangzeb
by biju nair on Feb 28, 2007 01:52 AM  Permalink
Mr Ajay,

You are agreeing to the comment that not all muslims are terrorists. I know why. Not all Muslims read Quran and Hadiths and understood correctly. That is why most of them are still called moderate Muslims. It doesn't take much time to read and understand those books currectly(I took less than a week).

So called moderate Muslims need 1-2 Weeks to become true Muslims and start killing and persecuting Kaffirs.

Biju



   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:The truth about Aurangzeb
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 04:59 AM  Permalink
which is this website faithfreedom. Every author in that website making one or other baseless allegations on prophet & islam without any proof. If you want to learn about Islam and prophet(pbuh) refer Quran & Hadith not these bigots whose job is to write crap about Islam. There are many better resources to learn about Islam & prophet(pbuh). The main aim of this website is to write bad about islam. So, you guys are referring that website? I really can't believe people can go as low as this just create hatred against muslims by creating such aweful website. It's really bizarre! God save you guys who are referring such website and such authors for Islamic reference

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:RE:The truth about Aurangzeb
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 07:48 AM  Permalink
Do you even have the guts to answer his challenge ? Show him where he is wrong! Don't hide behind false outrage show us the counter argument to the case he makes. Its the hadith that claim Muhammad's marriage to Ayesha at 6 and the consummation of the marriage when she was 9. What more do you want from the Hadith ?

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:The truth about Aurangzeb
by Chankya Pandit on Mar 01, 2007 03:12 PM  Permalink
Hindu people and nation of Bharat as a collective entity needs answer, and they deserve the TRUTH thats being intentionally destorted and hidden behind the walls of sickularism minority appeasement etc. at the end of the day, India is a Hindu majority country (and thats why secular), and record MUST be set straight viz a viz its past. and if India is developing so fast, its Hindu economy, if you please. no one is saying stop development and build temples on their original places(kashi ayodhya mathura and more). they can happen in parallel.
the bigger picture is here of identity and national character. japan is japan, coz of its inherent japanese culture and ethos, so are other countries like china russia rome or saudi arabia. likewise, India has its very own culture and heritage(land of indic religion-namely sanatan dharma, buddism, jainism, sikhism). realising that to be its orginal identity and learning the 'true nature' of islamic rule in India is not only important, but becomes very relevant in the present geo political scenario. its a moral obligation upon every indian to pass on 'history of india as it was'.

we are not atheist communist from china, for Lord Rama's sake. we will have ayodhya mathura kashi , just like muslims have their makka, xians have their vatican, sikhs have their golden temple in amritsar. its only justified to the majority of people. israel is the homeland of jews, so is India homeland of Hindus(incld. jain,buddist,sikh). muslims and christians are over privilleged guests alongwith communists.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shobhit Kumar on Feb 26, 2007 09:54 PM  Permalink  | Hide replies

I have spent quite some time in reading about these previous replies in the last few days.

One clear line ...

Those who side with hindus have a rather flexible and open mind. They may criticise others (esp. Muslims) but they dont shy or hesitate in admitting weaknesses or mistakes in their system.

Those who side with the Muslims are alas, a bit more rigid and static in their ideas.

For them Quran is the ultimate.
ok fine, that is understandable.

If I was to go on a killing spree, destroying all my enemies at one go and then quote Srimadbhagvadgita, it wud be naturally wrong to blame Sri Gitaji for this behaviour of mine.

Ditto for the issue of Jihad inspired allegedly from Quran.
That wud be wrong, I dont support it.
Quran is the holy book for Muslims and so I respect it even if I dont know much about it.

But when a Muslim starts taking the stand that Quran is absolute and beyond debate and has to be followed at any costs and worse, starts imposing on those who dont believe as much into it, then things start taking a wrong turn.

I am ready to argue about Gitaji, for or against, depending upon my knowledge levels and my interpretation.

shud the same not be true for Quran ?

If Quran is indeed the word of God, why hesitate in debating it, as truth will win in the end after all !!!

and the question is not just limited to Quran's meaning.

I read somewhere in the replies of some chap that Jesus was a Muslim and was a pakka namazi.

Gosh !!!
so wasnt Jesus the first Muslim ?
600 yrs before Mohd. ?
and so Jesus gave us not one but two world religions.

Somehow, I have noticed that our Muslims are giving us very shallow and laughable logics, as that watch n desert example shows; it has been shown to be fallacious and yet he sticks to it.

Hindus are not beyond faults, they too have several sins on their souls, the biggest of them being the caste issues and one that haunts them still.
Dont think I am a SC/ST/OBC, I am a brahman and proud to be so but I do feel a bit embarrased when I read bout the way we upper casts have dealt with those who were not born in higher families.

but I also believe that this issue has been overblown a bit and that the original ratinale behind the caste system was rather justified and practical, doesnt a doctor/lawyer want his child to follow his steps? it reduces a lot of initial efforts.

the initial market that we had was a barter system which was based on vocations and expertise, narturally a person skilled in one art wud teach this art to his children and so it wud go on n on.
It was/is as logical as is 1 1=2

that it deteriorated later on was the problem.
still apart from this caste system, are there any other major deficiencies in Hinduism ?
may be yes, but I do not know at this time.

Muslims brothers, pls look deep inside,

Do u really feel that advocating Islam rule (Darul-Islam) everywhere is right?

Do u really feel that punishing a woman for illicit relation when SHE has been raped is natural justice?

Do u really feel that ridiculing others beliefs just because they r diff from urs is right ?

Do u really feel that destroying others holy places and erect unattended Mosques over them is right ?

Do u really feel that calling a spade a spade
(as in the case of Aurangzeb) is something that shud be avoided?
why then do u rake up the issue of Babri demolition ?

If Babur cud destroy a really holy place like Ram's Temple at his janmbhoomi, why cant we destroy something that insults our sentiments ?

I have been to the fort where Aurangzeb has improsoned his real brother Dara-Shikoh, it really a scary place, even today.
Aurangzeb imprisoned hiw own father, till death.

Even if we dont count other cruelties of his, do u all think that these two activities were justified ?
and that too only for a mortal takht ?

ShahJahan allegedly gave us Taj-Mahal, the monument of Love, though some doubt it, I am sure some one here knows what I pointing to (that is another topic of debate btw)

His son, Aurangzeb, definitely gave us the scars of hatred n violence.

I am not against Muslims at all.
but pls try to see the reason involved.

Aurangzeb was no King Solomon, he was more like a tribal chief, brutal and cruel.

History shud record this as such and nothing else.

Beware ... The time bomb is ticking, a huge reaction is gonna come, I can see it, wud be better if we all see it.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Rasheed Kappan on Feb 26, 2007 10:37 PM  Permalink
Dear Kumar,
You have wrapped up the whole argument quite well. But see your generalisation of the common Muslim reactions in perspective. First, Islam is an institutionalised religion, unlike Hinduism, which is a civilisation. I guess, even the name "HIndu" is derived from the Indus river, a nomenclature derived from Arabs of yore.
I agree that there is lack of space for dissent and liberal thought in Islam in India. But to demonise them for holding on to a set of value systems that had survived for years would be wrong, particularly in a country where they are exposed to communalism of a deeply political kind.
I would contest the argument that the article on Aurangzeb that triggered this debate was purely to "inform" the modern readers of a bigot. The seemingly innocuous pretense of the writer could be unmasked. But this is not the space for it.
Worldwide, Muslims are being branded as terrorists, illiberal, bigots and what not. It is only natural for them to feel insecure ,particularly in a country with the history of Partition and frequent riots that are so hauntingly close.
The Sachar committee report has quite articulately reflected the present backward state of the muslim. Now to refer to the posts of Muslims here to prove they are educationally backward as well, would be unfair.



   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shobhit Kumar on Feb 28, 2007 07:16 PM  Permalink
Hi Rasheed,

I fully agree with what u say here.
It wud be wrong for me do have a generalised opinion merely on the basis of the posts here which are very limited and have a rather sensitive topic in the background.

I do not brand All Muslims as bad or terrorists or Jehadis.

"I agree that there is lack of space for dissent and liberal thought in Islam in India. But to demonise them for holding on to a set of value systems that had survived for years would be wrong, particularly in a country where they are exposed to communalism of a deeply political kind."

Thats really well said by you, nothing cud have beein more accurate than this.

I do not want to offend Muslims by having a generalised notion about Muslims as human beings or Islam as a religion.

But ... somehow the Muslim reaction to something that might appear to be contrary to the general Muslim belief tends to be a bit more violent and aggressive, and it does not have dialog as an option, only a total boycott or some fatwa.

I am not generalising now, u know it.
I do not say that things that happened in the past that resulted in some fatwas or violence were necessarily correct, they may have been wrong, u cant insult somebody like that, but cud they have been dealt with in a more dignified way ?

why is it that when a Father-in-law raped his Daughter-in-law, her husband is ordered to divorce her and treat the woman as his wife?

is this logical ?

If Quran says this, can it be correct ?
My idea is that Quran cant say this, there must be something wrong in the interpretation, so, shud the entire Quran not be re-interpreted once again to remove all such wrong instances?

And if Quran indeed says this, wud a Muslim still continue to believe in it ?

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by on Feb 26, 2007 10:46 PM  Permalink
"I also believe that this issue has been overblown a bit and that the original ratinale behind the caste system was rather justified and practical, doesnt a doctor/lawyer want his child to follow his steps? it reduces a lot of initial efforts."

Now, how would a Dalit react to that ????



   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 26, 2007 11:27 PM  Permalink
Dear shobit,
Regarding your comment on Jesus (was muslim)?
Muslims believe that Messenger/Prophets have been sent to each and every corner of the world. It specifies some of the bibilical prophets (Adam, Moses, Abraham, Ismail, Ishaq, Jesus, (pbuh to all)) who are prophets to muslims too. They also spread the message of same God which prophet mohummad (pbuh) spread. Quran even mentions about Bible, toroah(jews holy book. Quran also says all these books are revelations from God but later on they got corrupted by selfish people (especially kings of various empires) and created more than one version of bible, toroah, etc (Bible has 27 versions). That's why God sent Quran as the last revelation from him and he promised Quran will be protected from the corruption. We muslim believe, since messengers have been sent to every cornor of the world, Sri.Ram and Sri. Krishna might be the prophets/messengers sent to India but people started worshipping them as Gods just like how christians did with Jesus. Watch/desert example is just an example to prove the existence of God. It's left u whether u want to believe in existence of God. Who told u Islam punishes woman who has been raped. In Islam punishment for rape is capital punishment. Who told u that muslims want to ridicule other belief. In fact Quran itself says do not ridicule other dieties. In this forum hindus are rediculing Muslims belief and muslim are rediculing hindus. So now don't blame only muslims for that. Who told u that muslims have destroyed temples. do u have any proof to support your claims? Regarding Aurangzeb, Nobody is fan of aurangzeb here. If he has destroyed temples and forcefully converted hindus, then he is butcher. But this a moot point. Because, historians have different opinion regarding aurangzeb. There are many hindu historians who believe that he is a just ruler. Again I do not want bring up that topic here. Instead of debating on aurangzeb, people started blaming Islam and prophet(pbuh). and likewise I guess muslims also started attacking hindus. That's our typicall indian mentality. We Indians Fight each other for no reason. Most of the questions u asked were just your imaginations. At least I've never attacked any religion in this forum.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 07:16 AM  Permalink
You can't get any more ridiculous than this, ROFL.
More lies from Shenidh - here is proof. Your claims really don't deserve a response.

"
There is no clear definition of rape in Sharia law, and the rules of evidence dictate that the testimony of the victim holds no weight because she is female. Under Sharia law, rape can only be proven by four male eye-witnesses to the act, who must have seen the actual penetration (Sahih Bukhari, vol. 9, bk. 97, no. 7409). The Reliance of the Traveller rules that "if testimony concerns fornication or sodomy, then it requires four male witnesses". Muslim legal scholar Sheikh Umar Barakat specifies that the witnesses must "have seen the offender insert the head of the penis into her vagina". If a rape prosecution fails, the woman is often found guilty under Sharia adultery laws.

"V.S. Naipaul reports that in [Pakistan], 'a pir, or holy man, in a provincial town had been charged with raping the thirteen-year-old daughter of one of his followers. The case against him couldn't get far in the sessions court because the new Islamic law under which he was tried required four eyewitneses to the act'." (Islam Unveiled, R. Spencer, Encounter Books; pg. 89.) Sadly, stories such as these are commonplace.

The law is based on an event in the life of Muhammad, when his favourite wife, Aisha, was suspected of adultery. To clear her name, he demanded four witnesses to the act. Allah demanded: "Why did they not produce four witnesses? If they could not produce witnesses, then they were surely lying in the sight of God" (Sura 24:13). This law acquitted Aisha, but has led to the suffering of hundreds of women.
"

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 12:18 AM  Permalink
Dear Shenidh,
Agreed, you have not attacked any religion. But why are you not open about someone asking questions about your religion. Why do Muslims get all worked up just because someone wants to point at a loophole. Why are Muslims so closed to criticism. If Quran can be interpreted in a million ways in different Islamic nations, practicsed in thousand ways, why stick to only what the Maulvi says.
Till the 14th century, Islamic civilisations were leaders in Science, Mathematics and every field which teh West now leads. But since then the radical, conservative orthodoxy has taken over, and now feel inferior to the West.
Look at INdia, despite our million differences, oppositions, parties and religions, arent we all tagging along. Islam, with such a powerful philosophy as the oneness of man and oneness of God, can take any dissent by its stride...Dont you agree.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 12:49 AM  Permalink
Dear unsung,

Who told u that muslims are not open about asking some questions about our religion. If you have seen all my commnets, I'm on debate with Mr.Secular regarding his severest Islamic criticism. In fact he has called our prophet(pbuh) pediophile(God forbid), he made up koran and what and all..but I never attacked hinduism or any other religion. I'm having honest debate with him that whatever he is believing is his imaginary views and I'm trying to refute his allegations with whatever Islamic knowledge I've.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:39 AM  Permalink
I'm not the one claiming Muhammad was a pedophile the Hadith is, either you admit the the Hadiths are a load of rubbish or acknowledge their accuracy. You can't have it both ways and cherry pick the facts that show Muhammad favorably and close your eyes every time his marriage to Ayesha when she was 6 and consummated when she was 9 is mentioned.


   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 11:14 AM  Permalink
No Ayesha Hadith is perfect. Niether prophet was(pbuh)pedophile. It's basically your mind is sick. Sick minds always think sick. Inspite of explaining to you before you are raising that question again. Let me tell you again that during those days there was no concept of minor. Once the girl is reached puberty, she is suppose to get marry.
Even Ramakrishna paramhans got married to a girl of 5 years old. So, does he pedophile. No it was culture at that. In India even now in rural areas we can find child marriages.

Since you are sick minded person, i think better you watch this video. It explains you about prophet(pbuh) marriage Aisha(RA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNgqqtXIBxI



Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 01:59 PM  Permalink
Muhammad was 53 and she was 6 and yes anyone that has sex with a child of 6 is a pedophile. I'm glad we have got that out of the way.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 07:36 AM  Permalink
You have made excuses for your belief thats all, you give yourself too much credit, by calling your blind faith logic, or scientific or whatever. The best you can come up with is "we muslims believe this, or we muslims believe that" this is not a logical argument. No one told him/her Unsung Humanist can read for him/her self, it's bleeding obvious.

Two last simple questions (lets forget about the whole Islam thing).

Was Aurangzeb a good man ?

Was he justified in destroying the hindu temples killing the Hindus, forcibly converting them to Islam,
and imposing Jaziya on the non-muslims ?



   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Unsung Humanist on Feb 27, 2007 12:59 AM  Permalink
Well, the intolerant fatwas issued by some of your religious heads; the outcry against people within the community who dare to ask questions, all these point to a lack of space for dissent. I did not refer to your argument with "Secular Indian," it was about the general Indian Muslim response to dissent.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 02:06 AM  Permalink
which fatwa u r talking about. be specific, then only i can respond to you appropriately. Even if muslim respond violently to any criticism which I condemn from heart, do u think it's just limited to muslims. Does hindus don't respond violently to any criticism? Since Islam is global religion, u can see more media coverage on muslim issues.

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:42 AM  Permalink
For Shenidh:

Salman Rushdie
Ibn Warraq
Taslima Nasreen

Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shobhit Kumar on Feb 28, 2007 07:24 PM  Permalink
Hi Shenidh,

Your post sounded allright to me, till I read one line in ur post ...


"Who told u that muslims have destroyed temples."

This is the fundamental cause of rift between Muslims and the Hindus.

Muslims did not destroy the temples, oh wow.

So it must have been Hindus who did it, right ?

And to answer ur question in a logical way, can u pls give me a proof that it was Mohd. who orated the Quran to his followers and not some insane person who kept on mumbling ?

pls show me the proof for this, and I really really promise to u that I shall give u some unignorable proofs.

you really got it so wrong this time dear.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by jav on Feb 26, 2007 10:45 PM  Permalink
Nice long message Shobit....but i fail to understand (fully) what is it that you or any other on this board are trying to say?

I have no hesitation is saying that Islam is captured by some extremist and is used at times to justify the specific brutality and injustice but are all muslims in this world to be blamed for all the wrong doing of certain men who have sought to be over zealous and perhaps in their attempts to be hero as true believers of Islam??

If hindus in Gujrat went on a killing spree to kill the muslims in the name of Hinduism are they not just as barbaric??

so please try and create an atmosphere of tolerance and humanity and take out the hatred based on the wrong interpretation of religious beliefs as I firmly believe that there is no religion out there that teaches hatred and THEN KILLING as everyone on this board seem to think.

Let's all be Indians and create a better atmosphere for us all to live in and let's stop dwelling in the past. If a certain minority of muslims still like to live in the past let them...as it will bring no happiness to them only sadness if they truly understand their religion!!

Thank you.




   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 27, 2007 12:30 AM  Permalink
Jav,
At least somebody is there who is not speaking hatred. I really appreciate your comments. Hope everybody learn something from you.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:34 AM  Permalink
"f hindus in Gujrat went on a killing spree to kill the muslims in the name of Hinduism are they not just as barbaric??"

Yes the killers and their masters were/are barbaric, no question about it. And if there is a religious text in Hinduism that encourages Hindus to kill all non-Hindus, personally I wont be surprised if there is one, Hinduism has the largest number of religious texts in the world, (most Hindus are familiar with only a handful) that text should be spat upon and burned. Lets have the Muslims doing the same. That is the difference between Islam and Hinduism.


   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by on Feb 26, 2007 10:51 PM  Permalink
History is written by the winners. Now, this is chillingly true even in the modern era. You have the Congress and BJP governments changing school textbook contents at will. Now, to quote works of historical research with finality would be absurd.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Dear Muslim Brethern ...
by Shenidh on Feb 26, 2007 11:32 PM  Permalink
Jav,

Thanks for your nice comments. There are extremist on every side. Blaming the whole community just becoz some morons are doing something wrong is very absurd.


   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator. | Hide replies
RE:Aurangzeb: The Monster
by on Feb 26, 2007 11:12 PM  Permalink
Wikipedia, for your info, can be edited by anyone. It is continuously edited. So, lets not hold that as the final truth. As for your thought of kicking every Muslim who don't agree with you to be kicked to Pakistan, here's a thought: Muslims are lucky people like you don't constitute the majority.



Jai HInd !!!!



   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Aurangzeb: The Monster
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 07:22 AM  Permalink
Good point, now lets see what the Britannica has to say:

"In 1675 Aurangzeb arrested and executed the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur, who had refused to embrace Islam

...

In addition, Hindu idols, temples, and shrines were often destroyed.
"




   Forward   |   Report abuse
Hinduism is civilization.
by Ghanshyam Shetye on Feb 26, 2007 01:06 PM  Permalink  | Hide replies

Dear mr. shah khan

Hinduism is not a religion it%u2019s a civilization. Hinduism is about love and peace not about hate and cruelty about other religion. A Hindu is born Hindu it%u2019s not like your religion he has to do KHATNA to become follower of you religion. First open your eyes try to see from where you come from then talk about the others. You talk about the backwardness of Indian (Hindu people) but why don%u2019t you see that why we are so backward (as you see) we are dragging your followers on our shoulders although they are from your religion but still anyhow they are the Indians and we have to drag them, because we want to go ahead and they are chains in our leg. You are saying we are backward open you eyes and see the world at least we are stick to 12th century but you are still nomadic (living animal life - no civilization what so ever) once some Mohammad try to educate you animals but you change the meaning as per your need and stay where you are at the beginning of the stone age.

Civilization is not about living on bigger house or having cars, money, gismo gadgets. But it%u2019s about cultivation of mind and sole, it%u2019s a path of peaceful living. We know what are bad and good about us and we always try to leave back out bad things and embarrass good things in our life. Progressiveness is the keyword of civilization. Have you ever see or here your religion are called as civilization its always called as religion only religion. In Hindi civilization we can proudly say we accepted many religions even who looted us or attached on our society we accepted then. But you are remain uncivilized religious blind followers only


    Forward  |  Report abuse
RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by Shobhit Kumar on Feb 26, 2007 09:50 PM  Permalink
I have spent quite some time in reading about these previous replies in the last few days.

One clear line ...

Those who side with hindus have a rather flexible and open mind. They may criticise others (esp. Muslims) but they dont shy or hesitate in admitting weaknesses or mistakes in their system.

Those who side with the Muslims are alas, a bit more rigid and static in their ideas.

For them Quran is the ultimate.
ok fine, that is understandable.

If I was to go on a killing spree, destroying all my enemies at one go and then quote Srimadbhagvadgita, it wud be naturally wrong to blame Sri Gitaji for this behaviour of mine.

Ditto for the issue of Jihad inspired allegedly from Quran.
That wud be wrong, I dont support it.
Quran is the holy book for Muslims and so I respect it even if I dont know much about it.

But when a Muslim starts taking the stand that Quran is absolute and beyond debate and has to be followed at any costs and worse, starts imposing on those who dont believe as much into it, then things start taking a wrong turn.

I am ready to argue about Gitaji, for or against, depending upon my knowledge levels and my interpretation.

shud the same not be true for Quran ?

If Quran is indeed the word of God, why hesitate in debating it, as truth will win in the end after all !!!

and the question is not just limited to Quran's meaning.

I read somewhere in the replies of some chap that Jesus was a Muslim and was a pakka namazi.

Gosh !!!
so wasnt Jesus the first Muslim ?
600 yrs before Mohd. ?
and so Jesus gave us not one but two world religions.

Somehow, I have noticed that our Muslims are giving us very shallow and laughable logics, as that watch n desert example shows; it has been shown to be fallacious and yet he sticks to it.

Hindus are not beyond faults, they too have several sins on their souls, the biggest of them being the caste issues and one that haunts them still.
Dont think I am a SC/ST/OBC, I am a brahman and proud to be so but I do feel a bit embarrased when I read bout the way we upper casts have dealt with those who were not born in higher families.

but I also believe that this issue has been overblown a bit and that the original ratinale behind the caste system was rather justified and practical, doesnt a doctor/lawyer want his child to follow his steps? it reduces a lot of initial efforts.

the initial market that we had was a barter system which was based on vocations and expertise, narturally a person skilled in one art wud teach this art to his children and so it wud go on n on.
It was/is as logical as is 1 1=2

that it deteriorated later on was the problem.
still apart from this caste system, are there any other major deficiencies in Hinduism ?
may be yes, but I do not know at this time.

Muslims brothers, pls look deep inside,

Do u really feel that advocating Islam rule (Darul-Islam) everywhere is right?

Do u really feel that punishing a woman for illicit relation when SHE has been raped is natural justice?

Do u really feel that ridiculing others beliefs just because they r diff from urs is right ?

Do u really feel that destroying others holy places and erect unattended Mosques over them is right ?

Do u really feel that calling a spade a spade
(as in the case of Aurangzeb) is something that shud be avoided?
why then do u rake up the issue of Babri demolition ?

If Babur cud destroy a really holy place like Ram's Temple at his janmbhoomi, why cant we destroy something that insults our sentiments ?

I have been to the fort where Aurangzeb has improsoned his real brother Dara-Shikoh, it really a scary place, even today.
Aurangzeb imprisoned hiw own father, till death.

Even if we dont count other cruelties of his, do u all think that these two activities were justified ?
and that too only for a mortal takht ?

ShahJahan allegedly gave us Taj-Mahal, the monument of Love, though some doubt it, I am sure some one here knows what I pointing to (that is another topic of debate btw)

His son, Aurangzeb, definitely gave us the scars of hatred n violence.

I am not against Muslims at all.
but pls try to see the reason involved.

Aurangzeb was no King Solomon, he was more like a tribal chief, brutal and cruel.

History shud record this as such and nothing else.

Beware ... The time bomb is ticking, a huge reaction is gonna come, I can see it, wud be better if we all see it.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by Secular Indian on Feb 27, 2007 05:52 AM  Permalink
The caste system has been a disaster no matter how justified it was in theory. Something that should be learned from Islam is their concept of universal brother hood. The sort of thing that motivates a Sudanese to come all the way to Kashmir to fight for what he believes are injustices towards his co-religionists.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 26, 2007 05:36 PM  Permalink
another screw head.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by mohammed ahmed on Feb 26, 2007 05:47 PM  Permalink
kumar bhai..........
DEBATE like A DEBATER.
u seem to be a COWARD even while debating........

u were born naked.......... be naked only...
and u will be called "CIVILISED... ha.ha.ha.

poor logic......... man.....
u got trapped urself....

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by chaitanya kumar on Feb 26, 2007 06:17 PM  Permalink
let's debate...about what? you need some rational thought work before we do that. I don't want to come down to your level just for the sake of it. The "Secular" and intellectual morons will discuss with you just to keep with the times and get to know the reality though most of them know nothing is going to change with you guys for better. People don't have great hope, they are addressing your points to change you for better or suppress you for being a stupid mind("OPEN UR EYES MAN. 20% INDIANS HAVE OPENED THEIRS"...which century are you living in?). You people can start with this: condemn the attrocities committed on Hindus since Islam arrived in India for all the genocides, razing of structures and the mindless savagery altogether caused to hurt a peaceful civilization that gave so many wise thoughts to the mankind. Do it through the highest bodies that represent all your sects of Islam. That would be a beginning. People can be human when the carry some remorse for what their ideologies represent and evolved and what they did in that process. And repentance, and then compromise by making amends that would be amenable to the negotiating side. But you people are much behind to even get it to your head. Stuck in the Allah's world and his grip on you that will someday either demoralize for everything you stand or push you to where it began. Remember one thing. It's Madness that you people believe in, and it doesn't matter if it's good or bad anymore when you can't weild it through ideological superiority when there is so much discerning approach in other traditions which are reforming by the day to march ahead. Islam has not begun it's very basic reforms and looking for ways to recede to very crude way of life where it seems very anxious to find a way to approach the "prophecy" and it's implementation, and it is doing so by escaping from surrounding realities which demand greater efficiency and hard thinking. Better to move ahead and see other things in store that your people have been hiding from all these times through mindset or way or life. The "Infidel" world. It will rock each of your asses(it already started to). The way i say it to you, seems i had to recede to my kindergarten approach to make it understandable to you. That is your level.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by Secular Indian on Feb 26, 2007 07:30 PM  Permalink
You are quite right, one can hit one's head against a brick will only so much.

Forward   |   Report abuse
Message deleted by moderator
Message deleted by moderator
RE:RE:Hinduism is civilization.
by Babloo Bhaiya on Feb 26, 2007 07:41 PM  Permalink
@md ahmed.

if u r happy by assuming these all then be happy.

but it wont be considered to be a right approach. apart from bashing up the community along with which u have been living.. what u and community in general have done in india? one .. two.. three .. four .. exceptional cases r okay. for these one .. two.. three.. .. four .. exceptional examples only make us to swallow live flies! this we have been doing so far.. :-('

be happy.. aah.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Total 9683 messages Pages:    <<  < Newer  | 261 | 262 | 263 | 264 | 265   Older >   >>
Write a message