The torch bearer of women's rights and women's progress in India and the world as a whole????
Normally if it was a case of dowry or related, she would have taken procession after processions...continuously harping how backward is Indian society.
I hope she is coward and afraid of the fatwa, is she?
RE:WHERE IS SHABANA AZMI?????
by hanek singh on Nov 27, 2007 08:29 AM Permalink
RECENTLY SHE WAS SEEN IN SOHO [ NEW YORK] SIPPING MARGARITA IN A POSH MEXICAN RESTAURANT . PLEASE BE KIND TO HER , LET HER FINISH HER DRINKS .
See how you proved me wrong by going into details of ayesha. All I wanted to show to you is what seems at surface is not always correct. If you find sculptors with scarce clothing on hindu temples, it does not mean that gods and goddesses have to be painted nude.
I hope you got the point.
As for Taslima, she should be fought by knowledge and argument not by goondagardi and kiling her as many of the muslim followers seem to be asking for.
RE:RE:for Imran
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:14 AM Permalink
Bhudda, Does it say in the QURAN ? NO.
Hadith are subject to scrutiny. They are NOT the word of God. I have you a list of reasons why it is POSSIBLE that Aisha (RA) was NOT 9 years old.
So it NOT a proven FACT that she was 9. But since you have developed such a hatered for Islam, that you are inclined to believe anything and everything that tried to defame Islam. That is what we call "BIAS"
I have a BIAS towards Islam, you have a BIAS against Islam.
RE:for Imran
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:11 AM Permalink
Ashish, what you believe as a HINDU does NOT concern me. It does not make me a better Muslim by critisizing your faith.
What I am saying is that when we protest against of defend Taslima, we need to make a distinction.
- Are we defending her right to free speech or are we defending her views. If you are defending her right to free speech then I am with you. On that same principle, I will defend the right of Muslims to protest her view in a manner that does NOT violate the LAW.
Coming to MF Hussain, Same principle applied. I defend his RIGHT to express but as far as content is concerned, it does not effect me because I do not share the Hindu belief.
Should he do it, personally I think NO. It is common sence to know that this will affect the Hindu community and why should we do that to our own countrymen.
Same applies to the Danish Cartoons. The cartoonist has every right to express himself and Muslims have every right to protest in a legal manner. I support the cartoonist right to free speech BUT I protest against his work.
I hope we are mature enough to understand that difference.
So, My questin to you is, Why are you supporting Taslima ?
RE:for Imran
by arjuna on Nov 27, 2007 01:33 AM Permalink
Imran,
Its not the issue of supporting her . its the issue of helping a human being. its not new it happened many times it is the culture and nature of hindustani's to protect people who ever knock thier door for help irespective of religion caste or community. killing is not the solution.
RE:RE:for Imran
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:53 AM Permalink
Are there not any Indians in this country that we must help ? Why is Taslima taking priority over them ?
I agree Killing is not the solution.
But we need to have some principles behind over actions.
You can support Taslima for these reasons (Either/OR/And)
- Her right to free speech - Her views expressed in her writings
I can point you to millions of people who need your help as a human being that Taslima.
RE:RE:for Imran
by deepak on Nov 27, 2007 10:29 AM Permalink
why are u not supporting Taslima??? why r u not so angry on Osama who blew up for Allah??? Taslima wrote about Bengali Hindus oppressed every day in 'moderate' Bangladesh...why cant she write about this??/ why is Islam so immune that we cant write about it??? why do u think Islam should be protected by blasphemy laws and terror threats??? why is Islam so insecure that it has to hide??????
RE:for Imran
by deepak on Nov 27, 2007 10:26 AM Permalink
fight a female writer because she wrote a few books???? LOL....Taslimas 'Selected Columns' simply discusses texts which are quoted & preached DAY & DAY out by mullahs....Taslima discusses "MAQSADAL MUMINEEN' a reference book vry popular all over the subcontinent and available in most Indian languages..the book clearly advocates WIFE BeATINg...how is Taslima wrong in making this an issue of discussion or even condemnation???? was Raja Rammohun Roy hunted down for advocating widow marriages???? Taslima wrote about a helpless Hindu Bengali family whose daughter is raped and the family driven out by JIhadies..this happens every single day in Bangladesh.......every single day Jihadies KILL people Saying Namaz in Pakistan....how is it controversial if you talk sbout this?????
What was Ayesha%u2019s (ra) Age at the Time of Her Marriage? It is normally believed that she was nine years old at the time of her marriage with Mohammad (sws) was consummated. I do think it was according to the traditions of the Arab culture, as otherwise people would have objected to this marriage. But unfortunately, the modern day man is not satisfied with an answer as simple as that. Reply1 To begin with, I think it is the responsibility of all those who believe that marrying a girl as young as nine years old was an accepted norm of the Arab culture, to provide at least a few examples to substantiate their point of view. I have not yet been able to find a single dependable instance in the books of Arab history where a girl as young as nine years old was given away in marriage. Unless such examples are given, we do not have any reasonable grounds to believe that it really was an accepted norm. In my opinion, the age of Ayesha (ra) has been grossly mis-reported in the ahadith. Not only that, I think that the narratives reporting this event are not only highly unreliable but also that on the basis of other historical data, the event reported, is quite an unlikely happening. Let us look at the issue from an objective stand point. My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayeshas (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are:
RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by Truth hurts on Nov 27, 2007 01:39 AM Permalink
Imran..please dont point a fingure towards authenticity of hadiths..or some mulla will issue a fatwa against you :)) haha
RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by on Nov 27, 2007 02:41 AM Permalink
One important point we have to clarify here is that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, when proposing to `Aisha, was not the first suitor, for, according to many historians, Jubair ibn Mut`am proposed to her before the Prophet, peace and blessings for him.
This gives an indication that `Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, was mature enough for marriage at that age.
Giving more details on this issue, Sheikh Faysal Mawlawi, deputy chairman of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, states the following:
Firstly, Prophet%u2019s proposal to `Aisha came through a suggestion made by Khawalh bint Hakim as a sign of strengthening the relation with his Companion Abu Bakr and confirming his love for him.
Secondly, the fact that `Aisha, before the Prophet proposed to her, was being pursued by Jubair ibn Mut`am, indicates that she was mature enough for marriage, according to the prevailing tradition at that time, if not, the Quraish people, who would never waste any chance to insult the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, would have found this marriage as a golden opportunity to pour on him rain of insults.
Rather they found nothing wrong in this engagement, and they received the news of the Prophet%u2019s proposal for `Aisha as something usual, and even, expected.
Aisha was not the first case, for many girls married at her same age to men who were at their fathers%u2019 age. Hala, the cousin of Amina bint Wahb was married to Abdul-Muttalib on the same day
RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:46 AM Permalink
· Most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. An event as well known as the one being reported, should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three. · It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have had shifted after living in Medinah for seventy one years. · Tehzibu'l-tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: "narratives reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq". It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq. (vol 11, pg 48 - 51)
RE:RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:46 AM Permalink
· Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, another book on the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that when he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly. (vol 4, pg 301 - 302) · According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha (ra) was born about eight years before Hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari (kitabu'l-tafseer) Ayesha (ra) is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur'an, was revealed, "I was a young girl". The 54th surah of the Qur'an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Ayesha (ra) had not only been born before the revelation of the referred surah, but was actually a young girl (jariyah), not an infant (sibyah) at that time. Obviously, if this narrative is held to be true, it is in clear contradiction with the narratives reported by Hisham ibn `urwah. I see absolutely no reason that after the comments of the experts on the narratives of Hisham ibn `urwah, why we should not accept this narrative to be more accurate.
RE:RE:RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:47 AM Permalink
· According to a number of narratives, Ayesha (ra) accompanied the Muslims in the battle of Badr and Uhud. Furthermore, it is also reported in books of hadith and history that no one under the age of 15 years was allowed to take part in the battle of Uhud. All the boys below 15 years of age were sent back. Ayesha's (ra) participation in the battle of Badr and Uhud clearly indicate that she was not nine or ten years old at that time. After all, women used to accompany men to the battle fields to help them, not to be a burden on them. · According to almost all the historians Asma (ra), the elder sister of Ayesha (ra) was ten years older than Ayesha (ra). It is reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma (ra) died in 73 hijrah when she was 100 years old. Now, obviously if Asma (ra) was 100 years old in 73 hijrah she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah. If Asma (ra) was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha (ra) should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, Ayesha (ra), if she got married in 1 AH (after hijrah) or 2 AH, was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:47 AM Permalink
· Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history, while mentioning Abu Bakr (ra) reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah -- the pre Islamic period. Obviously, if Ayesha (ra) was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH -- the time she most likely got married. · According to Ibn Hisham, the historian, Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before Umar ibn Khattab (ra). This shows that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam during the first year of Islam. While, if the narrative of Ayesha's (ra) marriage at seven years of age is held to be true, Ayesha (ra) should not have been born during the first year of Islam. · Tabari has also reported that at the time Abu Bakr planned on migrating to Habshah (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am -- with whose son Ayesha (ra) was engaged -- and asked him to take Ayesha (ra) in his house as his son's wife. Mut`am refused, because Abu Bakr had embraced Islam, and subsequently his son divorced Ayesha (ra). Now, if Ayesha (ra) was only seven years old at the time of her marriage, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Habshah. On the basis of this report it seems only reasonable to assume that Ayesha (ra) had not only been born 8 years before hijrah, but was also a young lady, quite prepared for marriage.
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:48 AM Permalink
(pbuh) asked her regarding the choices she had in her mind. Khaulah said: "You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)". When the Prophet (pbuh) asked about who the virgin was, Khaulah proposed Ayesha's (ra) name. All those who know the Arabic language, are aware that the word "bikr" in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine year old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier is "Jariyah". "Bikr" on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady, and obviously a nine year old is not a "lady". · According to Ibn Hajar, Fatimah (ra) was five years older than Ayesha (ra). Fatimah (ra) is reported to have been born when the Prophet (pbuh) was 35 years old. Thus, even if this information is taken to be correct, Ayesha (ra) could by no means be less than 14 years old at the time of hijrah, and 15 or 16 years old at the time of her marriage.
These are some of the major points that go against accepting the commonly known narrative regarding Ayesha's (ra) age at the time of her marriage. In my opinion, neither was it an Arab tradition to give away girls in marriage at an age as young as nine or ten years, nor did the Prophet (pbuh) marry Ayesha (ra) at such a young age. The people of Arabia did not object to this marriage, because it never happened in the manner it has been narrated.
RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:18 AM Permalink
You are misleading again...
These were NOT coming from AISHA (RA)...All these Hadith came from "Hisham ibn `urwah"
My reservations in accepting the narratives, on the basis of which, Ayeshas (ra) age at the time of her marriage with the Prophet (pbuh) is held to be nine years are: - Most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. An event as well known as the one being reported, should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three. - It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have had shifted after living in Medinah for seventy one years.
RE:Ashish Sinha - Some perspective.
by Lalu Prasad Yadav on Nov 27, 2007 02:25 AM Permalink
Zakir Naik is certainly NOT comic. Bukhari is CERTAINLY NOT ISLAM. ISLAM IS SUBMISSION OF MAN TO GOD'S WILL. WILLY OR NILLY, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT TO GOD'S WILL. FOR EXAMPLE, NOT ONE OF US CAN PUT OFF HIS OR HER DEATH.
RE:RE:nice comment by Imarna ptel
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:45 AM Permalink
Ashish, Why don't you guys read my message and think before you write,
I repeat, If Hindus are comfortable with portraying God and Godess in that manner, so be it.
I as a Muslim really do not care about what you believe in other than general Knowledge.
Muslims do not believe in idolizing the prophet in any shape of form. Hence the protest.
W.r.t the prophet marrying a 9 year old...Can you please provide me substantiated evidence of that allegation. Reading hate sites is not the best way to be informed.
I have an article from a Muslim scholar on this subject. If you are really out to seek the truth you will read it once. This is more one opinion. Unless you want to believe the Hate sites.
RE:nice comment by Imarna ptel
by on Nov 27, 2007 02:41 AM Permalink
One important point we have to clarify here is that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, when proposing to `Aisha, was not the first suitor, for, according to many historians, Jubair ibn Mut`am proposed to her before the Prophet, peace and blessings for him.
This gives an indication that `Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, was mature enough for marriage at that age.
Giving more details on this issue, Sheikh Faysal Mawlawi, deputy chairman of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, states the following:
Firstly, Prophet%u2019s proposal to `Aisha came through a suggestion made by Khawalh bint Hakim as a sign of strengthening the relation with his Companion Abu Bakr and confirming his love for him.
Secondly, the fact that `Aisha, before the Prophet proposed to her, was being pursued by Jubair ibn Mut`am, indicates that she was mature enough for marriage, according to the prevailing tradition at that time, if not, the Quraish people, who would never waste any chance to insult the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, would have found this marriage as a golden opportunity to pour on him rain of insults.
Rather they found nothing wrong in this engagement, and they received the news of the Prophet%u2019s proposal for `Aisha as something usual, and even, expected.
Aisha was not the first case, for many girls married at her same age to men who were at their fathers%u2019 age. Hala, the cousin of Amina bint Wahb was married to Abdul-Muttalib on the same day
RE:Imran a legitimate question for you
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:35 AM Permalink
Bhuddha, I wish it was as simple as you make it sound. I see two problems/challengs facing the Muslim community,
- Education - Dictatorships
With regards to your comment on Bib Laden, you fail to mention the speeches and opinions voiced out by Muslim scholars condemning the 9/11 attacks as un-Islamic. Why does Islam say that killing an Innocent is like killing the entire Humanity ? So weren;t the 9/11 Victims innocent ? Isn't that against the teachings of Islam ?
See you people tend to give more important to Fatwas that what they deserve. My question to you is, What is a Fatwa ? In Islam, a fatwa is nothing more than an opinion. It is NOT the word of God.
The Fatwa that you INCORRECTLY mentioned is as follows and I would agree with it if presented in the following way
Breat Feeding - If a woman breatfeeds a child, even though she is NOT the biological mother, then it is forbidden for that Child to marry the Children of the woman who breast-fed her.
Thats why COPY and PASTE is NOT research.
You want a Fatwa (Opinion) on Bin-Laden,
The acts of violence committed by and the followers of Bin Laden are against the teaching and principles of Islam. Muslims all across the world should NOT associate these actions and this kind of Vision with Islam. Islam condenms without exception such acts of violence against innocents.
RE:Imran a legitimate question for you
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:04 AM Permalink
With reapect to the issue of Fatwa, I gave you where Islam stands. Are Muslims perfect in following Islam, NOT EVEN CLOSE. Don't we see people blindly following political leaders ?
Take elections for example, how many people do you think make informed decisions as oppose to blindly following a political party ?
Education is the solution to this problem. I consider myself to be educated and a student of Islam. I do not advocate violence. I condemn the violent acts of Muslims in the name of Islam. If Islam were to teach violence, there would be 1.6 Billion terrorist and the world would cease to exist.
With respect to the quote in the Quran, Chapter 5, Iyah 32, "if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people."
So Islam gives 2 conditions (Note that I mentioned "INNOCENT" in my post)
Murder - A person convicted of Murder is NOT an innocent person.
Spreading Mischief - That accounts to spreading trouble in the society. That is what is left for interpretation. Treason is a form of Mischief. Someone colluding with our enemies to damage our country is "Spreading Mischief". And frankly I would say that based on this paragraph, it is JUSTIFIED if the INDIAN GOVERNMENT were to hang all of the convicted terrorist.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by imran patel on Nov 26, 2007 11:58 PM Permalink
If Hindus had shown "Maturity" , there would not have been any discussion on MF Hussains right to express himself. I being a Muslim do not agree with what he did.
As far as painting Muhammad (PBUH) nude, there is no place or mosque where Muhammad is depicted in such a fashion. Whereas the temples in India are littered with images of nude God and Goddess. (There are imgaes of men having intercourse with Cows).
My point is that in Islam we do not support this kind of Art. If Hinduism is against it as well, then you have a RIGHT to oppose the paintings of MF Hussain as long as you use tools that do not break the LAW.
Same applies to Muslims. I am all for Muslims protesting their displeasure. But I cannot stand with them when they use violence to demonstrate their displeasure.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by manmadhan on Nov 27, 2007 12:12 AM Permalink
Hi Imran .. you might not have got a chance to visit to a temple... but let me tell you the nude figures on the temple or not of god or godesses, they represent common man and woman.
Look at your first and last paragraphs. You say Hindus haven't shown maturity since they are having "discussions" on MF Hussians paintings... but if muslims were protesting thier displeasure(Non violent) it is ok with you.... how hyprocite are you?
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by ACM on Nov 27, 2007 12:17 AM Permalink
How can you say that gods and godesses are in intercourse? Have you checked that they could be just depictions by some artist - which Hinduism was free enough to allow to be portraied - possibly inspite of some objections even in that age/era? Why is that not the case with Islam? You need to question your own convictions my friend and that that is the biggest problem with muslims! The strenght of your convictions ensures that we all suffer - which is the root cause of a lot of tragedy in the world.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by ACM on Nov 27, 2007 01:46 AM Permalink
People tend to hold hard to their convictions on religion when they feel challenged. It's an automatic response because it feels like a challenge to their self identity. It's important to recognize that faith should not be confused with self identity. It's more like there are other religions out there and I happen to know this religion better so I follow it. It's difficult lesson to teach to most any followers of any religion but worst in the case of Islam because. 1. The amount of security Islam guarantees inside its fold 2. The scare Islam spreads outside if one tries to step out or promote the non Islamic world. It's best described by the term chakravuha - by the way I do not wish to use this term to promote Hindu viewpoints. Hindu fanatics - go hang - along with your Muslim/Christian/Sikh/Jewish counterparts.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by ashish sinha on Nov 27, 2007 12:26 AM Permalink
Nice ! If Hindu temples depict images of nude goddess, its okay to draw nude pictures. Nice !
hence by the same measure, if Muhammad could have sex with 9 yr old, its okay to call for reforms for women and amendments in Qoran.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by Mohammed AliSherKhan on Nov 27, 2007 12:00 AM Permalink
Mr. Sinha- you have got your basics wrong. Islam is more powerful and stronger than Hindoo and Christ- so Moslems can feel free to abuse, ridicule and torture infidels with impunity, but no one can question anything in Islam. If any one does so he/she will be punished. No one can eradicate Islam- Islam shal rule all.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by Vasanth Srinivas on Nov 27, 2007 12:08 AM Permalink
Yes. We can see your unity and strength in IRAQ, IRAN, Porkistan.
RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:11 AM Permalink
You have got it wrong.
Muslims believe that Islam is the last message of God to mainkind through his messenger, Muhammad.
The message of God cannot be changed, i.e. the Quran. But interpretation of those message is open to debate and scrutiny. That is the Islamic point of view.
What has happened today (Mainly due to ignorance and lack of education on part of the Muslims), is we have implied that the Interpretations of those revelations from Allah are not subject to scrutiny.
My Hindu brothers seem to take that view as the Islamic view. There is a difference between those two things.
In brief, As a Muslim I cannot change/alter the Quran as I believe it to be the final word of God. But I must always challenge my interpretation of those revelation.
RE:RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by ACM on Nov 27, 2007 12:23 AM Permalink
At this point - you're lying to yourself (again in complete conviction). How can you claim that Quran is perfect while interpretation is not. That is an oxymoron. It effectively means that depending you how you interpret it it's perfect or imperfect which means that it's left to the reader to determine perfectness which means that it's imperfect by design.
RE:RE:RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 01:29 AM Permalink
It is my belief that the Quran is the word of God. You do not have to share that Belief. I am not saying that it is SCIENCE. I am saying it is my belief.
The Quran is NOT a cindrella story. It is in Arabic. So I have to look at translations. I have to look at the context under which that paragraph was revealed. Based on this I have to make my interpretations. Are my interpretations going to be perfect ? No. That is why I am saying that Muslims should always challange their interpretation of the Quran.
In the Mahabharat, Sri Krishna tells Arjun to pick up his weapons and fight his own cousins. When he refuses, Sri Krishna says that Arjuns like will be a WASTE. Now does that mean all Hindus need to fight their cousins ? NO. We need interpretation based on context and situation. We do not change the Mahabharat, but we try to challenge our interpretation of that event based on the context. and if we put in context, it makes sense. we realize that it was a fight between good and evil and the lesson was, if we have to fight evil, we should no matter who we have to fight. Always be on the side of Good.
So why can we all not be a bit more alert of context when it comes to Islam ?
RE:RE:RE:RE:question to all my Muslim brothers
by ACM on Nov 27, 2007 03:02 AM Permalink
Again - you're indulging in comparitive religion which I'll ignore. You believe strongly that Quran is the word of God and that it's perfect. That is my problem. I'm saying that no book is perfect - the Gita or the Quran or the Bible - to the word since they all need interpretation. If they were perfect, why were we all not born with all that knowledge prebuilt. Why are we having all this difference of opinions. Was Allah or Vishnu or God or Shiva fooling around with us all by not imbibing all these commandments directly into us? Think about it. Isn't this dischord the single biggest problem in the whole wide world. Think of the amount of progress all mankind could have made if it were not for this single discord. I have a problem with some aspects all religions although I'm not an atheist nor a communist nor even an anti-religious person. I have big problems with Islam because of reasons mentioned in a posting above. These 2 factors are not unique to Islam but are stronger and more prevelent to it. But an Islamist (both muslim and non muslim) will point to other religions and say there are questionable beliefs there as well but the point is about the enormity of the threat.
ISLAMA IS A TOOL OF ARAB COLONISATION, WHERE IN THE NAME OF BROTHERHOOD, ALL THE CONVERTED MUSLIMS ARE REQUIRED TO WORK FOR ISLAM, UNTILMATELY ARABS. A CONVERT MUSLIM FEELS MORE COMPELLED TO JUSTIFY HIS EMBRACING EVEN BY FORCE OF ISLAM IS A RIGHT. ALL THE BLAH BLAH OF BROTHERHOOD WILL EXIST UNTILL EVERYBODY IS MADE A MUSLIM AND THEN THEY WILL FIGHT AMONG EACH OTHERS. INDIAN MUSLIMS ARE ALSO CREATING A REFT WITH OTHER MUSLIMS FOR INDIAN.
IMRAN PATEL, SEE HOW THE MUSLIM DID THE BOMBLASTING TO KILL THE LAYERS AND OTHER INNOCENT PEOPLE, BECAUSE NO ONE WILL TAKE UP THE CASE OF MUSLIM TERRORISTS.
THAT MEANS, IF YOU DONT DEFEND ME, I WILL KILL YOU TOO.
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE LIKE YOU TO DEFEND THEM AND ABUSE KRISHNA AND RAME.
I WOULD ANY DAY PREFER TO LIVE IN THIS KRISHAN-RAMA CULTURE THAN BINLADENS, OF COURSE LIKE YOU TOO DO. THOUGH YOU WILL SURELY STILL DEFEND BIN LADEN AND ALZWAHIRIs
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:03 AM Permalink
I have never defended the violent actions of Muslims with all their demonstrations.
Damage to public/private property is a crime and must be punishable under the law of this country. NO EXCEPTIONS !!!
Have you ever seen me defend Bin-Laden or Zarqawi ?
My contention is that what these fellows represent is NOT Islam. If that was the case you would have 1.6 Billion Muslims as suicide bombers. Is that the case ? Are there 1.6 Billion suicide Bombers ?
I do not insult other religions, because my faith prevents me from doing that.
Yesterday I saw a movie made in Pakistan...I recommend that you all see it. It is called "Khudha ke Liye"...I liked the subject. Gives a good idea of what is happening in the Muslim word.
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by Desi on Nov 27, 2007 12:44 AM Permalink
Where can we see this movie? Can you upload it? Just wanted to add that you atleast take a sane path in putting forward your points instead of all the abuses going on here! Keep it up? A healthy discussion will probabaly dispel your strong views.
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by ACM on Nov 27, 2007 12:30 AM Permalink
On the one hand you say that Islam depends on interpretation on the other hand you say that Osama and gang are incorrectly interpreting Islam. On what basis do you make the claim that their intrepretation is incorrect? They are only following the tenets of Islam, and atleast in their minds, possibly better than you. In their opinion, you are not a very devoted follower of Islam. To them you are a fake muslim. What drives your conviction that your intrepretation of Islam is not fake but theirs is? By the way, folks who try to prove their religion is better than someone else's are deluded. Such comparision, at best, can be called comparing apples to oranges - at worst, its unbelievable stupidity.
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by Om on Nov 27, 2007 12:17 AM Permalink
"I have never defended the violent actions of Muslims with all their demonstrations" By the Way who are you to defend or offend ?? Does your offense makes any difference?
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by ashish sinha on Nov 26, 2007 11:55 PM Permalink
yeah for all the ills in hinduism that Imaran points out, they don't exist any more. We have learned to evolve ourselves.
hinduism as a religion has the ability to accept changes. Islam performs poorly on this ground.
RE:See the hegemony of muslims
by Lalu Prasad Yadav on Nov 27, 2007 02:44 AM Permalink
THIS KRISHNA-RAMA CULTURE IS ACTUALLY A COMPOSITE CULTURE OF THE MINORITIES TOO. ALSO THERE IS NO HINDU RASHTRA, HENCE OBVIOUSLY INDIAN SOCIETY BEING SECULAR IS GOOD TO LIVE IN.
Would you support the freedom of speech for a Hindu, if he or she were to claim one of the following,
- Sri Krishna was nothing else but a womanizer and an Adulterer - King Rama did not trust his wife, instead mistreated her with the entire "Agni-Priksha" - The existence of King Rama is a big Question Mark ? - Sri Krishna is NOT really god as he was NOT able to stop the masaacer in the Mahabharat
I agree that Taslima is being treated unfairly. She has a RIGHT to speak her mind. Muslims on the other hand have a RIGHT to protest, using all the tools that do not violate the law of the land.
Hindus seem to support Taslima, ONLY because she has managed to irk the Muslims.
If you want to support Taslima, base it on a principle.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend", is not exactly a principle.
Think about it. Sooner or later there will be some Hindu who will question the teachings and beliefs of Hinduism. What do you think will be the reaction of the Hindu Fanatics ?
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Lalu Prasad Yadav on Nov 27, 2007 02:42 AM Permalink
Salman Rushdie or even this Taslima Nasreen are living examples. Have you forgotten that a Sangh Parivar goon had called for beheading Karunanidhi? That his writ did not run in Tamil Nadu speaks volumes for the sagacity and education of the Tamil people. Also, not only does he have police protection but at the street level his party men can decimate the Saffron Brigade.
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by hanek singh on Nov 27, 2007 08:07 AM Permalink
mr patel, you are correct lord krishna could not ptevent the slaughter of countless in battle of mahabharta, despite valiant effort. their karmas ordained that but i am glad that ALLAH could save all the muslims from american bombing in iraq/ afganistan also saved them during iraq/ iran war for over 8 years . thank allah it is savingh muslims from suicide bombers in pakistan/ iraq besides all the believers from Israels in gaza and west bank it seems ALLAH has a special protection plans for muslims BE HAPPY THE MUSLIMS ARE HELPING EACH OTHER SO BEAUTIFULLY IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE WORLD
RE:RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by imran patel on Nov 27, 2007 12:18 AM Permalink
why should rediff ban my id...Do I not have the FREEDOM to FREE SPEECH ?
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Vasanth Srinivas on Nov 26, 2007 10:33 PM Permalink
Even "Periyar" is a hindu who questioned the customs of Hindus boldly. He has many hindu followers. People like them are welcomed in India and elsewhere by hindus. What did Tasleema say wrong about Islam or ALLAH...? First get the quotes and then speak.
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Truth hurts on Nov 26, 2007 10:35 PM Permalink
- Sri Krishna was nothing else but a womanizer and an Adulterer ....? How ? -King Rama did not trust his wife, instead mistreated her with the entire "Agni-Priksha" ..? Ram trusted his wife but to give respect to public opinion he took that step. This proves how much he cares for his public that to keep there opinion he made his wife to go go through "Agni Pareeksha" - The existence of King Rama is a big Question Mark ? Deny the existance of ayodhya, sri lanka and all other places mentioned in ramayana. - Sri Krishna is NOT really god as he was NOT able to stop the masaacer in the Mahabharat..?Mahabarata was essential that time because that was a start of another YUG according to hindu. That war was essential to eliminate bad from earth and initiate a new YUG on earth..
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by raj mazumder on Nov 26, 2007 10:36 PM Permalink
there are two things: theology and history. In 21st century people are educated they know history but still follow theology(believe blintly without asking any question). Those who believe in religion for them their religion is the best!! no one is born hindu, muslim, christan it is people(their parents,relatives) that make them believe what they believe. It is time to learn little bit of world history!! There won't be any religion, Everey one is created by one person i.e. all religion says that. Everyone adores one person in different name then why people have to fight for it. Be a good human being thats all.
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by shashank singh on Nov 26, 2007 10:43 PM Permalink
Gr8 thinking Mr Raj.... you are one of the few sensible people here!
RE:RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Lalu Prasad Yadav on Nov 27, 2007 02:47 AM Permalink
GREAT RAJ! I AGREE WITH YOU TOTALLY THAT IN THE DISCUSSION OF RELIGION, WE FORGET OUR HUMANITY. I TOTALLY ENDORSE THE VIEW THAT EACH ONE OF US SHOULD BE A GOOD, HELPFUL HUMAN BEING!
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by True Indian on Nov 26, 2007 10:41 PM Permalink
If she would have said these four points, hindus wd have still not countered her. Its time to realise the characterstics of hinduism. They are not coward but do not care about such trivial statements from an ordinary person. MF Hussain went beyond his limits by painting our goddess nude. Still he is not been hunted like poor Taslima. The truth is that muslims are still backward due to thier thinking. They can never rise above their religion and will always be the most hated community in this world. There were more illogical and bad practices like sati, animal sacrifice etc in Hinduism but with modern age they got over them (casteism still remains.. thanks to our political parties esp Congress). Muslim still go for multi marriages, fatwa, sacrifices, burka, no birth control etc. so they still remain backward. Mesage to my muslim brothers... come on change your outlook and move towards modernization
RE:RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Lalu Prasad Yadav on Nov 27, 2007 02:50 AM Permalink
How are birth control and burkha backward? If some women have the right to flaunt their bodies, then some other women should have a right to cover up as their conscience dictates. I fail to understand how this is regressive. In fact, it is very modern.
RE:Question to ALL Hindu Brothers...
by Raju Dalit on Nov 26, 2007 10:43 PM Permalink
Absolutely right Sir, is it not funny that some people can conveniently equate Tasleema with MF HUSSEINS insults?
What really did Danish Cartoon show? Nothin embarressing and blasfamous.
BUT SOME PEOPLE ALWAYS ARE LOOKING TO PICK UP A FIGHT, START A QUARREL AND START THE RIOTS.
this is a mentality of people totally dis-satisfied how they have fared thru the history.
We hindus have never tried to supress the muslims ever. See their history and nearly 20 millions have been butchered by them over the years and 10s of millions FORCIBLY converted.
These converted HINDUS some how find it as their duty to somehow DEFEND ISLAM and HURT HINDUS.
i just wonder what kind of indoctrinations these guys are going thru in the mosques and secret houses where very quiet but sinister meetings take place.
IF THERE IS ANY ONE WHO HAS CONCERNS AND ALSO HATRADE THEN IT IS HINDU TOWARD MUSLIMS, NOT THE OTHERWAY ROUND.
