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.
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.
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 ?
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."
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.
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. "
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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!!
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.
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.
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.
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.
