RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 08:11 AM Permalink
So, you are saying every muslim is a terrorist really because no matter their educational background or status in society, any practicing muslim is bound to violence because islam at its core exhorts violence. Right? Is that your thesis? So by that account, millions of muslims living in India and around a billion muslims worldwide at this moment are really planning and conspiring to blow up innocent people. Or at best silently applauding the killing of innocent and by doing so they are being model muslims; following in the path of their prophet who was made "victorious" through violence. So, why don't you prove this idea. There are hundreds of muslims around you. I mean look around you, look at the muslim celebrities in India and around the world. I mean every practicing muslim must be violent, must hate kafirs etc. Can you prove any of this garbage without throwing big arabic words around? Can you prove any of this. Look at the logic...every muslim must be violent naturally because this is what they are taught. Is that really so? Can you prove that? Don't you have any integrity whatsoever in your ideas?
RE:Where is the abuse?
by aatankvade ullah on Jul 31, 2008 08:14 AM Permalink
What happens when Muslims are in majority? Why are minorities killed and driven out? Pakistan and now kashmir...
RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 08:28 AM Permalink
If you are refering to Partition then are you telling me muslims were not killed and looted? Do you seriously want to write your own history to prove a point? You can certainly do so but what is the point of this grand debate when you can not back it up with integrity, logic and perhaps facts? You say under muslim majority, minorites are discriminated against, persecuted even; a point you are trying to make albeit very poorly. There are enough examples that under muslim rule, minority such as jews and christians lived peacefully...look at the islamic rule in spain. At the same time, I have no problems saying that discrimination happens in muslim majority countries much similar to discrimination against muslims in Maharashtra and much the same as discrimination against Indians under British Raj. Don't get violence as a religious creed which is an outlandish charge and discrimination mixed up. Discrimination is a social disease, a human disease that affects people of all religious background and ethnicity. Isn't there discrimination in hindu social structure as practiced in India to this date?
RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 08:56 AM Permalink
Is that really true? I mean you wrote that sentence that too with an exclamation point! But can you back it up with a fact? US is by far christian majority, europe as a whole is by far christian majority, Middle East is by far Muslim majority.... India is by far a hindu majority. You are not suggesting these countries became majority by mass killing of minorities? Not true.
RE:Where is the abuse?
by rolladesi on Jul 31, 2008 09:31 AM Permalink
Zameer - Search on the net for the terms "Hindus and Pakistan". Try the wikipedia link.
The increasing Islamisation of Pakistan and antagonism against a majority Hindu India has forced many Hindus to leave Hinduism and convert to other faiths such as Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. Such Islamisation include the blasphemy laws, which make it dangerous for religious minorities to express themselves freely and engage freely in religious and cultural activities. The promulgation of Sharia, Koranic law has also increased the marginalization of Hindus and other minorities.
RE:Where is the abuse?
by Devavrata Satya on Jul 31, 2008 08:55 AM Permalink
Of course Muslims were killed and looted during partition.
Jews and Christians are people of the book, and have to live as Dhimmis under Islam, with various conditions imposed on them. Same was the fate of Hindus in India.
Discrimination is universal. It does not need a religion.
But a religion like Islam clearly discriminates between Momin and Kafir. That itself is not what causes violence in its name. What causes the violence is Allah's instruction to that effect in the Quran, and the Prophet's own example.
Why has the percentage population of Hindus declined rapidly in Pakistan and Bangladesh, while that of Muslims in India has increased over the past 50 years?
There are religions where the important thing is not your belief, but your actions. Please do your own research on that.
Why would God need to create any discrimination? It is only a sectarian God, and not a universal God who would do that. A God who will reward those who worship him and punish those who refuse to believe in him is no better than a mafia boss.
A Kafir is someone who does not believe in Allah or in the prophethood of Muhammad i.e. anyone who refuses to say the Kalima. Please confirm with your local Imam and correct me if I am wrong.
Yes, Allah is Arabic for God, but this God is a very specific God, different from any of the Hindu Gods, or the Hindu understanding of the universal Brahman.
You express your disdain for the gods and goddesses the pre-Islamic Arabs had 'conjured up'. That is exactly in tune with Islam, which regards all other gods as 'conjured up', and the worshippers of those gods to be bound for eternal hell after death, and deserving domination by Muslims on earth. Have you ever stopped to consider that Allah might just be something Muhammad 'conjured up'?
The Prophet migrated out of Mecca himself; no one pushed him out. And it was he who broke the treaty, and not the Meccans. And that is just one incident. Muhammad also ordered the execution of 900 Jews of Banu Qurayza, and watched the slaughter. The point is that the Quran is not for a time and place - it is for all eternity. And so the hateful verses are used to justify Islamic violence today, and will continue to be so used.
I will believe what I read. My belief in something does not depend on who is saying it.
RE:RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 09:08 AM Permalink
Which religion does not discriminate between a believer and a non-believer? That's a discrimination created by God in any religion. Makes sense too. God created this world and all your life you kept chasing after everything but Him. He will discriminate as we aspire to discriminate between right and wrong. But let me clarify: a kafir is a non-believer not a non-muslim; no matter who tells you otherwise. And while at it, Allah is not a muslim God, it is simply God. Like bhagwan in hindi. And arab christian prays to Allah that is God much the same as muslims pray to God that is in arabic Allah. So, of course God in Islam discriminates between Momin, a believer and a Kafir, who rejects God. Then Allah's instructions for the newly converted muslims to fight; now whatever books you are reading apparently throws a very different light on that account. Most muslims will draw you to read quran in historical context and will tell you that muslims were heavily persecuted as a growing religion in Arabia because it directly would have destoryed Arab economy that was mostly based on plethora of Gods and Goddesses that they had conjured up. Prophet was pushed out of Mecca and then was able to draw a treaty for a cease fire that was broken by the meccans and that led to the whole war. Most muslims, whether you believe them or not will tell you a very different account of that. Who do you believe? Coward terrorists or law abiding muslims? It's late here and I am tired...ciao
Yes, that is exactly my thesis. Any Muslim who comes to acquire a true understanding of Islam, no matter their educational background or status in society, and wishes to follow its teachings, is duty-bound to convert Dar-ul-harb to Dar-ul-Islam by any means.
But that does not mean that all Muslims are conspiring to blow up innocent people. Most Muslims have no idea what the Quran says, because they simply recite it in Arabic, a language they do not know. They do not know the Hadiths which have detailed Sunnah of the Prophet. They are Muslims by birth, and just go about their lives as the rest of us.
You are asking me to prove what I do not believe and have never claimed.
All I am claiming is that Islam and the Prophet's own conduct are very clear on how Muslims should deal with Kafirs. If many Muslims are not following those teachings, it is because they do not understand Islam.
But my point is that the so-called radicals and extremists are the ones with a clear understanding of Islam, and they are the ones who put its teachings into practice. So it is Islam which must be questioned, because these Muslims are themselves as much victims of Islam as their targets.
RE:RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 08:43 AM Permalink
And who defines this obscure "true understanding" of Islam? Is there something called "true understanding" of hinduism or christianity that the world abides by that you can neatly package up and stamp a lable on a group of people? Of course, it is very convenient for you to say that this true understanding of Islam is attained by these spineless cowards because that supports your thesis. Simply put, majority of religious muslims around the world will tell you differently. In fact, they will flat out disagree with you that no I am a muslim and I don't think its necessary to be "duty bound" by any "killing of the kafirs" Says who? You throw obscure Quranic passages and hadiths and they will tell you no it doesn't mean that at all. Look the fact is these terrorists don't have mononpoly on what Islam means and what you ought to be duty bounded by. There are a billion muslims world wide and by far majority of them are not blood thirsty vampires. I don't deny that these terrorists are muslims and they are using religion as there argument to recruit and kill but if your thesis had any waters; not thousands but millions of muslims would be out blowing themselves up. That's just not true.
That is defined in the Quran and Hadiths. Those who understand them and really believe in them are true followers of Islam.
Who you call spineless cowards are those who have the real understanding of what Islam demands from them, and are willing and happy to give it. My thesis comes from this fact, and I am not stating this fact in order to support a premeditated thesis.
Yes, many religious Muslims will flat out deny that they are duty bound to strive against Kafirs, and that is precisely because they do not understand Islam. Islam does not give you the choice to pick and choose what you like and ignore the rest. The Quran is believed by Muslims to be directly dictated, word-for-word by Allah, the only true God, to Muhammad, the final messenger. If you will reject one thing, you have to reject the whole, for how can the supreme God of the universe be wrong about anything?
The Quran passages are not obscure - if anyone will say that they do not mean what they say, they are fooling only themselves.
As I have said before, many Muslims are content to just recite the Quran in Arabic without understanding it. Of course they are not bloodthirsty vampires. Many Muslims might be much better persons than many Hindus.
But those who understand Islam and believe what is teaches become the radicals and extremists.
Yes, because I can quote Quran and Hadiths, you have to accept my arguments. You can define your faith any way you like, but then it does not remain the Islam that I am questioning. If you believe your faith is something other than the one the Quran and Hadiths talk about, why should my questioning of Islam bother you?
Of course we can all get along fine. You should note that I have never attacked all Muslims like some other posters have. I make a distinction between the faith and the people who follow that faith. Islam is not conducive for people to get along together, because mutual acceptance is something alien to it. And for this reason, I am questioning it.
You do not have to blindly believe in what an Arab businessman claimed 1400 years ago. Think for yourself.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Where is the abuse?
by Zameer Rehmani on Jul 31, 2008 09:29 AM Permalink
I beg to differ. Understanding is a relative term here. In the end, its just their opinion vs the opinion of majority of the muslims. And to say that the majority of muslims don't understand Islam is but again only an opinion. So, nothing is bounded by absolutes here. I think that's where the trouble begins; when we start to define our perspective of the world in absolutes as if we know the mind of God. That's what these terrorists believe in. That's what you are really saying: no they are not real muslims; real muslims by definition will be violent. Is it true because you believe so? Of course not. In my world, that is my perspective, your thoughts and rationales are outright fundamentalist in their zeal and lacking any concrete foundation for ideas your espouse. I am a practicing, believing muslim and I don't like to be told I don't understand my own religion but you would have me beleive that I am a fake. I don't know my own faith and that my faith is defined by these criminals. Because you say so? Because you can quote quranic passages and hadiths to me?
You see its all relative. I have friends from all background and religious persuasion. We get along just fine. I don't look down upon them and I hope I have their love and respect. I am not the only one; in the midst of all this cacophony in India, my story is more common in every muhallah and city then here in New York.
The question is how we define our reality. Let someone else do it for us or thi
RE:RE:RE:RE:Where is the abuse?
by Devavrata Satya on Jul 31, 2008 11:05 AM Permalink
Mr. Rehmani,
It just so happens that the extremists' opinion is based on sound Islamic doctrine. The majority opinion does not matter because a) it is not in accordance with what Allah orders in the Quran and the Prophet's example and b) it is the extremist opinion that causes the violence.
I do not think you are fake - I think you are simply too nice a person to be violent to others, but at the same time, you seek to defend the beliefs you have been brought up with.
You can call me a fundamentalist, but I am not saying anything that the Quran is not saying. I am using Islam's own sources - Quran and Hadiths - to question it. If you question the foundation of my criticism, you question the foundation of Islam.
Of course you do not like to be told that you do not understand your own religion - no one likes being told that. Centuries ago, people believed that the earth was flat and did not like anyone telling them that it was in fact round. But facts are facts, and we have to come to terms with them.
