How did Hindus Become Vegetarians?
Murad A Baig February 29, 2008
#342 Posted by vengatramanan on March 23, 2008 9:13:25 pm
I came across P.T.Sreenivas Iyengar's book on 'History OF Tamils' and he too corroborates non-veg as the accepted diet of vedic Hindus (includes Brahmins and others). It seems Rhino's meat was the most desired and then came the preference for buffalo and cow. During the vedic period, he says, Hindus invoked several Gods and worshiped fire. Vedic Brahmins offered oblations to the fire and all the tedious mantras were practised during the vedic period. It was, according to P.T.S, during the agamika period Hindus adopted vegetarianism to counter Jainism's appeal, which goaded the youth to adopt a more challenging ascetic life-style. Jainam could have been the original torch-bearer of vegetarian diet. He says that it was during the agamik period where Hindus stopped doing yagams (worship by fire) and started to believe in a single God and temples. Earlier during the vedic period, people used to worship in open.
During the agamik period, God was treated like a human guest. People worshipped by offering food and human accoutrements as oblations. The offerings were eventually used by the worshippers themselves. When he says agamikas worshipped single God, curiously, he doesn't imply monotheism. Probably a single God was treated as the protaganist during the pujas. Saivam and Vaishnavam were the branches of agamika. Brahma lost his prominence during the agamika period.
P.S:- I believe Harimau should be knowing better.
During the agamik period, God was treated like a human guest. People worshipped by offering food and human accoutrements as oblations. The offerings were eventually used by the worshippers themselves. When he says agamikas worshipped single God, curiously, he doesn't imply monotheism. Probably a single God was treated as the protaganist during the pujas. Saivam and Vaishnavam were the branches of agamika. Brahma lost his prominence during the agamika period.
P.S:- I believe Harimau should be knowing better.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#341 Posted by sattar2 on March 10, 2008 12:12:04 pm
zee (#338),
”… I had asked an avowed murtid how come murtids attack Muslims so much? …I suspect it is because murtids feel threatened by Islam”
It’s the same with the ummah attacking Ahmadis. Ponder over this; therein lies the answer to your query.
#340 Posted by akcheema on March 7, 2008 11:25:13 pm
Re: # 338
The question is actually very easy Zeemax; maybe nobody thought it was worth answering. I’ll detail it as follows:
1 – It is completely natural to first talk about one’s understanding of the faith system one has left. One obviously has problems with that system, otherwise no reson for dissent.
2 – It is NOT EXCLUSIVE to ex-muslims; In the 20th century, with a hangover of victorian values, it took Bertrand Russell a book “why I am not a christian” to explain his reasons for leaving; several other examples too (Edwina Curry – Judaism, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, your favourite Dr Einstein! and many others – christianity/Judaism). If their was no intellectual conflict then why leave?
3 – It is only “just become possible” for people that left Islam to speak of their reasons; sometimes due to the anonymity of the world wide web, sometimes protection etc in the west.
4 – By and large today, dissent is much better tolerated in any other major faith system than Islam. Until recently, one was automatically “wajib-ul-qatl”. People leave their faiths all the time, especially in the west, they don’t face any major repercussions as a result; surely not a death sentence.
5 – Some of the main reasons for dissent are intellectual and moral (it may surprise you!). Those conditions continue to exist and make lives miserable in the part of the world one belongs; other members of family especially women, lack of intellectual freedom, lack of social justice.....reasons are innumerable.....On, naturally wants those conditions to change for their loved ones, on seeing them go through life with the same baggage, especially after one has seen the freedom it has given them to pursue life fully.
It could go on..... If you had read my first couple of interacts on this site, you wouldn’t have asked this question.
The question is actually very easy Zeemax; maybe nobody thought it was worth answering. I’ll detail it as follows:
1 – It is completely natural to first talk about one’s understanding of the faith system one has left. One obviously has problems with that system, otherwise no reson for dissent.
2 – It is NOT EXCLUSIVE to ex-muslims; In the 20th century, with a hangover of victorian values, it took Bertrand Russell a book “why I am not a christian” to explain his reasons for leaving; several other examples too (Edwina Curry – Judaism, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, your favourite Dr Einstein! and many others – christianity/Judaism). If their was no intellectual conflict then why leave?
3 – It is only “just become possible” for people that left Islam to speak of their reasons; sometimes due to the anonymity of the world wide web, sometimes protection etc in the west.
4 – By and large today, dissent is much better tolerated in any other major faith system than Islam. Until recently, one was automatically “wajib-ul-qatl”. People leave their faiths all the time, especially in the west, they don’t face any major repercussions as a result; surely not a death sentence.
5 – Some of the main reasons for dissent are intellectual and moral (it may surprise you!). Those conditions continue to exist and make lives miserable in the part of the world one belongs; other members of family especially women, lack of intellectual freedom, lack of social justice.....reasons are innumerable.....On, naturally wants those conditions to change for their loved ones, on seeing them go through life with the same baggage, especially after one has seen the freedom it has given them to pursue life fully.
It could go on..... If you had read my first couple of interacts on this site, you wouldn’t have asked this question.
#339 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 10:36:59 pm
Re: # 338
"..t it is because murtids feel threatened by Islam particularly,"
Not surprising since the consequences of being a murtid is horrible ranging from limb decapitation to death by mob lynching.!!
"..t it is because murtids feel threatened by Islam particularly,"
Not surprising since the consequences of being a murtid is horrible ranging from limb decapitation to death by mob lynching.!!
#338 Posted by zeemax on March 7, 2008 10:27:48 pm
#334 Posted by dost_mittar
akcheema#330:"I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place"
I had asked an avowed murtid how come murtids attack Muslims so much? If there wasn't a God to them, so be it. Why do they have to run around gathering material to try to prove there isn't one when Muslims don't care a damn whether murtids believe there is one or not?
As expected, I never received a reply. But I suspect it is because murtids feel threatened by Islam particularly, and not the concept of religion in general.
akcheema#330:"I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place"
I had asked an avowed murtid how come murtids attack Muslims so much? If there wasn't a God to them, so be it. Why do they have to run around gathering material to try to prove there isn't one when Muslims don't care a damn whether murtids believe there is one or not?
As expected, I never received a reply. But I suspect it is because murtids feel threatened by Islam particularly, and not the concept of religion in general.
#337 Posted by Eklavya on March 7, 2008 10:17:47 pm
beej bhrata, despite my best efforts to corrupt your mind for the longest time, you don't accept the simple truth: 'ordinary' people of different religious groups are NOT the same.
You are just too impressed by the fact that everyone gets up in the morning, and takes a crap (hopefully). :)
You are just too impressed by the fact that everyone gets up in the morning, and takes a crap (hopefully). :)
#336 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 10:12:55 pm
Re: # 330
"I'd also like to say to Laddu (just like Hamidm did before); if us muslims desire for our prophet (and his camel) to be insulted, we should be the ones organising it!"
Cheema ji,
I would accept this as a politically correct statement for an insider to make. But for an outsider who bears the maximum brunt of Mohammad inspired violence I would beg to differ. Unless and kafirs and idolators start making noises and stop paying lip service to Mohammadeans and acting like dhimmis I do not see GENUINE moderate voices like your getting any importance.
Genuine moderates needs vociferous and noisy responses from kafirs and idolators if they have to succeed in obtaining a consensus on ultimately discarding the Medina verses from Quran !!
"I'd also like to say to Laddu (just like Hamidm did before); if us muslims desire for our prophet (and his camel) to be insulted, we should be the ones organising it!"
Cheema ji,
I would accept this as a politically correct statement for an insider to make. But for an outsider who bears the maximum brunt of Mohammad inspired violence I would beg to differ. Unless and kafirs and idolators start making noises and stop paying lip service to Mohammadeans and acting like dhimmis I do not see GENUINE moderate voices like your getting any importance.
Genuine moderates needs vociferous and noisy responses from kafirs and idolators if they have to succeed in obtaining a consensus on ultimately discarding the Medina verses from Quran !!
#335 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 9:55:54 pm
Re: # 331
Sindhu Sharma ji,
Since you are a brave person , you must attempt the sadhana I have prescribed.
May the Leader of Ganas lead the Gana to the path of peace and lightness.,.
Just remember the attitude when you do the Japa after Avahanam of Ganapati in the muladhara-
" What is outside is inside as well".
This statement is the crux of all Hindu Sadhanas!
Sindhu Sharma ji,
Since you are a brave person , you must attempt the sadhana I have prescribed.
May the Leader of Ganas lead the Gana to the path of peace and lightness.,.
Just remember the attitude when you do the Japa after Avahanam of Ganapati in the muladhara-
" What is outside is inside as well".
This statement is the crux of all Hindu Sadhanas!
#334 Posted by dost_mittar on March 7, 2008 9:33:48 pm
akcheema#330:
"I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place"
...but you should (criticise other religions, too); if you do not respect your own religion, why should you be expected to respect someone else's?
As for characters on chowk, some are real (and also known p;ersonally to other chowkies) and others are phony); after you spend some time, you will undoubtedly come to know them better and form your own opinions about them. Chowk also has an option of getting in touch with individual chowkis if they want to be "your friends".
"I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place"
...but you should (criticise other religions, too); if you do not respect your own religion, why should you be expected to respect someone else's?
As for characters on chowk, some are real (and also known p;ersonally to other chowkies) and others are phony); after you spend some time, you will undoubtedly come to know them better and form your own opinions about them. Chowk also has an option of getting in touch with individual chowkis if they want to be "your friends".
#333 Posted by bjkumar on March 7, 2008 9:18:28 pm
Akcheema, since you are taking input from non-believers, here is mine:
1) Islam is a religion – like many other religions of the world.
2) It has its good stuff and it has its bad stuff, too!
3) Most Muslims are ordinary folks who – like most other people of the world, are not too concerned with the detailed stuff inside (good or bad) and are in that religion because of – like followers of most other faiths – the accident of birth.
4) Unlike most contemporary religions (but like many other religions when those were relatively new), it does not tolerate dissidence well. And those who get DEEP into it – tolerate even less – unlike its ordinary folks most of who do not get deep into it. The deeper one gets – the more difficult it becomes to dig out. Those who try to bring in “flexible interpretations” are immediately shouted down and threatened (be they from inside or outside) and they shut up. (The way some individuals are denouncing the Mirzaees on this board is a current example!) Those who do not shut up get fatwas issued against them and then assaulted or killed for apostasy.
5) Those who issue such fatwas and otherwise keep control have no incentive to let go because they like the power! They instead work to further consolidate this power. There are many among the rest who are too chicken to challenge the setup and instead find it more convenient to deny the problems.
6) That sort of setup keeps the population at large back in other parts of life – education, women’s emancipation, and everything else that follows from those two – including progress in the Arts and Sciences.
Note: This is how I see it, mostly based on the (wishy-washy) Pakistanis on this website. I am not an authority on that religion and am unlikely to become one in the foreseeable future – perhaps not in (this) lifetime!
1) Islam is a religion – like many other religions of the world.
2) It has its good stuff and it has its bad stuff, too!
3) Most Muslims are ordinary folks who – like most other people of the world, are not too concerned with the detailed stuff inside (good or bad) and are in that religion because of – like followers of most other faiths – the accident of birth.
4) Unlike most contemporary religions (but like many other religions when those were relatively new), it does not tolerate dissidence well. And those who get DEEP into it – tolerate even less – unlike its ordinary folks most of who do not get deep into it. The deeper one gets – the more difficult it becomes to dig out. Those who try to bring in “flexible interpretations” are immediately shouted down and threatened (be they from inside or outside) and they shut up. (The way some individuals are denouncing the Mirzaees on this board is a current example!) Those who do not shut up get fatwas issued against them and then assaulted or killed for apostasy.
5) Those who issue such fatwas and otherwise keep control have no incentive to let go because they like the power! They instead work to further consolidate this power. There are many among the rest who are too chicken to challenge the setup and instead find it more convenient to deny the problems.
6) That sort of setup keeps the population at large back in other parts of life – education, women’s emancipation, and everything else that follows from those two – including progress in the Arts and Sciences.
Note: This is how I see it, mostly based on the (wishy-washy) Pakistanis on this website. I am not an authority on that religion and am unlikely to become one in the foreseeable future – perhaps not in (this) lifetime!
#332 Posted by bjkumar on March 7, 2008 8:44:43 pm
I must admit it is kind of fun to watch this HP make an ass out of himself again!
And, as the icing - he also has to say "sorry"!
A sorry ass, indeed!
#331 Posted by HP on March 7, 2008 8:40:00 pm
#330 Posted by akcheema
A decent comeback! I am sorry I used some indecent words there. You are new and possibly couldn't get the motives behind that serial offender and the RSS member's posts.
Most of the Indians on this site are of RSS and Hindutva bend and that includes the ones who would deny even being hindu.
People like dost_mittat and anil can't hide their affiliations despite the lip service to some lofty desires.
Keep posting. You write good stuff and ask the right questions.
A decent comeback! I am sorry I used some indecent words there. You are new and possibly couldn't get the motives behind that serial offender and the RSS member's posts.
Most of the Indians on this site are of RSS and Hindutva bend and that includes the ones who would deny even being hindu.
People like dost_mittat and anil can't hide their affiliations despite the lip service to some lofty desires.
Keep posting. You write good stuff and ask the right questions.
#330 Posted by akcheema on March 7, 2008 7:52:40 pm
Re: # 324
Thanks but your contribution IS important. The reason being that it is likely to be a "common sense" and dispassionate approach that would almost be impossible to get from a "submitter", or should it be "submittee"?
The AlephNull affair is irrelevant; its a pseudonym any way. The rhetoric IS genuine though as its not the first time I have faced it; things needed to be said and so they were. The "actual personality" behind things matters less; that could be said about all of us!! How do I know you ARE (i.e., Dost_Mitter) who you say you are?!
I'd also like to say to Laddu (just like Hamidm did before); if us muslims desire for our prophet (and his camel) to be insulted, we should be the ones organising it! Like I pointed out many a times, the only reason I criticise Islam is because it is part of MY heritage. I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place.
Thanks but your contribution IS important. The reason being that it is likely to be a "common sense" and dispassionate approach that would almost be impossible to get from a "submitter", or should it be "submittee"?
The AlephNull affair is irrelevant; its a pseudonym any way. The rhetoric IS genuine though as its not the first time I have faced it; things needed to be said and so they were. The "actual personality" behind things matters less; that could be said about all of us!! How do I know you ARE (i.e., Dost_Mitter) who you say you are?!
I'd also like to say to Laddu (just like Hamidm did before); if us muslims desire for our prophet (and his camel) to be insulted, we should be the ones organising it! Like I pointed out many a times, the only reason I criticise Islam is because it is part of MY heritage. I can equally crticise christianity, judaism, hinduism etc but that is not my place.
#329 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 7:40:33 pm
Re: # 322
sindhu sharma ji,
Namaskar,
Yeh mullah-gardi karne wallon to aise hi patka jaata hai.
Vaise there is a very important upasana for you-
1. Take a Ganesh idol.
2. Do Praan-Pratishta in Northern/North East part of your house.
3. Start Shoodo-pachara pujan of the moorti.
4. After aavahanam when you start the Japa of Ganapati Mantra imagine that Ganapati is situated in the Mooladhara Chakra of your body.
5. Now recite the mantra with the attitude that "What is outside is also inside you" while keeping the mind fixed on the mooladhara chakra.
6. Recite 108 times the ganapati mantra with this attitude.
7. After Japa complete the Shodapochar Pujan of Ganapati.
Lord Gana-pati would indeed release the trapped energies in the muladhara and bring bliss to your mind.
Let there be peace.
Om shanti Shanti!!
Baaki aap ki marzi!!
sindhu sharma ji,
Namaskar,
Yeh mullah-gardi karne wallon to aise hi patka jaata hai.
Vaise there is a very important upasana for you-
1. Take a Ganesh idol.
2. Do Praan-Pratishta in Northern/North East part of your house.
3. Start Shoodo-pachara pujan of the moorti.
4. After aavahanam when you start the Japa of Ganapati Mantra imagine that Ganapati is situated in the Mooladhara Chakra of your body.
5. Now recite the mantra with the attitude that "What is outside is also inside you" while keeping the mind fixed on the mooladhara chakra.
6. Recite 108 times the ganapati mantra with this attitude.
7. After Japa complete the Shodapochar Pujan of Ganapati.
Lord Gana-pati would indeed release the trapped energies in the muladhara and bring bliss to your mind.
Let there be peace.
Om shanti Shanti!!
Baaki aap ki marzi!!
#328 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2008 6:40:56 pm
that should be: hinduism turns fine lads into laddus.
#327 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2008 6:40:08 pm
#326 hp: hinduism turns fine lads in laddus. mullahism turns fine lads like naqsh into kaddus. :-(
#326 Posted by HP on March 7, 2008 6:37:21 pm
#323 Posted by tahmed32
You were too hasty there! That was not Pundit Laddu Maharaj. He was actually quoting alepo's post there who copied that from Naqash!
You were too hasty there! That was not Pundit Laddu Maharaj. He was actually quoting alepo's post there who copied that from Naqash!
#325 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2008 6:35:26 pm
further to #323 ok. never mind laddu. i just googled, and google took me straight to Naqshandhi's ilog on chowk. Where bro Naqshbandhi approvingly quotes this from omar khayyam.
#324 Posted by dost_mittar on March 7, 2008 6:35:07 pm
akcheema#298:
My "take" on this issue is irrelevant since I have not "submitted". The purpose of my response was to affirm that, to the believer, islam does provide the answer to your question. In the same vein, I would say that He did send the same message over and over again, the only difference is that he did not put in place the same safeguards. Why did he not put the same safeguards earlier? well, the believer cannot of course say that He erred earlier, all he would say is, "Allah knows best".
Anyways, this is my take. But a believer would perhaps have a more satisfactory explanation.
[Re. your response to alephnull, you are new here and it will take some time to recognize the cast of characters and their styles:)]
My "take" on this issue is irrelevant since I have not "submitted". The purpose of my response was to affirm that, to the believer, islam does provide the answer to your question. In the same vein, I would say that He did send the same message over and over again, the only difference is that he did not put in place the same safeguards. Why did he not put the same safeguards earlier? well, the believer cannot of course say that He erred earlier, all he would say is, "Allah knows best".
Anyways, this is my take. But a believer would perhaps have a more satisfactory explanation.
[Re. your response to alephnull, you are new here and it will take some time to recognize the cast of characters and their styles:)]
#323 Posted by tahmed32 on March 7, 2008 6:32:31 pm
HP: you have to admit laddu got it right this time. This arby sand has indeed blinded too many muslim brothers. :-(
Laddu child: Who is the poet?
Laddu child: Who is the poet?
#322 Posted by HP on March 7, 2008 6:16:07 pm
#321 Posted by laddu
#286 Posted by akcheema
Pundit Laddu Maharaj and chacha Cheema,
Aap dunoo hazarat ko ik penchoud ulloo bana raha hai!
This AlephNull aka ahole, alepho and many other nics, is a certified member of Shiv Sena and RSS both! Yes, he is the only Hindu on this site who will be enshrined as the hindu of the hindus.
You two have been really out of your mind or taken a break from your senses to not see the word play there!
Pundit Laddu Maharaj, I had accepted Hinduism and ba’it farmayee thi aap kay haath per because I thought you were the most learned and the smartest Hindu on this site and I will directly have access to Brahmin caste and you promised me that too. But now, alas, I have to revert back to my atheism as you have clearly shown that you are perhaps as big an ulloo as alepho is, who made you look like a cho-tia so easily!
Your former follower,
Sandhi Sharma!
Cheema chacha,
Hain kawakob Kutch, nazar aatay hai Kutch!
This site is not for simple minded folks. You got to check a person’s background via his previous posts before starting your innocent responses. You looked so dumb there.
Alpo, can't let you have fun on this site. hehehehe!
Game is over!
#286 Posted by akcheema
Pundit Laddu Maharaj and chacha Cheema,
Aap dunoo hazarat ko ik penchoud ulloo bana raha hai!
This AlephNull aka ahole, alepho and many other nics, is a certified member of Shiv Sena and RSS both! Yes, he is the only Hindu on this site who will be enshrined as the hindu of the hindus.
You two have been really out of your mind or taken a break from your senses to not see the word play there!
Pundit Laddu Maharaj, I had accepted Hinduism and ba’it farmayee thi aap kay haath per because I thought you were the most learned and the smartest Hindu on this site and I will directly have access to Brahmin caste and you promised me that too. But now, alas, I have to revert back to my atheism as you have clearly shown that you are perhaps as big an ulloo as alepho is, who made you look like a cho-tia so easily!
Your former follower,
Sandhi Sharma!
Cheema chacha,
Hain kawakob Kutch, nazar aatay hai Kutch!
This site is not for simple minded folks. You got to check a person’s background via his previous posts before starting your innocent responses. You looked so dumb there.
Alpo, can't let you have fun on this site. hehehehe!
Game is over!
#321 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 5:50:14 pm
Re: # 314
"Khaira na kar saka mujhe jalwa e danish e Farang
Surma hai meri aankh ka khaak e Madina o Najaf.
(The glare of Western sciences could not confuse my vision,
For the dust of Najaf and Medina is the collyrium of my eyes.)"
More Arabian land and Bedioun culture arse licking. Islamism is indeed Arabian Imperialism. The "dust of najaf and median" is more precious than all sciences........ that is simply hilarious!!
"Khaira na kar saka mujhe jalwa e danish e Farang
Surma hai meri aankh ka khaak e Madina o Najaf.
(The glare of Western sciences could not confuse my vision,
For the dust of Najaf and Medina is the collyrium of my eyes.)"
More Arabian land and Bedioun culture arse licking. Islamism is indeed Arabian Imperialism. The "dust of najaf and median" is more precious than all sciences........ that is simply hilarious!!
#320 Posted by bjkumar on March 7, 2008 5:46:52 pm
I absolutely support the Mirzaees' (or anybody else's) right to call themselves Muslims (or Mussalmans or Mohammedans or any other equivalent term) if they wish to.
The term "Muslim" is not copyrighted and is not anybody's baap ki bapauti!
It is kind of fun to watch this multinick creature who calls himself Salim Chauhan go through all his evolutions and finally end up - like the Jinnah - hobnobbing with the jihadis!
Shame on this creature - and shame on this pathetic website for promoting hatred!
The term "Muslim" is not copyrighted and is not anybody's baap ki bapauti!
It is kind of fun to watch this multinick creature who calls himself Salim Chauhan go through all his evolutions and finally end up - like the Jinnah - hobnobbing with the jihadis!
Shame on this creature - and shame on this pathetic website for promoting hatred!
#319 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 5:46:23 pm
Re: # 314
"You should be employing your energies and your formidable dialectical skills to advance the cause of Islam, not to erect roadblocks in its path. Did not our Noble Prophet Muhammad (SAW) himself say that the ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr?"
Phir se Khooni Dhamki deta hai?
If Mohammad said that suicide bombers are more sacred than those who insist upon the path of dialogue and reason then he indeed a criminal maniac who should be incarcerated for ever!! Nay! Banished from the face of earth for inciting and inculcating hatred and violence on earth!!
"You should be employing your energies and your formidable dialectical skills to advance the cause of Islam, not to erect roadblocks in its path. Did not our Noble Prophet Muhammad (SAW) himself say that the ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr?"
Phir se Khooni Dhamki deta hai?
If Mohammad said that suicide bombers are more sacred than those who insist upon the path of dialogue and reason then he indeed a criminal maniac who should be incarcerated for ever!! Nay! Banished from the face of earth for inciting and inculcating hatred and violence on earth!!
#318 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 5:40:37 pm
Re: # 314
"I am grieved to see that you willfully persist in the sinful folly of apostasy. You are not merely destined for jahannum yourself -- you are gravely endangering the akhirat of impressionable young Muslims through your slick anti-Islamic sophistry! You are the worst kind of murtid – the proselytizing kind!"
Abey , Ulte Sir ke Jinn!! Dhamki aur Gaali kya deta hai!! Tere jaisee bahut Gunde sahi kiye hai humne......
"I am grieved to see that you willfully persist in the sinful folly of apostasy. You are not merely destined for jahannum yourself -- you are gravely endangering the akhirat of impressionable young Muslims through your slick anti-Islamic sophistry! You are the worst kind of murtid – the proselytizing kind!"
Abey , Ulte Sir ke Jinn!! Dhamki aur Gaali kya deta hai!! Tere jaisee bahut Gunde sahi kiye hai humne......
#317 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 5:34:28 pm
Re: # 314
"If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator"
I have my petrol cannisters and pig skin ready!!!
"If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator"
I have my petrol cannisters and pig skin ready!!!
#316 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 5:32:23 pm
Re: # 314
"You are indeed the vilest of the idolatrous Hindu infidels. If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator"
Maulavi Alif-Null Saheb,
Aap waakai mein akal se NIL hain . Go and read Shahi Hadith if you want to know the true character of Mohammad. He raped women on the same night they were grieving for the death of their husbands and their family members. And he called those hurriedly taken 'forced-consent' under coercion of those captive women living under fear of their lives as "marriage".
It is my time to say - Tauba astaghfirullah!
"You are indeed the vilest of the idolatrous Hindu infidels. If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator"
Maulavi Alif-Null Saheb,
Aap waakai mein akal se NIL hain . Go and read Shahi Hadith if you want to know the true character of Mohammad. He raped women on the same night they were grieving for the death of their husbands and their family members. And he called those hurriedly taken 'forced-consent' under coercion of those captive women living under fear of their lives as "marriage".
It is my time to say - Tauba astaghfirullah!
#315 Posted by sattar2 on March 7, 2008 4:32:02 pm
Bhatti Sahib (#304),
I have seen several excerpts - from the writings of Promised Messiah and Ahmadi-leadership - which were misquoted, mistranslated, or quoted out of context by those who wanted to incite hatred against Ahmadis. But upon quoting the full paragraph, the objections fizzled out. I suspect the same here … and that’s why I asked you what I asked you.
You initially downplayed the issue, then hinted that you got this from your Ahamdi friends, and now it is becoming obvious that you got this from an anti-Ahmadi source. Nothing wrong with it … but be careful trusting a short, choppy quote that may very well be out of context.
#314 Posted by AlephNull on March 7, 2008 4:15:20 pm
laddu #295, #289, #287
Tauba astaghfirullah! You are indeed the vilest of the idolatrous Hindu infidels. If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator!
akcheema #296
I am grieved to see that you willfully persist in the sinful folly of apostasy. You are not merely destined for jahannum yourself -- you are gravely endangering the akhirat of impressionable young Muslims through your slick anti-Islamic sophistry! You are the worst kind of murtid – the proselytizing kind!
Alas, you have been misled by your exposure to Western science and by your hubristic pride in your own intellect. Know then that Western science has uncovered only an infinitesimal fraction of the truth that is known to Allah SWT, of which much more can be glimpsed by a thorough study of the Majestic Quran and through the Islamic occult sciences. You should be employing your energies and your formidable dialectical skills to advance the cause of Islam, not to erect roadblocks in its path. Did not our Noble Prophet Muhammad (SAW) himself say that the ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr?
Verily, there is neither guts nor glory in apostasy! Cheema sahib, it is still not too late to repent of your hubris, recant from your apostasy and revert to the Straight Path which is Islam!
In conclusion let me leave you with the immortal words of Allama Muhammad Iqbal Lahori, patron saint of Pakistan:
Khaira na kar saka mujhe jalwa e danish e Farang
Surma hai meri aankh ka khaak e Madina o Najaf.
(The glare of Western sciences could not confuse my vision,
For the dust of Najaf and Medina is the collyrium of my eyes.)
Reflect on these words and you may yet see the light of Truth.
Tauba astaghfirullah! You are indeed the vilest of the idolatrous Hindu infidels. If you were before me I would strike off your head for blaspheming against our Beloved Nabi. Begone, infidelator!
akcheema #296
I am grieved to see that you willfully persist in the sinful folly of apostasy. You are not merely destined for jahannum yourself -- you are gravely endangering the akhirat of impressionable young Muslims through your slick anti-Islamic sophistry! You are the worst kind of murtid – the proselytizing kind!
Alas, you have been misled by your exposure to Western science and by your hubristic pride in your own intellect. Know then that Western science has uncovered only an infinitesimal fraction of the truth that is known to Allah SWT, of which much more can be glimpsed by a thorough study of the Majestic Quran and through the Islamic occult sciences. You should be employing your energies and your formidable dialectical skills to advance the cause of Islam, not to erect roadblocks in its path. Did not our Noble Prophet Muhammad (SAW) himself say that the ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr?
Verily, there is neither guts nor glory in apostasy! Cheema sahib, it is still not too late to repent of your hubris, recant from your apostasy and revert to the Straight Path which is Islam!
In conclusion let me leave you with the immortal words of Allama Muhammad Iqbal Lahori, patron saint of Pakistan:
Khaira na kar saka mujhe jalwa e danish e Farang
Surma hai meri aankh ka khaak e Madina o Najaf.
(The glare of Western sciences could not confuse my vision,
For the dust of Najaf and Medina is the collyrium of my eyes.)
Reflect on these words and you may yet see the light of Truth.
#313 Posted by hamidm2 on March 7, 2008 1:52:16 pm
Re: # 308
salim mian,
is that you ? ........... life is full of surprises
salim mian,
is that you ? ........... life is full of surprises
#312 Posted by sattar2 on March 7, 2008 1:43:46 pm
Urstruly (#302);
C’mon, you’re being too harsh now. The “flying prophets” issue has rattled the cage … zee is denying it … while you are pointificating time dilation and relativity theory to explain it all. And all along kaal bhai has been trying to maintain a straight face - lol …
(kaal bhai, … denial is a river in Egypt …)
+++
Salim bhai,
I don’t know about the ’71 PAF issue. Maybe it was namaz time during the dog-fight … and all the Mirzai pilots decided to face kaaba in unison; what can I say? Question now is … who was the asshole who gave azaan on the communication radio …?
C’mon, you’re being too harsh now. The “flying prophets” issue has rattled the cage … zee is denying it … while you are pointificating time dilation and relativity theory to explain it all. And all along kaal bhai has been trying to maintain a straight face - lol …
(kaal bhai, … denial is a river in Egypt …)
+++
Salim bhai,
I don’t know about the ’71 PAF issue. Maybe it was namaz time during the dog-fight … and all the Mirzai pilots decided to face kaaba in unison; what can I say? Question now is … who was the asshole who gave azaan on the communication radio …?
#311 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on March 7, 2008 12:15:01 pm
Sattar Sahib,
With all due respect, sir, Muslims do not insist on being called Jews or Christians. If Ahmedis called themselves something else, I would have no problem with them, just like I do not care one way or another about Bahaais - in fact they are pretty decent people, but they are NOT Muslims nor do they claim to be.
With all due respect, sir, Muslims do not insist on being called Jews or Christians. If Ahmedis called themselves something else, I would have no problem with them, just like I do not care one way or another about Bahaais - in fact they are pretty decent people, but they are NOT Muslims nor do they claim to be.
#310 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on March 7, 2008 12:12:30 pm
Sattar Sahib,
Your good nature and polite behavior is certainly very different from the Mirzaees we encounter on UP. However, sir, it makes me very sad that Ahmedis insist on being called Muslims and yet usually go to extremes in their profanity and insults against the very man who blessed us with Islam. May Allah protect and exalt the name of our Holy Prophet (PBUH), the Seal of ALL Prophets. Ameen.
Your good nature and polite behavior is certainly very different from the Mirzaees we encounter on UP. However, sir, it makes me very sad that Ahmedis insist on being called Muslims and yet usually go to extremes in their profanity and insults against the very man who blessed us with Islam. May Allah protect and exalt the name of our Holy Prophet (PBUH), the Seal of ALL Prophets. Ameen.
#309 Posted by krbhatti on March 7, 2008 12:10:03 pm
Re: # 306
Sir ji,
Yes we will go in circles because you choose to ignore vital facts that i presented like:
1) Mulsims consider you non muslims, while consider shias as muslims, so no analogy between both.
2) Ahmadiah founders consider non ahmadis as distinct from non ahmadias.
3) Despite the faith explanation that Islam contain significant material which is like Judo/christian traditions because the original message is the same, even if I agree to you plagiarism accusation, Muhammad (PBHU) never interfered with other religion by declaring them outside of their religion (how funny it would have been), but that is the starting point of ahmadism.
So unless you do not consider above facts with open mind, the, yes sir; we'll go in circles.....
Again as far as material is concerned, I gave you the sources already. Why you are concerned as to how I got it????
So bye, and chill out and peace.....
Sir ji,
Yes we will go in circles because you choose to ignore vital facts that i presented like:
1) Mulsims consider you non muslims, while consider shias as muslims, so no analogy between both.
2) Ahmadiah founders consider non ahmadis as distinct from non ahmadias.
3) Despite the faith explanation that Islam contain significant material which is like Judo/christian traditions because the original message is the same, even if I agree to you plagiarism accusation, Muhammad (PBHU) never interfered with other religion by declaring them outside of their religion (how funny it would have been), but that is the starting point of ahmadism.
So unless you do not consider above facts with open mind, the, yes sir; we'll go in circles.....
Again as far as material is concerned, I gave you the sources already. Why you are concerned as to how I got it????
So bye, and chill out and peace.....
#308 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on March 7, 2008 12:08:45 pm
I used to support Mirzaees' right to call themselves Muslim because I felt that Islam is an open religion that welcomes everyone. Also, I admired their emphasis on education and community awareness.
Having observed Qutubuddin Bukbuk's behavior, I started doing some research and discovered why these heretics piss off normal everyday Muslims - including Sunnys, Shias, Smileys, and even some stray Maharishis and Jehova's Witnesses.
Why would anyone insist on being a part of a religion whose founder they disrespect? Don't tell me that Mirzaees have any respect for our Holy Prophet (PBUH). On numerous occasions I have witnessed the Bukbuk boys use very profane words for him.
Secondly, as a Paki I find it reprehensible that these munaqfiqs used their positions of power to undermine Pakistan and its security. In the '71 war, for some reason (probably nepotism) Mirzaees were in command of the PAF - and we all know its dismal performance during that debacle.
In almost every part of the world, these charlatans have allied themselves against the enemies of Islam. As if this was not bad enough, they spread their phony message of "reform" to confuse the minds of young people in areas of the world where Islam has vulnerable foundations - e.g. Bosnia, sub-Saharan Africa, US, and UK.
We need to discredit these cancerous parasites and ensure that they are never mistaken as Muslims. May God punish them for their perfidy and treason.
Having observed Qutubuddin Bukbuk's behavior, I started doing some research and discovered why these heretics piss off normal everyday Muslims - including Sunnys, Shias, Smileys, and even some stray Maharishis and Jehova's Witnesses.
Why would anyone insist on being a part of a religion whose founder they disrespect? Don't tell me that Mirzaees have any respect for our Holy Prophet (PBUH). On numerous occasions I have witnessed the Bukbuk boys use very profane words for him.
Secondly, as a Paki I find it reprehensible that these munaqfiqs used their positions of power to undermine Pakistan and its security. In the '71 war, for some reason (probably nepotism) Mirzaees were in command of the PAF - and we all know its dismal performance during that debacle.
In almost every part of the world, these charlatans have allied themselves against the enemies of Islam. As if this was not bad enough, they spread their phony message of "reform" to confuse the minds of young people in areas of the world where Islam has vulnerable foundations - e.g. Bosnia, sub-Saharan Africa, US, and UK.
We need to discredit these cancerous parasites and ensure that they are never mistaken as Muslims. May God punish them for their perfidy and treason.
#307 Posted by Salim_Chauhan on March 7, 2008 12:06:25 pm
#303 Sattar2 {"So shias and sunnis don’t have disputes … but are killing each other anyway. And you have a problem with Ahamdis? Sahib, since you raised the issue of violence, violence is indeed relevant. And you can find nothing against Ahamdis ..."}
Sattar Sahib,
Please don't use one set of misfortunes to justify a worse case of insidious damage to Islam. People fight, people kill, and people die. But it is very rare that a certain group of people start a "movement" to sabotage the very institution that they claim to be a part of.
Sattar Sahib,
Please don't use one set of misfortunes to justify a worse case of insidious damage to Islam. People fight, people kill, and people die. But it is very rare that a certain group of people start a "movement" to sabotage the very institution that they claim to be a part of.
#306 Posted by sattar2 on March 7, 2008 11:56:41 am
Bhatti Sahib,
Once again: If you are concerned with violence, you cannot ignore shia-sunni issues. Note that you raised the issue of violence … but can find nothing against Ahamdis.
This stealing business has been going on for ages. If your view is that … “it is OK for Muslims to steal/borrow/copy, since their religion is the true one”, note that Ahmadi-Muslims say the same.
You did not answer my question: Where did you get the material you posted in #230? Give no hints ... but a straight answer ...
Ahmadi-Muslims could publish the records of 1974 hearings, but it will not serve any purpose. While you are at it, ponder over what the government is hiding.
+++
Looks like we are going in circles … so I’ll end this from my side, esp. if you merely repeat the same points.
Once again: If you are concerned with violence, you cannot ignore shia-sunni issues. Note that you raised the issue of violence … but can find nothing against Ahamdis.
This stealing business has been going on for ages. If your view is that … “it is OK for Muslims to steal/borrow/copy, since their religion is the true one”, note that Ahmadi-Muslims say the same.
You did not answer my question: Where did you get the material you posted in #230? Give no hints ... but a straight answer ...
Ahmadi-Muslims could publish the records of 1974 hearings, but it will not serve any purpose. While you are at it, ponder over what the government is hiding.
+++
Looks like we are going in circles … so I’ll end this from my side, esp. if you merely repeat the same points.
#305 Posted by krbhatti on March 7, 2008 11:40:33 am
Re: # 302
Urstruly brother,
I do not have any problem with sattar saab till now. I would say that he has behaved in most gentelmanly manner during whole discussion, though he does not need any certificate from me. Same goes for my other ahmadi friends with whom I lived under the same roof and broke bread with and shared moments happiness and sorrow together. (sattar saab, here is a hint as to my access to ahmadi literature).
Urstruly brother,
I do not have any problem with sattar saab till now. I would say that he has behaved in most gentelmanly manner during whole discussion, though he does not need any certificate from me. Same goes for my other ahmadi friends with whom I lived under the same roof and broke bread with and shared moments happiness and sorrow together. (sattar saab, here is a hint as to my access to ahmadi literature).
#304 Posted by krbhatti on March 7, 2008 11:34:54 am
Re: # 303
Dear Sattar saab,
Again you came up with shia/sunni issue as an arguement, which is again wrong because you choose to ignore the simple fact that muslims do not consider ahmadias part of muslim community.
Again as far as stealing identity is concerned, you again chose to ignore that islam never at any time in history chose to appropriate christian or jewish identity for itself. Further I am not at all concerned that who copies who. You can plagiarise whatever you want fron Quran and Hadith; do it; no body is going to stop you. But do not say that you are muslim because we muslim say so and say so because you elders expressly proclaimed distinctiveness of both communities...
As far as my access to ahmadi materials is concerned, it is none of your problem, sir........... If you want to find it out that material go to ahmadiah community's elders and ask them for it. Go to rabwah or london and tread your own path.
I do regret non disclosure of 1974 presentations by Government of Pakistan, but most of time we have morons at our helms of affairs. But my question is that why doesn't ahmadiah community itself publishes what they submitted in that hearing. This would help in pressing GOP to come out of the closet.
Dear Sattar saab,
Again you came up with shia/sunni issue as an arguement, which is again wrong because you choose to ignore the simple fact that muslims do not consider ahmadias part of muslim community.
Again as far as stealing identity is concerned, you again chose to ignore that islam never at any time in history chose to appropriate christian or jewish identity for itself. Further I am not at all concerned that who copies who. You can plagiarise whatever you want fron Quran and Hadith; do it; no body is going to stop you. But do not say that you are muslim because we muslim say so and say so because you elders expressly proclaimed distinctiveness of both communities...
As far as my access to ahmadi materials is concerned, it is none of your problem, sir........... If you want to find it out that material go to ahmadiah community's elders and ask them for it. Go to rabwah or london and tread your own path.
I do regret non disclosure of 1974 presentations by Government of Pakistan, but most of time we have morons at our helms of affairs. But my question is that why doesn't ahmadiah community itself publishes what they submitted in that hearing. This would help in pressing GOP to come out of the closet.
#303 Posted by sattar2 on March 7, 2008 11:12:49 am
Bhatti Sahib,
So shias and sunnis don’t have disputes … but are killing each other anyway. And you have a problem with Ahamdis? Sahib, since you raised the issue of violence, violence is indeed relevant. And you can find nothing against Ahamdis ...
Regarding stealing identities: Since you are concerned about who copied who, I have put the issue in proper perspective. Arguably, Islam stole most teachings from earlier religions.
You wrote: ” …As far as plagiarism of their scriptures is concerned, well it is because for us source is the same hence this stunning similarity…”
And similarly, for Ahmadis, the source is the same … and hence they consider themselves Muslims. It is really very simple ...
Furthermore …
Ahamdis presented their views in the 1974 hearings. But the government refused to release the records of these hearings. I’ll let you wonder why …
I know you gave the sources of the quotes. But my question is that … where did you come across this material in the first place?
So shias and sunnis don’t have disputes … but are killing each other anyway. And you have a problem with Ahamdis? Sahib, since you raised the issue of violence, violence is indeed relevant. And you can find nothing against Ahamdis ...
Regarding stealing identities: Since you are concerned about who copied who, I have put the issue in proper perspective. Arguably, Islam stole most teachings from earlier religions.
You wrote: ” …As far as plagiarism of their scriptures is concerned, well it is because for us source is the same hence this stunning similarity…”
And similarly, for Ahmadis, the source is the same … and hence they consider themselves Muslims. It is really very simple ...
Furthermore …
Ahamdis presented their views in the 1974 hearings. But the government refused to release the records of these hearings. I’ll let you wonder why …
I know you gave the sources of the quotes. But my question is that … where did you come across this material in the first place?
#302 Posted by Urstruly on March 7, 2008 10:52:39 am
Re: # 301 Bhatti
Your arguments are irrefutable. When confronted like this Sattar usually presses F6 button on his keyborad, and that automatically generates a post on flying prophets, fire breathing donkeys, and talking wolves for him. Wait and see.
Your arguments are irrefutable. When confronted like this Sattar usually presses F6 button on his keyborad, and that automatically generates a post on flying prophets, fire breathing donkeys, and talking wolves for him. Wait and see.
#301 Posted by krbhatti on March 7, 2008 10:38:06 am
Re: # 300
Sattar Saab,
[Once you mention inter-sectarian violence, shia-sunni issue becomes relevant.]
No it does not become relevant because of fudamental difference in nature of shias vs. sunni issue and ahmadi vs. non ahmadi issue. As I said earlier, whatever claim shias might have they never have any dispute regarding the finality of prophethood, which is the starting point of ahmadiah doctrine. Ahmadis are not a sect of islam.
[Try to estimate how many shias have been killed by sunnis … an vice versa. To keep things simple, stick to Pakistan only and review only the past half-century. Now tell me how many people have Ahmadis killed.]
Again irrelevant because of what I explained above though I condemn the voilance.
[And don’t worry about this “identity theft” issue. Jews complain that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) plagiarized their scriptures and stole their prophets. Christians are unhappy since Quran stole their Son of God and declared him human. This has been going on for ages … and only now you are realizing it?]
Well you cannot tell me what to worry and what not to worry as it does not concern you, and the simple reason is that WE MUSLIMS DO NOT CONSIDER YOU AS PART OF US. Why we do not consider you part of us is the distinctness of ahmadiah comunity as proclaimed by Ahmadiah founders themselves. We don't even have to go into proving it ourselves as ahmadiah founders themselves has given the answer very early in ahmadiah community's career.
As far as Jews and christians are concerned, we have a claim that our is final form of religion, but we never at any time interfered in their religious space by claiming that jews and christians cease to be jews and christians if they do not beleive in Muhammad's (PBUH) message. As far as plagiarism of their scriptures is concerned, well it is because for us source is the same hence this stunning similarity.
As far as Jesus's status is concerned, we muslims have our own beleif regardinng him but in no case we go into their church and claim it as our own nor we name our temples as church.
As far as those quotes are concerned, if you read clearly, I have given the sources. I just translated them in english but you are free to go and find out relevant material yourselves. I am sure ahmadiah community does have a collection of all those publications........
In the end would you please explain why identity theft is a minor problem.
Further, when ahmadis were declared non muslims, they were given chance to present themselves. Why not ahmadiah community disclose all the discussions they had during these deliberations.
Sattar Saab,
[Once you mention inter-sectarian violence, shia-sunni issue becomes relevant.]
No it does not become relevant because of fudamental difference in nature of shias vs. sunni issue and ahmadi vs. non ahmadi issue. As I said earlier, whatever claim shias might have they never have any dispute regarding the finality of prophethood, which is the starting point of ahmadiah doctrine. Ahmadis are not a sect of islam.
[Try to estimate how many shias have been killed by sunnis … an vice versa. To keep things simple, stick to Pakistan only and review only the past half-century. Now tell me how many people have Ahmadis killed.]
Again irrelevant because of what I explained above though I condemn the voilance.
[And don’t worry about this “identity theft” issue. Jews complain that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) plagiarized their scriptures and stole their prophets. Christians are unhappy since Quran stole their Son of God and declared him human. This has been going on for ages … and only now you are realizing it?]
Well you cannot tell me what to worry and what not to worry as it does not concern you, and the simple reason is that WE MUSLIMS DO NOT CONSIDER YOU AS PART OF US. Why we do not consider you part of us is the distinctness of ahmadiah comunity as proclaimed by Ahmadiah founders themselves. We don't even have to go into proving it ourselves as ahmadiah founders themselves has given the answer very early in ahmadiah community's career.
As far as Jews and christians are concerned, we have a claim that our is final form of religion, but we never at any time interfered in their religious space by claiming that jews and christians cease to be jews and christians if they do not beleive in Muhammad's (PBUH) message. As far as plagiarism of their scriptures is concerned, well it is because for us source is the same hence this stunning similarity.
As far as Jesus's status is concerned, we muslims have our own beleif regardinng him but in no case we go into their church and claim it as our own nor we name our temples as church.
As far as those quotes are concerned, if you read clearly, I have given the sources. I just translated them in english but you are free to go and find out relevant material yourselves. I am sure ahmadiah community does have a collection of all those publications........
In the end would you please explain why identity theft is a minor problem.
Further, when ahmadis were declared non muslims, they were given chance to present themselves. Why not ahmadiah community disclose all the discussions they had during these deliberations.
#300 Posted by sattar2 on March 7, 2008 9:54:30 am
Bhatti Sahib (#268),
Once you mention inter-sectarian violence, shia-sunni issue becomes relevant.
Try to estimate how many shias have been killed by sunnis … an vice versa. To keep things simple, stick to Pakistan only and review only the past half-century. Now tell me how many people have Ahmadis killed.
And don’t worry about this “identity theft” issue. Jews complain that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) plagiarized their scriptures and stole their prophets. Christians are unhappy since Quran stole their Son of God and declared him human. This has been going on for ages … and only now you are realizing it?
And finally, if you did not get the quotes from a web-site, I stand corrected. So tell me … from where did you get them?
Once you mention inter-sectarian violence, shia-sunni issue becomes relevant.
Try to estimate how many shias have been killed by sunnis … an vice versa. To keep things simple, stick to Pakistan only and review only the past half-century. Now tell me how many people have Ahmadis killed.
And don’t worry about this “identity theft” issue. Jews complain that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) plagiarized their scriptures and stole their prophets. Christians are unhappy since Quran stole their Son of God and declared him human. This has been going on for ages … and only now you are realizing it?
And finally, if you did not get the quotes from a web-site, I stand corrected. So tell me … from where did you get them?
#299 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 7:32:51 am
The "Super-natural" in Islam
So, Islam is all scientific and "rational"? What a BS claim. Islam is all mumbo jumbo about a "formless God" who conjures the world out of nothing.
It is a host of mumbo-jumbo about how one hen pecked husband got hallucinations in a cave and called it as extra-material, telepathic, intuitive signal from that formless god.
Islam is full of mumbo jumbo about heavens that are product of a bedoiun male fantasy of free sex and drinks for ever!!!
Can there be a more mythical and 'superstitious' than this Bedouin fantasy of a sex starved 40 year old maniac who cannot have a normal sexual relations with a dying 65 year old wife!!
So, Islam is all scientific and "rational"? What a BS claim. Islam is all mumbo jumbo about a "formless God" who conjures the world out of nothing.
It is a host of mumbo-jumbo about how one hen pecked husband got hallucinations in a cave and called it as extra-material, telepathic, intuitive signal from that formless god.
Islam is full of mumbo jumbo about heavens that are product of a bedoiun male fantasy of free sex and drinks for ever!!!
Can there be a more mythical and 'superstitious' than this Bedouin fantasy of a sex starved 40 year old maniac who cannot have a normal sexual relations with a dying 65 year old wife!!
#298 Posted by Eklavya on March 7, 2008 7:31:40 am
So, from a non-believer's point of view, a key issue in any conversation is how far and how deeply a believer has thought about both the bases and the implications of his/her faith before stopping his/her quest for answers. And you will find dramatic, dramatic differences among people...
#297 Posted by Eklavya on March 7, 2008 7:21:32 am
cheema ji, just a minor point.
You are not dealing here with "belief... without question" but "belief AFTER question(s) stop."
A faithful is encouraged to and does continually question, but then creates a PERSONAL(IZED) understanding that subsumes or transcends those questions.
So some of the faithful may choose to believe in flying billy goats quite literally, others may consider that a figurative message, while yet others may simply choose to 'ignore' that as too minor a point to worry about, and focus on major principles (which naturally will be all very different for different people).
Faith is exclusively 'intra-subjective' understanding, while humanistic doctrines all tend to aim for inter-subjective understanding.
You are not dealing here with "belief... without question" but "belief AFTER question(s) stop."
A faithful is encouraged to and does continually question, but then creates a PERSONAL(IZED) understanding that subsumes or transcends those questions.
So some of the faithful may choose to believe in flying billy goats quite literally, others may consider that a figurative message, while yet others may simply choose to 'ignore' that as too minor a point to worry about, and focus on major principles (which naturally will be all very different for different people).
Faith is exclusively 'intra-subjective' understanding, while humanistic doctrines all tend to aim for inter-subjective understanding.
#296 Posted by akcheema on March 7, 2008 6:31:11 am
DM # 294
Thanks. I understood fully what I wrote. I do acknowledge the distinction in so much that it exists; but based on whose claim?
One has to ask oneself this perfectly simple question; if someone comes up to me today and claims to have some message from a god based on private revelation, how does one verify that claim? Of course that verification is no longer required if one believes in it without question (Eklavya school of thought); the concept of "flying billy-goats" changes from one of sheer entertainment to that of some spiritual significance that doesn't need rational justification. Besides, my questions were exactly what you pointed out, if a message was good, why not send that same message ALL the time with the same safeguards to keep it un-corrupted?
Why don't you share your take on it?
AlephNull #287:
I didn't mean to upset your senstivities; however, I will not use kid gloves to handle religion. We have had debates about the political parties, personalities etc where people share their views about how they wish to be governed; why should I not ask tough questions about some doctrine that wants to run every aspect of our lives?
To me, all religions are equally open to critique; the reason I talk about Islam is because that is my heritage. I don't feel qualified to take the p... out of someone else's faith. And by the way, no one is "najis" in my eyes be it hindu, muslim, christian, jew or something else; they are all human beings and I resent a fellow human being described as "najis".
Thanks. I understood fully what I wrote. I do acknowledge the distinction in so much that it exists; but based on whose claim?
One has to ask oneself this perfectly simple question; if someone comes up to me today and claims to have some message from a god based on private revelation, how does one verify that claim? Of course that verification is no longer required if one believes in it without question (Eklavya school of thought); the concept of "flying billy-goats" changes from one of sheer entertainment to that of some spiritual significance that doesn't need rational justification. Besides, my questions were exactly what you pointed out, if a message was good, why not send that same message ALL the time with the same safeguards to keep it un-corrupted?
Why don't you share your take on it?
AlephNull #287:
I didn't mean to upset your senstivities; however, I will not use kid gloves to handle religion. We have had debates about the political parties, personalities etc where people share their views about how they wish to be governed; why should I not ask tough questions about some doctrine that wants to run every aspect of our lives?
To me, all religions are equally open to critique; the reason I talk about Islam is because that is my heritage. I don't feel qualified to take the p... out of someone else's faith. And by the way, no one is "najis" in my eyes be it hindu, muslim, christian, jew or something else; they are all human beings and I resent a fellow human being described as "najis".
#295 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 3:02:45 am
Re: # 294
"Any new challenges could be met through the approved process of Ijtihad, of course within the framework of the quran."
What is the "framework of Quran" you talk about?
the first principle is that you cannot question that paedophile.
the second priciple is that you cannot question his words.
the third principle is that no other person can claim his words to be correct over his ( the notion of last prophet).
that is the crux of "Frame work of Quran" - if you think you know more about it then let us know!!
"Any new challenges could be met through the approved process of Ijtihad, of course within the framework of the quran."
What is the "framework of Quran" you talk about?
the first principle is that you cannot question that paedophile.
the second priciple is that you cannot question his words.
the third principle is that no other person can claim his words to be correct over his ( the notion of last prophet).
that is the crux of "Frame work of Quran" - if you think you know more about it then let us know!!
#294 Posted by dost_mittar on March 7, 2008 1:54:24 am
akcheema#186:
I am surprised that, as an informed muslim, you do not understand the distinction between Prophet Mohammad and earlier prophets. He is the Last Prophet because Allah took upon Himself the responsibility of keeping the message uncorrupted. The quranic message will forever remain unadulterated and there would never be a need for another prophet. Any new challenges could be met through the approved process of Ijtihad, of course within the framework of the quran.
I am surprised that, as an informed muslim, you do not understand the distinction between Prophet Mohammad and earlier prophets. He is the Last Prophet because Allah took upon Himself the responsibility of keeping the message uncorrupted. The quranic message will forever remain unadulterated and there would never be a need for another prophet. Any new challenges could be met through the approved process of Ijtihad, of course within the framework of the quran.
#293 Posted by krbhatti on March 7, 2008 1:18:00 am
Re: # 282
Motiyaan wali sarkar,
Jis din meray andar da rajput 'pootar gaya', I may start to sort out that also.............
Motiyaan wali sarkar,
Jis din meray andar da rajput 'pootar gaya', I may start to sort out that also.............
#292 Posted by zeemax on March 7, 2008 1:17:44 am
#264 Posted by Eklavya
For the faithful, 'flying prophets' is a minor detail. Anything is possible in God's domain ... Believers, of course, may correct me if I misunderstand.
You're right on the dot. The supernatural phenomena are all minor details which no Muslim dwells upon, and few even know of.
For instance, you will rarely hear people adulating Muhammad's splitting of the moon etc, while you see Headees' relating to worldly qualities like his perseverance or bravery or compassion all the time.
In short, it is not a debate BY FAR in Islam. Wonder why Mirzais want to make it a debate!
For the faithful, 'flying prophets' is a minor detail. Anything is possible in God's domain ... Believers, of course, may correct me if I misunderstand.
You're right on the dot. The supernatural phenomena are all minor details which no Muslim dwells upon, and few even know of.
For instance, you will rarely hear people adulating Muhammad's splitting of the moon etc, while you see Headees' relating to worldly qualities like his perseverance or bravery or compassion all the time.
In short, it is not a debate BY FAR in Islam. Wonder why Mirzais want to make it a debate!
#291 Posted by laddu on March 7, 2008 12:29:06 am
Re: # 290
I do not think whether Mohammad can become "Angelic" from any Vantage point?? It is only that momeens are taught NOT to question him. If momeens start questioning him, then from ANY vantage point he remains a person not worth emulating.
I do not think whether Mohammad can become "Angelic" from any Vantage point?? It is only that momeens are taught NOT to question him. If momeens start questioning him, then from ANY vantage point he remains a person not worth emulating.
#290 Posted by Eklavya on March 7, 2008 12:04:22 am
laddu, we just missed you on this board!
laddu, an argument can be made that God and Satan are not always 'different entities.' And your idolatrous Hinduism and Islam can certainly appear as satanic cults from each other's vantage points.
So be careful before you accuse others :)
laddu, an argument can be made that God and Satan are not always 'different entities.' And your idolatrous Hinduism and Islam can certainly appear as satanic cults from each other's vantage points.
So be careful before you accuse others :)
#289 Posted by laddu on March 6, 2008 11:25:30 pm
Re: # 287
Mullad Gardi. The Gundas of blood thirsty Allah can only try to terrorize by threatening imprisonment in their imaginary Islamic torture cells.
Mullad Gardi. The Gundas of blood thirsty Allah can only try to terrorize by threatening imprisonment in their imaginary Islamic torture cells.
#288 Posted by laddu on March 6, 2008 11:17:46 pm
Re: # 286
"As for the "god's message getting perverted", where was he when it was happening? Surely an omniscient god would have known exactly what was to become of his "previous" messages; why send those messages at all! "
An excellent question - I would even go on to say why the blood thirsty God would try all his perversions to test poor human beings. Why doesn't he implant his instructions of hadiths and sunnat in the brains of humans so that they act like perfect clones of Mohammad.?
Since, God was not able to do this therefore he has created an imperfect creation. If God did that on purpose then all this violence and suffering and behaeadings of my idolator fore fathers who could not be persuaded by him , despite omnipotence, shows that he is only a satanic and perverted demi-god.
Infact , Mohammad's Allah is Satan in the guise of benevolent God.
"As for the "god's message getting perverted", where was he when it was happening? Surely an omniscient god would have known exactly what was to become of his "previous" messages; why send those messages at all! "
An excellent question - I would even go on to say why the blood thirsty God would try all his perversions to test poor human beings. Why doesn't he implant his instructions of hadiths and sunnat in the brains of humans so that they act like perfect clones of Mohammad.?
Since, God was not able to do this therefore he has created an imperfect creation. If God did that on purpose then all this violence and suffering and behaeadings of my idolator fore fathers who could not be persuaded by him , despite omnipotence, shows that he is only a satanic and perverted demi-god.
Infact , Mohammad's Allah is Satan in the guise of benevolent God.
#287 Posted by AlephNull on March 6, 2008 11:03:34 pm
akcheema #286
{{Sometime I wonder.........................Do you guys ever think OR are you just robots conditioned by your parents/teachers/society etc............}}
Cheema sahib, I am truly distressed by your unrepentant ladiniat. Forget about Ananth07 – he is a najis Hindu idolator and cannot be expected to know better. You however have had the inestimable advantage of a Muslim upbringing. Despite this you have allowed yourself to be hoodwinked by Western science and your own arrogant confidence in the powers of the unaided human intellect.
Ab bhi vakth hai – you can still repent of your repellent apostasy and revert to the Straight Path which was revealed for all times to come in the Quran-ul-Furqan Tariq-ul-Majid! If you require advice or assistance there are many erudite alims available on Chowk itself. Revert, revert, revert – or go to hell!
{{Sometime I wonder.........................Do you guys ever think OR are you just robots conditioned by your parents/teachers/society etc............}}
Cheema sahib, I am truly distressed by your unrepentant ladiniat. Forget about Ananth07 – he is a najis Hindu idolator and cannot be expected to know better. You however have had the inestimable advantage of a Muslim upbringing. Despite this you have allowed yourself to be hoodwinked by Western science and your own arrogant confidence in the powers of the unaided human intellect.
Ab bhi vakth hai – you can still repent of your repellent apostasy and revert to the Straight Path which was revealed for all times to come in the Quran-ul-Furqan Tariq-ul-Majid! If you require advice or assistance there are many erudite alims available on Chowk itself. Revert, revert, revert – or go to hell!
#286 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 10:26:32 pm
Re: # 284
I have written quite a bit about this "religion of nature" concept before; nature doesn't follow religious doctrine. If it was such a "natural" thing to be muslim, people wouldn't be dissecting it out as we are.
As for the "god's message getting perverted", where was he when it was happening? Surely an omniscient god would have known exactly what was to become of his "previous" messages; why send those messages at all!
However, if we DO accept your argument for a minute, Mohammed was born about 600 years after Jesus; god saw it fit to "revise" his message because it had been perverted; its 1400+ years since Mohammed now, by the same analogy, shouldn't we have had some further "revised/updated" editions of the messages as well?! You mean Jesus went through the trouble for NOTHING! Only to be corrected later because the "original" was so quickly perverted!! Maaan!...
Sometime I wonder.........................Do you guys ever think OR are you just robots conditioned by your parents/teachers/society etc............
I have written quite a bit about this "religion of nature" concept before; nature doesn't follow religious doctrine. If it was such a "natural" thing to be muslim, people wouldn't be dissecting it out as we are.
As for the "god's message getting perverted", where was he when it was happening? Surely an omniscient god would have known exactly what was to become of his "previous" messages; why send those messages at all!
However, if we DO accept your argument for a minute, Mohammed was born about 600 years after Jesus; god saw it fit to "revise" his message because it had been perverted; its 1400+ years since Mohammed now, by the same analogy, shouldn't we have had some further "revised/updated" editions of the messages as well?! You mean Jesus went through the trouble for NOTHING! Only to be corrected later because the "original" was so quickly perverted!! Maaan!...
Sometime I wonder.........................Do you guys ever think OR are you just robots conditioned by your parents/teachers/society etc............
#285 Posted by Ananth07 on March 6, 2008 10:24:50 pm
#284
“Islam is the Straight Path – the original and pristine religion – the Religion of Nature, in perfect accord with reason and rationality itself.”
abrahamic religions are dogmatic and are bound to their respective books, which in turn makes them “relevant” only to that particular time and region when they came in to being. Science and free flow of information can only weaken these religions.
“Islam is the Straight Path – the original and pristine religion – the Religion of Nature, in perfect accord with reason and rationality itself.”
abrahamic religions are dogmatic and are bound to their respective books, which in turn makes them “relevant” only to that particular time and region when they came in to being. Science and free flow of information can only weaken these religions.
#284 Posted by AlephNull on March 6, 2008 10:09:42 pm
Ananth07 #283
{{The fact is Islam is a derived object of parent judeo christain object…. With a few new properties.}}
Incorrect. Totally false and baseless. Islam is the base class, if you will.
Islam is the Straight Path – the original and pristine religion – the Religion of Nature, in perfect accord with reason and rationality itself.
Unfortunately humankind being perverse strayed from the path and fell into error. That is why Allah SWT sent prophets like Moses and Jesus to bring humans back to the original faith. Despite these many mercies mankind still went astray. Judaism and Christianity in their present or even historic forms are not progenitors of Islam – they are corruptions of the original and perfect message which is Islam.
Finally Allah SWT sent Prophet Muhammad as the Final Prophet to convey the true message in its pristine original form so that mankind might revert to the Straight Path once and for all. This is a great gift which Allah SWT has given to you, a mercy for all mankind. No further law-bearing prophets are required or expected; those who claim to be such are nothing but monsters of heretical depravity.
{{The fact is Islam is a derived object of parent judeo christain object…. With a few new properties.}}
Incorrect. Totally false and baseless. Islam is the base class, if you will.
Islam is the Straight Path – the original and pristine religion – the Religion of Nature, in perfect accord with reason and rationality itself.
Unfortunately humankind being perverse strayed from the path and fell into error. That is why Allah SWT sent prophets like Moses and Jesus to bring humans back to the original faith. Despite these many mercies mankind still went astray. Judaism and Christianity in their present or even historic forms are not progenitors of Islam – they are corruptions of the original and perfect message which is Islam.
Finally Allah SWT sent Prophet Muhammad as the Final Prophet to convey the true message in its pristine original form so that mankind might revert to the Straight Path once and for all. This is a great gift which Allah SWT has given to you, a mercy for all mankind. No further law-bearing prophets are required or expected; those who claim to be such are nothing but monsters of heretical depravity.
#283 Posted by Ananth07 on March 6, 2008 9:33:45 pm
The fact is Islam is a derived object of parent judeo christain object…. With a few new properties.
Why cant muslims accept Ahmadi as a derived object of parent object Islam…. Ahmadi also have a few new properties….
Why cant muslims accept Ahmadi as a derived object of parent object Islam…. Ahmadi also have a few new properties….
#282 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 9:17:35 pm
Re: # 281
Paaji, I am only asking you to sort it all out! Don't make any exceptions though, like the Shias, Brelvis etc...... I reckon someone who believes in the intercessary powers of, say Data Ganj Bakhsh Ali Hajveri, is committing the same crime.........you are intelligent enough....
Paaji, I am only asking you to sort it all out! Don't make any exceptions though, like the Shias, Brelvis etc...... I reckon someone who believes in the intercessary powers of, say Data Ganj Bakhsh Ali Hajveri, is committing the same crime.........you are intelligent enough....
#281 Posted by krbhatti on March 6, 2008 9:04:25 pm
Re: # 276
Yaar cheema saab, Motiyaan waali sarkaar,
There is no doubt that there is a very significant element in Islam that is also there in Judo-christian traditions. For faithfuls it means the continuity of same faith across the times while for non beleivers it means what you want to pin point. Depends your angle of looking. But What I am saying that this similarity of Islam with Judo/christian traditions has nothing to do whatsoever with ahmadi/non ahmadi question.
Yaar cheema saab, Motiyaan waali sarkaar,
There is no doubt that there is a very significant element in Islam that is also there in Judo-christian traditions. For faithfuls it means the continuity of same faith across the times while for non beleivers it means what you want to pin point. Depends your angle of looking. But What I am saying that this similarity of Islam with Judo/christian traditions has nothing to do whatsoever with ahmadi/non ahmadi question.
#280 Posted by nkg on March 6, 2008 8:24:30 pm
Cow produces more reniewable resource (milk, dung-solid fuel, dung-fertiliser) than its meat. So, it was prudent to keep it alive than kill and eat.
#279 Posted by nkg on March 6, 2008 8:20:28 pm
Re: # 245
Certain vitamins and most of carb,fat and proteine is basically synthesized in animal/plant body as result of reaction. Tough, the primary chain starts with plant, but even aniamls produce some chemicals, which it does not consume as food. In fact, couple of amino-acids are avaialble only in meat & egg and can not be supplimented. But that, do you need all types of amino acids for survival. Most of the yoga books prescribes vegetarian food. So, I believe that vegetarian food is healthier than non-veg stuff.
Certain vitamins and most of carb,fat and proteine is basically synthesized in animal/plant body as result of reaction. Tough, the primary chain starts with plant, but even aniamls produce some chemicals, which it does not consume as food. In fact, couple of amino-acids are avaialble only in meat & egg and can not be supplimented. But that, do you need all types of amino acids for survival. Most of the yoga books prescribes vegetarian food. So, I believe that vegetarian food is healthier than non-veg stuff.
#278 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 7:22:02 pm
Re: # 277
even a Muslim Urdu poet (I think it was Ismail Meerthi but I am happy to stand corrected) wrote a poem we read as kids:
"Rabb ka shuker adaa ker bhai;
Jis ne hamaari gaye banaai".
even a Muslim Urdu poet (I think it was Ismail Meerthi but I am happy to stand corrected) wrote a poem we read as kids:
"Rabb ka shuker adaa ker bhai;
Jis ne hamaari gaye banaai".
#277 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 6:59:35 pm
Re: # 275
Welcome back Laddu!
Man this cow business! A cow is a cow is a cow.....
Perhaps we can accept the concept of "an all giving cow, its nourishing milk, oxen for agriculture etc and meat(?), hide and all the rest" is an allegory(?). The ancients might have thought it was the be-all and end-all of existence.
Let's move on to something more 21st century perhaps...
Welcome back Laddu!
Man this cow business! A cow is a cow is a cow.....
Perhaps we can accept the concept of "an all giving cow, its nourishing milk, oxen for agriculture etc and meat(?), hide and all the rest" is an allegory(?). The ancients might have thought it was the be-all and end-all of existence.
Let's move on to something more 21st century perhaps...
#276 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 6:42:20 pm
Re: # 268
Bhatti sahib; O paaji, jaan deyo baadshaho; tuhanu eh chhoti jayi gal samajh naeen aa rahi!
Here is the deal; Monotheism was monopolised by the Judeo-christians in the 7th century arabia. This concept was hijacked and recycled, with additions of existing arabic customs to make it acceptable to the pagan arabs. It was a strong political ideology that united the warring tribes and made a nation out of them.
There was absolutely nothing new in Mohammed’s message; nothing that either didn’t exist in some shape or form in judeo-christian mythology, or not known via transmitted knowledge across from other trading partners of the arabic peninsula; in fact this is where Mohammed got to hear about the tales of the “biblical prophets” first, on his travels.
A few examples: Paradise with its “doodh aur shehed ki nehrain” (God’s promise to Abraham to give him and his descendents the “promised land of milk and honey”.
Dietary laws (see my previous interacts on the subject).
He did introduce a very clear picture of “heaven and hell”; one with carnal pleasures alongside the doodh and shehed!, the other with clear warnings about the forthcoming fire/punishments for sins against god; this helped consolidate the faith (iman pakka karne ke liye) so there would be no dissent. To this day, it happens to be the hardest faith system to leave or even criticise from within.
Now, the Shias, with their non-acceptance of virtuall the whole of Islamic history after Mohammed’s death, what is your take on their “Imams – Haazir or Ghaib”, their strange redeeming and intercessary powers to change the course of this world and the next; even Mohammed didn’t make such claims. I think there are far more similarities between mainstream Sunnis and, at least, the Lahori-Ahmaddiyas (who only regard Mirza a “mujaddid” – reformer rather than prophet).
Are you happy to leave the shias to “sipaah-e-sahaaba” or are you, in the fullness of time, planning to “sort them out” as well?
“Yeh muamlay hein naazuk......”
Bhatti sahib; O paaji, jaan deyo baadshaho; tuhanu eh chhoti jayi gal samajh naeen aa rahi!
Here is the deal; Monotheism was monopolised by the Judeo-christians in the 7th century arabia. This concept was hijacked and recycled, with additions of existing arabic customs to make it acceptable to the pagan arabs. It was a strong political ideology that united the warring tribes and made a nation out of them.
There was absolutely nothing new in Mohammed’s message; nothing that either didn’t exist in some shape or form in judeo-christian mythology, or not known via transmitted knowledge across from other trading partners of the arabic peninsula; in fact this is where Mohammed got to hear about the tales of the “biblical prophets” first, on his travels.
A few examples: Paradise with its “doodh aur shehed ki nehrain” (God’s promise to Abraham to give him and his descendents the “promised land of milk and honey”.
Dietary laws (see my previous interacts on the subject).
He did introduce a very clear picture of “heaven and hell”; one with carnal pleasures alongside the doodh and shehed!, the other with clear warnings about the forthcoming fire/punishments for sins against god; this helped consolidate the faith (iman pakka karne ke liye) so there would be no dissent. To this day, it happens to be the hardest faith system to leave or even criticise from within.
Now, the Shias, with their non-acceptance of virtuall the whole of Islamic history after Mohammed’s death, what is your take on their “Imams – Haazir or Ghaib”, their strange redeeming and intercessary powers to change the course of this world and the next; even Mohammed didn’t make such claims. I think there are far more similarities between mainstream Sunnis and, at least, the Lahori-Ahmaddiyas (who only regard Mirza a “mujaddid” – reformer rather than prophet).
Are you happy to leave the shias to “sipaah-e-sahaaba” or are you, in the fullness of time, planning to “sort them out” as well?
“Yeh muamlay hein naazuk......”
#275 Posted by laddu on March 6, 2008 6:26:25 pm
Re: # 270
Eklavya, Did you forget reciting the reverse-kalima today?
How can you fail to distinguish between Indian Cow ( female bovines), Ox, Bull, Buffalo?
There are atleast 50 types of cattle. I remember that with the advent of American Jersey Cows a lot of Hindus refused to used the Ghee made of that breed for Pujan purposes!
There is a breed of Indian Cow that is indeed sacred. But I doubt if the reference of "gau" is towards the American Jersey Cow or the Bull or the Oxen or other 49 breeds of cattle.
Regarding, vegetarianism, except for Brahmins, Kshatriyas and others are not prohibited from hunting, killing animals or eating the meat.
In the past hindu kings' darbars had excellent recipies for different types of meats. Lord Rama was a king and he followed his dharma and was not a vegetarian.
Yes, but when every person has to embrace Sanyasa (renunciate) in the last quarter of his life and he has to give up tamasika food including meat. So vegetarianism is dependent upon your stage of life as well and is mandatory for Hindus in later stages of life (Sanyaas Ashrama).
Islam has no conception of the spiritual stages (Ashrama) of a human life , because it is based upon cloning Mohammad who lived the first 42 years of life under a powerful woman and the rest 20 years of the life he lived as a murderer, rapist and bandit.
Eklavya, Did you forget reciting the reverse-kalima today?
How can you fail to distinguish between Indian Cow ( female bovines), Ox, Bull, Buffalo?
There are atleast 50 types of cattle. I remember that with the advent of American Jersey Cows a lot of Hindus refused to used the Ghee made of that breed for Pujan purposes!
There is a breed of Indian Cow that is indeed sacred. But I doubt if the reference of "gau" is towards the American Jersey Cow or the Bull or the Oxen or other 49 breeds of cattle.
Regarding, vegetarianism, except for Brahmins, Kshatriyas and others are not prohibited from hunting, killing animals or eating the meat.
In the past hindu kings' darbars had excellent recipies for different types of meats. Lord Rama was a king and he followed his dharma and was not a vegetarian.
Yes, but when every person has to embrace Sanyasa (renunciate) in the last quarter of his life and he has to give up tamasika food including meat. So vegetarianism is dependent upon your stage of life as well and is mandatory for Hindus in later stages of life (Sanyaas Ashrama).
Islam has no conception of the spiritual stages (Ashrama) of a human life , because it is based upon cloning Mohammad who lived the first 42 years of life under a powerful woman and the rest 20 years of the life he lived as a murderer, rapist and bandit.
#274 Posted by CreateAlpha on March 6, 2008 6:14:57 pm
Furthermore, like many have said...if an angel can speak to a pervert in a cave and give him the word of god...what is so illogical about a guy receiving divine dictacts from gods ala mirza? Tell me why this is implausible. Wasn't god finished wth jesus' message in the abrahamic tradition before mohammeds wet dreams? Same logic applies.
#273 Posted by CreateAlpha on March 6, 2008 6:09:36 pm
Eklavya yaar, once again you fall off your own logic train. "Faithful need no explanation but faithless do"???? What kind of idiotic thinking is that. You cannot be serious here. You are smarter than this. Faithlessness is as valid as faithfulness....where did you get thos notion that they are and can be distictly vetted? There is one god and his name is allah is as valid a statement as there is a chutiya concept of god and allah is the most chutiyest of those concepts. Both statements are valid and true equally. Your logic of dismissing the latter while admitting validity of the former is asinine. No offense kaal....but I thought you were atleast psuedointellectual. Sab Theek hai ooper?
#272 Posted by Eklavya on March 6, 2008 3:28:35 pm
LOL, sattar bhai, zee has abandoned NOTHING, nor has any other Muslim.
As a good Hindu, you reject. I have no problem with that, but Muslims will.
And, if you are going to 'restore' Islam by turning it into Hinduism, I again would have no problem with it.
I just wish you were upfront about it, so if some Muslims advocated restrictions upon you, your protests would have credibility.
-------------------
Have to say, this Hindu/Ahmedi notion that Islam is some retarded form of Hinduism, and will one day grow up to become Hinduism-lite, all stretched and loose, is a bit strange...If that is indeed Islamic goal, I would say you are a couple of thousand years behind :)
As a good Hindu, you reject. I have no problem with that, but Muslims will.
And, if you are going to 'restore' Islam by turning it into Hinduism, I again would have no problem with it.
I just wish you were upfront about it, so if some Muslims advocated restrictions upon you, your protests would have credibility.
-------------------
Have to say, this Hindu/Ahmedi notion that Islam is some retarded form of Hinduism, and will one day grow up to become Hinduism-lite, all stretched and loose, is a bit strange...If that is indeed Islamic goal, I would say you are a couple of thousand years behind :)
#271 Posted by sattar2 on March 6, 2008 2:36:08 pm
Kaal … in addition to #269 …
I hate to break this to you yet again (lordi, lordi … have mercy on me) but even zee has abandoned you and rejected flying prophets. Read this again, you fool! May be you were too busy kissing his rear to notice what he wrote. Start with #220 and follow through …
So your main issue remains with zeemax. You are wasting your time getting sidetracked with other issues ...
+++
Re #270: If it took 1400 years to get to flying prophets, cow worship is right around the corner (grin).
And it would be a stretch to say that Islam is getting destroyed; it is merely getting stretched … like Hinduism did, long ago. No difference … same, same. But don't worry, we Ahamdi-Muslims will bring it back to its proper form. Heck, we can even sell it to our Hindu brethern ...once again (wink).
I hate to break this to you yet again (lordi, lordi … have mercy on me) but even zee has abandoned you and rejected flying prophets. Read this again, you fool! May be you were too busy kissing his rear to notice what he wrote. Start with #220 and follow through …
So your main issue remains with zeemax. You are wasting your time getting sidetracked with other issues ...
+++
Re #270: If it took 1400 years to get to flying prophets, cow worship is right around the corner (grin).
And it would be a stretch to say that Islam is getting destroyed; it is merely getting stretched … like Hinduism did, long ago. No difference … same, same. But don't worry, we Ahamdi-Muslims will bring it back to its proper form. Heck, we can even sell it to our Hindu brethern ...once again (wink).
#270 Posted by Eklavya on March 6, 2008 2:10:30 pm
sattar boss, ALL of that is possible.
May be Hindus are right, and Muslims are wrong. May be god does indeed do the things you say he might do, and has secretaries like you and me.
I just wouldn't believe all that, and call that Islam, or tell all that stuff to Muslims, and still expect to be counted among Muslims.
What's next for Islam? Cow worship?
A good way to destroy Islam, and quite innocent too! :)
May be Hindus are right, and Muslims are wrong. May be god does indeed do the things you say he might do, and has secretaries like you and me.
I just wouldn't believe all that, and call that Islam, or tell all that stuff to Muslims, and still expect to be counted among Muslims.
What's next for Islam? Cow worship?
A good way to destroy Islam, and quite innocent too! :)
#269 Posted by sattar2 on March 6, 2008 1:39:36 pm
Kaal (#267),
You are getting bent out of shape over nothing …
As you criticize Ahamdis of limiting and reducing the divine, you are overlooking the possibility that perhaps god Himself told Mirza how to interpret flying prophets. Maybe god talks to each Ahamdi every day. Perhaps I am having coffee with god today, after work. Got it? Good!
You cannot rule out these possibilities UNLESS you yourself limit the role of divine and reduce Him down to your own level. And this is your dilemma …
And no one is bringing god down to earth. But are you suggesting He Himself cannot choose to come down to earth?? Unless you are His private secretary, I fail to see your point.
In essence, what you accuse Ahmadis of, you yourself commit … but only to a more extreme degree. If there is ONE thing you should learn here, this is it.
More later …
You are getting bent out of shape over nothing …
As you criticize Ahamdis of limiting and reducing the divine, you are overlooking the possibility that perhaps god Himself told Mirza how to interpret flying prophets. Maybe god talks to each Ahamdi every day. Perhaps I am having coffee with god today, after work. Got it? Good!
You cannot rule out these possibilities UNLESS you yourself limit the role of divine and reduce Him down to your own level. And this is your dilemma …
And no one is bringing god down to earth. But are you suggesting He Himself cannot choose to come down to earth?? Unless you are His private secretary, I fail to see your point.
In essence, what you accuse Ahmadis of, you yourself commit … but only to a more extreme degree. If there is ONE thing you should learn here, this is it.
More later …
#268 Posted by krbhatti on March 6, 2008 1:22:29 pm
Re: # 265
Sattar Saab,
Don't mix the issue of shias and sunnis in defence of ahmadism. These two are seperate issues. Shias never came up with an imposter.
And finally, please mention the name of web site from which I have sourced my info. It would be a news for me.......
Re: # 265
Cheema saab,
Muhammad never said any where that christians or jews will cease to be christians or jews if they do not beleive in him, contrary to Mirza Sahib's claim that unless one does not beleive in him he is not muslim.
Muhammad did not encroach upon the religious space of anyone, and presented Islam to people to accept or reject it. In case of Mirza, he is preseting not any new religion but only his status as prophet, and stealing the identity of muslims if they reject him.
Sattar Saab,
Don't mix the issue of shias and sunnis in defence of ahmadism. These two are seperate issues. Shias never came up with an imposter.
And finally, please mention the name of web site from which I have sourced my info. It would be a news for me.......
Re: # 265
Cheema saab,
Muhammad never said any where that christians or jews will cease to be christians or jews if they do not beleive in him, contrary to Mirza Sahib's claim that unless one does not beleive in him he is not muslim.
Muhammad did not encroach upon the religious space of anyone, and presented Islam to people to accept or reject it. In case of Mirza, he is preseting not any new religion but only his status as prophet, and stealing the identity of muslims if they reject him.
#267 Posted by Eklavya on March 6, 2008 10:20:52 am
vengatramanan, Hindus/Indians can question everything and believe anything that does not itself remove this freedom without imposing unacceptable costs. All Hindu/Indian belief is human stuff anyway.
Even among those Hindus who have a god (or gods) most make very sure that their god never gets to have a final word, is brought down to earth to say new things and do his/her duty everytime things begin to go terribly wrong for a terribly long time. Our mirzai friends might have a resonance to that idea.
Vengat, in India, a whole range of diverse ideas combined in various ways to ultimately lead to the mighty tradition of the Buddha. Just as at a later time, many great ideas combined to make Sikhism.
Even among those Hindus who have a god (or gods) most make very sure that their god never gets to have a final word, is brought down to earth to say new things and do his/her duty everytime things begin to go terribly wrong for a terribly long time. Our mirzai friends might have a resonance to that idea.
Vengat, in India, a whole range of diverse ideas combined in various ways to ultimately lead to the mighty tradition of the Buddha. Just as at a later time, many great ideas combined to make Sikhism.
#266 Posted by vengatramanan on March 6, 2008 9:27:28 am
Eklavya,
Amartya Sen speaks about disparate schools of thought in Hinduism. Didn't Lokayata and Carvaka schools question all of the postulates on God and the Hindu beliefs?
Amartya Sen speaks about disparate schools of thought in Hinduism. Didn't Lokayata and Carvaka schools question all of the postulates on God and the Hindu beliefs?
#265 Posted by sattar2 on March 6, 2008 9:00:17 am
Cheema Shaib (#262),
Your observation is on the mark … and highlights ummah’s double-standards.
History of Islam is replete with fatwas of kuffr and inter-sectarian violence; shias and sunnis have been killing each other as far as I can remember … and more. Bhatti Sahib remains oblivious to all this and takes issue with Ahamdi-Muslims - all on basis of quotes from an obscure website. Go figure ...
#264 Posted by Eklavya on March 6, 2008 8:50:29 am
CA, the faithful need no explanation, faithless ones do.
For the faithful, 'flying prophets' is a minor detail. Anything is possible in God's domain.
For you, Mirzais, and me, that becomes a barrier impossible to cross.
Not that you (Hindus and Mirzais) would agree, but that is how it is.
Believers, of course, may correct me if I misunderstand.
For the faithful, 'flying prophets' is a minor detail. Anything is possible in God's domain.
For you, Mirzais, and me, that becomes a barrier impossible to cross.
Not that you (Hindus and Mirzais) would agree, but that is how it is.
Believers, of course, may correct me if I misunderstand.
#263 Posted by CreateAlpha on March 6, 2008 8:22:37 am
yaar kaal, eik baat bataa, how come you always go back to the refrain of faith needs no explanation yet start out with explaining what faith is? On one hand you ask folks not to question zee or bhatti or urstruly's faith...(as you think it is the right one) on the other hand, you question those who are ahmedis' faith..(as you think it is the wrong one). I think you should take a break from chowk for a few weeks and clear up your logic. perhaps a visit to an ashram or some sufi shrine for meditation or something. you are more confused now than ever before.
Feel free to come back with a lot of words without actually saying much...we all expect it.
Feel free to come back with a lot of words without actually saying much...we all expect it.
#262 Posted by akcheema on March 6, 2008 4:17:27 am
Re: # 246
"Actually ahmadism is nothing but a sect or cult based on identity theft. If you take out the name of islam out of it, the whole building of mirzaism will come down, which is kind of a funny thing. Just imagine a cult or sect having nothing new in it except introduction of a new prophet for the sake of nothing and want the name of a already existing religion appropriated to itself and the current followers ex-communicated".
Isn't Islam a similar cult build around Mohammed?
"Actually ahmadism is nothing but a sect or cult based on identity theft. If you take out the name of islam out of it, the whole building of mirzaism will come down, which is kind of a funny thing. Just imagine a cult or sect having nothing new in it except introduction of a new prophet for the sake of nothing and want the name of a already existing religion appropriated to itself and the current followers ex-communicated".
Isn't Islam a similar cult build around Mohammed?
#261 Posted by khurram on March 5, 2008 6:11:21 pm
Re: #252
Arrey Bhatti sahib. Don't get too worked up about missionary tactics. If there is any misrepresentation going on it will eventually backfire. Truth will eventually prevail. There is no need for coercive methods. That will only undermine your own case.
Arrey Bhatti sahib. Don't get too worked up about missionary tactics. If there is any misrepresentation going on it will eventually backfire. Truth will eventually prevail. There is no need for coercive methods. That will only undermine your own case.
#260 Posted by Eklavya on March 5, 2008 5:57:24 pm
sattar bhai, aisa nahi hai.
Believers like zee, urstruly, or even bhatti ji, fully understand that their faith NEEDS no explanation. Explanation is the extra gravy, only for those who need it. At the most, one needs to satisfy oneself. (if there is ONE message you should have gotten by now from your many interactions with tahmedji, that must be it.)
Anyways, we should leave Islam to Muslims. It is not for me or for you - people who make their 'faith' contingent upon dozens of preconditions, preconceptions, prejudices.
Chalo, some day we will discuss our own silly human religion - Hinduism. Then you can make whatever god you want, subject it to whatever conditions catch your fancy, and worship that god in whatever fashion you care. Or not worship it at all.
As our co-religionist anil ji likes to say: then your god will become your best imagination.
Until then, let Muslims in peace, please; and live in peace yourself.
I think we are probably done, but if not, please, the last word is yours. :)
Best regards, and goodnite for now.
Believers like zee, urstruly, or even bhatti ji, fully understand that their faith NEEDS no explanation. Explanation is the extra gravy, only for those who need it. At the most, one needs to satisfy oneself. (if there is ONE message you should have gotten by now from your many interactions with tahmedji, that must be it.)
Anyways, we should leave Islam to Muslims. It is not for me or for you - people who make their 'faith' contingent upon dozens of preconditions, preconceptions, prejudices.
Chalo, some day we will discuss our own silly human religion - Hinduism. Then you can make whatever god you want, subject it to whatever conditions catch your fancy, and worship that god in whatever fashion you care. Or not worship it at all.
As our co-religionist anil ji likes to say: then your god will become your best imagination.
Until then, let Muslims in peace, please; and live in peace yourself.
I think we are probably done, but if not, please, the last word is yours. :)
Best regards, and goodnite for now.
#259 Posted by sattar2 on March 5, 2008 5:05:59 pm
Kaal bhai (re #180), … to wrap things up …
You started with a bang and a thunder, but did not say much worthwhile. One may be tempted to conclude you are full of it …
Perhaps you felt betrayed when zee finally turned his back on Islam (#220). Urstruly made matters worse by trying to explain flying prophets (#200); it was painful for me even. I understand you are merely trying to make the best of a hopeless situation … even as these miserable foot-soldiers continue to shoot at their own.
So it all turned out to be much ado about nothing. I hope Bhatti bhai is not holding his breath waiting for some earth-shattering analysis from you. There is none; it’s all fluff with neither meaning nor relevance.
But you’re not alone in your petty obsessions. The world is full of fools; each looking for a cause, trying to be a martyr. But it can get somewhat annoying after a while, you know :-)
You started with a bang and a thunder, but did not say much worthwhile. One may be tempted to conclude you are full of it …
Perhaps you felt betrayed when zee finally turned his back on Islam (#220). Urstruly made matters worse by trying to explain flying prophets (#200); it was painful for me even. I understand you are merely trying to make the best of a hopeless situation … even as these miserable foot-soldiers continue to shoot at their own.
So it all turned out to be much ado about nothing. I hope Bhatti bhai is not holding his breath waiting for some earth-shattering analysis from you. There is none; it’s all fluff with neither meaning nor relevance.
But you’re not alone in your petty obsessions. The world is full of fools; each looking for a cause, trying to be a martyr. But it can get somewhat annoying after a while, you know :-)
#258 Posted by sattar2 on March 5, 2008 1:56:04 pm
Bhatti (#228),
You may claim that your Islam supports imprisoning others over religious differences … and it would be a valid answer.
And that would be a good time for you to retract support for the Golden Principle. I am sure you did not mean it when you quoted it; it was all a misunderstanding.
#229: And unless you have copyrighted “Quran”, I fail to see your point.
#257 Posted by sattar2 on March 5, 2008 1:22:28 pm
Urstruly (#244);
Why bother with discussion when your Islam should simply be accepted? I mean, why? … why now??
Try to sort out the meaning of “last” (refer to #195). Unless you do that, it would be futile to burden you with more stuff you are in denial of.
In the mean time, please come up with more theories about flying rocks and fire-breathing donkeys - it is all very impressive. No, seriously …
Why bother with discussion when your Islam should simply be accepted? I mean, why? … why now??
Try to sort out the meaning of “last” (refer to #195). Unless you do that, it would be futile to burden you with more stuff you are in denial of.
In the mean time, please come up with more theories about flying rocks and fire-breathing donkeys - it is all very impressive. No, seriously …
#256 Posted by Eklavya on March 5, 2008 12:15:31 pm
"predominantly Christian south africa, an Act of Parliament has declared them non-Muslims...."
Urstruly, non-Muslims generally don't get Islam's internal issues, so that would be hard to believe!!
But if true, that would constitute a GREAT victory for Muslims.
Urstruly, non-Muslims generally don't get Islam's internal issues, so that would be hard to believe!!
But if true, that would constitute a GREAT victory for Muslims.
#255 Posted by Urstruly on March 5, 2008 12:07:49 pm
Re: # 254
i give you reference from a Quadini website, read all parts:
http://www.muslim.org/sa-case2/part2.htm
i give you reference from a Quadini website, read all parts:
http://www.muslim.org/sa-case2/part2.htm
#254 Posted by krbhatti on March 5, 2008 11:56:09 am
Re: # 253
Now thats a news for me. Can you give me some reference like some news item or law site for south african act......
Now thats a news for me. Can you give me some reference like some news item or law site for south african act......
#253 Posted by Urstruly on March 5, 2008 11:51:15 am
Re: # 252
I don't think that we should be complaining for their efforts elsewhere. The non-Muslim world is God's open territory inviting us to take the message of Monotheism there. But in Africa the situation is not all that hopeless. There are Muslim missionaries active too who have effectively countered the Quadiani prolesytization efforst there. In this regard, Moulana Shah Ahmad Noorani Sahib and his father has an enormous role. becuase of their efforts in almost all African Muslim countries Quadianis are regarded as non-Muslims, at some places by law. In a predominantly Christian south africa, an Act of Parliament has declared them non-Muslims. May Allah bless the souls of Noorani elders who made enormous efforts to make it a reality.
I don't think that we should be complaining for their efforts elsewhere. The non-Muslim world is God's open territory inviting us to take the message of Monotheism there. But in Africa the situation is not all that hopeless. There are Muslim missionaries active too who have effectively countered the Quadiani prolesytization efforst there. In this regard, Moulana Shah Ahmad Noorani Sahib and his father has an enormous role. becuase of their efforts in almost all African Muslim countries Quadianis are regarded as non-Muslims, at some places by law. In a predominantly Christian south africa, an Act of Parliament has declared them non-Muslims. May Allah bless the souls of Noorani elders who made enormous efforts to make it a reality.
#252 Posted by krbhatti on March 5, 2008 11:37:37 am
Re: # 250
Yaar Khurran mian. Hold your horses. I am not judgig them. It all started when they start to judge me and my comunity. I don't have even problem with that.
My problem starts when they go to central aisa or africa and start preaching ahmadism in the garb of islam, and the person on the receiving end does not have any clue as to ahmadism's status in Islamic world. Don't you think they should be more forthcoming by telling whom they preach what they are preaching and where they stand in the eyes of other muslims.....
Isn't it below the level of integrity and fairplay......
Yaar Khurran mian. Hold your horses. I am not judgig them. It all started when they start to judge me and my comunity. I don't have even problem with that.
My problem starts when they go to central aisa or africa and start preaching ahmadism in the garb of islam, and the person on the receiving end does not have any clue as to ahmadism's status in Islamic world. Don't you think they should be more forthcoming by telling whom they preach what they are preaching and where they stand in the eyes of other muslims.....
Isn't it below the level of integrity and fairplay......
#251 Posted by Urstruly on March 5, 2008 11:30:51 am
Re: # 250
I think we should rather be making their lives comfortable and safe as a minority. They are protected people by Islamic law and by constitution (or whatever is left of it), and thus their lives have more value than Muslim subalterns.
I think we should rather be making their lives comfortable and safe as a minority. They are protected people by Islamic law and by constitution (or whatever is left of it), and thus their lives have more value than Muslim subalterns.
#250 Posted by khurram on March 5, 2008 11:16:57 am
Re; #249,
I am glad that you realize that if you were placed under similar restrictions you would consider them illegitimate and fight against them.
Don't judge your Ahmadi friends too harshly. It is easy to make brave declarations from the comfort of a majority position. Living under overwhelming domination is another matter.
I am glad that you realize that if you were placed under similar restrictions you would consider them illegitimate and fight against them.
Don't judge your Ahmadi friends too harshly. It is easy to make brave declarations from the comfort of a majority position. Living under overwhelming domination is another matter.
#249 Posted by krbhatti on March 5, 2008 10:48:25 am
Re: # 247
I am sure Urstruly has answered. But as to your question regarding my status with my current beleifs in ahmadi majority; well dear, I would have fought for my right because I beleive that I am right and would have gladly done so despite any harm that may come due to it. This is another dimension where I find my ahmadi friends lacking. They just don't stand up, and I think the reason is that there is some injuction against jihad in there system. When I pressed an ahmadi friend on this, he came up with reply, "Haan kharray ho jain aur muft main maray jain."
They just don't stand up for their beleifs............
I am sure Urstruly has answered. But as to your question regarding my status with my current beleifs in ahmadi majority; well dear, I would have fought for my right because I beleive that I am right and would have gladly done so despite any harm that may come due to it. This is another dimension where I find my ahmadi friends lacking. They just don't stand up, and I think the reason is that there is some injuction against jihad in there system. When I pressed an ahmadi friend on this, he came up with reply, "Haan kharray ho jain aur muft main maray jain."
They just don't stand up for their beleifs............
#248 Posted by Urstruly on March 5, 2008 10:03:14 am
Re: # 247
Quadianism in its essence is a unique animal. Islamic fiqah does not allow prolysetization of another religion to the Muslim population (since the punishment for apostasy is death so it is counter-intuitive). But it does allow prolysetization of christianity and judaism to the non-Muslim population of the polity. Keeping this in mind, if a restriction is not placed on a Quadiani for identifying himself as such, he can proselytize his religion to Muslim population pretending to be a Muslim and yet he won't be in violation of any law. Therefore section 295A, B, and C of Pakistan Penal code require them to identify themselves as Quadianis, and they cannot name their temples as masjid, etc.
Quadianism in its essence is a unique animal. Islamic fiqah does not allow prolysetization of another religion to the Muslim population (since the punishment for apostasy is death so it is counter-intuitive). But it does allow prolysetization of christianity and judaism to the non-Muslim population of the polity. Keeping this in mind, if a restriction is not placed on a Quadiani for identifying himself as such, he can proselytize his religion to Muslim population pretending to be a Muslim and yet he won't be in violation of any law. Therefore section 295A, B, and C of Pakistan Penal code require them to identify themselves as Quadianis, and they cannot name their temples as masjid, etc.
#247 Posted by khurram on March 5, 2008 9:47:24 am
Re: #246,
Bhatti Sahib,
I do not dispute your points #1 to #5.
Bhatti Sahib,
I do not dispute your points #1 to #5.