The Irreverent Hero Islam Forgot

Re: # 223; tahmed

Sorry you lost me there again; YOUR concept of God is called "Deism"; it has nothing to do with ritualistic religion of any kind; please get the concepts clear in your head first.

If you are referring to being a DEIST or "free-lance monotheist" as someone else described it, feel free to practice it; just don't call it Islam; as I said before, the two are light years apart.

If you insist on labelling your God and other beliefs as Islam, then I am afraid you do have to incorporate the ritualistic elements etc, including the 'hate-verses' against the Kuffar etc, the clear sub-ordination of women, second rate status of Dhimmis, and the other details you selectively choose to ignore. You can't just selective quote different eras of Islamic history to suit YOUR needs either; you can't defend the "but-shiken" attitude of Ghaznavi by quoting selective parts of "Muslim Spain"; it is far from mono-lithic, do you know why? Because of the selective, personally suited interpretations of various times. The Qur'an remains un-changed as you guys keep going on, it is all there in BLACK AND WHITE. The shades of gray are a "figment of YOUR" imagination, because it seems to suit the order of the day, and not to say yourself personally.

On what critera do you interpret one verse one way and the other a different way to suit YOUR personal sensibilities? If God is as magnanimous as you make him out to be, he could have given us something more easily interpretable, don't you think? If you had read my interacts collectively, you would,'t have presented me with the same question you have already asked and I have answered; going back a few years, I saw some similar themes on Hamidm's previous interacts as well.

You, willingly or unwillingly are held appropriately accountable and answerable to what goes around in Islam's name; and start DEFENDING the Bad with the Good; it is ONE PACKAGE wether you like it or not!

You can't just bail out by saying "that is not MY Islam"!

Khuda Hafiz; back to work

Re: # 225; tahmed,

P.S.: When Stephen Hawking was asked by an interviewer if he believed in God (because of references to THAT word in his books), his answer was that 'If by God you mean the collective forces of the universe, that have been involved right since the Big Bang to the present day, the apparent harmony in nature etc, then yes, but not as defined by religion'. (it is not word for word; from a TV interview I watched)

That, my friend is the God of the Philosophers/Scientists (e.g., Einstein) etc and I wouldn't mind refering to THAT as God, if calling it by that particular word keeps people happy.

As far as I am concerned, That Is It; NOTHING ELSE but man made rubbish.

Cheers

Re: # 226; tahmed

sorry to come back again; I don't want any potential un-answered questions here.

Read Gill Sahib's articles; there has been one on the Philosophical thought in the Muslim world. Iqbal etc, and many before, there whole objective of "thinking" has been to RE-AFFIRM what is already there; it is NOT ABOUT DISCOVERING/DEVELOPING anything new. Gill Sahib has already explained it very well.

As far as the Qur'an is concerned, a very poorly written, self-contradictory, confusing/confused, bit of rhetoric. I don't get tired of explaining it by quoting none other than the great "Abu Bakr Mohammed bin Zakariya Al-Razi" the great Muslim (?) scientist and philosopher. Goes like so:

"You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Qur'an. You say: "Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one." Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. ... By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: "Produce something like it"?!"

#221 Posted by akcheema.

Read Ghalib:"Eeman mujhe rokay hai, jo kheenche hai mujhe kufr; Kaaba mere peechhay hai kaleesa mere aagay"

My friend, I suggest you stick to Aziz Mian Qawwal, and leave Ghalib alone.

For instance, read the following and tell me what it means:

Usey kon dekh sakta, keh yagana hai woh yakta,
Jo dui ki bu bhi hoti, tau kaheen doochaar hota.

(Hint: It has something to do with 'Duality', or lack of it)

cheema sahib,

........ why are you talking to a doorknob (aka tahmed) ?????

Re: # 228 Zeemax bhai

Thank you sir. Please feel free to read my contributions towards the end on the Bulleh Shah board by Gill Sahib. I have spoken in reasonable detail about the concepts you are referring to. think it was in reply to Majfari Sahib.

Cheers

Re: # 229; hamidm sahib,

I think you are right; I give up!
Although saying that, my doorknob does respond more approprately to what it is meant to do!

Cheers

Re: # 228 Zeemax bhai;

I think I have written a lot on this subject in the Sufi context, and if my memory serves me right, you'd find it all on the Bulleh Shah board.

Just to finish off what you started; I think it is the second last sheyr, ends like:

"yeh masaa'il-e-tasawwuf, yeh tera beyan Ghalib
tujhe hum wali samajhte, jo na baada khwaar hota".

Apologise if made any mistakes.

Cheers

Re: # 232; Zeemax bhai

Ghalib also said something like

"Jabke tujh bin naheen koi maujood;
phir yeh hangaama ai khuda keya hai"

I am going to work

Cheers

Re: # 233 Zeemax

btw; we can also discuss the intricacies of "wahdat-ul-wujud" or its opposite in detail. Perhaps starting with Ibn-al-Arabi himself?

Personally I am of the opinion:

"dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum"!

Cheers and Khuda Hafiz for now.

akcheema ji

Hope you won't take hamidm2 too seriously and mistake your interlocutors here for doorknobs.

Neither is anyone here, on either side, deaf, or blind.

The problem is that you are trying to talk across the tallest and the most impenetrable dividing wall ever constructed on earth (or in heaven).

------------

BTW, it is patently unfair of you to tell tahmedji that he or any other Muslim 'can't bail out' by talking of HIS particular Islam. He does and will and has a right to, just as does and will every other Muslim. That is the essence of direct relationship to Allah (or Allah's message).

------------

And that's the wall that makes all communication (on the issues of interest to you) totally futile. Can you even imagine trying to use your 'reason' with a billion plus fully-believed-in 'Islams'?

How many will you talk to and convince - one, ten, two hundred, one million?

Hamidm: Namecalling is not an argument. And in any case, there are far more seasoned namecallers on chowk than you. So that leaves you neither here not there - just like "lost-my-deposit" lota rashid and the "rising sun" musharraf whom you were brilliantly predicting would oversmart everyone.

I could start competing with you in namecalling. But I wont. Because I like to believe that people sometimes sound more stupid on chowk than they actually are.

cheema sahib: i'll check out your posts and get back to you later.

Tahmed doesn't have a clue about anything, let alone the Quran, he reads (or better yet does not read) the Quran through the lenses of the white man's master symbols regarding his advertise "morality". In other words, he hold the Quran subordinate to what the white man tells him is correct and incorrect. Just like the "religious god" (has many varieties)- and only God knows what the hell he means by this as God has commonly been defined by religious institutions, reasoning through which led to his "philosophical god" (also having many varied varieties)- the facts are lost on him. He is spineless, moraless and thoughless. Many times (even as he has acknlowledged) he has copied what I have written about the Quran, mixed that with his white man worship and presented that as if it is "proof" of his idolatorous ways.

Science reveals a very specific God, rather than a "religious god" or a "philosophical god", consider what the facts show. That has been treated extensively by me and the article can be read here http://god.rationalreality.com

The hypocrite tahmed, is the very antithesis of the way of the Quran, ignore the fool...

By the way Negroponte is on his ultimatum tour again and he is visiting with the new PM, the opposition as well as the rat (president) and seperately with Kiyani- This trip is only for exchanging pleasantries, enjoying samosas with tea, it has no political agenda because as we all know there is no such thing as the US elite or their interest in Pakistan, according to the resident scholars tahmed, and hamidm.......these idiots will be denying US role in Pakistani affairs even when one of these days the thugs in washington declare that they have to liberate the people of Waziristan...

By the way the heading for my ilog about the Negroponte visit (below) is aptly put:

Barbarians at the Gate: Negroponte visits Pakistan....again