Headache and Heartburn

Humsab #205,

From when is Darwin`s theory an established scientific fact???

You are mixing theories and propositions of scientists with established facts.

As for Quran 36:40, what is wrong with this verse, it describes that the sun and moon move in their own distinct orbits and never collide with each other????????

As I told you before better read more of the Quran before you question.



All future discussion with me can be directed to my e-mail address: lil_web_surfer@yahoo.com

Good bye and See you all.

Re: Lubna #208

``--Oh, so when SOLITUDE goes hollering around about how ``wrong`` the beliefs of others are, that they need to be ``helped through the darkness of Islam`` towards his ``garden`` - the ``right path`` - it`s OKAY then huh?``

Are we in kindergarten here? ``He took my chocolate first so I took his``....I do this sometimes but I`m still maturing.

In any case, he has expressed his opinions (and defended them very well too I might add) and in return people could have expressed theirs...instead many people declared themselves soldier`s of god`s army and started attacking him.

Zahra #220
`` As far as the interest in other religions is concerned, it should draw ones attention when there is a serious need to learn more. Laiken, that is my personal view. I would be interested to know more of a religion only, if I am planning to marry someone from that religion or if I am conducting a research on certain behaviors.``

This `seige` or `ghetto` attitude is responsible for a lot of grief in the region where we come from. You are entitled to your beliefs and opinions but it seems you are implying that explaining our beliefs to others in their own terms of understanding or vice versa is somehow a `defiling` activity. I personally would would rather make efforts to respect and understand those around me than engage in such a `spurious` protection of myself.

If educated and articulate people have such an attitude of defensiveness as displayed by many on this board, why blame others less enlightened for being the same, only making the additional effort of being armed with dandas and weapons.

Sadhana

Zahra #220
``On your comment about Hindus being comfortable with all the questions and etc. I think at times you get carried away with your sweeping statements.``

Let me set you right on your understanding of my statement and your understanding of Hinduism. I didnot say that `Hindus` are comfortable with questioning, I said basic Hinduism is comfortable with and even demands questioning. This is not a matter of interpretation, its the basic underlying principle of a huge part of the philosophy now referred to as Hindu philosophy(one reason why its huge).There is enough in the scriptures which can be thrown at anyone who tries any armtwisting, to put it in the simplest terms. How those who are now posthumously called `Hindus` in the various ages have allowed/disallowed this basic principle to operate is another matter.

Now on to your own sweeping term : `confused`. How do you define confused? If its is so easy to demonstrate and prove `confused`, why not settle the question comprehensively and simply once and for all? If so much is invested in faith/belief/understanding, why isn`t there a better articulated and more valid defence for something held so dear ?

Sadhana

Sadna:

Just to assist you with the apparent confusion on board - issue vs the issue-raiser. I do not know about others, but I have interacted with Solitude Urf Athar Sheraz on other boards besides Chowk.
I understand his psychology very well. That`s why I ain`t regarding them[Issue vs Issue-rasiser] as different entities. He has been spelling out a lot of personal stories on different boards that gave a clear cut picture of his childhood. Simple! I would not like to go farther than that. If a child is pushed to do things, he is going to rebel. If a child observes malpractices, he is definitely a candidate for `Mr.Confused.`

As far as the interest in other religions is concerned, it should draw ones attention when there is a serious need to learn more. Laiken, that is my personal view. I would be interested to know more of a religion only, if I am planning to marry someone from that religion or if I am conducting a research on certain behaviors. As I am not involved in any of the above, therefore I will just say a polite hello to people from other faiths..... Theek Thaak ? Vul Raazi ? Again, that`s a personal view.

On your comment about Hindus being comfortable with all the questions and etc. I think at times you get carried away with your sweeping statements. You should say that YOU will be comfortable talking about your religion and addressing all the issues than speaking for your whole community. I cannot speak for my whole community and I won`t. Simply because some may know more than others, some may be Jahil-ae-Mutliq acting otherwise and some may know everything. How can I say that I can speak on behalf of all ? Can you ?


RSaxena:
I do not think the author needs to be thankful to Solitude at all. It is still this article that invoked turbulance in the minds and hearts of many. Her narrative includes her observations. How many people are that damn observant? Personally, I did not like the Baint Singh`s twist, otherwise it was an informative piece. It seems you have a hard time appreciating a woman`s thoughts.

Do you ?

:-)

RE: Rsaxena# 214

Trust me, once your name is up there under the article title you dont want that to happen to your thread unless that was what in your mind in the first place. And of course I can only speak for myself.

The worst thing you can do to a lady is to call her ``genderless``. I didnt know you were such an insensitive oaf :)

tahmed321 #212

Thanks for your post. You address the personal faith in God and the Prophet part of it. How about specific questions like personal habits say like alcohol, coexistence with nonbelievers and their beliefs, status of women, prescribed punishments for religious transgressors, what constitutes religious transgression, duties to the community, moral/religious authority granted to religious leaders, belief in interest-free economy, etc etc? Are these allowed to be matters of individual interpretation and choice, too, freely accepted as such by others ?

More than anything else I donot understand why, on this board the questions raised cannot be separated from the questioner.

Many have raised points about some literal religious `edicts` which could and have been used `against` others. I find noone answering Solitude`s points on these, rather I find them questioning his right to question and credibility as questioner. Its hard to understand how will it make those issues go away to attack him personally?

I have absolutely no desire to `convert`(no offence). Raising awkward questions in personal faith and to those who choose to preach their own version of `Hinduism` to others is an accepted way at least in modern times of getting there or not getting there. Another thing, ``There are many ways`` is a basic and fundamental feature.

Sadhana

``He proposes getting rid of the veil``

``He proposes banning the slaughtering of animals on various festivities such as Eid``

``If it’s wrong to propose using force upon a person to make them pray or fast or wear the hijab``

It IS wrong to propose using force upon a person when they are praying (as long as that person is praying in a secluded place out of the way of national highways- believe it or not Muslims pray by the sides of highways without the proper hazard lights and that is illegal).
It would be wrong to prevent Muslims from starving themselves.

It is wrong to prevent a person from wearing the clothing of their choice (if you want to announce your ``modesty`` by wearing veils).

As far as slaughtering of animals are concerned - we have developed more humane methods of slaughtering animals and the Islamic method is outdated. Ritual sacrifice of animals to prove your love for god or the poor is fine as long as you do not exercise extraordinary cruelty towards it.

PETA and other animal rights groups feel the Islamic method is excessively cruel (that may come as a surprise to a people who believe in crucifying human beings, chopping off their hands and feet, stoning them to death, lashing them and starving women ``till death over takes them``). [all quranic and sunnah related refs. will be provided].

If you understood my replies to say ``force muslims to not practise Islam`` then I was wrong. I do not advocate using force but displaying sporadic acts of religious disobediance. Acts that let the followers and their leaders know how the detractors feel about Islam.

One suggestion for reform :
- imparting critical skills that will allow Muslims to deconstruct the Quran.
- a less sanctimonious, violent attitude towards criticism.
- teaching constant self-searching, self- critical as a skill.

Regarding the prophets orders to assasinate poets, writers, intellectuals, artists, thinkers, women and old men kindly refer to the following (following are the oldest, the most reliable, the first ever and the source of all the other imitations, heavily relied upon by Muslim scholars - these are besides the traditional and widely known abuses and commandments in the Quran for slaughter ):

SIRAT RASUL ALLAH page 675,676 by Ibn Ishaq.
KITAB AL TABAQAT AL KABIR Volume 2, BY IBN SA`D(2) and volume 2, page 31
23 YEARS: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad``, by Ali Dashti.

A quote from one of them :

Abu Afak, a man of great age (reputedly 120 years) was killed because he wrote against Mohammad. The deed was done by Salem b. `Omayr at the behest of the Prophet, who had asked, ``Who will deal with this rascal for me?`` The killing of such an old man moved a poetess, Asma b. Marwan, to compose verses against the Prophet, and she too was assassinated.

--

I am researching the ahadith and tafasir (Ibn e Kathir) some more and I will equip you with more as I get the time.

Lastly what Farangi Kush qouted about ``no compulsion in religion`` (by Maulana Rizvi) is the standard, most popular and widely accepted reading of the Quran. Some non practising Muslim (from fear of looking unpopular amongst Non Muslims or moderates) might twist the meaning in their favor but it does not change the views of Islamic authorities and reputed Islamic Scholars, theologians.

Islam is presented to non muslims as harmless by non practising muslims (since they know the least about Islam ) meanwhile the devout Muslims devastate everything from the world trade center to Afghanistan to Indonesian massacres - but cloaking a serpent to look like a lovey-dovey rabbit only hides its poisonous nature (nothing against Muslims who are just victims of the poison not bad in themselves - just brainwashed like the Borg).

``Note:I understand arabic very well!`` - Khan2000

Think of the following verse of the Quran :

Wama arsalna min qablika min rasoolin wala nabiyyin illa itha tamanna alqa alshshaytanu fee omniyyatihi fayansakhu Allahu ma yulqee alshshaytanu thumma yuhkimu Allahu ayatihi waAllahu AAaleemun hakeemun.

and this one :

Afaraaytumu allata waalAAuzza
Wamanata alththalithata al-okhra

After you understand the above verses - read Ibn Said and Al Tabari and also express your opinions on :
Alla humma Inna Nasthaeenuqa wa Nasthaghfiraq
Wa Nuseey Alaika Wa La Naghfiruq
Wa nakhla wa Natruq Main Yafjuruq

Re: Umairr #108

Thanks for a very interesting post. Actually learnt quite a bit from it.

Re: Lubna`s various posts.

Nicely put. I won`t tell you that I agree with you lest the wrath of F_K et al be directed towards you as well.

Regards to all.

Re: Khan 2000 #180

Several states in the US ban first-cousin marriages. I guess they count as governments.

Re: Urstruly #177

Thanks. I just found the website and did not know the history. Some of there stuff is pretty clearly as extreme as the pro-Islam websites that attempt to ``prove`` that Islam has an answer to each and every single question.

Re: Fairdinkum #175

My knowledge of Islam is better than that of some and not as good as that of many, I guess. The product of several years of Islamiat in school, reading the Koran (Arabic and English translation), listening to people and watching them debate, a course on it in college, etc. I have forgotten much of what I knew/read since it did not interest me in the least until I found the Chowk website.

As far as my parents go, I think that the fundamental message of Islam is a realization that you are not the ultimate arbiter in this world (belief in God), respect for others, tolerance, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, however you want to phrase it. Pretty much the standard Judeo-Christian-Islamic line as accepted by all but the most reactionary elements in each religion.

They reject the most extreme forms of outward manifestions of Islamic piety that seem to obsess the ignorant: the need to keep a beard, the need to have your shalwar hiked up above the ankles, the need to pray five times a day, to wear a hijab, the belief that a masjid once built cannot be destroyed, the ban on interest, the fetish over halal meat when outside Pakistan, the fact that daughters must inherit less than sons, and the list goes on and on. In short, they do not accept the Koran and/or Hadiths as how-to manuals to live every facet of their day-to-day lives. They do not think that the Sharia is an appropriate legal code for the 20th/21st century. They do accept the Koran as laying out very broad guidelines as to what constitutes a `good` life.

I don`t know, maybe you would consider them non-Muslims. Thats your problem.

As I have said umpteen times, I have nothing against Islam or any one wanting to live their life according to its tenets (however defined). I merely object to any one insisting that I, or any one else live, my life according to it. That is the source of the ``1400 year old...`` crack. I do not accept that life and the world now are exactly the same as life and the world 1400 years ago. The only timeless message in the Koran is the same one as in the Old and New Testament. It is not about the regulation of beard length or the need to levy zakat at 1/40th rate.

Regards.

sadna #201 Further to my previous post, I think it is dangerous for your to ask such questions: we might end up convincing you to convert to Islam (just kidding, I am sure you can find your own path to God via Hinduism or Christianity or any other of the better known religions).

sadna #201 you ask ``My question is how literally should one believe in `revealed` books to qualify as true believer? Is intepretation an individual choice or what religious elders of that time pronounce?``

Here is one answer: A person can believe anything in order to be a true believer. If the person believes in God, then he is a true believer in God, otherwise he is not.

In order to be a true muslim, one needs to go an extra step (and no more): One needs to believe in the Kalima: ``There is no god but God and Mohammed is his massenger``. This to me is the part one must truly believe in order to qualify as a muslim.

What is God for a muslim? Muslims know God by 99 attributes, and also know that they can never know his remaining attributes.

What is the god that a muslim must not believe in? These are entities possessing attributes that are the opposite of the known 99 attributes. This means, we must shun cruelty (since God is Kind), greed (since God is Generous), and so forth.

Who is Mohammed for a muslim? A messenger, nothing more and nothing less than a human being. He is not important, the message he conveyed is important.

What is God`s message? First: try to understand God by appreciating his creation. Second: act in ways that indicate compliance (or submission) to the attributes of God.

You may not believe in all this, but that is your choice and for a muslim does not mean you are any less closer to God than a true muslim.

I dont say all muslims believe or act in accordance with this, nor do I claim to have lived up to God`s message. But you asked about beleifs, and these are the muslim beliefs that a good muslim should try to live up to.

Re: Urstruly

``I think the authoress (just trying to be politically correct here) must have grown an ulcer by now after seeing what people have done to her thread.``

I think the author (Iit is a non-gender specific term I believe) should thank Solitude for making this board interesting enough to get over 200 responses...else it would have gotten 15-20 and been passed by without notice.

Re Tahmed

You don`t consider yourself prejudiced, yet you do make comments that appear that way to many people on the other side. Likewise, the same yardstick also applies to me. Just as you think I am unreceptive to criticism, I believe you too are unreceptive too. You say to-ma-toe, I say to-mah-to. Perceptions versus reality.

That`s life.

Krashid,

So much for the Ummah/Arabs standing together with Pakistan to fight India eh? Iraqi leaders are in India signing all sorts of ``strategic partnerships`` covering not only oil but other political matters too.

http://asia.dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/asia/article.html?s=asia/headlines/001129/asia/afp/Iraq_to_forge_strategic_partnership_with_India__sell_oil.html

my dear solitude!

what a command performance.

i`ve yet to come across one person hold an argument against so many with such grace and balance and dignity.

i join you in your rejection of this violence and hypocrisy and bigotry that is islam and hinduism and christianity, my friend.

i asked maharashtra`s vishwa hindu parishad`s president to write on the subject of hindus and tolerance and he`s sent in 947 words today without a mention of caste. to the shudra and the dalit, the very notion of equating hinduism with tolerance will be laughable and yet this calumny of our religion being benign is propogated by the ignorant.

the manusmriti with all its attendant bigotry has ruled india for over 2 millenia to our undying shame and we want to make a song and dance about this and call hinduism the world`s most ancient culture of tolerance.

i am quite appalled by the responses to your writing, especially by people seeking to portray you as racist.

even your non-violent rejection of their ideas is seen as dangerous by these fundamentalists.

warm regards

aakar patel