The world of the Wise Lord
Nazar Khan February 8, 2005
#73 Posted by echoboom on February 10, 2005 10:50:05 am
Shoresahib:72
Only THIS* portion was addressed to you with clear caveat:
The rest was NOT for you. Whoever is a mushrik, mulla, fundamentalist, moderate or `modern` will understand.
Any muslim will not have any problem with that.
Whosoever expects rights to be given or awarded never has any rights anyway. I hope you never got the rights from anywhere to obtain the right to ask ``who gave..``
The answer to the rest has been ignored by me.
*The fountainhood of all sufis, Ali Mowla, is a paragon & paramount example for all of us to follow. An Imam, a Khalifa, A Quazi, A Mufti, a Mulla, a Mowlana, a soldier, a statesman, an administrator , as well as a shining beacon for all , muslim & non-muslim alike, till eternity*
subject is closed from this end. You can write whatever and that`ll be fine with me.
Only THIS* portion was addressed to you with clear caveat:
The rest was NOT for you. Whoever is a mushrik, mulla, fundamentalist, moderate or `modern` will understand.
Any muslim will not have any problem with that.
Whosoever expects rights to be given or awarded never has any rights anyway. I hope you never got the rights from anywhere to obtain the right to ask ``who gave..``
The answer to the rest has been ignored by me.
*The fountainhood of all sufis, Ali Mowla, is a paragon & paramount example for all of us to follow. An Imam, a Khalifa, A Quazi, A Mufti, a Mulla, a Mowlana, a soldier, a statesman, an administrator , as well as a shining beacon for all , muslim & non-muslim alike, till eternity*
subject is closed from this end. You can write whatever and that`ll be fine with me.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#72 Posted by ShoreSahib on February 10, 2005 10:14:41 am
Re: # 70
What do you mean? Your reply is unclear,
``And I would agree with you a 100%, only if margarine muslims were not privy to this.`` EchoBoom
``That post (#63) was not meant for muslims; or kaafirs either. It was meant for mushriks , murtids, munaafiques, zindeeques, ilhaadees,etc [ in english: margarine muslims, marginalised muslims, `modern` muslims, `moderate` muslims, etc etc]`` echoboom
What do you mean by the comment stated above? Did you coin this term margarine muslims? Since when do Mushriks and ``modern muslims, Moderate muslims, and marginalized muslims etc`` were lumped in the same pile.
Who gave you the right to call other Muslims Mushrik?
How can you point out the splinter in your fellow Muslim brother`s eye when you have a log in your own.
Tuff Hai
What do you mean? Your reply is unclear,
``And I would agree with you a 100%, only if margarine muslims were not privy to this.`` EchoBoom
``That post (#63) was not meant for muslims; or kaafirs either. It was meant for mushriks , murtids, munaafiques, zindeeques, ilhaadees,etc [ in english: margarine muslims, marginalised muslims, `modern` muslims, `moderate` muslims, etc etc]`` echoboom
What do you mean by the comment stated above? Did you coin this term margarine muslims? Since when do Mushriks and ``modern muslims, Moderate muslims, and marginalized muslims etc`` were lumped in the same pile.
Who gave you the right to call other Muslims Mushrik?
How can you point out the splinter in your fellow Muslim brother`s eye when you have a log in your own.
Tuff Hai
#71 Posted by amrita on February 10, 2005 10:14:00 am
Re: # 62
Feroz - its quite possible the hymn book you saw was written in Gujarati as any number of Parsis call Gujarat home and speak the language. There is nothing especially Hindu about it - the script is also called Gujarati and looks like a variant of Devanagiri, which is what Sanskrit and Hindi are written in. It is spoken on both sides of the border although there are a number of dialects and I believe in Pakistan the primary dialect is Karachi. I could be wrong about that, though. In India, most Indian Gujaratis speak a variant of Kutchi. But the script is unaffected by dialect or by religion or caste. If your grandparents hailed from Bombay then it is all the more possible that it is written in Gujarati as modern day Maharashtra and Gujarat were once Bombay State - Bombay Presidency under the British.
As a sidenote, I see this board has succumbed to the pull of Aurangazeb. Too bad no one can ever write a decent biography of the man. Kind of like Jinnah, I guess.
Feroz - its quite possible the hymn book you saw was written in Gujarati as any number of Parsis call Gujarat home and speak the language. There is nothing especially Hindu about it - the script is also called Gujarati and looks like a variant of Devanagiri, which is what Sanskrit and Hindi are written in. It is spoken on both sides of the border although there are a number of dialects and I believe in Pakistan the primary dialect is Karachi. I could be wrong about that, though. In India, most Indian Gujaratis speak a variant of Kutchi. But the script is unaffected by dialect or by religion or caste. If your grandparents hailed from Bombay then it is all the more possible that it is written in Gujarati as modern day Maharashtra and Gujarat were once Bombay State - Bombay Presidency under the British.
As a sidenote, I see this board has succumbed to the pull of Aurangazeb. Too bad no one can ever write a decent biography of the man. Kind of like Jinnah, I guess.
#70 Posted by echoboom on February 10, 2005 9:26:54 am
65:shoresahib
And I would agree with you a 100%, only if margarine muslims were not privy to this.
The fountainhood of all sufis, Ali Mowla, is a paragon & paramount example for all of us to follow. An Imam, a Khalifa, A Quazi, A Mufti, a Mulla, a Mowlana, a soldier, a statesman, an administrator , as well as a shining beacon for all , muslim & non-muslim alike, till eternity.
Now is there ANY muslim who would have an iota of argument about that?
That post (#63) was not meant for muslims; or kaafirs either. It was meant for mushriks , murtids, munaafiques, zindeeques, ilhaadees,etc [ in english: margarine muslims, marginalised muslims, `modern` muslims, `moderate` muslims, etc etc]
And I would agree with you a 100%, only if margarine muslims were not privy to this.
The fountainhood of all sufis, Ali Mowla, is a paragon & paramount example for all of us to follow. An Imam, a Khalifa, A Quazi, A Mufti, a Mulla, a Mowlana, a soldier, a statesman, an administrator , as well as a shining beacon for all , muslim & non-muslim alike, till eternity.
Now is there ANY muslim who would have an iota of argument about that?
That post (#63) was not meant for muslims; or kaafirs either. It was meant for mushriks , murtids, munaafiques, zindeeques, ilhaadees,etc [ in english: margarine muslims, marginalised muslims, `modern` muslims, `moderate` muslims, etc etc]
#69 Posted by kaurasach on February 10, 2005 9:25:35 am
Aurangzeb`s tyranny towards non muslims is the cause of destruction of the Mughal dynasty. Had he been less fanatical, the Marathas, Jats, even Rajputs (who were usually loyal allies) and sikhs had not revolted.
Reality seldom mirrors books. The token tax may have been an excuse to put burden on the masses, many of whom couldn`t afford even the token taxes. Hindus formed about 1/2 of the campaign armies, since they did millitary service, why were they still subjected to the tax?
Reality seldom mirrors books. The token tax may have been an excuse to put burden on the masses, many of whom couldn`t afford even the token taxes. Hindus formed about 1/2 of the campaign armies, since they did millitary service, why were they still subjected to the tax?
#68 Posted by kaurasach on February 10, 2005 9:21:32 am
Aurangzeb`s Jizya.
``From the standpoint of Aurangzeb`s Hindu subjects, the real impact of his policies may have started to have been felt in 1668-69. Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in 1668, and an edict of the following year prohibited construction of Hindu temples as well as the repair of old ones. Also in 1669, Aurangzeb discontinued the practice, which had been originated by Akbar, of appearing before his subjects and conferring darshan on them, or letting them receive his blessings as one might, in Hinduism, take the darshan of a deity and so receive its blessings. Though the duty (internal customs fees) paid on goods was 2.5%, double the amount was levied on Hindu merchants from 1665 onwards. In 1679, Aurangzeb went so far as to reimpose, contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, the jiziya or graduated property tax on non-Hindus, and according to one historical source, elephants were deployed to crush the resistance in the area surrounding the Red Fort of Hindus who refused to submit to jiziya collectors. The historian John F. Richards opines, quite candidly, that ``Aurangzeb`s ultimate aim was conversion of non-Muslims to Islam. Whenever possible the emperor gave out robes of honor, cash gifts, and promotions to converts. It quickly became known that conversion was a sure way to the emperor`s favor`` (p. 177).``
``From the standpoint of Aurangzeb`s Hindu subjects, the real impact of his policies may have started to have been felt in 1668-69. Hindu religious fairs were outlawed in 1668, and an edict of the following year prohibited construction of Hindu temples as well as the repair of old ones. Also in 1669, Aurangzeb discontinued the practice, which had been originated by Akbar, of appearing before his subjects and conferring darshan on them, or letting them receive his blessings as one might, in Hinduism, take the darshan of a deity and so receive its blessings. Though the duty (internal customs fees) paid on goods was 2.5%, double the amount was levied on Hindu merchants from 1665 onwards. In 1679, Aurangzeb went so far as to reimpose, contrary to the advice of many of his court nobles and theologians, the jiziya or graduated property tax on non-Hindus, and according to one historical source, elephants were deployed to crush the resistance in the area surrounding the Red Fort of Hindus who refused to submit to jiziya collectors. The historian John F. Richards opines, quite candidly, that ``Aurangzeb`s ultimate aim was conversion of non-Muslims to Islam. Whenever possible the emperor gave out robes of honor, cash gifts, and promotions to converts. It quickly became known that conversion was a sure way to the emperor`s favor`` (p. 177).``
#67 Posted by Urstruly on February 10, 2005 9:04:41 am
Re: # 54 Sameer
Although your comparison is correct, however, the total paradigm thru which we should see the American invasion has changed from the paradigm through which we should see the interaction between Roman, Islamic, and Persian Empires. In this day and age man has been able to cause the evolution of international laws that have helped him establish various international institutions like UN, International Criminal Court, Interpol, and various other bilateral and multilateral iunstitutions and forums. With the emregence of politiocal and economic systems such as European Union, NAFTA, SARC, SAAF and various other forums and institutions world was heading towards a ``collaborative`` globalization saying good bye to its dog-eat-dog neighborhood. The American and Western invasion of Muslim lands has practically rendered these institutions and the evolution of international law and institutions defunct and pushed them back to the era of colonilism and to the era of dominant and subject empires and nations. We are all back to square one. Humanity had suffered immensely all around the globe during the two world wars to finally set foot into a collaborative coexistence. And we are back to the age of Empires. In a closely knit globalized world in near future Muslims will never accept the status of third class citizens of the world. Muslims will never accept a political order of the world where they are subjects of someone else. This perception is thus causing the a global unrest in Muslims - that is the imeptus for the global sedition against this unjust political order that is being imposed upon them and hence we are heading for a very long and sustained bloody conflict unless some radical change takes place unexpectedly.
Although your comparison is correct, however, the total paradigm thru which we should see the American invasion has changed from the paradigm through which we should see the interaction between Roman, Islamic, and Persian Empires. In this day and age man has been able to cause the evolution of international laws that have helped him establish various international institutions like UN, International Criminal Court, Interpol, and various other bilateral and multilateral iunstitutions and forums. With the emregence of politiocal and economic systems such as European Union, NAFTA, SARC, SAAF and various other forums and institutions world was heading towards a ``collaborative`` globalization saying good bye to its dog-eat-dog neighborhood. The American and Western invasion of Muslim lands has practically rendered these institutions and the evolution of international law and institutions defunct and pushed them back to the era of colonilism and to the era of dominant and subject empires and nations. We are all back to square one. Humanity had suffered immensely all around the globe during the two world wars to finally set foot into a collaborative coexistence. And we are back to the age of Empires. In a closely knit globalized world in near future Muslims will never accept the status of third class citizens of the world. Muslims will never accept a political order of the world where they are subjects of someone else. This perception is thus causing the a global unrest in Muslims - that is the imeptus for the global sedition against this unjust political order that is being imposed upon them and hence we are heading for a very long and sustained bloody conflict unless some radical change takes place unexpectedly.
#66 Posted by Urstruly on February 10, 2005 8:34:34 am
Re: # 54 Sameer
I think your contention is historically inaccurate. Islamic state originally have been a city state as it was the political system of the day. Outside the cities there were nomads or baduins who practiced a tribal structure. As the Islam spread outside the boundaries of the state of Mecca and Medina there rose a need for a political structure that should go beyond the city limits. For example, the first Caliph Abu Bakr`s (RA) attempts at streamlining the system of Zakat and its imposition upon all Muslims whether they lived in the twin city states or not and later Omar`s (RAs) attempts to impose levies and taxes that were based on Roman system demanded a rigid political-state structure. The emrgence of a unified Islamic state in Arabia was a natural outcome of this need.
Now at the time Arabia was surrounded by two superpower empires who were often competing and fighting with each other to gain more territory and extend their tax and revenue base - these superpowers were the Roman Empire in the West and the Persian Empire in the East. The eastern coast of Africa and Yemen in the South and mesopotemia in East had been the battleground between two empires for the centuries. Both super powers were seeing the emergence of a Mulsim state right in their midst and its emergence as a new political order as a threat to their vested interests of the centuries. The Muslim invasion of West in Africa and Persia in East was inevitable and natural outcome of this hostility towards them from the centuries old empires who would not tolerate another compatitor. Had Romans not been busy in their contests in Northern Europe and had the Persians not been recovering from a recent defeat in Yemen by local Roman backed Christians, they would have pre-empted it. Arabs were living in a tough and unforgiving neighborhood.
Your comparison with recent American and Western invasion of Muslim lands is appropriate. America and West see the emerging Islamic ideology as a threat to their vested monitary interests which they have established and strengthened since the colonial period. They have immensely benefitted from the natural resources that belong to Muslim and other helpless African and Latin American nations. Islam is one political ideology that is seeing an eye to eye with this historical injustice in this day and age. West has pre-empted this time to preserve their interests. The war cry of `democracy and freedom` is just a hogwash. Democracy and freedom can only spread by example and persuation and not through murder, mayhem, and subjugation. If America and West mean what they say then their best option is to establish democracy and freedom in the freindly and allied states, for example, Pakistan and Egypt. On the other hand Paksiatni dictator is rendered the status of state guest in America and West and he stays at Camp David as state guest. The same thing goes with Hosni Mubarak. America has a ``friendly`` occupation in Gulf States for the past couple of decades, their best chances to promote democracy was there. Why did they have to commit genocide of Iraqis who had nothing to do with anything related to America except that they dared threaten the American interests by invading Kuwait and they had to be punished. That is how the world works. Sometimes, pre-emption is for survival, and sometimes it is for dominance.
I think your contention is historically inaccurate. Islamic state originally have been a city state as it was the political system of the day. Outside the cities there were nomads or baduins who practiced a tribal structure. As the Islam spread outside the boundaries of the state of Mecca and Medina there rose a need for a political structure that should go beyond the city limits. For example, the first Caliph Abu Bakr`s (RA) attempts at streamlining the system of Zakat and its imposition upon all Muslims whether they lived in the twin city states or not and later Omar`s (RAs) attempts to impose levies and taxes that were based on Roman system demanded a rigid political-state structure. The emrgence of a unified Islamic state in Arabia was a natural outcome of this need.
Now at the time Arabia was surrounded by two superpower empires who were often competing and fighting with each other to gain more territory and extend their tax and revenue base - these superpowers were the Roman Empire in the West and the Persian Empire in the East. The eastern coast of Africa and Yemen in the South and mesopotemia in East had been the battleground between two empires for the centuries. Both super powers were seeing the emergence of a Mulsim state right in their midst and its emergence as a new political order as a threat to their vested interests of the centuries. The Muslim invasion of West in Africa and Persia in East was inevitable and natural outcome of this hostility towards them from the centuries old empires who would not tolerate another compatitor. Had Romans not been busy in their contests in Northern Europe and had the Persians not been recovering from a recent defeat in Yemen by local Roman backed Christians, they would have pre-empted it. Arabs were living in a tough and unforgiving neighborhood.
Your comparison with recent American and Western invasion of Muslim lands is appropriate. America and West see the emerging Islamic ideology as a threat to their vested monitary interests which they have established and strengthened since the colonial period. They have immensely benefitted from the natural resources that belong to Muslim and other helpless African and Latin American nations. Islam is one political ideology that is seeing an eye to eye with this historical injustice in this day and age. West has pre-empted this time to preserve their interests. The war cry of `democracy and freedom` is just a hogwash. Democracy and freedom can only spread by example and persuation and not through murder, mayhem, and subjugation. If America and West mean what they say then their best option is to establish democracy and freedom in the freindly and allied states, for example, Pakistan and Egypt. On the other hand Paksiatni dictator is rendered the status of state guest in America and West and he stays at Camp David as state guest. The same thing goes with Hosni Mubarak. America has a ``friendly`` occupation in Gulf States for the past couple of decades, their best chances to promote democracy was there. Why did they have to commit genocide of Iraqis who had nothing to do with anything related to America except that they dared threaten the American interests by invading Kuwait and they had to be punished. That is how the world works. Sometimes, pre-emption is for survival, and sometimes it is for dominance.
#65 Posted by ShoreSahib on February 10, 2005 7:53:18 am
``They need the mullah, the mullah does not need them`` EchoBoom
Muslims need only the Quran and God. The Islamic Clergy is neither needed nor required. It is these Mullahs that have taken Muslims down this path of present wretchedness.
Muslims if on the right path were supposed to inherit the earth, but yet they are the beggars of the world, and they have no one to blame but themselves and their Mullahs.
Sufi Couplet:
The Mullah and the lamp are both such losers
For they spread light amongst people, yet themselves are in utter darkness
Muslims need only the Quran and God. The Islamic Clergy is neither needed nor required. It is these Mullahs that have taken Muslims down this path of present wretchedness.
Muslims if on the right path were supposed to inherit the earth, but yet they are the beggars of the world, and they have no one to blame but themselves and their Mullahs.
Sufi Couplet:
The Mullah and the lamp are both such losers
For they spread light amongst people, yet themselves are in utter darkness
#64 Posted by Urstruly on February 10, 2005 7:49:27 am
Re: # 57
Rahulmal & Kalchakra
Contrary to the popular belief, Jaziayah is not a punitive tax according to the Islamic Law; it should rather be regarded as a token tax, since the amount that it requires to pay is quite insignificant. For example, under Hanfi Jurespridence, the amount to be paid is equivalent to the price of food, that one person consumes in ten days in a year. For eaxmple, US government, sets this amount to be $7 per day and if it were to impose Jaziya tax it would have been $70 per year. The tax applies only to able bodied males in a family; For example in a family of five where children are minor, the family pays $ 70 a year. Women, eldrely, children, disabled, idiots, monks, preists, and members of religious establishment are exempt. The Shafi juresprudence sets its value higher and equal to that of one gold dinar - but that might be due to the relative prosperity in the time of Imam Shafii. The basic principle to calculate Jaziyah in any time, however, is the amount equivalent to the food that is required for the sustenance of a man for ten days.
With this token tax, the non-Muslims are rendered exempt from the compulsory military training and Jihad which is incumbent upon every able bodied Muslim citizen. Non-Muslims are also allowed to maintain their lifestyle that is comensurate with their value system but not that of Islamic values, for example, consumption of Alcohol etc. They are also allowed to conduct their manner of business, for example an interest based business, which is not allowed in a Muslim business ethics.
This as a matter of fact establishes a parity among the citizenary of the people of different faiths. The social contract thus allows, non-Muslim citizens self autonomy to the extent that they can have their own judicial body and a local bodies to conduct their own affairs.
The above is not just an ideological discourse, but this system was actually remained in practice until the Ottoman Caliphate collapsed. In Ottoman Caliphate this system was called the Millat System. In modern times, the constitution of India, grants this judicial autonomy to its Muslim citizens- what it lacks is the legislative autonomy to keep the judicial process evolving - Millat system on the other hand also provided the legislative (in a sense that is comensurate with the institutions that existed at the time) autonomy as well.
Rahulmal & Kalchakra
Contrary to the popular belief, Jaziayah is not a punitive tax according to the Islamic Law; it should rather be regarded as a token tax, since the amount that it requires to pay is quite insignificant. For example, under Hanfi Jurespridence, the amount to be paid is equivalent to the price of food, that one person consumes in ten days in a year. For eaxmple, US government, sets this amount to be $7 per day and if it were to impose Jaziya tax it would have been $70 per year. The tax applies only to able bodied males in a family; For example in a family of five where children are minor, the family pays $ 70 a year. Women, eldrely, children, disabled, idiots, monks, preists, and members of religious establishment are exempt. The Shafi juresprudence sets its value higher and equal to that of one gold dinar - but that might be due to the relative prosperity in the time of Imam Shafii. The basic principle to calculate Jaziyah in any time, however, is the amount equivalent to the food that is required for the sustenance of a man for ten days.
With this token tax, the non-Muslims are rendered exempt from the compulsory military training and Jihad which is incumbent upon every able bodied Muslim citizen. Non-Muslims are also allowed to maintain their lifestyle that is comensurate with their value system but not that of Islamic values, for example, consumption of Alcohol etc. They are also allowed to conduct their manner of business, for example an interest based business, which is not allowed in a Muslim business ethics.
This as a matter of fact establishes a parity among the citizenary of the people of different faiths. The social contract thus allows, non-Muslim citizens self autonomy to the extent that they can have their own judicial body and a local bodies to conduct their own affairs.
The above is not just an ideological discourse, but this system was actually remained in practice until the Ottoman Caliphate collapsed. In Ottoman Caliphate this system was called the Millat System. In modern times, the constitution of India, grants this judicial autonomy to its Muslim citizens- what it lacks is the legislative autonomy to keep the judicial process evolving - Millat system on the other hand also provided the legislative (in a sense that is comensurate with the institutions that existed at the time) autonomy as well.
#63 Posted by echoboom on February 10, 2005 6:45:01 am
For Urstruly, Vertex and other muslims only:
The constituition of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Read it, could be quite an eye-opener for the condemned & wretched nay-sayers and ill-wishers of Islam and muslims. Quite an intellectual arsenal here to confront the westoxicated bums & punks--the munaafiques, the marginalised, and the margarines.
All of them will revert before their own D-day. They all do. We all witness how their family-folk invite that very mullah who these godforsaken ones so despised on their Keyboards.
They need the mullah, the mullah does not need them.
some relevant excerpts from the Islamic Republic of Iran`s constituition:
Article 12: The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelver Ja`fari school [in usual al-Din and fiqh], and this principle will remain eternally immutable. Other Islamic schools, including the Hanafi, Shafi`i, Maliki, Hanbali, and Zaydi, are to be accorded full respect, and their followers are free to act in accordance with their own jurisprudence in performing their religious rites. These schools enjoy official status in matters pertaining to religious education, affairs of personal status (marriage, divorce, inheritance, and wills) and related litigation in courts of law. In regions of the country where Muslims following any one of these schools of fiqh constitute the majority, local regulations, within the bounds of the jurisdiction of local councils, are to be in accordance with the respective school of fiqh, without infringing upon the rights of the followers of other schools.
Article 13: Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian Iranians are the only recognized religious minorities, who, within the limits of the law, are free to perform their religious rites and ceremonies, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education.
Article 14: In accordance with the sacred verse; (``God does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with those who have not fought against you because of your religion and who have not expelled you from your homes`` [60:8]), the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and all Muslims are duty-bound to treat non-Muslims in conformity with ethical norms and the principles of Islamic justice and equity, and to respect their human rights. This principle applies to all who refrain from engaging in conspiracy or activity against Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The constituition of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Read it, could be quite an eye-opener for the condemned & wretched nay-sayers and ill-wishers of Islam and muslims. Quite an intellectual arsenal here to confront the westoxicated bums & punks--the munaafiques, the marginalised, and the margarines.
All of them will revert before their own D-day. They all do. We all witness how their family-folk invite that very mullah who these godforsaken ones so despised on their Keyboards.
They need the mullah, the mullah does not need them.
some relevant excerpts from the Islamic Republic of Iran`s constituition:
Article 12: The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelver Ja`fari school [in usual al-Din and fiqh], and this principle will remain eternally immutable. Other Islamic schools, including the Hanafi, Shafi`i, Maliki, Hanbali, and Zaydi, are to be accorded full respect, and their followers are free to act in accordance with their own jurisprudence in performing their religious rites. These schools enjoy official status in matters pertaining to religious education, affairs of personal status (marriage, divorce, inheritance, and wills) and related litigation in courts of law. In regions of the country where Muslims following any one of these schools of fiqh constitute the majority, local regulations, within the bounds of the jurisdiction of local councils, are to be in accordance with the respective school of fiqh, without infringing upon the rights of the followers of other schools.
Article 13: Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian Iranians are the only recognized religious minorities, who, within the limits of the law, are free to perform their religious rites and ceremonies, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education.
Article 14: In accordance with the sacred verse; (``God does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with those who have not fought against you because of your religion and who have not expelled you from your homes`` [60:8]), the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and all Muslims are duty-bound to treat non-Muslims in conformity with ethical norms and the principles of Islamic justice and equity, and to respect their human rights. This principle applies to all who refrain from engaging in conspiracy or activity against Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
#62 Posted by ferozk on February 10, 2005 6:27:05 am
Nazar et al:
This is turning out be a very interesting discussion and I have already passed along your article to my Parsi friends. I am told that there is an international directory of all the Parsis in the world, which is maintained out of the United States though I have yet to access it. I am sure that if you have the time and you do a Google search, you can find a Parsi organization, which might be interested in preserving this article and this interact discussion within its own publications. I think it should be preserved as an example of oral history on a religion, which is not that well known, but seems to have influenced all the major religions of the world.
Since, there is a discussion going on the comparative nature of Zorastrianism and Hinduism, I think that I should point out an interesting fact. I very clearly remember that the old Zorastrian hymn book of my late grandmother was written in a Hindu text. Since I am not a linguist, I am not sure whether it was Sanskrit or later day Hindi, but the letters/words looked quite similar to what modern day Hindu script looks like today. The only explantion I can think of is that since my grandparents` family was from Bombay, it could be just a coincidence that hymns were in a Hindu text. The other explantion is that my mother tongue is Gujrati, the language/text which I am assuming is Hindu based, could be a Gujrati text for all I know. Since I can understand Gujrati fluently and can speak a little bit of it and I also know what Hindi sounds like, I do not feel that my explantions are credible in explaining why the hymns were written in what looks like a Hindu text.
If there is anyone on Chowk, who can explain this puzzle, what a Gujrati text looks like, I would apprectiate the insights.
Ciao
This is turning out be a very interesting discussion and I have already passed along your article to my Parsi friends. I am told that there is an international directory of all the Parsis in the world, which is maintained out of the United States though I have yet to access it. I am sure that if you have the time and you do a Google search, you can find a Parsi organization, which might be interested in preserving this article and this interact discussion within its own publications. I think it should be preserved as an example of oral history on a religion, which is not that well known, but seems to have influenced all the major religions of the world.
Since, there is a discussion going on the comparative nature of Zorastrianism and Hinduism, I think that I should point out an interesting fact. I very clearly remember that the old Zorastrian hymn book of my late grandmother was written in a Hindu text. Since I am not a linguist, I am not sure whether it was Sanskrit or later day Hindi, but the letters/words looked quite similar to what modern day Hindu script looks like today. The only explantion I can think of is that since my grandparents` family was from Bombay, it could be just a coincidence that hymns were in a Hindu text. The other explantion is that my mother tongue is Gujrati, the language/text which I am assuming is Hindu based, could be a Gujrati text for all I know. Since I can understand Gujrati fluently and can speak a little bit of it and I also know what Hindi sounds like, I do not feel that my explantions are credible in explaining why the hymns were written in what looks like a Hindu text.
If there is anyone on Chowk, who can explain this puzzle, what a Gujrati text looks like, I would apprectiate the insights.
Ciao
#61 Posted by ferozk on February 10, 2005 6:24:56 am
Nazar et al:
This is turning out be a very interesting discussion and I have already passed along your article to my Parsi friends. I am told that there is an international directory of all the Parsis in the world, which is maintained out of the United States though I have yet to access it. I am sure that if you have the time and you do a Google search, you can find a Parsi organization, which might be interested in preserving this article and this interact discussion within its own publications. I think it should be preserved as an example of oral history on a religion, which is not that well known, but seems to have influenced all the major religions of the world.
Since, there is a discussion going on the comparative nature of Zorastrianism and Hinduism, I think that I should point out an interesting fact. I very clearly remember that the old Zorastrian hymn book of my late grandmother was written in a Hindu text. Since I am not a linguist, I am not sure whether it was Sanskrit or later day Hindi, but the letters/words looked quite similar to what modern day Hindu script looks like today. The only explantion I can think of is that since my grandparents` family was from Bombay, it could be just a coincidence that hymns were in a Hindu text. The other explantion is that my mother tongue is Gujrati, the language/text which I am assuming is Hindu based, could be a Gujrati text for all I know. Since I can understand Gujrati fluently and can speak a little bit of it and I also know what Hindi sounds like, I do not feel that my explantions are credible in explaining why the hymns were written in what looks like a Hindu text.
If there is anyone on Chowk, who can explain this puzzle, what a Gujrati text looks like, I would apprectiate the insights.
Ciao
This is turning out be a very interesting discussion and I have already passed along your article to my Parsi friends. I am told that there is an international directory of all the Parsis in the world, which is maintained out of the United States though I have yet to access it. I am sure that if you have the time and you do a Google search, you can find a Parsi organization, which might be interested in preserving this article and this interact discussion within its own publications. I think it should be preserved as an example of oral history on a religion, which is not that well known, but seems to have influenced all the major religions of the world.
Since, there is a discussion going on the comparative nature of Zorastrianism and Hinduism, I think that I should point out an interesting fact. I very clearly remember that the old Zorastrian hymn book of my late grandmother was written in a Hindu text. Since I am not a linguist, I am not sure whether it was Sanskrit or later day Hindi, but the letters/words looked quite similar to what modern day Hindu script looks like today. The only explantion I can think of is that since my grandparents` family was from Bombay, it could be just a coincidence that hymns were in a Hindu text. The other explantion is that my mother tongue is Gujrati, the language/text which I am assuming is Hindu based, could be a Gujrati text for all I know. Since I can understand Gujrati fluently and can speak a little bit of it and I also know what Hindi sounds like, I do not feel that my explantions are credible in explaining why the hymns were written in what looks like a Hindu text.
If there is anyone on Chowk, who can explain this puzzle, what a Gujrati text looks like, I would apprectiate the insights.
Ciao
#60 Posted by KaalChakra on February 9, 2005 11:23:28 pm
nazar khan
Glad you took that tongue-in-cheek remark with humor.
Not to forget, the `cousins` in India too followed precisely your suggested trajectory of decay. If the Zorastrian seeds of good versus evil ultimately produced the semitic religions, the karma concept of the Indic cousins led inexorably to caste system.
In a basic sense, the caste system and the semitic religions are reflections of each other - one blames its victim for `wrong acts,` the other for following the `non god.`
Glad you took that tongue-in-cheek remark with humor.
Not to forget, the `cousins` in India too followed precisely your suggested trajectory of decay. If the Zorastrian seeds of good versus evil ultimately produced the semitic religions, the karma concept of the Indic cousins led inexorably to caste system.
In a basic sense, the caste system and the semitic religions are reflections of each other - one blames its victim for `wrong acts,` the other for following the `non god.`
#59 Posted by KaalChakra on February 9, 2005 11:09:38 pm
Rahul
Politics and religion are not contrary principles. They coexist and complement. An active power equation does not remove religion from the mix. Power can bring religion to the top, and religion can enhance or diminish the drive for power over specific others.
This is just another form of the nonproductive materialist/idealist debate. Do you happen to be a pure materialist? :)
Politics and religion are not contrary principles. They coexist and complement. An active power equation does not remove religion from the mix. Power can bring religion to the top, and religion can enhance or diminish the drive for power over specific others.
This is just another form of the nonproductive materialist/idealist debate. Do you happen to be a pure materialist? :)
#58 Posted by nazarhayatkhan on February 9, 2005 11:05:37 pm
Kaalchakra # 56
(For no intention or fault of its own, it `gave birth` to the three semitic religions of today)
HA. HA.
All religons (call it philosophies or ideologies) begin with very simple concepts of goodness and requirements of the social system of the time. With the passage of time, their Reformers or Followers or the Clergy keep making them more complicated and difficult to follow. Until the common man revolts - and then concepts like `separation of Church from state` or `secularism` germinates.
nhk
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- majumdar: Kaal bhai, Now or Never... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- nkg: Re: # 133 Special provision... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- majumdar: Nkg moshai, What is wrong... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 128 Dinaric... RSS is... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 120 HP... The core... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 98 hamidm2... " what... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: add to #133 Posted... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: #127 Posted by tahmed32... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
