A Journey Through Our Conscience

Re: # 255

See there was no need to get into tizzy over a simple question. I hope this answers ntsyed`s querry.

Faruk #253 You seem like a wise man. I will switch my pir from Hamidm to you. ;-)

Urstruly (#241),

I am honored that you’ve asked me. I hope we can stay on talking terms this time.

”Muslim” issue

Firstly, rejecting a prophet of Allah does not make one a non-Muslim. This issue rests between Allah and each individual. Earlier you made up stuff against Ahmadis … only to discover that your web-mullahs misguided you. I hope you’ve learnt your lesson by now.

More on Ahmadi-Muslims

Quran explains why Ahmadi-Muslims are considered kaffirs by others. Each time a prophet of Allah appears, corrupt elements of society gather to oppose him. Quite often the charge is led by corrupt clergy. Example of Jesus Christ comes to mind in this context. He came to guide people back to Mosaic Law and was betrayed by the clergy.

Islam, like any other religion, has suffered at the hands of its followers. Emphasis on peace, dignity, and compassion is replaced with corrupt political ideologies, oppression, and ill-conceived calls for jihad. Islamic laws on blasphemy, apostasy, and adultery underscore this issue. Stories about prophets raising the dead, flying above clouds to meet with god further underscore this issue. Quran suggests that Allah will raise prophets to revive teachings of Islam as people go astray.

On the same issue, dear Prophet (pbuh) foretold that Allah will raise Issa-ibne-Marriam in latter days of Islam. This metaphor emphasizes parallels between Jesus Christ, raised earlier, and the prophet who will appear later among the Muslims. In this context he also prophesied that people of Issa-ibne-Marriam will be singled out by all 72 sects of corrupt ummah. He said …

“ …my people will be divided into 73 sections, all of them will be in the fire except one.`` The companions asked, `Who are they O Messenger of Allah,` Holy Prophet (pbuh) said, ``They are those who will be like me and my companions.``

In an unwitting fulfillment of this prophecy, ullema from all 72 sects declared Ahmadis non-Muslims. This declaration seems to attest to truthfulness of Islam, the dear Prophet (pbuh), and views of Ahmadi-Muslims. Furthermore, Ahmadis are not allowed to declare their faith in kalima, to pray openly, or to perform hajj. These are some more parallels between Muslims then, and Muslims now.

I hope this suffices. On the same note, tell us more, as you claimed, about the dear Prophet (pbuh) brutally violating Quran, of which he was reminded by others. Surely we all can learn from you.

dost-mittar

``The problem arises when people claim that the message is as valid today as it was then.``

Precisely. People who understand what you are saying don`t bother defending the indefensible. Intellectually, morally, and psychologically they have moved on. Others haven`t. That`s the problem.

It`s the whole concept of religion as clear and unerring guide to action in general, not just Islam. Would you think that villagers who regularly beat up their women would not find justification and vindication in such verses? Of course, they did.

Intellectuals may rationalize them all they want, but here lie THE real roots of our today`s evils.

(just a thought: as if Hitler`s murders of Jews had nothing to do with the Bible and with Chrisitanity! LOL...but let`s not go there, since we are rightly focused on Hindus and Muslims)

re : tahmed 32 #251
“I think that summarizes it. (havent read the article or the discussion, but i have blind faith in hamidm).”

Your statement caught my eye…..

it’s very close to the sate of Muslims in the world today.


Most have not read the book or understood anything in it, but they have blind faith in some guy who has strung a beard between his ears……


Regards,

Faruk

ntsyed,

I think I know which verses you keep referring to … but wanted to see if you have the integrity to come forward. Apparently you don’t.

Killing people for worshipping their gods is absurd … and is negated by common sense as well as Quran. Executing ``infidels and hypocrites`` for anti-state terrorist activities applies to everyone ... regardless of who they worship.

BTW, you cousin Urstruly, when cornered, once admitted that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) blatantly and brutally violated Quran … and was reminded of this by others. The Prophet (pbuh) apparently realized his mistake, and made appropriate changes in his conduct. I kid you not ... all this is coming from Urstruly!!! Now, it’s a travesty for a Muslim to hold such beliefs … isn’t it? (Urs, correct me if I am wrong … won’t you?).

You cousins also hold mutually contradictory views on ahadith. You acknowledged that they contain errors, Urstruly does not think so. So maybe the two of you should sort out your Islam first. And feel free to ask echo for advice … apparently he knows how to copy-and-paste.

Lastly, MJ asked you a simple question about Banu Quraiza … and you’re rambling once again. What`s up with that?

250: I think that summarizes it. (havent read the article or the discussion, but i have blind faith in hamidm).

Re: # 244

``I fail to see the correlation between the two``.......... and therein lies the problem !

nt:

so this time its you who is shying away from the arguments. come on man, you could have done a better job than making your man stand in line with tyrants, dictators and killers. i completely missed any argument if you had any.

tell me, if such massacres are a routine in this not-so-rosy world, why do we need a religion for the first place, if it doesn`t intend to improve the situation?

is god sitting in front of the tv, eating pop-corn while he enjoys the show? or is he like you and me, who desparately wants the situation to improve but is too egoistic to talk to me directly?

Oh another Head of State, who is also a Pope err ..Poopy? The other `great` ones are the Jerry-Springer family of England. There also a Poopy (female pope) holds the Orb in one hand and the Mace in the other.

L`aanUt lUkhh L`aanUt on such lowclass among humanity. Are they not aware that muslims are there for a purpose? Does she not know the number of Danes who are abandoning
her royal deviousness for Islam.

No it is the western thuGGs who are in muslim lands who should leave; but they are there like vultures, hyenas, and crows--nobody has changed their muslim lifestyle or Islamic laws. Let Karzais, Musharrafs, Mubaraks et al remain confined within their Palaces & the Western thuGGs in their bases. May Allah increase their security so much that they know not the difference between a prison and a palace.

No muslim has ever been conquered!...unless of course when he sells himself and tries to become ``moderate``, ``enlightened``..in short westoxicated.

---

Danish queen warns against rise of Islam
Queen Margrethe II says in her new book people must on occasion show their opposition to Islam.

COPENHAGEN - Denmark`s Queen Margrethe II warned against the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Denmark and the world in a new book out on Thursday, saying people must on occasion ``show their opposition to Islam``.

``It is a challenge we have to take seriously. We have let this issue float about for too long because we are tolerant and very lazy,`` she said in the authorized biography ``Margrethe`` written by journalist Annelise Bistrup.

While she did not specifically refer to fundamentalism, she spoke of ``these people for whom religion is their entire lives``.

``We have to show our opposition to Islam and we have to, at times, run the risk of having unflattering labels placed on us because there are some things for which we should display no tolerance,`` she said.

``And when we are tolerant, we must know whether it is because of convenience or conviction,`` added the queen, who has reigned since 1972 and celebrates her 65th birthday on Saturday.

Denmark has in recent years been accused of fuelling xenophobic tendencies after implementing a slew of measures aimed at curbing immigration. The government has argued that it wants to focus efforts on improving the assimilation into Danish society of immigrants already in the country.

Queen Margrethe, who professes a knowledge of Islam due to her interest in archaeology, said it was ``natural that young Muslims would be attracted`` to the faith`s absolute values and seek refuge in religion ``as they are cut off from our community because of their lack of (Danish) language skills.``

``It`s not just a matter of speaking and understanding`` Danish, she said, but also ``understanding the language`s codes, and we have to help them.``

The queen, who is hugely popular among Danes, is the head of the Lutheran-Evangelical Church, of which 85 percent of Denmark`s 5.4 million inhabitants are members. Muslims make up about three percent of the population.

Re: # 245 kaalchakra,

what a deep understanding. man you should have been a muslim. at this time, we are in dire need of such people.

kaalchakra#245:
``(2) asked that we be aware of the historical time, arguing that the verse was true THEN but now NOW``

In my opinion, this can be a valid argument, not just for Ramayan, but also for Mahabharat, Quran, Bible or any other scripture. The problem arises when people claim that the message is as valid today as it was then.

As an aside, that particular verse, as far as I know, is not in the original Valmiki Ramayan but only in the Tulsidas version, which is probably more reflective of the time when he wrote it, namely during the 16th century Avadh.

re: dost-mittar # 231, teshah

Shahji had the reference wrong, but his argument is right. Islam was not the first religion to openly institute broad discriminations against women. Being a latecomer it merely got rid of a few inequities prevalent in the-then Arabic society, retained other social inequities, and created many brand new ones.

---

Still, `pashu dhol...`` reference is very apt. During the days of my childhood, spent living in an Indian village, I heard almost every defensive method that is even today standard fare for all Koranists worldwide. In random order, here are the top 15 avoidance strategies used by people -


They

1) looked for `compensating` verses from other parts of Ramcharit Manans,

(2) asked that we be aware of the historical time, arguing that the verse was true THEN but now NOW

(3) asked that we consider the place, arguing that the verse was revealed in a particular SITUATION and since we don`t face that situation now, no harm is done.

(4) reinterpreted the words, suggesting those words meant very different from what any lay person would obviously take them to mean.

(5) brazenly blamed the reader - the confusion, it was argued, arose because the reader did not `read intelligently, `with an open mind,` or was too closed in his/her heart, or was too ignorant, or not read well enough in commentaries on the book. If the reader thought harder, was more open to receiving God`s word, or educated himself by reading up on commentaries, etc. (s)he would get what God meant.

(6) adopted a ``So-what? Naturalist Imperative - nature discriminates - argument.

(7) adopted a ``So-what? Divine Imperative - these are God`s words - argument, implying you and I could not outguess or judge God.

(8) highlighted the miracle of the book - how could one book be full of such wisdom, beauty and have caught the imagination of so many people?

(9) highlighted the miracle of the ``author`` - how could an ordinary person write such a miraculous book? / or its variant, who were we to assume we know better than Goswami ji?``

(10) highlighted the force and sufficiency of tradition - how could an ordinary person question the wisdom of validated by people over centuries?

(11) advanced the ``cardboard religion`` argument - if we let people pick apart the book, the whole religion will come crashing down, and then we will live like animals.

(12) made militaristic rationales - the book is being attacked by our (Urban/Muslim) enemies, we must guard against them by closing rank, not question our own basics.

(13) suggested a ``closed-eyes`` approach - we not read what the book says specifically, but go by/ or interpret according to what we think the book as a whole is trying to say. This head in the sand appraoch I always found particuarly curious.

(14) made elitistic arguments againt ``dumb masses`` who will not change or listen - so why not belive what they belive or keep quiet?

(15) fell back on ``great Hinduism`` argument - when everything else fails then slide into generalities of how our culture was the best etc etc.


Luckily, these did not become the psycho/emotional afflictions of the majority of opinion-makers, specially not among the younger generations. Every newer generation defends such religious absurdities less and less, so we can move into a better future.

Re: # 242

I fail to see the correlation between the two:

1. Who is Muslim or not

and

2. India/US/Pak relationship

ntsyed#238:

I am surprised at your response comparing the prophet to today`s human rights abusers. Nobody is using pbuh after Bush. Nobody gets death threats if he or she criticises him, lampoons him or ridicules him. Are you saying that the prophet was not flawless?

Re: # 241

............. so while we are discussing who is a ``real`` muslim, the world moves on - the two front page stories on BBC today tells the whole sordid story :

India and US in `open skies` deal
India and the United States sign an agreement increasing the number of flights between the two countries.

US discusses Pakistani terror war
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld visits Pakistan and discusses the operation against militants in Waziristan.