Fissures in the Middle

I've read that it seems to fit with the latest prophet Bush's commandments. :-)

For people who would like to know the context of jaziyah, here you go

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html

and there is an excellent commentary describing the context by Mr.Maududi

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau9.html

read at your own pleasure. :-)

#549 Krishna sahib, it is your job to produce that verse which is no secret not mine. It doesn't take much effort, just type in "Jizya verse in the Quran" on google and out will pop several links.

Regarding your comment "Nowhere does any of the poisonous verses say that they are valid only under such and such circumstances..."

Those non-poisonous verses, as in all rules of logical comprehension, have to be understood using their context, if they refer to day you cannot generalize that to night. Maybe you are unaware of those "basic rules" governing understanding and comprehension. To re phrase your statement

"Nowhere do any of the verses say that they are valid only under such and such circumstances, when being read by a moron. When read by those with half a sense of how to comprehend the written word the context delimits the verses.."

Earlier comment got mixed up.

Nowhere does any of the poisonous verses say that they are valid only under such and such circumstances. It is rather convenient to be thumping the koran when it suits you, and ignoring it when it doesn't. With this kind of spin, even the Mein Kampf can be shown to be a book of peace and brotherhood.

that's right. :-)

Nowhere does any of the poisonous verses say that they are valid only under such and such circumstances. It is rather convenient to be thumping the koran when it suits you, and ignoring it when it doesn't. With this kind of spin, even the Mein Kampf can be shown to be a book of peace and brotherhood.
For them status adjustment after they are overcome to adjust them into the new society were two fold, i) either they became Muslims out of free volition or ii) they compensated for harm done and for protection.

These were the terms of peace, since they started the war they could of course continue in their warfare, the terms of peace and status adjustment come after they've been overcome. No where does that verse ask us to generalize this to all times and to all battles or to all societies. The mullah, taking liberty with the Quran misuses it.


The latest prophet Bush has said the same thing, either the Muslims convert to being democrats or pay jaziyah in the form of being occupied for oil. :-)

Afterall, according to him the Muslims started the war and the western freedoms are under attack.

masadi

After all those words, you STILL haven't produced the verse that validates the following:

"..there is nothing Islamic or Quranic in the generalized concept of the Jizya. The mullah's have been misusing that verse in its blanket application to all non Muslims everywhere, there is no such prescription........Religion becomes a factor only against those non-Muslims who were fighting the Muslims because of their religion to destroy them..."

Is that just because you don't like me being lazy? I don't think so.

[No where does that verse ask us to generalize this to all times and to all battles or to all societies.]

Nowhere does any of the poisonous verses say that they are valid only under such and such circumstances. It is rather convenient to be thumping the koran when it suits you, and ignoring it when it doesn't. With this kind of spin, even the Mein Kampf can be shown to be a book of peace and brotherhood.

In #547, read "There is a big difference obfuscation and being lazy." as

There is a big difference between obfuscation and being lazy. (by being lazy I refer to Krishna sahib's laziness, him wanting me to do his homework)

Krishna sahib,

You should take it easy, count till ten and try not to blow a fuse. There is a big difference obfuscation and being lazy. I simply do not want to search a verse number for a verse I know quite well and which is always at the fingertips of the Ali Sina worshippers. That said I have read more Quran in less than a life time than you will probably read in 5, I understand clearly what that verse says and what similar verses dealing with warfare imply. I am not in the illogical habit of plucking one verse and then generalizing it without regard to context or the people it is being applied to, those that were fighting the Muslims just because of their religion to annhialate them. For them status adjustment after they are overcome to adjust them into the new society were two fold, i) either they became Muslims out of free volition or ii) they compensated for harm done and for protection.

These were the terms of peace, since they started the war they could of course continue in their warfare, the terms of peace and status adjustment come after they've been overcome. No where does that verse ask us to generalize this to all times and to all battles or to all societies. The mullah, taking liberty with the Quran misuses it.

Now, it is "hijacking" of a thread because you and your kind fellows turn every discussion into a discussion about Islam. Finally whenever an interpretation of a particular verse is offered from the Quran itself that puts Islam in a good light you all hate it, condemn it, find excuses to reject it, yet when a completely outlandish interpretation is presented that puts it in a bad light, makes it seem as unintelligent as the average Mullah, you all love it and want to force that interpretation onto Islam and the Quran as if you all are lifelong scholars of it. Krishna sahib this is obfuscation of the truth and might I be so unpolite to add, stupidity of the highest calibre.

Thank you for your patience,

TNI Masadi

#545 masadi on

[It is no secret the Quranic verse that you ask for, you just have to read it in its context. Since TNI masadi is not in the habit of allowing others to deliberately hijack every discussion into one involving Islam, neither does he learn Islam from those that know less than a quarter of what he knows about Islam, I would suggest you use a Quran search service off of google, that zizya thing, the combination of Zakat and Jizya was very constructive on your part.]

Nobody was trying to hijack nothing. YOU are the one that said "...there is no such prescription........Religion becomes a factor only against those non-Muslims who were fighting the Muslims because of their religion to destroy them..".

I merely asked for the chapter and verse that says so.

Obfuscation and avoiding direct questions is something that Muslims have had to adopted as a strategy nowadays. Now that people cannot be silenced with threats and intimidation, because of the anonymity afforded by the internet, people have started asking direct questions. And when you push Muslims for the facts, they have nowhere to hide.

You are not convincing anyone other than yourself with this "don't hijack the discussion" and "look it up yourself" stuff.

Krishna sahib,

Having a good day so far? It is no secret the Quranic verse that you ask for, you just have to read it in its context. Since TNI masadi is not in the habit of allowing others to deliberately hijack every discussion into one involving Islam, neither does he learn Islam from those that know less than a quarter of what he knows about Islam, I would suggest you use a Quran search service off of google, that zizya thing, the combination of Zakat and Jizya was very constructive on your part.

Happy hunting, and drive safely,

TNI Masadi

#541 masadi

[...there is nothing Islamic or Quranic in the generalized concept of the Jizya. The mullah's have been misusing that verse in its blanket application to all non Muslims everywhere, there is no such prescription........Religion becomes a factor only against those non-Muslims who were fighting the Muslims because of their religion to destroy them...]

masadi,

Could you quote the chapter and verse on the zizya tax thing in the Quran (that "Allah" obviously detailed to muhammad) - that says this?

#503 majumdar babu

[MKG's fault was that he brought bad apples in the Muslim community to the fore rather than supporting the more progressive elements. And he began the pandering to minority fundamentalists (Moplahs) a policy which has been adopted by GOI/INC as well. And which in turn strengthens majority communalism.

Hope that clarifies.]

Thanks for trying to clarify, majumdar babu. But it really does not, at least for me. Please answer the following question - had there been no Gandhi present in those days, what kind of India would we see today? Would there have been a partition? What would have been the relation between the Hindu and Muslim communities today? Would we today have the fundamentalist Muslim elements in the country today if Gandhi had not been present in those days?

(Once we are done with this current issue, I would next like to ask you how, in EVERY country around the world, Muslims exist either as a oppressive majority or a turbulent minority, to quote someone else - is that because there are non-Muslim Gandhis everywhere acting against the interests of the overall Muslim community?).

Tahmed writes "Good morning to you too, Mr Masadi. Today is yet another day we can say "Thank you, Mr. Jinnah"."

Tahmed sahib, thank you for your kind greeting. You never answered my question about the quality of your sleep. Did you sleep well? It is not morning in this new and awaking land I live in, in fact it is night and close to bed time.

Regarding your Mr. Jinnah comment, if you base your assessment of the worth of Mr. Jinnah and his rhetoric on the posts of right wing lunatics from across the border, that will do no justice to either Mr. Jinnah (who emerges as a positive figure compared to their hate) nor the Indians, the majority of which will not subscribe to such hate even though they have been pushed and shoved to accept it based on "facts on the ground" created by the Feudal/Colonial division..... Think about this before letting the right wing nuts determine how you guage the world....

Thank you for you attention, have a good day,

TNI Masadi

Masan sahib,

How are you feeling today? You can call it whatever you want
that is fine with me, there is nothing Islamic or Quranic in the generalized concept of the Jizya. The mullah's have been misusing that verse in its blanket application to all non Muslims everywhere, there is no such prescription. Taxes should be applied based on income and wealth and not religious affiliation, we agree...Religion becomes a factor only against those non-Muslims who were fighting the Muslims because of their religion to destroy them, and are then overcome, and then charged compensation for their special protection, this is supposed to change their status from "enemy combatant"- a target for every citizen, to rehabiliated citizen- a privilage the US will never grant the "enemy combatants" it captures, don't you think. It only applies to those non-Muslims who were battling you, not the mass of the unbelievers in a society...Thank you for your generous understanding...

TNI Masadi

Have a good day now

Re: # 523 harish

I had read that jinnah interview before.... Reading it again, it's really astounding - what was true then also is true today even after 60 years... this bizzare rentier mindset has been carried through mutliple generations...

So much has changed in pakiland, but this rentier mentality has not changed... It's as if it's imprinted in paki DNA... Wow...

Interviewer's statement below underscores the whole problem so clearly: "it was more nearly related to.... bankruptcy of ideas in the new Muslim state -- a nation drawing its spurious warmth from the embers of an antique religious fanaticism, fanned into a new blaze."

Good morning to you too, Mr Masadi. Today is yet another day we can say "Thank you, Mr. Jinnah".