Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Isa-ee: A thought Experiment

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The minority issue

Mohammad A. Zaman, M.D. writes from Raleigh, NC, USA.

A COMMENT: I grew up in a small village in Sylhet, half of which was Hindu. I played with them. I grew up with them. I made friends with them. As I went to college, some of my best friends were Hindus. Durga and Saraswati Puja was just like any other festival to me. But the recent events in Bangladesh as reported by The Daily Star and other newspapers is profoundly disturbing. It is even more disturbing to see the reluctance of our elected government to accept the problem as it exists. Smart solution requires identification of the problem and understanding its intricacies. Without the willingness to accept the problem as a problem, establishing a high profile government commission is nothing but a futile venture. To meet the criteria for general acceptance, the investigation has to be independent ( of government) and transparent.

A FEW THOUGHTS: Even though we share a common cultural heritage, bonded tightly by a common language, a dichotomy got rooted with the introduction of Islam in Bengal. Probably most of the conversion in Islam occurred in the downtrodden and oppressed ``have-nots`` in the lower strata of Hindu society ( I bet my forefather was one of them). As they converted, they reaped the advantage of royal favors at the expense of their previous masters of higher strata. So a deep sense of untoward feeling between the two groups was there to begin with. And it is natural. Then came the British-Raj. With the loss of royal patronage, the Muslim society as a whole remained estranged, while the Hindu intelligentia embraced English. It was a complete reversal of the dice. Economically prosperous, culturally advanced Hindu Babus looked down at the Muslim Mians. Thus, despite a very strong bondage, a deep-seated resentment permeated the Muslim psyche. In Bengal, this possibly got worsened during the Bango-Bhango movement. The point, I am alluding to is simple: `` When economic and social parity supervenes, religion usually becomes a back-burner. The apparent ill feeling between the two groups of the same people, originated largely because of socio-economic reason. If the Hindu society was homogeneous to begin with, my forefather, most likely, would have retained his Sanatan faith. And my name would have been predictably different.`` This deep-seated strain is not going to go away anytime soon. In fact, this dichotomy of our very culture, led to the evolution of two different tributaries of a great cultural might. It is like a twin, though not monozygotic. We have two different names. We look different like two fraternal brothers and/or sisters. But our Mother is the same.

If we consider this basic proposition as an established fact, a lot of apparent difference and inconsistencies can be explained without any misgivings. Being Arabic in origin, my name does not betray my cultural heritage. It only affirms the fact that I am flowing from a different tributary.

AN AFTERTHOUGHT: As I mentioned earlier, akin to a tectonic fault line, there is a natural strain in our national psyche. And some unscrupulous politicians are magnifying this strain with resultant atrocities of volcanic proportion against our own fraternal brothers and sisters. It is time to raise a rational voice that reverberates in every rational soul.

how about none of the above?

I have many thoughts on the subject ..I myself being an American think a man or woman no matter of their cultursl beliefs should be able to make their own choices of who they marry with out the heartache of going against the famalies wishes ..we are living in the year 2000 and times have changed ...one should marry for Love ..companionship ..and suitablity ..not because someone else wants you to marry ...this is only my opinion ..but have lost the man I love because of his cultural expectations and knowledge of losing his family if he chose me over their wishes..

re. #254

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, Asad.

best regards,

PM

sadhna & patrick,

I am sorry about not continuing the discussion on this board....PM, I will engage sadhna in one of those spicy exchanges soon :)

Re: PM (#248)

My understanding of Hinduism is that originally it consisted of teachings of Prophets Ram and Krishna (peace be upon them). They were righteous individuals who appeared around 3-4 (?) thousand years ago in the present-day Indo-Pak region. It seems that they had divine revelations from God Almighty and went about conveying this message to their nations. Other than these prophets, there may have been other reformers (even other lesser-known prophets) commissioned by the Almighty God to reform the Indus valley nations.

My understanding is that overtime the original teachings of Hinduism got changed. Idea of one God was replaced with concept of multiple gods, and even prophets Ram and Krishna (peace be upon them) were given the status of gods. This is similar to the case of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) later considered the Son of God in Christianity. It is worth mentioning that the kalima (declaration of faith) in Islam states that “There is only One God, and Mohammad is the messenger of God”. One of the apparent purposes of phrase “ …and Mohammad is the messenger of God” is to prevent Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) from being given the status of god in the later days.

Another example is the idea of reincarnation, which I think was later introduced in the doctrine of Hinduism. As I understand it, reincarnation implies that the soul is eternal, and we keep coming back to this world in forms determined by our actions of the previous lives. That is, an animal today may come back as a human being in its next life if its actions are “good” in this life. This cycle of birth-death-reincarnation will continue till one is completely reformed. One has thus achieved nirvana, state of ultimate peace and oneness with this universe. It seems possible that concept of reincarnation later inadvertently led to a caste system in the society, where people belonged to certain castes by birth, and lived, worked, married etc. according to the rules of the castes. I am tempted to think that the caste system was introduced in Hinduism deliberately by the “people of the higher castes”, in order to exploit the masses and to validate their own life-styles and status with divine backing.

I am also tempted to think that the doctrine of reincarnation is a distorted form of the original Hindu teachings, which were probably similar to the teachings of the Koran. This original teaching is that each individual indeed has a soul which exists beyond the physical body, and continues of “travel on its journey” after a person dies. In the afterlife, the soul will be rewarded (or punished) according to one’s deeds in this life. Reward will come in the form of closeness with the Almighty God. This closeness to God may be described as being in paradise, which seems close to nirvana in some ways as described in Hinduism.

That is not to say that present-day Hinduism is entirely distorted. I would think that at least some of the original teachings of Prophets Ram and Krishna (peace be upon them) exist in the original form and can be made out by careful study of the Hindu scriptures. Although fully discovering the original Hindu teachings may be a task next to impossible. Hinting at earlier divine revelations Koran states (in Surah Al-Baqrah, I think) that previously revealed scriptures have been abrogated in favor of, and replaced by, the complete teachings of the Koran. This message in Koran seems to attest to authenticity of previously revealed scriptures, recognizes the transient nature of those scriptures and that these messages no longer exist in the original form, and offers fresh, complete guidance for all the humanity.

It is worth noting that in another verse Koran states that, we (i.e. God, Almighty) have sent this exhortation (Koran), and surely we will be its guardian. This is a divine promise made by the God, Almighty, which assures the believers that the original text of the Koran will not undergo any changes with time. As I understand, there is consensus among most scholars (eastern and western) that indeed Koran exists in its original form, 1400 years after it was revealed. This is also supported by the fact that there exists only one Arabic version of Koran all over the world. If Koran had undergone interpolations in its history, it is hard to imagine its Arabic text being identical all across the world, as it happens to be today.

That’s all for now. No, I have not read “History of Gods” by Karen Armstrong, but I have arrived at these conclusions by reading other literature and doing some comparative analysis of various religions (in spare time of course; I do not do this for a living!). As far as eating pork is concerned, it is a whole another issue, and I’ll try to post something on it later.

I hope my comments about Hinduism do not offend anyone. I believe in the righteousness and truth of “Hindu” prophets and reformers and their original messages. I do believe that Islam validates prophets sent to all nations and brings them all under one umbrella. It teaches us that we are all created by the same Almighty God, to Whom belongs all the praise, Who requires that to be righteous we need to have love and compassion for all.

Regards,

Asad (San Jose, CA)

PM
I am interested, too.

Sadhanaji,

Thanks for the welcome.

yes, I know that fairdinkum and you are probably on the same wavelenght on most matters. I was, however, serious about looking forward to his further thoughts on the subject.

best regards,

PM

I ,LL TRY TO INFLUENCE ``NON CO RELEGIENT`` BY MY

THINKINGS &ACTS &IWOULD HAVE SO MUCH POTENTIAL

``INSHALLAH``I,LL DO SO!

``OTHERWISE AAJKAL PAKISTAN MAIN BAITIAN UR JAIN TO

UNNHAIN KON MANA SAKTA HAIY``

RAB RAKHA !

PM #249
Nice to see you around again.
Re` discussion, I suspect on some matters fairdinkum and I happen to be on the same side of the argument, though I might be mistaken:-).

Sadhana

fairdinkum, Sadhana,

Looking forward to your exchanges between you two on the subject (though it doesnt look likely to be half as spicy as your last prolonged one :) )

rgds,

Dear Asad Sattar (re. #247),

Your earnest endeavour to reconcile the apparent inconsistencies between the Religions of the Book is laudable. On the subject of eveolution of ethic ideas within the Judaism, yo might find Erich Fromm`s ``You Shall Be as Gods`` quite insightful. I suspect you`ve read Karen Armstrong`s ``History of God``, dealing with the subject from a multi-religious perspective.

I`m curious to know how you`d accomodate Hinduism into your evolutionary thesis though. Or for that matter, explain under what changing circumstnaces it became kosher to eat pork and then taboo again.

regards,

PM

Re: vk (#235)

In response to your comment regarding specific circumstances for each nation necessitating multiple religions, I think that Islamic teachings address various issues from a standpoint which is fundamental to human nature, and common to all the people and nations of the world. In other words, fundamentally humans across the globe are more similar, then they are dissimilar. True, there are cultural differences across nations, but Islam does provide adequate leeway allowing people to maintain their cultural identities, and still be united by worshipping One God, the Almighty, and derive guidance from Koran.

However, if cultural practices and Islamic teachings conflict, adhering to Islam would require that such cultural practices be done away with. An example that comes to mind is that, say, marriage is an occasion that asks for some sort of celebration. Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) invited guests on these occasions. Guests and the hosts broke bread, celebrated, and prayed for the newly weds. All that is fine and dandy, no problem. But conflict may arise if the culture requires, say, consumption of wine in a mixed gathering, followed by couple dancing to celebrate such an occasion.

Reflection shows that consumption of alcohol, esp. in mixed gatherings, overtime will lead to promiscuity in a society and various other problems. This general trend will be more or less the same across all cultures. Merry making on a joyous occasion is fine, but there are certain limits beyond which the quality of human behavior will start to deteriorate.

Another example that comes to mind highlighting the evolution and culmination of religious teachings, is that of crime-and-punishment, as put forward in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Judaism professes the philosophy that is best summed up by ``an eye for an eye``.

There seems to be a good explanation for this seemingly harsh approach. Israelites had been enslaved by the Egyptians for almost 500 years when Judaism was revealed through Prophet Moses (peace be upon him). 500 years of slavery and subjugation had robbed the Israelites of any sense of pride. A parallel to this is the present-day condition of African-Americans in the USA. Almost a ``shock treatment`` was needed to awaken the Israelites and to salvage their self-esteem. This treatment was given in terms of Jewish teachings with its ``an eye for an eye`` approach. It is also interesting to note that adultery was severely punished by death according to Jewish Law.

1400 years that elapsed between Prophet Moses (peace by upon him) and Prophet Jesus (peace by upon him) had ``hardened the hearts`` of the Israelites by the somewhat severe Jewish teachings, desert life, and series of wars and persecution culminating in subjugation at the hands of the Romans. Now some ``softening up`` was needed, and therefore Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) brought the message with very strong emphasis on tolerance and forgiveness, explained well by the ``turn the other cheek`` approach.

Reflection in this day and age would lead one to conclude that both these approaches tend to take extreme positions on the issue of crime-and-punishment. For example punishing a wrong doer ALL the time, despite the circumstances and the perpetrator`s sense of guilt is a bit extreme. On the other hand, NEVER punishing a wrong doer, despite the circumstances and (lack of) perpetrator`s sense of remorse is also unfair from a society’s standpoint. A middle course would be highly desirable to deal with this matter fair and square. Eventually a balanced approach is presented in Islam. Koran teaches us that ultimately the victim has the right to exact revenge. But if you (as a victim) think that forgiveness will bring about greater benefit, then remember that Allah loves those who forgive. This teaching strikes a delicate balance between the rights and responsibilities of the criminal and the victim, and encourages one to exercise discretion and good sense in dealing with crime and punishment. It is also worth noting that staying consistent with this approach, punishment of adultery was reduced from death in Judaism to lashings in Islam.

This evolution of teachings on crime and punishment from Judaism, to Christianity, and finally to Islam is not a mere coincidence. There seems to be a ``method to this madness`` after all – a grand design, aimed at providing guidance for the entire mankind.

As for achieving salvation through Jesus (peace be upon him) is concerned, I think this subject merits some more thinking. As I understand it, present-day Christianity is far removed from the original message of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him). Present day Christianity revolves around Jesus’ crucifixion as a vicarious atonement. That is, to save the mankind from Adam’s “original sin”, God devised a plan and offered His son Jesus Christ as a sacrifice. Since Jesus’ sacrifice was to redeem the entire humanity, believing in Jesus (as the Son of God) and his sacrifice is adequate grounds for salvation. As long as a person believes in this doctrine, all his evil actions are more or less forgiven, even as one continues to commit sinful acts.

Reflection shows that such a doctrine lacks balance and is bound to corrupt a person’s belief system. On the other hand, Islam teaches us that we are ultimately responsible for our actions. Only “believing” in Islam in not enough, but this belief has to be backed up by actions.

Understanding that Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) was righteous and pure, I think his original message was about Oneness of God, to reform one’s self through prayers and sacrifice, and to do good deeds to ones fellowmen. Careful study of Bible makes this clear to an objective reader. After crucifixion of Jesus, this message was later replaced with the concept of Trinity with Jesus literally being the Son of God and vicarious atonement etc. Salvation can be achieved through following the original message of Prophet Jesus (peace by upon him), and Koran seems to support this view. Hinting at coming of prophets on various nations throughout mankind’s history, Koran states:

“Those who believe in Allah and His Messengers, they are the Truthful and the Witnesses in the sight of their Lord” (Al-Hadid 57:20).

The tricky part however is to get to the original, uncorrupted message of the prophets. This logic can be extended to the case of Hinduism as well. Although there is more to this discussion that has remained unsaid I’ll pause here, lest this post becomes too lengthy.

Lastly, I would like to express my efforts to present these arguments sincerely, carefully, and to the best of my knowledge. Any errors are unintentional. My aim is not to hurt anyone’s feelings, but if I did, I apologize profusely. Comments from anyone will be very much appreciated.

Best regards,

Asad

Some of the discussion here brings to mind that some people think that it is enough to believe in Santa Claus, and they will receive Christmas presents.

Others believe that in order to receive presents they have to learn how to give presents.

-arun gupta

Asif Naqshbandi!

Another thought.

If the decline of Muslims is due to not acting according to Islam, then rise of West must be due to actions according to Islam.

Or although Muslims are on decline, but West is not on rise.(Because according to your theory Islam is the cause of rise or fall)

What you have to give to majority of Muslims. If West stops its aid, the people in Somalia, (mostly Muslims) starve. Before oil wealth Muslims were in so decline, that Allama Iqbal said:

``Barq Girti Hai to Bechare Musallmanon Per``.

The question is this: If all Muslims start acting according to Islam, will it reverse their decline? And is it possible that all Muslims act according to Islam. (As you say apart from Barelvi Islam other Islam is incorrect. So until, all people become Barelvi, the decline of Muslim will continue. And since all people can never become Barelvi, so there is no hope for reversal of decline of Muslims.

I have not seen a better argument than this.