The Reality of the Looking Glass: Seeing Muhammad

Salams
A wonderful article. And first I would like to say congrats ot echoboom for contributing what the Non-Muslims have to say about our Prophet (Peace be upon him).
Other than that..all religions have their followers and everyone has a right to their opinion. If a Muslim wants to express himself than its his right..and if anyone has their comments..they have a right to express them too..but if they get out of hand..well then they show their own personality traits.


``But the point is the desire of all non-muslims to join together and dig dirt on your Prophet is provoked by the `misuse of Islam` by the muslims for political ends (among many other things) ``

Like you said Bharath- MISUSE OF ISLAM..Islam does NOT teach us all this. There hasnt been a more peaceful religion. And it is being misused..I am so glad you used the word. It means you KNOW Islam is not terrorism.
Of all the things Islam is said to be barbaric? Well what would you call someone who blows up cities with Atom Bombs? What happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki was displays of affection? Or however the prisoners of Iraq and Afghanistan were treated..was that overwhelming love? It was NOT! but is anyone blaming the Christians and Jews for it? Are they saying BECAUSE they were Christians and Jews their religion taught them to act like this? No..no one is saying that.

The same with our religion..there are always good people and bad people everywhere. And please everyone try to see both sides of the story.
Thats all I got to say for now.

Jazak Allah Shariar for trying to enlighten so many others about our Prophet (Peace be upon him)

Allah Hafiz

Re: # 76

Is by converting to Islam the sin of Shirk is also forgiven? In corollary, can a Muslim be a Mushrik as Dewbandies or Wahabis claim that both Barelvis and Shias are Mushrik? What about Mushrikin Arabs who converted to Islam, some of whom might have been lynched if Blasphemy law or Sharia was in operation then?

#148 the guy you are quoting, is he british? else, shy does his view matter?

Jang
[i agree with you about many idioticities in hindu religion]

Damn, and would that include Bombay, Madras, Calcutta or only Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata........-) Silly chaps, this missionary zeal for conversions........terrible, terrible.-)

re#147

The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract.-
Oliver Wendell Holmes

hisexcellency,

i agree with you about many idioticities in hindu religion. my bitch is that when islam was imposed in the sub-continent, it was not as a solution to the sillilness, but as a substitution of one set of silliness with another. in india both indus and the muslims have respect for the brit, who rarely tried to impose his religion..but the illumination of his ways was glaring (ignoring minor stuff like not using the lota)..i wish ghori or aurangzeb tries to abolish sutee or thugee, but alas..the sufi charlatans were just happy to have ignorant followers.

Re: # 144

Urstruly

Thank you dear Urstruly for the `elaboration`. Frankly speaking when I first read the Hadees in question I felt aghast as I could not believe a blind man, a sahabi, could be so cruel to kill a female slave of his, who was perhaps pregnant and was a mother of two sons of his and afterwards accuse her of blasphemy when called upon by the Prophet (PBUH) to speak up, the matter having been reported to him. It is still hard for me to believe such a Hadees which contradicts the very image of the Prophet(PBUH) as `Rehmatulaalimin`.

As for the law, the hadees does not prescribe any. If at all, it purports to condone a `lynch law` which, as a matter of course, is being practiced openly in the Pak land. It is in pursuance of this very `law` perhaps that gift money is being proclaimed for lynching `blasphemers`.

As regards the state, I believe that Islam did not establish or envision the establishment of a state. What it established in Madina was not a state but a direct social democracy, bereft of the coercive essential apparatus of the state like police, professional army, taxation, etc. In fact Quran and hadees express sympathy for the prisoner and hatred for the police and the tax-collector, the fundamental basis for the state. It may perhaps be taken as a revival of the true democracy of the historical Greek City State. But how has all this been subverted to establish despotic tyrannical state in the name of Islam that made its subjects incapable of thinking.

With regards

teshah

Re: # 143

Bharath

Why should the divorcee wives of the Mullahs should find it difficult to remarry? I think there should be much demand for a Mullah trained ex-wife. My point is why we men are so eagerly presumptuous and overly feministic when talking about or with women. My Ustad Ghalib had committed the same mistake once with dire consequences as evidenced by a couplet of his:

Mein ne chahaa kih bazme naaz chaahie gher se tahi
Sun kar sitam zareef ne mujh ko uthaa dia kih yoon

I think Arab culture is more realistic in dealing with the female gender and is diametrically opposed to the Hindu culture as it has come to be romanticized by Bollywood.

Re: # 112 teshah

The hadith that you have related is authentic and forms the basis of a very important rule in the jurisprudence of blasphemy law. Let me elaborate:


Suppose in an Islamic society the state enforces balsphemy law which stipulates the maximum punishment of death depending upon the seriousness of the crime. In that society it would be a criminal offence to kill a blasphemer. In other words if someone is accused of blasphemy, the only entity that can prosecute that person is the state. His accuser(s) would have to prove their case in the court of law. But having a law in a state does not mean that a crime will not happen e.g. every state in the world have theft as a criminal offence and yet theft happens. Similarly in a state where blasphemy law is in force, it is quite possible that a person might kill a blasphemer in fit of passion. Now according to the Islamic law, if the perpetrator is Muslim, he will be charged with murder. Also according to this law i.e. law of Qisas (Retaliation), the next of kin of a victim has right to either forgive the murderer by taking monetary compensation or without it, or he has right to ask state to execute the murderer. But in this case, when the victim is a blasphemer, his next of kin has no right to exercise his authrity as per law of Qisas (retaliation). In this case, the case would be considered as between murderer vs. state; and not as murderer vs. next of kin of victim.

re: #142 by HisExcellency on April 14, 2006 9:49am PT
>>>>>``Ergo, objective analysis of Muhammad`s personality is simply not possible.``<<<<<

Ok I understand your perspectives. You are saying most of these negative stories are cooked up and/or not-confirmable. RSridhar may come up with specific points and quotes to bullodoze all ur arguments (he does it very well). But the point is the desire of all non-muslims to join together and dig dirt on your Prophet is provoked by the misuse of Islam by the muslims for political ends (among many other things)

Our President Abdul Kalam describes in his autobiography that his mother told him events from the life of the Prophet as bedtime stories. He describes his father getting at 4 am every morning to say namaaz. If such a man like APJ (I am referring to his austerity, dedication, honesty, etc not to his bomb making capacities) could be made with good stories from the life of your Prophet we all should go for it. But the catch is she also told him stories from Ramayana and because of this I have read in Pak news papers and on this board that he is a fake muslim. You can not imagine our disillusionment.

>>>>Even if we manage to filter out the hate propaganda against Muhammad by Christiandom<<<<<

Tell us about hate propaganda! To this day we are ridiculed by both you people and Christians(and most of you converted just few hundred yrs ago). Hindus may have many faults but the the ultimate, MOST DEFINING characteristic is it is impossible for a Hindu to understand/ accept that there is only one way to interpret scriptures, only one story is true, and only one way to reach God, etc.

Barelvi vs Wahabi conflict in Karachi shows that most extreme version of this ONLY ONE WAY approach threatens everybody.


#141 by teshah on April 13, 2006 7:14pm PT
>>>>I think they would be happier to get rid of the Mullahs.
provided they can remarry easily. Can they?

re: bharath

++
Your anger was provoked by the mere suggestion to examine objectively the personality of your prophet
++

Bharath, I am contributing to this analysis, not objecting to it.
An objective analysis of Muhammad`s personality must take the following facts into consideration:

1. The Quran was written down during Muhammad`s life by his companions. But the personal quotes and events of his life were not. They were orally passed down the generations for 120 years after Muhammad`s death.

2. During early Abbasid era, Muslim scholars interviewed thousands of men to collect reports about Muhammad. None of these reports was a first-hand account. Names of places and people, dates and sequence of events were confused.

E.g. People reported that Muhammad married Ayesha some time after the death of his first wife (Khadija). But some said she was the 2nd wife. Others said she was the 3rd. Even her age at time of marriage was reported as 6 or 9 or 14 or 16 or 19 years.

3. The most authentic report (according to Sunnis) of Muhammad`s life was compiled by the Persian scholar Imam Bukhari 250 years after the Prophet`s death. Of the 600,000 reports that he analyzed, he only included 7,275 that he considered genuine in his compilation (i.e. Sahih Bukhari).

Shias consider Usool-e-Kaafi compiled by Abu Jafar al-Razi as the most authentic biography of Muhammad. This compilation was completed 320 years after Muhammad`s death and contains 16,199 reports.

4. The Umayyad caliphs (before Abbasid dynasty) employed poets to make up quotes of Muhammad that would legitimize their rule... and invalidate the Shia opposition. The Shia factions compiled their own ``Muhammad quotes`` to elevate Ali and his clan.

5. Islamic scholars agree that hadith books and Muhammad`s biographies are only inspired accounts, not firsthand exact accounts of his life. The Quran remains the only authentic and unaltered scripture in the Muslim view.

Even if we manage to filter out the hate propaganda against Muhammad by Christiandom, we are unable to discuss his personal life with any certainty because even Muslim historians can`t vouch for 100% accuracy of their accounts.

Ergo, objective analysis of Muhammad`s personality is simply not possible.
But objective analysis of Muhammad`s teachings is possible (i.e. if we make the logical assumption that his teachings were compatible with Quran).

Re: # 106

My question is why Col Jafri presumed that the wives of the Mullahs would feel penalized if divorced. I think they would be happier to get rid of the Mullahs. `Ham hein na`. What do you say Mr. Bharath?

Re: # 138

Kaal
The mirror has two faces.

Killing people in Karachi and Varanasi is also a human sacrifice in the name of religion. I see no difference in that and a stupid family employing a disgusting tantrik. Ignorance and blindness is the reason for this.

Not to be too parochial I can add that killing of Palestinian children by Israeli troops, the murder of X million Anne Franks with the collusion of the church and the Nazis , the murder of Muslims by the Crusaders are all human sacrifices.

I don`t think posts by HisExcellency are gracious. It displays the same unholy glee that all of us indulge in when one side suffers a tragic loss.

That is the sad part here. People crowing over each others tragedies.


You must call a spade a spade.

RSridhar

More recently, the Thugs that the British put down saw the looting and killing of travellers in religious light. Also, human sacrifices were made to Kali in Calcutta (this comes from the accounts of Christian Missionaries, and only Bengalis will know if any, and how much, truth is in that assertion).

Swarrier

Guilty as charged. :)

Hindus must step up to meet the challenge of murderous Tantriks, once and forever. They were the intended audience.

Muslims and Islam became partially relevant only in background, HisExcellency being gracious enough to highlight a real problem for us.

re:#129 by echoboom
Most of the testimonies (from your post) were by people who lived in 18th or 19th century (barring a few like Gandhi).
Those people would be surprised today at the way Islam has evolved. Even if Islam was intolerant in the 18th and 19th century, there was nothing like a global jehad. That concept is very recent.
Sridhar