Are the Converted Tribals Really Hindu?

Ref Bull-Yeah #329

[......the philosophical (and of every other kind) basis of islam is the quran....or is it the quran plus the hadith plus the millions of other layers of literature written on top of the hadith.......

my argument is that it is the quran....for the simple reason that the quran, itself, says so.....religion is completed (rightly or wrongly) in the quran.....what islam were people following, between the 200 years of the quran and the writing of the first books on hadith..

if we take hadith to be a pillar of islam, then it gains far more importance than the quran.....as their is far more text in the hadith than in the quran.....and, thus, in this case, islam becomes incomplete, if we don't take into account the life of bukhari......

infact bukhari then becomes more important than muhammad in islam.....because the life of muhammad is studied not based on the limited vague set of instructions given to him in the quran by God, but by the way bukhari describes muhammad in his book of hadith........considring that all of hadith (every single one, as far as i know) is heresay over hundreds of years, all of them could be incorrect.....]

But then the Quran itself was not written down for some time... some say it was not written down till after Mohammad's death. Of course, Mohammad himself did not write it down since he did not know how to read or write.

So why should the Quran be more accurate than the Sunna?

Hamidm mentioned somewhere that a goat ate part of the Quran so for all you know you don't have the COMPLETE set of instructions for life.

Let us get back to the Quran anyway, assuming it to be complete and inerrant. Can you explain the following to us? We are prepared to wait until Allah the All-Powerful causes Hell to freeze over.

“Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.� Koran 2:191

“Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood.� Koran 9:123

“When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them.� Koran 9:5

“Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.� Koran 3:85

“The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them.� Koran 9:30

“Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam� Koran 5:33

“The infidels are unclean; do not let them into a mosque.� Koran 9:28

“Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies.� Koran 22:19

“Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them.� Koran 47:4

“The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them.� Koran 8:65

“Muslims must not take the infidels as friends.� Koran 3:28

“Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an.� Koran 8:12

“Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels.� Koran 8:60

India. An urban civilization with a so-far-undeciphered writing system stretched across the Indus Valley and along the Arabian Sea c. 3000-1500 bc. Major sites are Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro in Pakistan, well-planned geometric cities with underground sewers and vast granaries. The entire region may have been ruled as a single state. Bronze was used, and arts and crafts were well developed. Religious life apparently took the form of fertility cults. Indus civilization was probably in decline when it was destroyed by Aryans who arrived from the NW, speaking an Indo-European language. Led by a warrior aristocracy whose legendary deeds are in the Rig Veda, the Aryans spread E and S, bringing their sky gods, priestly (Brahman) ritual, and the beginnings of the caste system; local customs and beliefs were assimilated by the conquerors

correction..

use that to ignore everything that has been said by Muhammad.

by shuold be about, or, in other words, if you ignore all of hadiths or sunnah, just because you don't find it good today..

#331 Posted by dost_mittar on

DM,
I normally use different syntax to say similar thing....

here it is...

It is wrong to say that people who were staunch followers of Islam and Prophet Muhammad would have deliberately said (made up) anything negative about him in hadhiths or Sunna, instead they might have removed a few things that might not have been so good about Muhammad. It becomes deceitful if you use that to ignore everything that has been said by Muhammad.

In no way Muhammad is a better person then what muslim history shows him, he can be worse than that.

Further, Kuran itself was written hundreds of years later, so somebody can claim that Quran is not what Muhammad preached. But it is again a deception, because those who wrote Kuran or those who wrote about Muhammad (hadiths) are men of Muhammad, pure muslims. Much purer than those who try to defend ISlam using such absurd reasoning.

Re: # 331

D.M. sb all these criticism of Islam hatred /agenda demonisation whatever

you didnt have to read so much

http://www.metacafe.com/channels/vterroe/

All those lies are nicely graphcally made tried to convince iliterates about islam .

Some of your ponits are resounding identical to those

dost mittar #332 but more seriously, you are of course entitled to your interpretation of islam and the Quran. Just realize that some of us non-mullah, non-hamidm muslim "dummies" beg to differ with it.

dost mittar #331 "You say that I am prejudiced and I have not cared to learn about Islam. You are probably right in your first observation.."

So, romair, myself and you are in agreement for once. :-)

bulleya#328:

You say that I am prejudiced and I have not cared to learn about Islam. You are probably right in your first observation but not so about the other: in fact, I have read more about Islam than have most Musims. Islam is a combination of the Quran and Sunna, one is incomplete without the other. You have mentioned the last sermon of the Prophet to show that the religion was complete at that time; the sermon itself is not part of the Quran. And the quran itself tells people to obey Mohammad, so Sunna is implicit in it. The Quran does not even tell the exact postures in which to pray and yet Muslims everywhere pray in the same manner which can only happen if the hadis are accepted as legitimate.

I have read the Quran and it's not a Book for the Dummies. One needs someone to explain the suras with reference to the context, which can only be done through hadith. Quite often, it is not obvious in the Quran even whether a particular hadith is being addressed to Mohammad, to his followers or to all men (as far as I remember, none of the verses is addressed to women).

I would also say that Islamic scholars have gone through a lot of pain to validate ahadith, so all of them are not accorded the same credence: indeed, they have used a technique often used in social sciences to validate a finding, namely the technique of mulriple evidence, in other words, only those ahadith were considered fully valid that were substantiated by several narrators.

And if you believe in the Last Sermon, then you should also believe in the concept of Ummahood because in it, the Prophet exhorts his followers: "People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust."

I am sure that you know all this already. I am merely writing this to say that I have read the quran, ahadith and other Islamic literature; the latest being our compatriot Tariq Fatah's book which I have reviewed and you can see the review on the book section of the Unplugged. In any case, how can even a complete dummy not become a semi-scholar of Islam after being on chowk for a whole decade?

#329 Posted by bulleya on

So bulleya, what is the philosophy of Islam and we are talking not in "muslim" or "non-muslim" sense, but what you have to say as an intelligent person. Truths are not divided between muslims and non-muslims but they are simply truths for everybody, else our understanding needs correction.

What is it that Kuran forces God to say?? How intelligent is it? How good it is for time to come? And what could have been the long term effect of God of Kuran with the kind of tribal (as per you social) laws it gave and with large armies suporting this "word of God"??


How do you change or evolve a God who has said his final words in his infancy?? When he hardly understood himself??

kaalchakra #: "In other words, hadiths may be unreliable, but doing away with them will lead to total free-for-all to everyone to claim/put forth as Quranic their own ratioality, in advancement of their own values and interests."

...the point being discussed is not how to reform or change islam.....the point being discussed (or, at least, should be discussed) is what is islam......how does islam define itself......how did God intend islam to be (if one is a muslim).....or how did muhammad intend islam to be (if one is a non-muslim and does not consider islam to be a divine religion).......

....so what is the answer to this question...regardless of how the chips may fall, one needs to study it.....

......the philosophical (and of every other kind) basis of islam is the quran....or is it the quran plus the hadith plus the millions of other layers of literature written on top of the hadith.......

my argument is that it is the quran....for the simple reason that the quran, itself, says so.....religion is completed (rightly or wrongly) in the quran.....what islam were people following, between the 200 years of the quran and the writing of the first books on hadith..

if we take hadith to be a pillar of islam, then it gains far more importance than the quran.....as their is far more text in the hadith than in the quran.....and, thus, in this case, islam becomes incomplete, if we don't take into account the life of bukhari......

infact bukhari then becomes more important than muhammad in islam.....because the life of muhammad is studied not based on the limited vague set of instructions given to him in the quran by God, but by the way bukhari describes muhammad in his book of hadith........considring that all of hadith (every single one, as far as i know) is heresay over hundreds of years, all of them could be incorrect.....

the quran does contain items about the life of muhammad, in the sense that it contains instructions given to him to convey to others......it asks him to address muslims on certain occassions and to address mankind on others.....

so, yes, if hadith are out, the whole current structure of islam will come crashing down.......clergy will disappear...who needs a clergy, when the only thing describing religion is simple book called quran......

islam will become far more flexible......which is the only way any code of life can be successful through all times.......it will provide a direction, under which human beings will make their own rules........rather than strict rules than all human beings need to follow......

...the removal of hadith as a form of the basis of exact islamic jurisprudence will not remove muhammad from the picture of islam.......it will remove bukhari and the clergy.....

muhammad was a revolutionary man by any int'l standards.....he carried out a massive social revolution, based on ideas which the progressive world has only recognized 1400 years later...his ideas of removal of clergy from society has only been adapted by the educated progressive west in the past few centuries.....his ideas of egalitarianism made a black slave (bilal) the president of syria, within the same generation, when the west is only now ready to put a black man as president (half black and not a slave).......

so muhammad survives with or without islam.....however, as per islam muhammad was only a messenger.....a vehicle through which God's instructions were to be transmitted....

had it been islam's philosophical intention to make his every move the basis of islam, then there would have been no need for the quran....someone would have, simply, walked around, following him and writing down what he did and getting his seal on it........(his seal, by the way sits in topkapi palace in turkey).......that would have been the quran......

the quran doesn't even tell muslims how to say their prayers.......yet their is, now, a very strict action-by-action method of saying prayers in islam.....all of which has been detailed out from what bukhari et al wrote.....

so the islam that muslims are following today, philosophically, is not the islam of muhammad (or God, through muhammad)......it is, primarily, the islam of bukhari, muslim etc.....

i am sure the intentions of imam bukhari, muslim etc. were good.......but in the long run, they may have done far more damage than good......their works re-ignited the role of the clergy, in a religion that forbids it by design........and they removed the flexibility of the religion, in a religion, which by philosophical design is very flexible........

dost-mittar #: "It was the Islam practised by the likes of Ghori, Ghazni and others who.....I have not read any succinct description of the philosophy of Islam..."

your knowledge of the subject is extremely limited.....as i keep suggesting to you, you will end up with very bigoted views, if you don't first understand what you are discussing....

......ghauri and ghazn(avi) etc. are not even recognized as islamic scholars......they were, more than likely following the examples of ashoka and other local kings than anything else......

....i think your views on islam (and perhaps religion, as a whole), are quite prejudiced......perhaps due to your early childhood experiences......however, your personal decency does not allow you to openly display that prejudice.....

....there is nothing wrong with prejudiced views, if one can prove them with facts......you are thus, neither willing to study the subject to substantiate your prejudices, nor are you willing to openly display your prejudiced views......

.......in that sense, you are the opposite of hamidm mian.....he, inside, is a a solid muslim.....he attends more islamic functions in one year than i do in ten......he has raised his kids as muslims.....his wife is a practicing muslim........

however, his personal indecency is so strong, that he wants to portray himself as prejudiced against something (in this case religion), even though he is in support of it....

not sure, which is worse......a prejudiced decent person.....or a non-prejudiced indecent person.....

what i do know is that it is impossible to argue against fact......so you need to first learn up on the subject.......

#325 contd...

Gandhi had forgot this lesson from Vedanta....
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=W3_LEYwGHqo&feature=related

Re: # 315
hari... bull...

[...quran is a very compact and simple book for any tom, dick and harry to read and interpret....this is how it does away with the clergy......]


and you guys ( house moslems) complain of mis-interpretation. From Baboor, Ghajn....to current day jihadis from Philipines to Americas....everybody mis-interpreted....

Re: # 323
Murad Beg....
Jihad, as fought by Mo himself was not soft jihad. 13 wars, endless sex and violence is not soft jihad....

What BD have done in Gujrat is very reasonable(2002)? Treat animal based on the merit....

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

Re: # 15

Quite right

Token rituals mean nothing except temporary expediency for temporary gain. The only conversions are the conversions of the heart. And people should be free to follow their hearts and minds.

The tragedy of the Hindutva bigots like the Bajrang Dal and VHP is that they are trying to imitate the Muslim Jihadis who hijacked Islam making the gentle Jihad of the Quran into the virulent and violent Jihad of the Taliban.

Like the Taliban (that is supposed to mean nothing but scholars)are they trying to make a Taliram out of the gentle Ram?