Are the Converted Tribals Really Hindu?

Re: # 345; hamidm sahib

as far as my reading of the Good Book (the Quran) goes, there is absolutely no mention of the "sunnat-e-Ibrahimi" in that ..... I'd be more than happy to stand corrected by the Ulema-e Karaam here .... including those almost canonised souls such as St. Tahmed (may Allah's peace and blessing be upon him)

dost-mittar #: "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...."

...i have quoted the line which says that religion is complete......this is straight out of the quran......

"And the quran itself tells people to obey Mohammad, so Sunna is implicit in it."

...yes, sunnah is implicit in it.....it is implicit, to the extend described in the quran.....not by bukhari.......this is my whole point.....

" would also say that Islamic scholars have gone through a lot of pain to validate ahadith....considered fully valid that were substantiated by several narrators."

can you explain what they have done......i have asked this to many people who make the argument that you make.....please detail it out.....take any single hadith out of the thousands and detail out exactly the process used to validate that hadith......take your pick of any.....

heresay cannot even lead to a prosecution in a court of law, in the same timeframe and in the same neighborhood.....how in the world can heresay be used to validate oral traditions, over centuries and different countries.......to the point that the exact wordings of heresay are considered 100% exact and can be used for jurisprudence......

it is logically impossible......and the statistical possiblity of such accuracy would be microscopic.......

in any case do highlight how any single hadith can be traced back to validate its originality......100%.....and i will consider your argument to be accurate........and mine to be inaccurate.......keep in mind there are thousands of hadith which need to be validated in this manner.....

Murad babu,

......Most of the atrocities ..... were the exaggerations of court flatterers in the exaggerated persian style praising the muslim piety and iconaclasm of Ghazni, Aurangzeb and others.....

Are you implying that "Muslim piety" consists of committing atrocities on non-Muslims?

Regards

Im in a camp in the wilds of Punjab so ive not been able to read all the resonses. No one will defend the violence of any invading or resident ruler but remember that the records are highly biased. Most of the atrocities including the sacking of Somnath were not claimed by any Hindu, Jain or Buddhist authority but were the exaggerations of court flatterers in the exaggerated persian style praising the muslim piety and iconaclasm of Ghazni, Aurangzeb and others.

Ghazni reportedly killed as many Shias in Persia as Hindus at Somnath. He had a Brahmin general called Tilak. Timur Lang slaughtereded both Hindu and Muslim residents of Delhi who challenged the looting of his troops. He killed 80,000 Muslims in Baghdad so religion had less to do with it than political expediency in brutal times. We should not read too much religious significance into the excesses of despots.

Re: # 348 tahmad

Here is my challenge to you too, which I have posed to every Mirzai masquerading as a Quranite before and the self-proclaimed 20th century moderns; please explain to me the Chapter titled "The Elephant (105)" without using any of the Hadiths. It has only 5 verses; shouldn't be that hard.

Re: # 346

"There is no other book that has been memorized word to word by 100s of millions of people around the globe. That is why when Qura'n boasts that it is the miracle in itself, the proof validates its claim at the same time."

That is a BS claim........

Millions of people know Jana Gana Mana by heart ... or some other pop hit ....that does not turn the composer or he song into a "miracle"!!

Islamists are real dumb people who would go to any illogical extent in order to defend Mohammad!

urstruly: the need for hadith is "inevitable" only for those for whom the need to disregard the Quran is inevitable...

hamidm #344 you are sounding more and more like McCain...with mr cheema playing sarah palin...and dost mittar playing the reverend pat robertson..

very nice indeed!

Re: # 331 Dost

I think you have summed up the relationship between Qura'n and Sunnah quite accurately. I must also add that Qura'n itself is in fact the biography of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) (in Quranic words itself); but since the verses in Qura'n are not arranged in the chronological order as they were revealed but were arranged as instructed by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) the need for Hadith (explanation of Qura'n) becomes inevitable. Holy Prophet (pbuh), himself instructed and allowed to document Hadith, and while doing that he clarified to the scribes as to what constituted as his words (hadith) and what was the Divine verses.

The difference between Qura'n and other sacred text is that, that Qura'n is only the word of Allah; whereas the Bible and the Torah are a mix of both the Divine word and the Hadith of many Prophets of Israel. For example, there are many many verses in Bible that go something like "And then He (Jesus pbuh) said that....", which leave no doubt in anyone's mind that such sentences were later added as biographical notes into the Bible. The same thing goes with the Torah, which includes the descriptions of verious Prophets and Kings that came after Moses (pbuh). So logically any such description cannot be the original Torah.

The Holy Qra'n is the only book in the history of mankind that has remained unalterable and will remain so until the end of Time. There is no other book that has been memorized word to word by 100s of millions of people around the globe. That is why when Qura'n boasts that it is the miracle in itself, the proof validates its claim at the same time.

cheema sahib,

... talking about sunnah, is circumscion a sunnah ? .... they day call it sunnat (or sutaan) in punjabi ..... if that is so, then surely tahmed and captain cluless have been cheated and conned into mutilation ....... that would be ironic !

Re: # 341

cheema sahib,

.... it is amazing to what depth people will sink to convince themselves that their fears and superstitions are justified ...... tahnks for reminding the flaming koranists like tahmed jr. that the prophet (pbuh and his camel) himself said that we have to believe in his sunnah (whatever the heck that might be and whoever the heck the author might have been ......)

captain clueless,

"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"

.... that sounds so stupid! ..... even a four year old does not buy the argument "because i say so" and that is why most parents simply say "because!" ........

Haramimau #338


Let me remind you of your own words in an earlier post...

QUOTE Harimau skewers the lower castes like you guys might skewer meat for sheesh-kebabs.
Harimau walks tall, knowing full well that just by birth alone he is superior to 95% of Indians and 100% of non-Indians. That kind of self-confidence is not easy to come by.

Harimau pities mlecchas like you who have the misfortune to be born into a strange cult and who can have no exit strategy short of death. In fact, he pities mlecchas more than he pities the lower castes who at least have reservations going for them.

When I go to a roadside temple near my home for a special puja, I deliberately wear a dhoti but no upper garments. You should see what happens: the sight of the sacred thread around my torso parts the crowd who stand a respectful foot away from me so that I won`t be defiled by their touch. This in the city of Chennai after 75 years of anti-Brahmin propaganda. Hey, I like that.

The Communist minister Chakraborty in West Bengal, defending his attendance at a religious ceremony, said that he is seen as a brahmin first, a Bengali next and a Communist last.

Nope, we don`t squirm. We walk with our heads held high. Squirming is for low-lifes, such as worms on a hook. UNQUOTE

Little wonder the "worms" want to quit Hinduism and convert to any available religion.


So dear Haramimau, you stand exposed for what you actually are.... a hypocrite... and you have no business casting stones..... actually you have no business even existing..... the world would be better off without you.....


Is there no end to the duplicity of some Hindus ???

Re: # 340

PS ... from Prophet Mohammed's last sermon too:
"“O People! No Prophet or Apostle Will Come after Me and No New Faith Will Be Born. Reason well, therefore, O People! and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the QUR’AN and my SUNNAH (i.e., sayings, deeds, and approvals) and if you follow these you will never go astray. "

very clear to me that it is QURAN AND SUNNAH and neither on its own ....

... I don't have an issue with people following any religion but when they try to distort its meaning to cater for their own individual sensitivities, they are being dishonest .. with everyone, including themselves

like hamidm sahib says be a cultural muslim... with no refernce to "faith" ... I don't have an issue with that whatsoever ... it is part of one's heritage

but these apologists are trying to adhere to a modified 'faith' which is different .... I wouldn't be surprised (as hamidms's ealier assertions) that some of them are mirzais! ... in my limited experience mirzais do emphasis the QURAN more than anything else .. including Prof Abdus Salam (who I have a great deal of respect for) who use to quote the book left, right and centre

Re: # 331; dost sahib

you are absolutely right .... there are no examples throughout muslim history where Quran was taken as a guideline in its own right without the Sunnah .... this "Quranism" is a recent phenomenon and would only last as long as it takes for some strong minded to present its flaws in similar details as the apparent embarrasing nature of the Hadith literature

the whole argument is astounding!! first we have a God who sends out 'messages' through jewish prophets ... these messages get tampered with (against the WILL of God!!) and he ends up chosing an arab to relay the 'same' message (also the 'final' edition .. apparently!!) ... initially it was "un-alterable" ... then some geezer called Bokhari comiples a whole bunch of embarrassing stuff and uses some Sahaba and Ummahaat-ul-momineen (most prominent being Ayesha) to justify his 'statements' .... the whole Ummah follows them until in the 20th/21st century a few 'westernised' muslims com up with "Quranism" .... apparently history got it wrong again! ... God's message (even the perfect and final one) got tempered with yet again!!

Is there no end to the impotence of this God????

My request for explanations of certain verses in #338 is in no way confined or limited to Romair.

All Mozzies who trot out the statement "Islam is a peaceful Religion" such as Mullah32 are welcome to try!