The Capture of Christianity

Kaal bhai, if you are a religious rightwinger, what should one make of your apparently earnest inquiries in nature and meaning of faith? Is it merely a polite front that masks deeper animosity?

Perhaps you missed the point: You are full of praises for (mainstream) Islam, even as you openly malign Mirzaees. Why stoke the fires of religious divide, unless you have something to gain from it. Is it because Mirzaees started the ruckus in your own backyard (Qadian) … or because their patient, calm approach makes it difficult for you to rile the crowds against them?

Nothing wrong with pitting group against the other … but perhaps you should be forthright about your own motives ... before you go chasing Murad Sahib. No?

Sattar bhai, nobody would be indignant if Murad ji called himself a religious rightwinger, as I do. Or even if he simply presented himself as a believing Muslim.

After all, Muslims have been defining religion for Hindus from the day they set foot on Indian land.

So as a proud believing Muslim, Murad bhai can happily be the slayer of unIslamic myths, but not as a secularist.

sattar2:

Nirvana is not escape, whoever used that term, unless it means escape from the cycle of life and death and the need to come back to this world. But I think that you get the basic good.

Muradbhai, sorry for this digression from the topic.

DM, I was basing it on earlier comments … just diluting the concepts to terms I could relate to …

�one is escape and the other is ultimate merger.
so nirvana would be running-away whereas mokhsha is full immersion imo" …… !!!
(grin).

Kaal bhai, the duplicity you associate with murad bhai is similar to what you yourself conveniently employ when airing grief against Mirzaees. Not that there is anything wrong with any of it … but you should consider giving up this moral indignation business. Unless of course, if you are joking …

#143 Posted by KaalChakra on
thank you, thank you.. if you don't already know it, it may give you an idea about which Jesus is more plausible..

#137 Posted by KaalChakra on
Murad is very sincere in his attempt to balm hurt ego of Islam. He picks one topic each time and tries to balm some part of this ego. So in some article he will say even Hinduism killed many, then he will say all prophets were nice but people hijacked their thoughts, now he is saying that even Christianity was copied from Budhdhism (he won't say Hinduism) so don't say if Islam was copied from Christianity, he will add a rider that all religions influenced each other. Again if you ask him about Prophet Muhammad having done many not so good deeds, he will striaght away give you example of Abraham and Sarah, to dilute it (like he did in #127).

So a committed ego balmer. What he doesn't know is that such ego-balmers are part of Islam since ever. This is what Islamist propagandists do, you ask them anything in Islam, they will talk at length about other religions, assuming that muslims won't even check what arguments they are giving and they can safely ignore all serious arguments from non-muslims.

The only reason muslims seem so far away from truth and are able to ignore degree of difference while comparing things/ideas (can compare anything to anything) is becaue they had such ego-balmers who did a good job to keep teaching suh an art of reasoning to them.

Pinku, you have put me on the spot! I have not been carefully following the philosphical aspects on this thread! At this point in time, on Murad Bhai's board, that would seem to be an unproductive enterprize (if it is productive anywhere else!).

But I will go through it and gladly offer my take. Best.

#128 Posted by KaalChakra on

Bhai Kaal, Badde-badde logon ke beech badi badi chhodni padti hai, too much or too little who will read?, I mean who is serious in any case. I wrote a shorter version long time back against Murad's earlier article. This is second time and perhaps a few more will get to read it.

But what do you think about it, did you know it already?

Cheema, I actually think of Islam and the Quran quite differently. IMO both have some pwerful and seemingly unique properties (that is what makes Islam so successful in this world, in terms of its sheer power to move people). But anyways, you and I are not writing books upon books or article after article trying prove or establish anything. :)

sattar:

No, you didn't get it right. You probably read BJ's last comment [I think that he was mixing moksha with mukti [just to 'simplify' things;) ]. Read earlier discussion by sadna, kaal, jang, etc.

Re: # 137; Kaal

I accept that only Murad can answer those questions to your satisfaction ... without knowing the background here, it'd be wrong of me to venture out in terrains unknown ... however,for your benefit, I'd like to 'hazard a guess' to the answersto your questions:

1 - Mohammed was very much the prophet of the (non-existent) allah

2 - Koran was the best gobbledigook he could come up with

3 - Islam is as original a source as the "arabian nights" is for the 'guidance' for mankind

now let us allow Kaalchakra and Muradbeg speak

Muradbhai:

Congratulations on your appearance on the Jim Lehrer News Hour on the PBS. [although I do not agree with your stance that Indians must replicate the havoc brought about by the car-obsessed America].

akcheema

One can have no problem with that, if by gobbledygook one means things that one mostly can't prove, that don't always make sense to everyone, and things that are often contradictory! Yaar, most of us reject that Indic gobbledygook anyways. :)

But Murad bhai is not in that business at all. He, as a Muslim, appraoches Islamic gobbledygook (if he believes it to be) very differently than he approaches unIslamic gobbledygook.

And it is not fear of Islam that drives him. Because he is obsessed with proving unIslamic gobbledygook to be 'gobbledygook.' :)

That's actually funny, because of most of non-Muslims accept that anyway. So his work is intellectually trivial but politically powerful and relevant.

--------------------

To help Murad bhai, here again are the three basic myths (for non-Muslims) that all Muslims hold. Murad bhai can pick all three or any two or any one to base some of his work on, so we know he is not just an ordinary old obsessed with defining other people's religions (nothing wrong with that, if that is what he wants to be).:

Any of the three 'myths' Murad bhai can choose to slay/slaughter/disprove for us:

(1) Muhammad was a Prophet of Allah.
(2) Qruan is not a book devised by men like any other book, or that it contains any divine message any more than any other book.
(2) Islam itself, the original, uncorrupted, as meant to be, is not a man-made religion any more than any old shaka-laka man-made religion.

Re: # 135; Kaal

I have no idea about Murad sahib (if only I could read minds!) ... but you do have a ceratain tendency to 'categorise' people ... don't you?

now ... in order to 'accept' my 'Indian' heritage, do I have to accept the gobbledigook Indic traditions? when I class 'my own' as the same!

... I openly say that both Islam and the so called "Indic" traditions are gobbledigook ... what say you?

treetop, I actually don't. I respect Muslims who claim to be Muslims and believe in their myths. We all have our myths and choose to believe them or reject them.

But Murad bhai has built himself up as a destroyer of religious myths, as the establisher of 'facts' in religion. The neat trick always is that ALL his research has been about other people's religions - not his own religion.

He just can't leave other people's shit alone, because fingering shit, he claims, is his life's work (not because he is an Islamist fanatic.)

If that is so, we need to all see him fingering some real Islamic shit (if that is shit).

-------

Cheema,

Two things. I never claim anything that many Muslims, religious Muslims, never claim. That would be unfair, and that is what Murad bhai does.

Two, my interest in Islam is precisely in counter to people like Murad Bhai, who has turned defining Hinduism into a Jihad. Hindus need to be able to undertand and communicate with people like Murad bhai - because there are so many of them in India.

Anyways, let's hope Murad bhai will easily show us that he is not what I suspect he is - a simple Islamist fanatic.

Re: # 132; Kaal

but of course he (mohammed) was a prophet of the (non-existent) allah ... are you saying you don't believe in that (the above)?

but you WILL insist on categorising people nevertheless, won't you? ... just because they call your 'beliefs' gobbledigook? .... even though they'd OPENLY call their own by a NO DIFFERENT label?!