The world of the Wise Lord

I feel the concept of Jaziya, allowing marriage with the people of the book and according the status of people of the book to some while denying it to others is more political than religious. In the days of Ummayyad dynasty, people were falling over each other to convert to Islam. The Jiziya tax imposed on the people was a huge burden and people wanted to get rid of it as soon as possible. But, if everyone converted it would deprive the state of a major source of revenue. So, conversion during that period was selective.

In India, the abhorrent tax was imposed based on the political strength of Turks. In times of turmoil, it did not make sense for a ruler to take additional panga by riling up the majority of subjects...so no Jiziya. As soon as ruler was in a position of strength, religiosity and Jiziya appeared on the scene. The tax was imposed by Alauddin Khilji and Muhammad Bin Tughlaq (the mad king). People like Akbar did not impose it because of their political foresight and not because of edicts in 7:14, if you get the drift :-) There were constant rebellions during Akbar`s reign as well - Rana Pratap is the most famous.

Aurangzeb is a peculiar case - most believe that his Jiziya decision was a manifestation of his zealotry, may be. I feel there is a political angle as well. Aur... was contending against Dara who was secular in his outlook. So, if Aur... had to mainitain his support base amongst the conservatives, he had to go for temple razings, Jiziya and so on. Some would ask - why did he do it after Dara was eliminated? Well, it is easy to eliminate a leader, more difficult to defeat the ideology he/she represents. There must have been sympathizers of Dara`s school of thought even after his death, so Aur... must rally his supporters.

And as Arjun_m says, allowing Muslims to marry `people of the book` does not count to a hill of beans. Muslim females can`t marry males from other religion, if they do, the male must convert to Islam. Non-Muslim females can marry into Muslim families without changing their faith, but their children will be raised as Muslims.

``The same principle was applied to Hindus throughout one thousand years of Muslim rule, until Aurangzeb Alamgir imposed Jizyah tax upon Hindus when they revolted in certain areas as per edict in Repentance 9:29.`` Urstruly # 40

The Hindu belief is that Aurangzeb reimposed Jizyah on Hindus. He was not the first Muslim ruler to impose such burdens upon Hindus.



Sameer

You capture the key differences between religious systems and their evolution with precision.

Zorastrianism offers an interesting historical view. For no intention or fault of its own, it `gave birth` to the three semitic religions of today. These semitic `children` dashed forward holding aloft Zorastrianism`s simplest cosmic tools. None grasped the subtlety of the `parent`s` complex and profound religious ethical framework. Naturally, none ever behaved like Zorastrians.

In behavior and religious temperament, Zorastrians remain closer to their ancient cousins in India.

Sameer # 54

My thanks to Urstruly were for the historical content re-affirmation.

You have brought about a new aspect as Vertex said some posts back.

He said that he Indians did not need to venture out because they were already very rich. I think it is partly true. It is true for the likes of Afghans, Central Asians, Mongols.

But in most cases the stampede to conquer others has some kind of ideology behind. Hitler was prosperous enough when he began the WW 11. Similarly, Americans are quite OK and they are conquering others `to protect liberty & freedom`.

Back to the Muslim`s stampede in 7 & 8 Century. Was it due to poverty or ideology based?

Similarly, another unresolved dilemma remains. Why did the Persians opt for the Shia sect. It is just a coincidence or has some other historical, religious or cultural explanation?

If you have time, do give your opinion.

nhk

Re: # 52

It is interesting that you are siding with Urstruly on the basis of exemption from Jizya tax on non-Muslims after conquering their home territories. Why did Omar go to war against Persians in Qadsiya in the first place? He did not go to war to impose exemption from Jizya tax on Persians. He defeated them and expanded the Islamic empire into outer Persian territory of modern day eastern Iraq and Jizya tax exemption came later. Do you know the famous quote attributed to Omar after winning in Qadsiya? He said: ``thank god for Arabs winning over Persians for the first time ever``. More like an Arab nationalist, he did not thank god for Muslims winning over non-Muslims.

Why do Urstruly or others then object to US conquering non-Christian territories of Iraq and Afghanistan and then imposing democracy later? Is imposing exemption from Jizya tax is better than imposing democracy?

Re: # 9

They say the name of the quranic prayer `namaz` also came from Zoroastrianizm. Is it so? At least I saw reference to Namz times on a notice board outside a zorastrian place of worship in Karachi. The Mulla use this name in Pakistan instead of qurani `Sallaat`. The name `Khuda` also of persian origin used to be widely used in urdu muslim literature instead of Arabic Allah, but has now been banned at least in the official media, the work of petro-dollars perhaps. Will you please throw light on these points as well?

Besides I think Zorastrianism believed in bitheism, the concept of Ahrman and YazdaN, and not in monotheism as stated by you. Judaistic Islam tried to combine these in mono-theism, but had to create satan to represent Ahrman, the god of evil. So virtually it is also bitheism. They worship the `Black stone` but throw small pebbles on the concrete Satans. They say only God knows what is evil and what is good but this much we know that the evil and good, ahrman and yazdaN, Allah and Satan cannot be seperated, i.e., they cannot exist exclusively. The great Aarif Ghalib says: -

Latafat be kasaafat jalwa peida kar naheeN sakti
Chaman zangaar he aainae baade bahaari ka

Urstruly

Thanks for your input about `the people of Book` and exemption of Jazia to Zoroastrians. You are always knowledgable & fair.

nhk

ShoreSahib,

``But it is dualistic: there are two independent principles in existence, not one. Ancient Iran was the world`s sole great civilization constructed on this principle of dualism``

...and this begs the question: so what? Never mind that entire civilizations can`t be built upon single conepts this vauge...

``Christianity, Judaism, and Islam– the Jerusalem Big Three– are all monist. What this means, among other things, is that since God is all powerful, nothing man does can be of any real cosmic importance...``

Nothing man does IS of cosmic importance. If otherwise, then percicely how is this manifested? In the afterlife? Through some unkown/unseeable way? How is this any better than the alleged short comings of so-called monists?

in #49 first para., the phrase should be ``since we would like people to not deceive us``.

shoresahib #47 i think evil is a very much human concept, and the distinction between good and evil becomes immaterial at the cosmic level: thus, evil is what we wouldnt like done to us. thus killing, unless done in self-defense, is evil. deception is evil - since we would like people to deceive us. and that is what kant`s categorical imperitive - or the saying ``do unto others as you would have them do unto you`` - is all about.

but why is this ``us`` so important - is our life really of any significance in the cosmic scheme of things. where even our entire planet earth (and all human history with it) is nothing more than a speck of dust in a vast desert which we know the universe to be; where there exist dimensions our brains and our senses are not wired to sense. God has bigger fish to fry than us insignificant little self-important containers of chemical compounds.

This seemingly academic point gains great importance in today`s world - because concepts of good and evil, and indeed religion, are there to serve mankind only. Not God. And thus religion is only as good as it serves mankind.

How well has religion served mankind? I wonder.

The only good it has done on chowk is give people something to chat about. :-)

The more I read about different religions, the more I come to appreciate the wisdom and practicality of the ``polytheistic`` religions especially of the East (Hinduism, Budhism, Zorastarism,). They are just brilliant pieces of work that cannot be matched. That is why followers of `monotheistic` religions are fascinated and copy the rituals and traditions of these vibrant religions.

The richness of the languages is unparallel too. Scientific perfection in the grammar.

The Avesta is steeped in these strains of bravery, fortified by vision and wisdom, bowed by pain and sacrifice but restored by hope and courage. Zoroastrian Iran created the material culture– some religious ideas and more legal concepts, poetry and music, art and architecture, cuisine and athletics, carpets, domes, even the symbol of the crescent, everything– that has been the France and the Italy of later Middle Eastern civilization. But there is one important feature that was almost lost. For you see, Zoroastrianism is monotheistic, in the sense that Ahura Mazda is the only God– the Destructive Spirit Ahreman is not a divine being, but a total negation, impossible to worship save by some perversion of the good and deception and defeat of the mind. But it is dualistic: there are two independent principles in existence, not one. Ancient Iran was the world`s sole great civilization constructed on this principle of dualism. Every other society on earth has been either polytheistic or monist. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam– the Jerusalem Big Three– are all monist. What this means, among other things, is that since God is all powerful, nothing man does can be of any real cosmic importance. There is no possible understandable answer to the paradox of the existence of evil beneath the dominion of a God who is all powerful and all good: one is reduced to various crippling excuses. Evil serves a mysterious cosmic purpose. Evil is a test. Evil is a sort of boot camp, strengthening our weak selves– no pain, no gain. Evil doesn`t really exist at all, it`s just privatio boni, the absence of good, a sort of hole in the cloth of the cosmos that God just lets be there. Yeah, right. Unde malum– Where does evil come from? Maybe evil`s just within us to start with, or it`s subjective, which is fine as an answer but it then makes the rest of religion irrelevant: stop going to church, then, and sit around in a Paris café drinking black coffee with the other existentialists and decide whether today`s the day you go back to your garret and blow your brains out. Wonderful. William S. Burroughs called our setup the OGU, the One God Universe. It`s entropic, it`s intellectually demeaning, it`s boring. The Iranian faith is the creed of courage, of humans who believe that what they do really matters. In the Big Three, it`s all mystery and submission. No more heroes.

Sa`di writes in the Golestan, Bani Adam a΄zaye yekdigarand, ke dar afrinesh ze yek goharand. Chu ΄uzvi bedard avarad ruzgar, digar ΄uzuhara namanad qarar. To kaz mehnate digaran bighami, nashayad ke namat nehanad adami. ``The children of Adam are limbs of the same body, created of the same essence; and when time brings pain to one, the others must suffer. If you feel no sorrow for others` afflictions, then you are undeserving of the name of man.``

Vertex/Urstruly.

Click on: Everything on Islam Fourth Link from TOP: for Dr. Hamidullah`s writings.

In response to several posts:

The Sanskrit and Old Persian overlap is well-known for being neighboring areas and both languages belonged to the same family, namely Aryan. Similarly the similarity of earlier deities, many words and soma/ homa drinking to feel spiritual are also unchallengeable commonalities and known for a long time. But that is only part and not the whole. I based my reasoning on independent philosophies of both areas. Lets not forget that Achamaenians ruled for good couple of hundred years over most of current Pakistan. Zarathustra himself is believed to born in modern day Balkhor Herat (Bactria) in northern Afghanistan - an area much more closer to subcontinent than Persipolis and western Iran of today.

The unity of all the good deities of Mithraism in the form of one Wise Lord in the sky was a clear break from the previous more eartly eastern dieties. Then reincarnation was let go in favor of rising from the dead on judgement day and going to heaven or hell based on good deeds (all ethical and no rewards for worshipping and praying). Then dualism in the East is like two sides of the same coin and to some mirror image of each other. Both good and bad are accepted outwardly natures of same inner and deeper reality. In Zoroastrism and other Western religions, bad is due to coming under the influence of a competing bad deity with good, called devil or satan. So two different deities are involved in making a person good or bad. In the west, the solution to become good is by following the path chosen by god or his prophets/ son, worships and prayers. In the East you only invoke deities help in time of need, otherwise Brahma is still sleeping with his eyes closed until he opens it and let go another cycle of 972000 years. In the West dieties are participating all the time with spoon feeding truth about life and universe through revelations whereas in the East dieties leave the meaning of life and finding the truth to humans. last and one of the most important difference is the use of visible metaphors in the East, like constellations, stars, moon, rivers, mountains, springs and seeing trees regenerating from seeds (leading to the philosophy of reincarnation) whereas in the West, more the invisible and apprachable by select few, more important and powerful the deity is. The clearly observation-based conclusions like people loving and respecting their parents and neighbors have to come back indirectly through god in the form of commandments in Western style.

Before the age of invisible deities, they were visible in one form or another all across the world, as Egyptians and Greeks mythologies in the West suggest. Then came the age of invisible dieties but with power to manifest in the visible forms and from Zarathustra onwards in the West, it became completely invisible to microwave, visible, infrared, ultraviolet and x-rays. In the East, deities had limited role in the life and development to invisible or visible did not make much sense and did not happen.

Vertex

As a matter of fact Dr. Parveen Shoukat has also mentioned that the Islamic Law of matrimony with `People of Book` was also extended to include Zorthostorians, without controversy at the time of Muslim Caliphates of Baghdad. The same law, however, remained quite contentious and controversial in Hindustan throughout the time - and I do not know the reason for that.

Not only Nazar, but all those who have contributed to this discussion need to be congratulated. Perhaps the best and most informative interaction on chowk.

Right now there is Mrs Khurshid Barrucha, a senator from Balochistan in the Parliament. She is elected on a general seat. My nextdoor neighbours are also Parsees and one of their cousins, owner of the Quetta Distellery was kidnapped a few years ago but never recovered.Presently there are two generals in the Army, one from infantry and another I guess is a doctor.

Cheerios

Vertex

The said Hadith and the topic I discussed was mentioned in two books; one is Human Rights in Islam by Dr. Parveen Shaukat; and other is Khutbaat-e-Bahawalpur by Dr. Mohammad Hamidullah. Unfortunately, neither book is currently in my possession, however, I am pretty sure a Google search may help you find the required referrence.