Understanding Political Islam
Thanks to Krishen-ji for alerting me to this interview of Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI). CSPI is devoted to the scientific study of the foundational texts of Islam, including the Koran and Hadith.
Its approach is unusual in that it relies on statistics to study the doctrines (e.g. see the discussion about “Jihad” below) and considers the Koran alongside the Sira and Hadiths as part of the Islamic Trilogy. Although published more than a year ago, large parts of it are still very relevant.
Excerpts:
…Our major intellectual breakthrough is to see that dualism is the foundation and key to understanding Islam.
…Endless ink has been wasted on trying to answer the question of what is Islam? Is Islam the religion of peace? Or is the true Islam a radical ideology? Is a moderate Muslim the real Muslim?
Â
This reminds a scientist of the old arguments about light. Is light a particle or is light a wave? The arguments went back and forth. Quantum mechanics gave us the answer. Light is dualistic; it is both a particle and a wave. It depends upon the circumstances as to which quality manifests. Islam functions in the same manner.
Â
Our first clue about the dualism is in the Koran, which is actually two books, the Koran of Mecca (early) and the Koran of Medina (later). The insight into the logic of the Koran comes from the large numbers of contradictions in it. On the surface, Islam resolves these contradictions by resorting to “abrogation”. This means that the verse written later supersedes the earlier verse. But in fact, since the Koran is considered by Muslims to be the perfect word of Allah, both verses are sacred and true. The later verse is “better,” but the earlier verse cannot be wrong since Allah is perfect. This is the foundation of dualism. Both verses are “right.” Both sides of the contradiction are true in dualistic logic. The circumstances govern which verse is used.
Â
For example:
(Koran of Mecca) 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.
From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers:
(Koran of Medina) 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”
All of Western logic is based upon the law of contradiction—if two things contradict, then at least one of them is false. But Islamic logic is dualistic; two things can contradict each other and both are true.
Â
No dualistic system may be measured by one answer. This is the reason that the arguments about what constitutes the “real” Islam go on and on and are never resolved. A single right answer does not exist.
Â
Dualistic systems can only be measured by statistics. It is futile to argue one side of the dualism is true. As an analogy, quantum mechanics always gives a statistical answer to all questions.
Â
For an example of using statistics, look at the question: what is the real jihad, the jihad of inner, spiritual struggle or the jihad of war? Let’s turn to Bukhari (the Hadith) for the answer, as he repeatedly speaks of jihad. In Bukhari 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about the inner struggle. So the statistical answer is that jihad is 97% war and 3% inner struggle. Is jihad war? Yes—97%. Is jihad inner struggle? Yes—3%. So if you are writing an article, you can make a case for either. But in truth, almost every argument about Islam can be answered by: all of the above. Both sides of the duality are right.
…QUESTION: So why this ignorance (about the history and doctrine of political Islam in the West)?
…Let’s examine the ethical basis of our civilization. All of our politics and ethics are based upon a unitary ethic that is best formulated in the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would be treated.
Â
…All religions have some version of the Golden Rule except Islam.
Â
QUESTION: So how is Islam different in this context?
Â
Warner: The term “human being” has no meaning inside of Islam. There is no such thing as humanity, only the duality of the believer and unbeliever. Look at the ethical statements found in the Hadith. A Muslim should not lie, cheat, kill or steal from other Muslims. But a Muslim may lie, deceive or kill an unbeliever if it advances Islam.
Â
There is no such thing as a universal statement of ethics in Islam. Muslims are to be treated one way and unbelievers another way. The closest Islam comes to a universal statement of ethics is that the entire world must submit to Islam. After Mohammed became a prophet, he never treated an unbeliever the same as a Muslim. Islam denies the truth of the Golden Rule.
Â
By the way, this dualistic ethic is the basis for jihad. The ethical system sets up the unbeliever as less than human and therefore, it is easy to kill, harm or deceive the unbeliever.
Â
Now mind you, unbelievers have frequently failed at applying the Golden Rule, but we can be judged and condemned on its basis. We do fall short, but it is our ideal.
Â
…
Since Islam has a dualistic logic and dualistic ethics, it is completely foreign to us. Muslims think differently from us and feel differently from us. So our aversion is based upon fear and a rejection of Islamic ethics and logic. This aversion causes us to avoid learning about Islam so we are ignorant and stay ignorant.
Â
Another part of the aversion is the realization that there is no compromise with dualistic ethics. There is no halfway place between unitary ethics and dualistic ethics. If you are in a business deal with someone who is a liar and a cheat, there is no way to avoid getting cheated. No matter how nice you are to a con man, he will take advantage of you. There is no compromise with dualistic ethics. In short, Islamic politics, ethics and logic cannot be part of our civilization. Islam does not assimilate, it dominates. There is never any “getting along” with Islam. Its demands never cease and the demands must be met on Islam’s terms: submission.
Â
…
Why should a Hindu want to recall the shame of slavery and the destruction of their temples and cities? After Hindu craftsmen built the Taj Mahal, the Muslim ruler had their right hands cut off so that they could not build anything as beautiful for anyone else. The practice of suttee, the widow throwing herself on the husband’s funeral pyre, came about as a response to the rape and brutality of the Islamic jihad as it sweep over ancient Hindustan.
…
But the Trilogy is clear about the doctrine. At least 75% of the Sira (life of Mohammed) is about jihad. About 67% of the Koran written in Mecca is about the unbelievers, or politics. Of the Koran of Medina, 51% is devoted to the unbelievers. About 20% of Bukhari’s Hadith is about jihad and politics. Religion is the smallest part of Islamic foundational texts.
Â
…
Mohammed preached his religion for 13 years and garnered only 150 followers. But when he turned to politics and war, in 10 years time he became the first ruler of Arabia by averaging an event of violence every 7 weeks for 9 years. His success did not come as a religious leader, but as a political leader.
…
After Mohammed’s death, Abu Bakr, the second caliph, settled the theological arguments of those who wished to leave Islam with the political action of death by the sword. The jihad of Umar (the second caliph, a pope-king) exploded into the world of the unbelievers. Jihad destroyed a Christian Middle East and a Christian North Africa. Soon it was the fate of the Persian Zoroastrian and the Hindu to be the victims of jihad. The history of political Islam is the destruction of Christianity in the Middle East, Egypt, Turkey and North Africa. Half of Christianity was lost. Before Islam, North Africa was the southern part of Europe (part of the Roman Empire). Around 60 million Christians were slaughtered during the jihadic conquest.
Â
Half of the glorious Hindu civilization was annihilated and 80 million Hindus killed.
Â
…
Our intellectuals and artists have been abused for 1400 years. Indeed, the psychology of our intellectuals is exactly like the psychology of the abused wife, the sexually abused child or rape victim. Look at the parallels between the response of abuse victims and our intellectuals. See how violence has caused denial.
Â
The victims deny that the abuse took place: Our media never reports the majority of jihad around the world. Our intellectuals don’t talk about how all of the violence is connected to a political doctrine.
Â
The abuser uses fear to control the victim: What was the reason that newspapers would not publish the Mohammed cartoon? Salman Rushdie still has a death sentence for his novel. What “cutting edge” artist creates any artistic statement about Islam? Fear rules our intellectuals and artists.
Â
The victims find ways to blame themselves: We are to blame for the attacks on September 11, 2001. If we try harder Muslims will act nicer. We have to accommodate their needs.
Â
The victim is humiliated: White people will not talk about how their ancestors were enslaved by Islam. No one wants to claim the victims of jihad. Why won’t we claim the suffering of our ancestors? Why don’t we cry about the loss of cultures and peoples? We are too ashamed to care.
Â
The victim feels helpless: “What are we going to do?” “We can’t kill 1.3 billion people.” No one has any understanding or optimism. No one has an idea of what to try. The only plan is to “be nicer.”
Â
The victim turns the anger inward: What is the most divisive issue in today’s politics? Iraq. And what is Iraq really about? Political Islam. The Web has a video about how the CIA and Bush planned and executed September 11. Cultural self-loathing is the watchword of our intellectuals and artists.
…
We must learn the doctrine of political Islam to survive. The doctrine is very clear that all forms of force and persuasion may and must be used to conquer us. Islam is a self-declared enemy of all unbelievers. The brilliant Chinese philosopher of war, Sun Tsu, had the dictum—know the enemy. We must know the doctrine of our enemy or be annihilated.
Â
Or put another way: if we do not learn the doctrine of political Islam, our civilization will be annihilated just as Egypt’s Coptic civilization was annihilated.
Â
Read the interview in full here.Â
Related Posts:
Islam’s “uncomfortable truthsâ€Â
When is it OK to wage “Jihadâ€?Â
SRK: �Jihad…a small little word�Â
Another link to the article by Bill Warner and some excerpts:
Simple statistics also reveal the true nature of the political/religious idea of jihad. When the word jihad is used, Muslims say that there are two kinds of jihad. There is the religious jihad, the greater jihad–the inner struggle against personal problems. The war jihad is the lesser jihad.
The Hadith of Bukhari gives all of the tactical details of jihad. A simple counting method shows that 3% of the hadiths are about the inner struggle, whereas, 97% of the hadiths are about jihad as war. So is jihad the inner struggle? Yes, 3%. Is jihad the war against kafirs? Yes, 97%.
This leads to a very important concept. Islam is based upon contradictory statements. How do we sort them out to get the complete meaning? We measure the amount of text devoted to each side of the dichotomy. That is what we did with the question of which jihad is the real jihad. It gives a complete statistical answer.
There is nothing new here. Only single value state ideas can be measured by one number. Multi-state ideas must be evaluated by statistics that measure every state of the variable. If an idea has different manifestations, then instead of arguing which is the right manifestation, just measure all of the manifestations.
There is an exact analogy to the measurement of the state of the electron in an atom. Quantum physics does not give a single answer about the energy and position, but gives us the statistical probabilities of each possible state. The same is true about Islam. We need to know its total state, not something about one category.
In conclusion, statistics is a superior way to gain complete knowledge of the texts of Islam. Statistics allows us to explore Islam in its totality. Remember the old story of the blind men feeling the elephant? One said the elephant was like a rope, another a tree, a wall and so forth. Was each man right? Were any of them wrong? No. But none of them were completely right. Statistical analysis cannot tell us the qualitative story but it allows us to remove the blinders of only looking at one category and forces us to look at the total picture.
Notice that this approach also effectively tells us how to evaluate the “experts” that get trotted out to buttress a favorite position. This is the iron rule of Islam-only Mohammed defines the truth of Islam. If what an expert says agrees with Mohammed, then the he is right, but he is redundant. If what the expert says contradicts Mohammed, then the expert is wrong. So experts are either redundant or wrong. Only Mohammed tells us the truth about Islam and he is never wrong or redundant. Skip the experts and move straight to Mohammed. The statistical approach does just that.Â
This guy talks sense.
Dear Sir,
What an article!!!!.
To annihilate the self destruction process of the persons against whom JIHAD is proposed I think we need more of sites like yours and we should fight against the enslavement of thought as has happened to the Teesta’s, Swaninathan’s, Vir Sanghvis’s and the whole tribe of the reporters of the Pseudo Secular press.
Let us face up to the challenge by taking our leaders as Shivaji Maharaj, Rani Of Jhansi, Padmini of Chittor, and more recently Shri. Modi, Shri. Togadia, Shri. Singhal etc.
Regards,
vck
Very revealing work. In fact, for a ‘secular’ debate on violence, communalism and terrorism these questions need to be addressed when moderate Muslims come to the table. I had heard about a different ethics and different golden rules used by Islamists and this article has given clarity.
Without clarifications on the basis of ethics and identity raised here no ‘talks’ with moderate Muslims can make any sort of progress. If one takes all of what is said here to be true and irrefutable then the only defense for Non-muslims is to assertively ensure that Muslims are kept in a manageable minority and constantly watched.
A very insightful find, and very nicely brings out Islam.
Thanks
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-why-should-i-respect-these-oppressive-religions-1517789.html
@ surah al anfal(8)verse 12 says that allah will be severe with the unbelievers now if u analyse that one who does not believe in the true master and will do all evil, what should almighty god do to him, now simply if we differentiate between good and the evil, even a common man will want the evil to face defeat or wish it to get worse,now the question is who is an unbeliever? one who does not beleive in one common god in arabic we call it ALLAH while here in india KHUDA RABBA PARMESHWAR ISHWAR if gaytri mimantran is understood it talks about one god koran talks about one god all the time so i dont understand this western golden rule that u follow,now if u beleieve in hindi parmesvar ishwar or baghwan as one “only almighty god” you are a believer this is what koran says….i am sorry to tell your intellectul gurus that understanding of god through koran is the best way that has been send…and has to be the last now the question of prophet muhammad(PUBH) is why to believe in him because the koran was send to him, so we have to believe in him as a prophet because god sends his message through a messenger or a prophet,now the question of political career of our holy prophet,if u go back to his era secularism was started by him in arabia where a unbelievr had to pay a tax called jaziya while as a believer would pay zakkat to the islamic state,WAR to protect onself one comes into self defence rightly so the prophet did not wage war without being attacked in every battle for examle battle of badr or battle of uhad …rest of the small scale war was to bring justice to weak,JIHAD means to stuggle against evil or in other words seeking sprituality it is imporatnt for every human being to do,KITAL means to kill when you are in a battle, rest ALLAh says in SURAH kafiruun(109) that if you dont want top believe it is not forced on you dont believe.At the end of it i reqest you to believe in one common god what the holy quran says,ISLAM on the other hand means peace and even if you dont believe, allah says in the koran to come to common terms with unbelievers if you are at conflict with them to bring peace what else is a golden rule other than the holy koran read koran and than write abot it it challenges you to fail it,
@ Adeel: I am struggling to understand what you are trying to say.
Pl. be more clear in your response.
Secondly, I notice that you have not addressed ANY point made in the original post.
Please keep your coments relevant and try and address the main point(s). And remember, sometime silence can be golden.
@Adeel bhai sahab,
All your Islamic cover-up propaganda has been pooh-poohed by Dr. Ali Sina and his army of ex-Muslims (like me).
Read “Faith Freedom International”: http://www.faithfreedom.org/
@aasma you have turned into a non muslim by choice i dont have a problem u have your reasons, but being a muslim i have every duty to clear doubts about islam if they come by my way,like non muslims who have thier reasons to speak against islam same mr.ali sina has.I am not making a propaganda i am alone to speak on shantanus blog this is reality what i wrote and every muslim knows that so u dont want to read truth and believe it u have made a choice.
@Adeel bhai sahab
I have turned into an ex-Muslim apostate by using my God-given Aql (Intelligence), while you continue to wallow in ignorance because of your Naql (blindly following the pedophile).
Have you tried to use your intelligence to disprove Dr. Ali Sina? Or are you afraid of reading his articles that will unravel your dogma?
@Indian
That article by Johann Hari, when it was re-printed in Bharat there were, as good as anyones guess, allot of riots particularly in Kolkata region and baap-ka-maal-hai national property destroyed & burnt. The Newspaper’s office was attacked, Editor was arrested by Islamofascist “Secular” Leftist govt, Dhimmi Manmohan Singh lost his sleep, etc. But then came an interesting turn. What did Johann Hari do? After writing an excellent article that you mentioned above and seeing the protests in “Secular” Bharat, he tried to prove his secular credentials by writing a followup. Now whats the best & easiest way of least resistance to prove your “secular” credentials? Any guesses?
Thanks for the links Satyabhashanam: Very interesting indeed.
@aasma i find it quite funny you still say god given aql(intelligence) you say you have left islam as a religon to follow than how come god is still there for you to believe probably you dont understand god and islam anyhow its not imporatnt to read ali sina and his theories against islam as one one his deciple(AASAM RIAZ) still believes in god i presume he has a political reason to sight which must be grossly misunderstood.
An Excellent article on the oxymoron. “Islam and Peace: Two Compatible Concepts?” by Adity Sharma. http://bit.ly/4ocQX1
Its a take by the author on Political Islam intellectually.
Excerpts from the article (emphasis mine),
“As Muhammad became disillusioned from the strife between the Pagan Meccans around him, he began to feel more and more aloof from the society in which he had been brought up. Soon, he began to experience religious visions which slowly but surely burgeoned in to a world religion of Islam focused primarily around the Quran and Hadiths. After Muhammad conquered Mecca, Islam began to spread in earnest, most of the times through questionable and brutal methods such as military conquest, or through peaceful methods like the spreading of political unity. This kind of descemination of the faith was rare however. From the Iran hostage crisis, to September 11, to the Madrid bombings, to the London bombings, to the incessant Islamist attacks in Bharat, and the ongoing terrorist assaults against the Israeli state, do these attacks have religious sanctification? Are they isolated incidents carried out by a few “mislead†Muslim Radicals, or, is there a more sinister side to the religion of Islam. Is Islam really a religion of peace?
…….
But what we can do, is to make aware those unbelievers who refuse to see the writing on the wall, I.E. if we do not wake up to the menace of Islam, we will all be praying five times a day, facing Mecca of course! It will mean the deathnil of great civilizations such as of Sanatan Dharm and Buddhism.
The root of Islamic terrorism is not poor youth taking up arms to fight the political system, it is not illiteracy among Muslims. These are socio-economical reasons happily advanced by Marxists and Islamists alike. These halftruths only facillitate for advancing a facade by Islam. The September 11 highjackers were not illiterate and unresourceful by any stretch of the imagination. An illiterate person can not construct an improvised Explosive Device (IED). An unresourceful person can not funnel thousands of dollars in to bank accounts of known terrorists. Again, it is not the supposed wrongs commited against Muslims.
Islam, and not Muslims, needs to be defeated at every level, especially at the intelectual level. Questioning the very pillars of Islam should be at the heart of every accademic discussion of Islamic terrorism.“
@Adeel bhai sahab,
Read my testimonial carefully. I am not an atheist. I believe in God.
But my God is not the God of Muhammad. My God is a Universal God (Ishwar) who loves everyone and makes no differentiation between believers and non-believers.
I love Ishwar and Ishwar loves me.
I don’t fear Ishwar. God is love – pure and simple. No fear, no hellfire.
Amazing, isn’t it? 🙂
@ Adeel bhai sahab,
Before Muhammad was born, Al-Lah was the well-known Pagan Moon-god of the Quraish tribe. Other Arabian tribes worshipped their own Gods and Goddesses (al-Lat, al-Uzza, Manat, Hubal etc)
Muhammad cleverly hijacked his own Quraish tribe’s Moon-God (Allah) and turned Allah into an Islamic God that Muhammad forced all other Arabian tribes to submit to – by hook, crook or the sword.
If you don’t believe this, answer these questions:-
1) Muhammad’s father’s birth-name was Abdullah (Slave of Allah) even before his son Muhammad was born. How do you explain that?
2) How do you explain the symbol of the Crescent Moon as an Islamic symbol that is present on Islamic flags and on top of mosques?
(Hint: The Crescent Moon is the symbol for the Quraish tribe’s Moon-God i.e. Allah).
3) Why do we continue to follow the Quraish’s tribe’s custom of sighting the Crescent Moon to mark the beginning of a festival (Ramadan)?
Answer my questions without being needlessly scared of an imaginary Allah or an imaginary hellfire.
Do some research on your own, instead of blindly believing a stupid book. Its very obvious that Islam is Bedouin Imperialism. It’s a pity that we are brainwashed from birth to become a wannabe Bedouin (even though we belong to a far more civilised ancestry and refined civilisation). The power of brainwashing… and the fear of hellfire. How childish.
@Aasma,
Thanks for providing the historical details behind the origins of the religion. Very helpful to know the origins.
@aama i think atheist is a kafir or a non believer why will god not diffrentaite between a believer and an non believer
your Q>1 allah in arabic means “god” the truth of one god didnt start from prophet muhamads time lets go close to abraham moses jesus they all spoke of one true almighty god so if anyone names himself abdullah what argument u have to confront prohphet muhamad with it… i fail to understand
Q> allah has made this entire universe which probably you will believe so no signs or any face or idol he has…arabs during that time were most advanced in astronomy physics and other science so muslims strictly follow the lunar calendar ..so if some muslims use moon as a sign ..what is wrong in it, later all quraish became muslims and prophet was himself a quraish
Q>3 as i already told you with cresent moon a claendar was developed by arabs.Ramadan was not proposed by muhamad but by arabs from centuries behind and what wrong does it make if we follow quraish calendar.you not being a christain follow the christain calendar so no problems there for you.
WHAT REASONS DO U GIVE Aasma, prophet muhamads mission was to tell the world about one almighty god and against the evils the man was doing that time,quran is a guidance from wisdom to a complete human being ,allah knows the best for us,dont get into these reasons they hold no weight belive me or not its out of context of believeing in god and following the guidance.lets finish this here only….no more posts.
One interesting point the author makes is that there will never be true reciprocity with fundamentalist (and perhaps even moderate) muslims (i.e no golden rule of mutual tolerance and respect). This presents a really big problem in both international relations as well as our own internal problems. It obviously cannot be solved merely by diplomatic means.
The truly amazing aspect of this whole discussion, is that Muslims expect the world to treat them fairly, and not hold them accountable for their support( moral and financial) of terrorists.
This reminds me of what Swami Dayanada Saraswathi (of Arshavidya gurukulam) once said: that what was known as dharma by Arjuna was also what was known as dharma by Duryodhana. Just as Arjuna expected the Kauravas to play fair and return the Pandava kingdom, Duryodhana also wanted fair play when Bhima fights with him in the end. He is angry when Bhima doesn’t do so.
This is fairly common in the West and in India where Muslims cry Islamophobia and human rights violations whenever they feel insulted by depictions of their religion or threatened by investigations into their collusion with extremists . They obviously expect fairplay in a democracy; yet feel no unease at the contradiction when Islamic countires deny even the basic rights to minorities.
Is it even possible to arrive at rapprochement with such a religion ?
@ Adeel Shafi:
I find it funny that you use the definition of God, only as defined by the Qurn’an.
And anyone outside that definition in a atheist, Kafir or Non-believer.
That my friend, is the reason of the whole problem.
That my friend, is also the reason why your fore-fathers were forced into Islam from Hinduism, possibly at a loss of limb and honor.
As for your understanding of Ishwara, I think that is a lost cause.
But do try to google a few words,
1. Sankhya-Yoga
2. Nyaya-Veisheshika
3. Mimansa
4. Advaita
5. Dvaita
6. Vishistha Advaita
@Harapriya,
Perhaps you have heard of the phrase ‘taqqiya’ where deception is practiced to suit their needs.
I guess that would be one big reason for the way they behave as a minority versus a majority.
Oh, this logic is as wonderful as the length of the Chinese emperor’ nose. Also, when it suits us, the Christian West turns out to be the fount of wisdom, and suddenly, the Taj turns into something that was built by the Muslims. Then, “‘taqqiya’ where deception is practiced to suit their needs”. Don’t you think that Mohammed & Co., should have had to pay some royalty to us? After all, all civilization flowed from the Aryan civilization in the lands watered by the Sindhu, and these people can only feebly try to imitate “Ashwatthamo hata” or a false sunset for Jayadratha. Or Mohini’s various appearances. Or that most gracious of gestures, Vamana’s third step. Frankly speaking, since we already know that the Muslims are a loathsome excrescence that deserves excision, why spend so much time on them? Why not spend a bit on discussing ourselves? Agreed, we are the greatest civilization, our people are the most noble, but there might still be an ingrown toe-nail that needs some attention.
@Jayadevan. I assume you are trying to prove your secular credentials a la Taroor. Rule #1 in the secular handbook: when discussing Islam and Muslims, immediately turn the topic to other religious groups to find their flaws. This is the moral equivalence argument again; i.e Vamana’s third step is equal to Mohammed’s killing of infidels.
Incidentally, didn’t Vamana’s third step bless Mahabali and give him an entire age of being Indra (which is what he wanted).
@Harapriya,
Rule I in any book should be.. take a good hard look at yourself. And this is basically a group of Hindus, interested in things Hindu, so in addition to going on ego trips by bashing other religious groups, a bit of introspection might be beneficial. I have spoken with nice, well-educated, god-fearing people like you all among the Muslims and the Christians and seen the same obsession with the mote in my brother’s eye while ignoring the beam in my own (I have better Mallu equivalents, but they are untranslatable, so I stick with English). And, please, don’t try to put words in my mouth. I was, if you will read the paragraph carefully, talking about deceit and trickery. To translate that to read “Vamana’s third step is equal to Mohammed’s killing of infidels” is stretching things a wee bit.
I was initially intrigued by the shifting ownership of the Taj. It is Tejomahalaya one day, (Hindu-)bloodstained Muslim mausoleum the next. The Western scholars – ditto. I understand that consistency is the virtue of fools, and that the human race progresses over the debris of jettisoned hypotheses and theorems, but this was a bit too rich to pass up. (The taqqiya thing came in when I looked up as I was typing my comment.)
Let me quote a few bits from “The Tao is silent” by Raymond Smullyan, for the Taoist perspective. Chapter 13 — “The Tao does not command” :-
..In the Judeo-Christian notion of God, one thing which is so rigidly stressed is *obedience* to God ! The great sins are “disobedience to God, rebellion against God, pride, self-will” etc. …
My comment: Oh, what a perfect recipe for creating a mass of robotic humans who can be easily manipulated!
The Taoist’s notion of the Tao, is only of “being in harmony with the Tao”, never surrender of will or being in an unequal relationship of obedience.
“The Tao never commands,
And, for this reason, is
voluntarily obeyed”
And Jayadevan, come on, and take on the Tao !
@Jayadevan,
Perhaps you should read more of this blog’s posts to understand the perspectives provided.
“Rule I in any book should be.. take a good hard look at yourself” Of course you can live in your imaginary theoretical fairyland while ignoring practical realities.
Sure Hinduism has its flaws. But it did not lead regimes of unspeakable cruelty and brutality of centuries where tolerance and peace. But then again talking about the topic at hand is not your forte.
I meant to add, But it did not lead regimes of unspeakable cruelty and brutality of centuries where tolerance and peace were paid lip service.
Dear All: As some of you know, I am in the middle of some pretty intense weeks so will only be posting comments infrequently…
That said, I have committed myself to find the time to read each and every comment before I go to sleep every day.
Thanks for your continued support and encouragement.
@Jayadevan – “I have spoken with nice, well-educated, god-fearing people like you all among the Muslims and the Christians ”
It is so typical of Dhimwits (like yourself) to extrapolate the Islamic fear of Allah to Kafir Hindus who love their Krishna.
Allah-fearing Muslims = Krishna-loving Hindus ?
Dude, what have you been smoking?
@ Jayadevan
Quite funny, your arguments are.
The “Ashwatthama Hata iti Gaja” part metaphorically represents the use of qualified exceptions, for the cause of a larger good, against “evil”.
By finding equivalence in Mohammed and Co.’s modus operandi,et al, you do realize that you are essentially accepting the fact they Koran followers do look at Hindus (Kafirs) as the ultimate Evil equivalent.
Which is exactly the point, the author is making.
Thanks.
Jayadevan uncle needs to take a one month vacation in Mundogiri in Haryana. Perhaps that will cure him of always looking for beams in his eye, and ingrown toenails on his foot.
BTW, Jayadevan, you didn’t respond to my comment regarding Gandhi and his advice to Jews/Nazism. And aren’t your comments equivalent of looking for motes in other people’s eyes? Perhaps you need to apply your wisdom to yourself first.
@Jayadevan. “with the mote in my brother’s eye while ignoring the beam in my own ” Ah.. is this a case of the devil quoting scriptures?!
Getting away from these biblical allusions, the fundamental issue is not whether there are good Muslims and bad Hindus. The central argument was that Islam’s belief system is incompatible to the modern democratic state and that when Muslims reach a critical mass in terms of population, they fight to significantly erode those democratic ideals.
The argument that Hindus should always introspect every time someone criticizes Islam (or for that matter Christianity) is quite silly. For one, no muslim Imam who preaches regularly from the pulpits across the world finds the need to introspect when he talks of getting rid of kaffirs. Neither for that matter do the missionaries stop to reflect whether they are destroying indigenous beliefs and religions when they embark on their proselytizing spree.
Secondly Hindus don’t regularly indulge in the kind of terrorist activities that we see members of Islam indulge in. Even our extremist groups are more rabble rousers than hard core terrorists. What you are suggesting is that the Hindus keep looking at the mote in their eyes while the Abrahamic religions hit them on the head with their beams.
Dear JayaGoebbels,
You suddenly seem lost for words, my friend. What happened? Cat got your tongue? 🙂
Here is an example of what a politically and socially powerful Islam might do to our penal code. http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/08/04/stoning-soraya-movie-reviews/
@ jayadevan at 23 above.
it reminded me of this annonymous quote
“The high standards of Australians are due to the fact that their ancestors were handpicked by the best english judges”
cheers!!!
sridhar
*** COMMENT EDITED ***
Dear JayaGoebbels,
Read the long comment from a reader (whose handle is “USMCSniper”) in the link below.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35818
*** NOTE by MODERATOR ***
No personal abuse please.
The glaring fact from the front page Magazine article is that even recent converts to Islam are able to assimilate the concept of jihad and seek to fight for Allah. Jihad may possibly be one of the unstated but central pillars of Islam .
@Adeel bhai sahab,
Why are you running away from the debate?
Here’s why Al-lah is the Pagan Moon God… You’ve been tricked !
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/skm30804.htm
@adeel shafi(#18) arabs during that time were most advanced in astronomy physics and other science
Ha…मà¥à¤‚गेरी लाल के सपने। Science of what? Stoning! Is that why it says in Quran & Hadit that Earth is Flat & center of the universe and Mohamed said Satan lives in peoples nose in the night so one should snort water before prayer to throw him out or while praying don’t look up otherwise your eyes will pop out or that woman are made from rib of man & they are 1/4 of men (wow what equality!), etc. etc.? This is not science. These are superstitions. So, please don’t just blabber and give us actual proofs.
Till then let me share some Vedic knowledge with you and the like of Jaydrath Mr. Apologist above:
पूजनीय ऋगवेद में कहा गया है कि ॥आ नो à¤à¤¦à¥à¤°à¤¾à¤ƒ करतवो कषà¥à¤¯à¤¨à¥à¤¤à¥ विशà¥à¤µà¤¤à¥‹ अदबà¥à¤§à¤¾à¤¸à¥‹ अपरीतास उदà¥à¤à¤¿à¤¦à¤ƒà¥¥à¥§-८९-१॥ – अरà¥à¤¥à¤¾à¤¤à¥ उतà¥à¤¤à¤® विचार सà¤à¥€ ओर से आने दो। (May auspicious knowledge come to us from every side, never deceived, unhindered, and victorious, That the Gods ever may be with us for our gain, our guardians day by day unceasing in their care.)
In this, You see care and not fear. You see knowledge and not hell. You see acceptance for good knowledge from everywhere not discriminate, deject, ridicule & murder others as “non believers”. That’s the difference.
Jayadevan ! O Jayadevan ! Where art thou, O Jayadevan?
Dr. Ali Sina’s interview to Gary Dale Cearley: “Islamic terrorism is the fruit of Islam” (http://is.gd/2hpfW). A must read.
Interestingly he says here as he has on various other occasions that most of the death threats and fatwas to chop his head are not from Muslims of conservative Islamic nations like Saudi, Iran, etc. but from Muslims of so-called “Secular” “Democracy” Bharat. An excerpt from the article above:
Gary Dale Cearley: As you have become apostate in the eyes of Muslims, I am interested in what kinds of threats have you had from the Muslim community and from where have the threats come?
Ali Sina: When you leave Islam threats come from all directions. Your apostasy offends every Muslim who will each attack you in their own way. Some Muslims want to kill you but not every Muslim is a murderer. Those who do not issue a death threat snub, pity you, vilify you. I was informed that there are two fatwas to kill me from two mullahs in India. There was also price put on my head: One million rupees. This is only $20,000 dollars. I was a bit disappointed. I thought I am worth more, but hey, it is more than 30 silver coins for which Christ was sold.
Fighting political islam: A very good article, with some strong, practical insights about fighting “dhimmitude” –
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=30714
One quote that resonated:
“We must make being a kafir a point of identity and pride. Call yourself a kafir in all relations with Muslims. We are the Free, free of Islam. Muslims are the slaves. We must make the word dhimmi a stinging, shameful rebuke, a punishing insult that hurts.”
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s special envoy to the UK, Ayatollah Moezi believes that Islam and politics are “inter-mixed†because religion “could not be ignorant of social issues. And part of social issues is politics, therefore Islam should have some sort of eye on political issues.
Source: Ayatollah Moezi’s interview in Times