Serious Question for the Muslims

[aryaputra]

To all muslims I have a question:

In all your talk about Qoran, you talk about submission to Allah, Qayamat ka Din and Jihad.

1. Why Jihad?

2. How does it benefit you?

3. If others do not beleive in Allah and submission theory, how is it a loss for the muslims?

4.if it is not a loss for the muslims, why are you Jihad-ing?

5. Does it make any difference to Allah if I do not submit to him? Is it not MY loss? Why do you care or worry?

[aryaputra]

pushing it to the top

[ekk]

I am no muslim but this is what i know..

The word Islam comes from the arabic word "salema" which means - peace, purity, submission and obedience. Thus
Islam means submission to the will of God and obedience to His law. Islam also sees nation states as "state at war" (non islamic - hence jihad) and "state at peace" (Islamic).

A muslim believes in Allah, who is supreme and eternal, infinite and mighty, merciful and compassionate. A muslim also believes in Allah, the One and Only God, hence others who do not believe in allah are kafirs. Thus jehad against kafirs or kufr is to bring them into submission and obedience of allah.

[aryaputra]

but what is the benefit in making others bow to Allah?

if you bow to Allah, allah will bless you. Fine.

If someone does not do so, leave him alone.

Why force others?

[Oscar]

Interesting point.........

[raniraja]

I think the muslims believe that it is the duty of every muslim to spread the word of Allah .. if they fail to spread it as exhorted by their scriptures, they will be questioned about on the day of judgement...This is why the Muslims are so much concerned about bringing the non-believers into their fold..

Also, if u convince a non-muslim to convert, it is supposed to bring great "sabab" (punya) to the muslim and his family.... Of course, the non-believers did not yield easily so over the centuries the concept got distorted to getting them converted by hook or crook..

an interesting thing is that Chanyak niti (saam, daam, dand, bhed) has been followed by the muslim preachers for conversion.

[aryaputra]

raniraja,

the view did not get distorted.

This method of Hook or Crook is prescribed in the Qoran itself. that is what is disgusting.

[raniraja]

umm.. i don't really know what to say about scriptures because in the scriptures of almost ALL religions, u will find justification for ANY deeds..

u will find justification for loving an enemy as well as for killing him..i think this is true of all the religions..

[aryaputra]

The Qoran does not justify anything...that is the problem.

All it contains are a set of rules (not guidelines) with no explanations. really.

my dear friend Ary:putr:

need some right people to get in touch if u are sincere and wanna find truth apart from malicing.
So there are a lotsa site and forums best is Firetalk.com
here u can online chat /talk and write...for immediate response and some very contemporary Muslim Brains...go to forum religioin and sprituality and then "Muslim Oasis".
Unfortunately in India muslims are not that in touch as compared to in U.K. or U.S. and Arab....except for few like me ...i agree but no. will swindelexp next decade I promise.
As for convincing u in this forum well....kutte ki dum sidhi nahin ho sakti par kutte ko kutta samjho use devta banane ki mat socho...That's what islam is it makes a human out of the animal called man whereas hinduism makes a human devta its a higher religion applied to wrong kernel..so understand man first before understanding god!!!!and that's why its just a set of rules and enforcing them.....par dum ka kya karen???

[aryaputra]

my dear brhma,

glad to hear a real good reply from your side --after a loong time.

my rational behind raising these kind of questions is that people like you contribute....that saves us the time and effort to learn everything from scratch.


I am sure everyone will appreciate if you could elaborate more on this topic.

okie. ary:

see brother first of all if u want a constructive discussion and this new forum to be clean stop defaming Quran{}

I wanna promote this site and in this period of crisis in front of the nation I restrict myself to attack the sangh parivaar and declare unconditional truce till the matter's resolved,henceforth I make peace by the religion which stands for peace.

...hmmm its just a preface...ready for Pulitzer..

Now what is it,what's the agenda??

1.Quran,Jihad,strict laws.....

well I don't defend or pretend to do so..if u feel Quran is
a bad book okie I respect ur sentiments.But before elaborating more on this subject kindly make a headstart....Kindly read the Book,,,,,, I SAY READ THE BOOK FIRST START TO END I mean in whatever language u understand its translated read it first thoroughly than only there can be a valid discussion.

I will never burn Vedas because I've read them.....and believe me friends whoever have burned The Quran have not read it not a single of them.

Tommorrow onwards I can elaborate on this if ur honest enuff "..and say Allah has placed a seal on their center(/hearts) and vice-versa"..thus what a muslim "experiences" is not by the non-muslim and vice-versa.......

The above is quite absurd ...tommorrow..till then signing off with the seal of ->

a l l a h


return 0

[Netra]

Hello brhma,

Could you kindly confirm the following:

The marriage of a Muslim to a non-Muslim is considered invalid and the children born to such couples are considered as "Haram ki Aulad", according to Islam.

If your answer is yes, could you kindly justify the statement.

Are non-Muslims not human beings?

Do you as an educated person favour such views?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Netra

Well
..hmmm. if u know about TCP/IP ...to connect to systems e.g. windows and unix......
There is need for connectivity and protocol.....

So....similarly there are two different systems and its as usual a complicated issue...the point here is resolving....

To be precise if a muslim marries a hindu
case 1: both choose to practice as usual
case 2:both practice one of them
case 3: both practice none of them
case 4:either of them practice one of them
as per the child class and inheritance..
lets make it an abstract class..i.e. in this case leave it to the child to adapt whatever he feels when he grows up
and if chooses to be either or none of the two,he becomes what he chooses to be....
So it all boils down to choice and in Islam its a game of choices and good muslim is necessarily have good spotrspirit.....
...as for the child he's a free bird....leave the kids alone
after all the world is moving towards convergence and open source...
So be it a child is a sweet gift from Allah and is dear to him its the parents which are haramy (dishonest in arabic) or pious and the conditioining of the child depends upon the ambience in which he grows up and a broken family is haraam,divorce is haraam,adultry is haraam .whether u give ur child right "sanskar" or right "dawah"...and then again when u open everything up the line between good and bad becomes subjective....
To close it....well yes the child is haraam without proper marriage..and right marriage according to Islam is another issue....
So I hope Netra that will answer some of what u were curious for...
and Allah knows the best(That's a trditional Islamic mannerism like inshaallah and mashallah)
Bacche ki jaan loge kya??

[Netra]

Thanks for the info brhma. From your answer I understand that divorce is haram. If so, why this talaq, talaq, talaq business?

I am putting before you two cases.

First case:

My cousin is married to a Muslim and theirs is the happiest marriage I have come across. Neither of them is religious, in fact, the husband is a rare case of atheist Muslim. They had a civil marriage and therefore no conversion. Actually it was he who told me to leave the religion column blank when I filled up my college forms and since then, I have always left the religion column blank.

Second case:

I have a Hindu friend who got married to a practising Muslim. She had to convert to Islam. She had three children by him. He then went on to divorce her and she had to bring up all three children herself.

How would you rate these two cases. In the first case you have an unreligious Muslim who has a very happy, unbroken family. The other case is of a religious Muslim who has a broken family.

Regards,

Netra

well
certainly the second case is not good at least for the children..
and first case is..happily everafter...good for children..

Yes I do admit the problem with Islam is enforcing,
same law is enforced in pakistan and same in saudi..see the crime rates....
I mean its all in the game and how you play it.
I respect the views of non-practicing muslims as do I respect the views of Dalai LAma.

I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE CREATION IS IN NEED OF CREATOR AND NOT VICE-VERSA

As for me ..well last 10-15 years I've experimented with all religions and philos.....and believe me Islam for me has proved to be well...quite good as far as practicalities are concerened quite down to earth and its the only religion which is based on imperfection and complexities....rather than talking about something which cannot be read or written but only realized.

More on that later......but these stages I've graduated long back....I don't mean coming to back street boys after going as far as hendrix or Bach or Ponty.....you need to listen to everyone at particular mood or time....
..and some people like ur friend non-practicing muslim prefer silence after a spell of say Savage-garden...

The options are here ,U gotta choose but without being a spoilsport, and I prefer silence over cribbing.

[Xandu]

Originally posted by brhma

Yes I do admit the problem with Islam is enforcing,
same law is enforced in pakistan and same in saudi..see the crime rates....
I mean its all in the game and how you play it.
I respect the views of non-practicing muslims as do I respect the views of Dalai LAma.



I'm glad that you don't believe in enforcing and do realise that a few of your Islamic brothers have that as their only aim in life (best example is that aurangzeb - his signature "Mughal Raj laana hai" ... yea yea aungu, come kiss my ass.. and be glad)

wasn't it in biology we studied that heterogenous copulation is good for offsprings while homogenous copulation tends to carry certain bad signatures :)
aurangzeb, has everyone in your family been sleeping with the same goat for several generations??.. look at you. i can't think of any other way that you were made. :D :D :D

X

[aryaputra]

Brhma,

If you have graduated, I feel it is your duty to teach the students who wish to learn. Telling us to read the books and understand it by ourselves---why do we need this forum then?

To hasten the learning process---to share the knowledge that is gained by one amonst others--- I am sure you are not going to lose any money by sharing this piece of spiritual knowledge---- If Mohammed believed like you do, there would have been no Islam.

[Netra]

Brhma, I appreciate your views and broad-mindedness. Saying my religion is better than yours is like saying my parents are better than yours and saying that my religion is the only true religion is like saying my parents are the only true parents. As a non-believer, I find good and bad points in all religions. I also believe that religion needs to evolve with time. We can't put 2000 year old ideas into practice now. We also need to understand why a certain thing is practised in a certain religion.

Take the example of disposal of the dead. The Muslims bury their dead simply because where the religion originated (Saudi Arabia) there was no wood to burn the dead. Whereas in a country like India, wood was available in plenty and hence burning of the dead bodies.

I also suppose that when the Koran was written, Jehad was meant to fight the people who behaved in a barbaric way without following the simple rules of proper behaviour. That the descendants started killing all non-Muslims is another story.

Lastly I believe we should use our rationale and power of reasoning and not do something simply because it says so in the Geeta, Bible or Koran. These books were meant for guidance and ideas should not be forced down people's throats.

Cheers

Netra

wait a sec.....hold on now
too much of everything's bad.
Too much of modernism is bad...u can't brutaly shrug away some old ideas and new ideas are not always good..So its very difficult to generalize everything.

e.g. in arts theories come and go at one point of time we had modernism and '70 hip cult....now modernism is considered brutal and has led way to post-modernism and back to roots kindaa trend....

So beware before u conclude....and Islam is beyond that...u can't shrug away by saying its an old-outdated ..not my kind....

Netra tell me have the basic instincts of man changed in last 2000 years or will they change in next 2000years...
lets see how well u undertand man--human being for that and this time i need generalised views..u started off with a particular specific example and then made it a general rule....that's not very convincing and logical u quote eceptions and make them a thumb rule....

Kindly tell me what are the basic instincts a human is drived with......lets start with scratch....before u make a martyr out of me...

[smellyfinger]

brhma,

I agree that basic instincts have not changed a whole lot. But the situation has. We have constitutions and law enforcement now that do the same job as a Koran or a Geeta. Rights and wrongs are defined there. You cant kill anyone just for the heck of it anymore, without paying the price.

Bottom line, you dont need a religious book to tell you how to lead your life, anymore. The parameters are defined within the framework of the law. Of course, countries that use a holy book as their constitution (read : shariat or taliban) are an exception.

[aryaputra]

basic instincts of man are derived from his needs:

Roti, Kapdaa aur Makaan + sex

So what is new. The new thing is that man's brain is ever developing. It contuinually learns and grows...it's not what was 2000 or 10000 years back. That is a big difference.

You may ask "What is different in the Ford model T and the Ford Taurus" ....both are cars...YES...but a lot different...all because of Man's brain.

One cannot force you to use Ford model-T in this jet-age just because our grandpa used it :D and he found nothing wrong with it.

[Netra]

Brhma, It is not only Islam, but no religion is my kind. Look at the treatment women are handed out in all religions. All prophets are males, both in the Semetic religions and in Hinduism as well. Even God is a HE.

Apart from this:

Can a woman ask for a divorce in Islam? Can she have more than one husband? What is the fate of a woman if she disobeys her husband? She should be beaten up. Am I right? What happens if she is unfaithful? She gets stoned. What happens to a man if he is unfaithful? Nothing. Shouldn't these ideas change with time?

In Hinduism, a widow is treated as inauspicious, even today. A widow had to go Sati in old times. What happened to a widower? He remarried. There is also casteism in Hinduism. That's where Islam scores over Hinduism because widow re-marriages are encouraged and there is no casteism.

The plus point of Hinduism is the freedom of thought and speech. There is no such thing a blasphemy. Also there is no compulsion in Hinduism and therefore you don't see people going around trying to convert people to their ideas. Javed Akhtar (Shabana Azmi's husband) said while interviewing Deepa Mehta that Hinduism was the most tolerant religion.

Like I said, there are pros and cons of all religions since they are all man-made. I know you won't agree. My husband doesn't agree either.

Cheers

Netra

P.S. Our basic instincts don't change, but our reasoning does.

[aryaputra]

Netra,

Well said.


But Sati is not part of the Hindu Religion. No Hindu scriptures speaks of SATI in this manner.

Sati typically means a devoted and dedicated wife. That's all.

One of the most well known SATI of all, Sati Savitri, I believe did not jump into a burning pyre.

Sati is/was a sociological devlopment restricted to some parts of India such as Rajasthan, where it was called a Johar. They did it after a war basically to prevent themselves from bieng abused by the victorious side, especially the mughal invaders.


The meaning of the word sati is righteous. But as written earlier the women named Sati, in Hindu religious literature, did not commit suicide on their dead husband's pyre. Therefore the custom of burning the widow on her dead husband's pyre probably did not evolve from religious background but from social background.

There are different theories about the origins of Sati. One theory says that Sati was introduced to prevent wives from poisoning their wealthy husbands and marry their real lovers. Other theory says that Sati began with a jealous queen who heard that dead kings were welcomed in heaven by hundreds of beautiful women, called Apsaras. And therefore when her husband died, she demanded to be burnt on her dead husband's pyre and so to arrive with him to heaven and this way to prevent the Apsaras from consorting with her husband. There are also other theories about the origins of Sati.

Also,
Hindu religion God, if you are a Hindu, should know is never without a consort.
in fact the name of the female is spoken before the male counterpart, eg.

Laxmi-Mahesh
Sita-Ram
Radha-Krishna,etc.

So let me repeat again - Sanatana Dharma is very well thought of...and provides for almost all sociological and spiritual solutions of mankind

[Netra]

Aryaputra, what you have said about Sati is true. I wonder however when the system originated.

In Ramayana, when Dashrath died, none of his wives went Sati.

In the Mahabharata, Shakuntala, Satyawati (Shantanu's wife), Ambika, Ambalika (Vichitravirya's wives) did not go Sati. However, Pandu's wife Madri went sati while Kunti didn't. So I suppose Sati must have been optional at that time. I haven't read the Mahabharat but seen the serial on Zee. It is the best serial I have seen.

I don't know anything about Sanatan Dharma, but aren't all the Dashavtars (re-incarnations of Vishnu) males?

Cheers,

Netra

[aryaputra]

Wow Netra!

you remember all the wives names too!

Agreed Dashavatar is male .... but that is basic Human nature ... Male superiority.

The arguement which I put up was that Sanatana Dharma tried to take care of this so-called Male-superiority by making the male incomplete without his Female counterpart. Isn't that ingenious?

No male God is complete without his female.

Tell me which religion takes into consideration such tiny but very important matter into account?

I think you got to hand it over to Sanatana Dharma (which nowadays is called Hindu Dharma).

well netra u deviate from the topic and with that it proves women are frickle minded...to that effect women are different from men and that's the reason why god chose men to be His messenger.
Accepting facts is difficult and facts are stranger than fiction...women's liberation is not going in the right direction...in islam strict laws are stipulated for both man and woman
1.woman should dress so that it does/nt show her 'satr'
2.man should also cover his 'satr' and lower his gaze if confronted with a 'naked'woman.
satr=body part defined as sensual :different for both men and women,'naked' =exposed satr.
......now hold on here before u shoot..
.....before blasting the above..and i can go very deep into that...
rape is where the situation is twisted and for that too in islam preconditions are imposed...now times they are a changing and as you said reasoning change LOL.

While watching discovery channel i came acroos three European women chatting about their experience in India.....one said well its a beautiful country but sometimes u know u are not secure I was raped three times during my stay cool but anyway.....

The lady enjoyed being raped kewl....so if that's wo Lib go ahead Islam is really 'old fashioned' for that.....
I can speak tonnes about how rational islam is contrary to the misconceptions specially about women......Netra believe me women are most secure in an islamic society in general compared to any other society and don't give me any bizzare exceptioins..its a fact and security brings liberation......

But u still have to define all the basal instincts...and cut this women crap....I think a man is dominated by his mother for half of his life and by his wife for the next half..what about me's liberation.....this is all crap

again -1 to ary: for deviating from topic....dear ary: if you wanna boast about sanatan dharm go ahead...but please change the heading of this thread.....
u can go to siddhavat sidhhaashram high in Himalayas and be a paramahans..if at all you knoe what I'am talking about..meanwhile here on this manavalok I surrender if this is what u want
Islam is a loser sanatan dharma wins okie.....don't ask any more questions from islam again ....and too serious ones.

[aryaputra]

That is why you like Islam. No deviations. Strict rules. Huh..

you got what you wanted.


Brhma, this is a discussion.

Deviations are always a part of any discussions.

also, you are not posting all the answers to our questions. Do you mean we have to keep on waiting for Guruji to speak and we should remain silent?

[Netra]

Brhma, If you read my post properly you will notice that I said that I didn't know anything about Sanatan Dharma.

As you said yourself, there are strict rules in Islam and that's what I don't like. I like to do what I feel like doing and if I appreciate advice, I hate taking orders.

I am off to a meeting. More chat tomorrow.

Regards,

Netra

[Big-G]

Netra....in that case, religion ain't your cup of tea. Every religion brings in it's fold some restrictions, some rules and some beliefs. The basic aim of every religion is to impart discipline in a person. Giving a person full freedom, to do as they please contradicts this aim. You have to abide by them, or else you no longer are a follower of that religion.

The best bet for you would be Atheism. If it's too much, become an agnostic or start your own cult.
No offence.

[Netra]

Big-G, I am an atheist or maybe an agnostic. I can't prove the existence of God but I can't disprove it either.

Cheers,

Netra