What's new

Without Comment - But, It Is Hoped, Not Without Feeling

well, if you are a leader you have to gain trust of your subordinate and nowhere it is as important as in the armed forces... If I was leading a group of largely muslim men, I will set aside my own belief and try to accommodate as much as possible. People like these small gestures, and its good for the team.

What I would probably not do, is change my own belief system( which is personal).
 
its happening today just look around you will find them
Well fundoos r already feeling the heat,,,surely religions will die thr slow n painful death,,tell u what in few of decades religious ppl will be mocked upon openly,But for now gotta be careful,,,looks like plenty of ppl present ready to behead u in public square or beat the crap outta me for eating the wrong meat :D
 
Well fundoos r already feeling the heat,,,surely religions will die thr slow n painful death,,tell u what in few of decades religious ppl will be mocked upon openly,But for now gotta be careful,,,looks like plenty of ppl present ready to behead u in public square or beat the crap outta me for eating the wrong meat :D

And the poor will still be called Muslim.

The poor will remain attracted to religion. The rich will be driven by conscience to do good for them.

That conscience can only be defined or explained to the human as religion. A collective bargaining tool between good and evil.

Lol


You have a very narrow understanding of religion.


You are just a status quo loving Indian.
 
My point was not that the Major General was right on all counts; it was that he struggled to defend his ideal, and, except for the blot on our honour that is this government, he and his generation largely succeeded. As did their equivalents on your side of the border.

Try to understand what I'm saying; both sets of people defended their ideal and both sets won. Neither side lost.
well why didnt you say that earlier?
 
I asked you a royalist question.

Not related to the thread. I answered the thread when I said Din i Ilahi concept to keep the status quo alive. Abdul Kalam modernised it.

Jinnah took the two nation theory approach based on concept that Islam is infact a system not just a religion.

As far as your comment was concerned, please read what I wrote first, carefully. You will find that I said, with certainty, that it is a scientific fact that the last day will come. Not that I said that it is not a religious fact that the last day will come.

If you understand the difference, we can move to the next bit.

Science depends on facts, and on the existence of proof. It is precisely correct to say that the last day has been predicted, based on the behaviour of stars and stellar objects elsewhere in the universe, and the conditions for that last day of the Earth have also been predicted. So we can say with certainty that it is a scientific fact.

Religion depends on faith, and proof is superfluous. For those who have faith, no proof is required. Therefore, given that there are many religions, nothing can be presented as a fact, and everything can be presented as a belief, with no further justification needed.

You mentioned the Din-i-Ilahi; I could not see any connection and left it unanswered. Nor did I see what Abdul Kalam had to do with Din-i-Ilahi. Which Abdul Kalam did you mean? If you meant the late Indian President, then your remark is bizarre, to say the least; Kalam was an observant Muslim. The fact that he was honoured, that his family was honoured by other religions did not mean that he himself failed in his own religious duties, those that are prescribed as necessary for observance. While he was tolerant of other religions, he did not neglect his own.

Perhaps you should get a firm grip on your facts before slandering the memory of people who reached heights that you are unlikely to reach.

Finally, regarding the Two Nation Theory, Hinduism also considers itself to be a system, not a religion. That consideration nowhere leads to the Two Nation Theory. If you knew about the background to that theory, it was a racist theory put forward by an atheist bigot named Vinayak Savarkar, long before the Muslim League took it up, although there are faint outlines in Syed Ahmed Khan's speeches. It was Jinnah who ennobled it and raised it to the level of a serious political platform; before him, those who used it were petty-minded religious fundamentalists. The post was entirely about how two views were prevalent in the two Dominions at the time of independence, and how holders of one view, the one nation theory, struggled to achieve their ideal, and how the Indian military is an important repository of belief that guards their achievements.

well why didnt you say that earlier?

??? Isn't it clear from the original post?
 
Sadly, the India that was pluralistic is dying a slow death. My interaction with secular and liberal indians, has them in virtual depression about the current climate.

The juggernaut that is Pakistan has not turned around yet, but has at least slowed down, and hopefully over the next decade will turn around.
 
And the poor will still be called Muslim.

The poor will remain attracted to religion. The rich will be driven by conscience to do good for them.

That conscience can only be defined or explained to the human as religion. A collective bargaining tool between good and evil.

Lol


You have a very narrow understanding of religion.


You are just a status quo loving Indian.
Yeah sure,,its me who got narrow understanding of religion
 
As far as your comment was concerned, please read what I wrote first, carefully. You will find that I said, with certainty, that it is a scientific fact that the last day will come. Not that I said that it is not a religious fact that the last day will come.

If you understand the difference, we can move to the next bit.

Science depends on facts, and on the existence of proof. It is precisely correct to say that the last day has been predicted, based on the behaviour of stars and stellar objects elsewhere in the universe, and the conditions for that last day of the Earth have also been predicted. So we can say with certainty that it is a scientific fact.

Religion depends on faith, and proof is superfluous. For those who have faith, no proof is required. Therefore, given that there are many religions, nothing can be presented as a fact, and everything can be presented as a belief, with no further justification needed.

You mentioned the Din-i-Ilahi; I could not see any connection and left it unanswered. Nor did I see what Abdul Kalam had to do with Din-i-Ilahi. Which Abdul Kalam did you mean? If you meant the late Indian President, then your remark is bizarre, to say the least; Kalam was an observant Muslim. The fact that he was honoured, that his family was honoured by other religions did not mean that he himself failed in his own religious duties, those that are prescribed as necessary for observance. While he was tolerant of other religions, he did not neglect his own.

Perhaps you should get a firm grip on your facts before slandering the memory of people who reached heights that you are unlikely to reach.

Finally, regarding the Two Nation Theory, Hinduism also considers itself to be a system, not a religion. That consideration nowhere leads to the Two Nation Theory. If you knew about the background to that theory, it was a racist theory put forward by an atheist bigot named Vinayak Savarkar, long before the Muslim League took it up, although there are faint outlines in Syed Ahmed Khan's speeches. It was Jinnah who ennobled it and raised it to the level of a serious political platform; before him, those who used it were petty-minded religious fundamentalists. The post was entirely about how two views were prevalent in the two Dominions at the time of independence, and how holders of one view, the one nation theory, struggled to achieve their ideal, and how the Indian military is an important repository of belief that guards their achievements.



??? Isn't it clear from the original post?

Now is this your belief what you said or a scientifically deduced logic?

Din i Ilahi was also a simple concept of keeping the status quo alive by preying on their religious cultural nerves. Remember Akbar was not native. All he did was to preserve the status quo of his rule but his judicial process of the state remained Islamic.

It's all about preserving the status quo.


Keep an open mind for once

Yeah sure,,its me who got narrow understanding of religion

If you say so

Sadly, the India that was pluralistic is dying a slow death. My interaction with secular and liberal indians, has them in virtual depression about the current climate.

The juggernaut that is Pakistan has not turned around yet, but has at least slowed down, and hopefully over the next decade will turn around.

Indian does not have that decade.

They are war hungry based on that calculation themselves
 
@Jf Thunder

Let me take it one step further.

It is important for people on both sides of the border to understand that this is not a zero-sum game. That the existence of Pakistan is not dependent on the extinction of India. That the existence of India is not dependent on the extinction of Pakistan. Both can live side by side without trying to extinguish the other. Both countries were built by the efforts of the entire population of each, believing as they did in opposite ideals.

The basis on which India was built was what was described, beautifully, in the original post. That belief in part depended upon thinking that the other, opposite belief would not last. So, too, was Pakistan founded, not merely on a belief, but additionally on the opposite ideal not surviving. Here we are, seventy years later; both positive beliefs have survived the shocks of nationhood, both negative beliefs have been proven wrong. What does it mean? Simply, that you can define how you wish to live, as a nation; there are corollaries but let us ignore them for the time being, in order not to derail the discussion. You cannot define how others wish to live, nor can you be assured that that other is wholly faulty and may or may not survive.


OK, I wrote in much more detail. Take a look and tell me what you think.

Sadly, the India that was pluralistic is dying a slow death. My interaction with secular and liberal indians, has them in virtual depression about the current climate.

The juggernaut that is Pakistan has not turned around yet, but has at least slowed down, and hopefully over the next decade will turn around.

That is true, but we are hopeful. This dreadful situation cannot, must not last. Already there are signs of trouble, in every sphere (almost every sphere, to be honest and to give the devil his due).

As for Pakistan, you are over the worst. The change from, say, five years ago is remarkable. All the more depressing for those of us who think ourselves to be secular and liberal is that while Pakistan is improving so decidedly, India is headed in that same direction, towards the same hell-holes in which Pakistan found herself bogged down not so long ago.

One of the signs is some of the bright young minds on PDF; that it is not a done deal is also true, and proof of that is the lamentable character of some of the OTHER young minds on PDF.
 
@Jf Thunder

Let me take it one step further.

It is important for people on both sides of the border to understand that this is not a zero-sum game. That the existence of Pakistan is not dependent on the extinction of India. That the existence of India is not dependent on the extinction of Pakistan. Both can live side by side without trying to extinguish the other. Both countries were built by the efforts of the entire population of each, believing as they did in opposite ideals.

The basis on which India was built was what was described, beautifully, in the original post. That belief in part depended upon thinking that the other, opposite belief would not last. So, too, was Pakistan founded, not merely on a belief, but additionally on the opposite ideal not surviving. Here we are, seventy years later; both positive beliefs have survived the shocks of nationhood, both negative beliefs have been proven wrong. What does it mean? Simply, that you can define how you wish to live, as a nation; there are corollaries but let us ignore them for the time being, in order not to derail the discussion. You cannot define how others wish to live, nor can you be assured that that other is wholly faulty and may or may not survive.



OK, I wrote in much more detail. Take a look and tell me what you think.



That is true, but we are hopeful. This dreadful situation cannot, must not last. Already there are signs of trouble, in every sphere (almost every sphere, to be honest and to give the devil his due).

As for Pakistan, you are over the worst. The change from, say, five years ago is remarkable. All the more depressing for those of us who think ourselves to be secular and liberal is that while Pakistan is improving so decidedly, India is headed in that same direction, towards the same hell-holes in which Pakistan found herself bogged down not so long ago.

One of the signs is some of the bright young minds on PDF; that it is not a done deal is also true, and proof of that is the lamentable character of some of the OTHER young minds on PDF.

Your government cannot afford a breakdown.

It is by design only going to get worse. India peaked in morality under Manmohan in every secular liberal Pakistani. But they themselves still say we have never peaked.

Your system was by design a ticking time bomb.

We knew it in 1956. Thus why we have the Qarar daad e Maqasid etched in stone in our Constitution.

You have no reset button.

That's why you use terrorism as a tool for foreign policy ever since 62.

So this moral high attitude needs to go if you call yourself a professional. Your childish attitude towards rating system is nothing short of misuse indeed. Consider this my first personal interaction behind the Indian flag which I reply to. A break in from the character El Sidd.
 
Now is this your belief what you said or a scientifically deduced logic?

My point referred to the belief of scientists that the Sun would some day reach the point of extinction and would balloon up to many times its present size, and in doing so would engulf most of the solar system.

I presume you are aware of this.

Din i Ilahi was also a simple concept of keeping the status quo alive by preying on their religious cultural nerves. Remember Akbar was not native. All he did was to preserve the status quo of his rule but his judicial process of the state remained Islamic.

So what is the connection with this post?

It's all about preserving the status quo.

Keep an open mind for once


If you say so

Indian does not have that decade.

They are war hungry based on that calculation themselves
 
Last edited:
My point referred to the belief of scientists that the Sun would some day reach the point of extinction and would balloon up to many times its present size, and in doing so would engulf most of the solar system.

I presume you are aware of this.



So what is the connection with this post?


That for me are sun worshipping in religious sense.

Just like the meteor worshippers belief that an asteroid will cause that

Just like a medical science experts counting on a mutation disease or whatever.

When I say it is my belief that Allah says so.

Why do I get the special attention? I as in Musalman.

There's too much assumptions in modern science as any other so called religions.
 
That for me are sun worshipping in religious sense.

Just like the meteor worshippers belief that an asteroid will cause that

Just like a medical science experts counting on a mutation disease or whatever.

When I say it is my belief that Allah says so.

Why do I get the special attention? I as in Musalman.

There's too much assumptions in modern science as any other so called religions.

It is a wonderful topic but I don't want to give the current thread any relevance and currency. There should be a separate thread for this. Create one and Insha Allah I will contribute.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Back
Top Bottom