What's new

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

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.

Sure man but religious debates are not the rules here.

So its ok. Everyone can make their own conclusions its a gradual process. We need science because it is on our side as much as we are on their side. Its just inevitable.

Time is not on man's side. Says the Qur'an itself.

Lol why do you think why its not my worry when people say Islam or without. It's an opinion as valuable as mine. The facts remain right smacked blue in our face.

Like it says Till when will you deny Us

The message is here and has been here.

First message: Read Iqra

So as the lord says

Nafs ul Mutmainna

We Pakistanis just will be satisfied until we correct ourselves.

We are a nation preferred not chosen.
 
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
why me i am poor guy did not harm anyone yet
 
why me i am poor guy did not harm anyone yet

Not you, dear Sir, never you. But you know that very well, you know that you are one of the icons, one of the three most loved characters on the forum, and that only a thundering idiot or some gutter scum would say nasty things to you or about you.

Now stop fishing for compliments and go back to dishing out zingers and keeping us in our appointed places.
 
My friend, if someone even considered this in Pakistan, he will be beheaded on a public square and none will shed tears for him. You are ridiculing our religion on our own forum. Think before you post.
Then there will be a lot of heads rolling in India.
You are fuc*in out of your bloo*y mind. It is blasphemy if I say it is. Now shut up and get lost.
get lost kid. He said nothing against Islam. Who told you quoting Quran by non-muslim is a blasphemy?
Go cry hard to the mods.
If you really think you are going to use this forum to spread your Abdul Kalamist stinking views, you are sorely mistaken. I will call your views out for the stinking load of rubbish that they are.
What is that Abdul Kalamist view? This is not Din ilahi.
 
Then there will be a lot of heads rolling in India.

get lost kid. He said nothing against Islam. Who told you quoting Quran by non-muslim is a blasphemy?
Go cry hard to the mods.

What is that Abdul Kalamist view? This is not Din ilahi.

Feeling uncannily feverish? Don't try to 'kid' me. Are you his servant that you need to speak on his behalf?
 
No, just taken aback by the bigotry in your comment. I'm not amused as I can clearly see your flag.

And I'm entitled to my opinion, I don't speak for anyone.

See, when you open your mouth on topics you have absolutely no understanding about, you end up confusing yourself, and confused about others. Then you start seeing 'bigotry' etc. The whole point is, just keep minding your own business and leave Islam, Muslims etc. out of your comments. Because you end up upsetting others on topics you don't understand. This is a very friendly and wise suggestion. You should consider it.
 
The author, whom I am quoting without his permission, is a senior officer of the Indian Army.

Excerpts:

As Muslims, both my spouse and i invariably led the puja of our army unit in its temple every other Sunday...Personally, I come from a regiment which is purely Hindu and has a regimental deity in Lord Badri Vishal, the personification of Lord Vishnu at the Badrinath shrine. As the head of the regiment i have invoked the blessings of Lord Badri Vishal by personally travelling to the shrine many times for the opening puja of the season after winter. As a senior commander in Kashmir some of my most satisfying moments were those when i did a round robin of all gurdwaras of the units on Guru Purab, ending with langar with the unit usually deployed in the most difficult area.

Once in a Muslim Grenadiers unit, its Hindu company commander put me to shame when i saw that he was keeping all 30 rozas with his men and even reading all five namaz which he knew perfectly.

When my fauji father was questioned during Partition about his choice of armies, he said: “While the nation formed on basis of faith will celebrate now but won’t last forever, the nation formed on basis of respect for every faith will have a difficult beginning but will always celebrate.” He remained with the Indian Army and rose to be its first Muslim GOC. When India has doubts about itself and the future course of inter faith relations it should just turn to its army for inspiration.
Clearly, regardless of the many predictions of “progressive intellectuals” and think tanks- current affairs show the opposite might be coming to pass.

As for the leading the Puja bit- it may be very liberal and inclusive of him but it is thoroughly shirking his beliefs. He might be referring to sitting with people during puja but unless it was for actual grievance or celebration- as a daily occurrence it is shirk by even the most casual reading of the core text.

As far as the prophet is concerned, I suggest you do a but more research on his life and personality before the sweeping ideals janab. He was an extremely tolerant being but also a Muslim(the first one in case anyone lost count). He rigorously differentiated between our values & beliefs versus those of other faiths- so while he warned of various sects as a division of unified Islam(72 is a common ancient Arabic metaphor for many), he did not mean it as a compliment for people trying to fit into their society by adopting their religion as well.
 
Commendable for his liberal stance, and at the end of the day, we answer for ourselves.

However, one point I would like to make, and it is in no way a criticism of the person mentioned but a general point that came up in my mind after reading this. When does integration reach a point that it is considered appeasement and annihilation of one's belief system? I mean if I was an Indian, I would also not eat beef simply to respect my Hindu etc neighbours and I would most certainly join them in their happiness and sadness, but does that mean that we must sacrifice our core religious beliefs to be counted as tolerant and integrated? I certainly would not expect a vegetarian Hindu/Jain to eat a goat sacrificed on the occasion of Eid since it would contradict an important facet of his belief system and I would not feel obliged to do what the gentleman in the original post did with regards to worship. (Again, I am not judging his afterlife or faith, just making an observation.)

Is this correct celebration of diversity or just over observant appeasement and does it not put societal pressure on communities to conform to this level of liberalism or be labelled/made to feel less tolerant?
 
Clearly, regardless of the many predictions of “progressive intellectuals” and think tanks- current affairs show the opposite might be coming to pass.

As for the leading the Puja bit- it may be very liberal and inclusive of him but it is thoroughly shirking his beliefs. He might be referring to sitting with people during puja but unless it was for actual grievance or celebration- as a daily occurrence it is shirk by even the most casual reading of the core text.

As far as the prophet is concerned, I suggest you do a but more research on his life and personality before the sweeping ideals janab. He was an extremely tolerant being but also a Muslim(the first one in case anyone lost count). He rigorously differentiated between our values & beliefs versus those of other faiths- so while he warned of various sects as a division of unified Islam(72 is a common ancient Arabic metaphor for many), he did not mean it as a compliment for people trying to fit into their society by adopting their religion as well.

Not to contradict you, but my remark was not in defence of the author, but in rejection of the sitting in judgement of what constituted a good Muslim and what did not. I seem to remember you yourself in older posts suggesting that one Muslim need not sit in judgement of another Muslim and of defining what was acceptable practice and what was not.

But if you think that that remark was out of order, I will accept from you -voluntarily, out of respect - what I will not accept from others. Say so, and I will do what I need to do.
 
Commendable for his liberal stance, and at the end of the day, we answer for ourselves.

However, one point I would like to make, and it is in no way a criticism of the person mentioned but a general point that came up in my mind after reading this. When does integration reach a point that it is considered appeasement and annihilation of one's belief system? I mean if I was an Indian, I would also not eat beef simply to respect my Hindu etc neighbours and I would most certainly join them in their happiness and sadness, but does that mean that we must sacrifice our core religious beliefs to be counted as tolerant and integrated? I certainly would not expect a vegetarian Hindu/Jain to eat a goat sacrificed on the occasion of Eid since it would contradict an important facet of his belief system and I would not feel obliged to do what the gentleman in the original post did with regards to worship. (Again, I am not judging his afterlife or faith, just making an observation.)

Is this correct celebration of diversity or just over observant appeasement and does it not put societal pressure on communities to conform to this level of liberalism or be labelled/made to feel less tolerant?

Difficult question, partly because of the nature of my own belief system. Let me get this out of the way first.
  • I am a 90% vegetarian, but I eat beef, pork and every kind of haram food, including Japanese food prepared by live grilling of sea-food on a hot plate.
  • I live in a flat owned by a Telugu Brahmin, so I took his consent before cooking even eggs; it would be easy to cheat him and cook meat and fish, an innovation for me, as he is totally non-interfering, but I do not need that on my conscience.
The second point is that specifically in the Army, they make a fetish almost of being inclusive; what has been described is an inherited habit of complete immersion in the beliefs and practices of the jawans. It is that precisely that has been upheld by the author as a singular distinction between the Army (and the Navy and the Air Force) and civilian society. That is part of our military tradition; whether it fits the norms of orthodox religion is another matter. I daresay that the Garhwali and Kumaoni would be squeamish at the buffalo-sacrifices at this time of year of their geographic neighbours, the Gorkhas.

It is not surprising that many Pakistanis are, to say the least, astonished at these practices, particularly at the easy transition of the devout from their chosen faith system to meticulously observing the practices of others, even radically opposed others. That leads me to my most important points. /to be continued/


Commendable for his liberal stance, and at the end of the day, we answer for ourselves.

However, one point I would like to make, and it is in no way a criticism of the person mentioned but a general point that came up in my mind after reading this. When does integration reach a point that it is considered appeasement and annihilation of one's belief system? I mean if I was an Indian, I would also not eat beef simply to respect my Hindu etc neighbours and I would most certainly join them in their happiness and sadness, but does that mean that we must sacrifice our core religious beliefs to be counted as tolerant and integrated? I certainly would not expect a vegetarian Hindu/Jain to eat a goat sacrificed on the occasion of Eid since it would contradict an important facet of his belief system and I would not feel obliged to do what the gentleman in the original post did with regards to worship. (Again, I am not judging his afterlife or faith, just making an observation.)

Is this correct celebration of diversity or just over observant appeasement and does it not put societal pressure on communities to conform to this level of liberalism or be labelled/made to feel less tolerant?
 
Not to contradict you, but my remark was not in defence of the author, but in rejection of the sitting in judgement of what constituted a good Muslim and what did not. I seem to remember you yourself in older posts suggesting that one Muslim need not sit in judgement of another Muslim and of defining what was acceptable practice and what was not.

But if you think that that remark was out of order, I will accept from you -voluntarily, out of respect - what I will not accept from others. Say so, and I will do what I need to do.

You misconstrued my earlier remark- it is not for us to act on what the gentleman did ir did mot do wrong, but to leave that to Allah. What I offered was my interpretation of that account and specifically what the tenets say or not about actions analogically similar to his.
Moreover, you chose to invoke the prophet for whom I am bound to offer my opinion & interpretation of his personality. Essentially, I never passed judgement on behalf of god but clearly defined what scripture & history entails on his actions.

Whether he is punished or rewarded for his actions is unknown and not anyone’s problem- but acceptance or acknowledgment of his actions cannot and should not be expected
 
You misconstrued my earlier remark- it is not for us to act on what the gentleman did ir did mot do wrong, but to leave that to Allah. What I offered was my interpretation of that account and specifically what the tenets say or not about actions analogically similar to his.
Moreover, you chose to invoke the prophet for whom I am bound to offer my opinion & interpretation of his personality. Essentially, I never passed judgement on behalf of god but clearly defined what scripture & history entails on his actions.

Whether he is punished or rewarded for his actions is unknown and not anyone’s problem- but acceptance or acknowledgment of his actions cannot and should not be expected

I understand what you have said, and appreciate the trouble you have taken to explain.

"...acceptance or acknowledgement of his actions cannot and should not be expected..." It was my fault to have sought to bridge a gulf that is too wide. It was untimely and even unfair to all concerned, the original author and those of you who read it here. Please read that as my acknowledgement that the post was misplaced.
 
I understand what you have said, and appreciate the trouble you have taken to explain.

"...acceptance or acknowledgement of his actions cannot and should not be expected..." It was my fault to have sought to bridge a gulf that is too wide. It was untimely and even unfair to all concerned, the original author and those of you who read it here. Please read that as my acknowledgement that the post was misplaced.
The simple fact remains that regardless of one’s personal inhibitions(I do not claim to be perfect either), The quran is still the same as compiled 1450 years ago and its words regarding associating any other than the supreme being known as Allah as an object of worship or giving is shirk.

Now what the officer had in mind with the pooja, his internal thoughts and machinations are beyond me and I have no right to act upon them as that too is against Islam. But based on what the Quran says, shirk is of the highest sins and unlikely to be forgiven by Allah per his own words.

That is that.

Whether shirk leads to communal harmony or solves world hunger is irrelevant- you shall not shirk in your head ever and only fake a facade if your life depended on it.

What might be acceptable? A close family friend(who was oddly RSS and fairly anti-Muslim & anti-Pakistan) passed away - he was extremely kind to me and treated me as his own. I went to his antya kriya.. and participated in his bhog. At no point did I join in either the Hindu or Sikh prayer, I went to offer support to the family- said my prayer to the gentleman and helped in the arrangements where I could. To me this was my responsibility both as a human being and as a Muslim
 
Hazrat Mohammed foresaw this, when he mentioned the 72 sects that would be found.

This made me log in once again. Sahib my comment is for your information only, to correct you and to present a different view to you ..... something that most of the Muslims themselves feel hard to accept (had it been some ordinary poster I won't have taken this pain of breaking my vow not to log in again ever, this is something which is bigger than my ego hence my logging in again for only once, I prefer remaining in reading mode).

Messenger Peace be upon him, never could have said or predicted such a thing / division, He peace be upon him can never be promoter of sectarianism .......... I will base my argument on what Quran has to say about the division, you can buy a good translation of Quran study it keeping specifically in mind how it stresses on unity, unity amongst not Muslims only but humans, it calls humanity a brotherhood, divided into different tribes for identification and not to divide them on basis of their beliefs. Now when the book is totally against the division and sectarianism so much so that it holds division and sectarianism a sin that is one level above shirk then how can Messenger who was given the responsibility to make others understand the message ever encourage division amongst his followers by making predictions of division? You should read how Messenger (Peace be upon him) was ordered to demolish a Mosque (Masjid e Zarar) ........... and one of the reasons for demolishing that mosque was that people (hypocrites) gathering there thought of schemes and plans to divide Muslims. You should read reply of Haroon Peace be upon him (Aaroon) to his brother Musa Peace be upon him (Moses) ......... when Musa scolded Haroon that how could you let people worship a non living calf in my absence .............. (and oh my my read the reply from Haroon), Haroon replied "Brother hadn't I feared that they would get divided I would have intervened and stopped them).

This is one illogical contradicting false belief we Muslims hold dear and try accomplishing that goal somehow. All this 72 sects nonsense is promoted by sectarians, so that anyone with a thinking brain could never question the division and sects, reason because according to them Messenger himself had predicted this and how can one question what Messenger has predicted ........... blasphemy. This leverage allows these sectarians to sell their manjan uninterrupted to both Educated and Non educated alike, and with guarantee that both these classes believe in their shizz without even questioning the narrative once.

I hope it makes some sense to you, its easier to explain things to a non Muslim ............ I will leave with hope that in future you will consider not to rely too much on what Muslims believe other than Quran, that other may not necessarily be Islam. Take care Joe Sahib.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Back
Top Bottom