Anybody care to Answer this Musilm.

[sefroth77 0]

Here is a Muslim rebuttle on my questions. I'm Maccoy and this Musilm is answering my questions, anybody with a opinion on these answers

 

 

 

Maccoy wrote:

 

But if you?re born in an atheistic or unenlightened family?well, tough luck.

It leaves no sensible way to explain why people (or, for that matter, any living beings) are born in different circumstances.

 

 

Hello Maccoy,

 

Different circumstances means different tests in Islam. The poor are tested with poverty, and they must raise themselves to stand over their rage. The rich are tested with oppulence and arrogance, and they must humble themselves due to it. EVeryone is tested and measured based on what they were given. For those born in Non-Muslim houses, it is the duty of the Muslims to teach them about Islam. It is why there are websites like this one.

 

 

Maccoy wrote:

 

 

I kindly need a explantion on these verses:

2:191

kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out

 

 

Verses like the one you quoted are used by anti-Muslim websites to defame Islam. Is it not true I can pull many verses from the Bible that speak of raping women and killing animals? We need to keep things in context. For example, the verse you noted above is only the partial verse. Here is the full verse:

 

"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

 

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

 

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

 

Does this verse really seem like an open clause to kill everyone? It plainly states to only fight those that fight you (in this case those that "suppress faith"), and it tells the Muslims no to transgress limits. That seems like a very fair way to wage war.

 

 

Maccoy wrote:

 

9:123 Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you.

 

 

I'm not sure where you got that translation from, but here is Yusuf Ali's translation:

 

9.123. O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.

 

 

Maccoy wrote:

 

9:5 Slay the idolaters wherever you find them

 

 

Maccoy, the verse you quote is regarding Pagans that broke a treaty with the Muslims. The rules of engagement were spelled out for this event (Quran 9:3-6)

 

"9.3. And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith.

 

9.4. (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.

 

9.5. But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

 

9.6. If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge. "

 

Again, you'll notice that the methods of war demand that Muslims be just in their dealings, and that they sue for peace if given the oppurtunity. AFter reading the 4 verses above, do you still have issues with the Quran?

 

The rest of the verses you quoted are along the same vein. I would urge you to read the full verses. If you need more explanation on any specific verse, I'd be happy to provide more details.

[barney 0]

In reply to Muslim's understanding of his koran:

 

Different circumstances means different tests in Islam. The poor are tested with poverty, and they must raise themselves to stand over their rage. The rich are tested with oppulence and arrogance, and they must humble themselves due to it. EVeryone is tested and measured based on what they were given. For those born in Non-Muslim houses, it is the duty of the Muslims to teach them about Islam. It is why there are websites like this one.

__________

 

To a Muslim it is the test but to Hindus it is ther Karma. When you question a Muslim why one is born rich while the other is born poor, he would find an axcuse for that. Ask him why one is born deformed whlie the other is normal. Tha too he will find an axcuse although he does not know the answer. Ask him why some babies die as soon as they are born while some die in a tender age? That too he will find some other axcuse as he really does not now the answer to them. All he know is God is putting you to test. Why should he test you when you believe in him? He only has to test the unbelievers[atheist] and satanist. A non Muslim has his own scripture and belief in God so why need for a Muslim to teach him when a Hindu is very far ahead of a Muslim as far as sprituality is concern. The Muslim websites are nothing but repeatation of the one single book they call the Quran. So, to me it is a waste of time listening to parrots.

__________

 

In reply to Muslim's understanding of his koran:

 

"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

 

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

 

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

__________

 

Who fought the Muslims in Mecca? Did the Hindus fight them or did they ask Mohhamed to give up his belief? Surely not but than why did the Muslims invade India and slaughtered Hindus in the name of Islam? So, the Muslims believe that whoevr they are and wherever they are as long as they are not Muslims, it is the Muslmis right to attack and kill? Is that what Islam is all about? Infact as far as I know the Muslims think Allah is the name of their God as we Hindus have other names for God and so they feel that we are non believers. If they knew that Allah means God and that when you call him by names like Krishna, Shiva or Vishnu it is actually in praise of HIM would they relize their mistake they have done for the past 1400 years?

__________

In reply to Muslim's understanding of his koran:

 

9.123. O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.

__________

 

Again, who grid the Muslims in Mecca during Mohammed's crusade? Did the Hindus fight Mohammed and his followers? If the Christians and the Jews fought them than they are enemies of Islam and that is only confined in Mecca but why invade India and commit atrocities in the name of Islam?

__________

 

Every time a Muslim is conered with question his reply would be the same as other Muslims as though they have been brainwashed from childhood to say the same to all questions from non Muslims. They are nothing but robots being programmed to answer the same and do the same. I have no respect for such relgion.

 

 

[Guest guest]

India was very wealthy, so everybody wanted a piece of the pie. What's it gotta do with religion, any religion, for that matter? Not only muslims, but other races have also invaded india just to plunder. It is as simple as that. So why give it a religion color? It is greed that forced brits, muslims, portugese et al to attack india.

[Guest guest]

Did muslims target India only for its wealth like all others?Then how did sind and bangladesh form?Did they all convert voluntarily?How did one fifth of indians convert?

 

what happened to afghanisthan,persia and other conquered countries by muslims?where are the zoarastrians,parsis now?Where is the civilization of the mighty egyptians and measpotomians?

 

When the war is for religion,it is a sin to hide the truth since it is embarrasing to some.

[barney 0]

You did not study the history of India did you? You said Islam is a religion of peace and the west has misinterpreted islam. Where is the peaceful religion today as it was yesterday? Do you find peace in an Islamic country today? If as you say Islam is a peaceful religion why than did its followers carry arms and invaded countries of defferent faith? Answer is simple, its followers believing the word of Mohammed wanted to convert all non Muslim countries in the name of their God Allah[as I have said above to a Muslim Allah is the name of their God]if not why the need to invade and convert. It is obvious what the motive of the Muslim invaders were and you cannot ignore that. Can you? The Muslm radicals are very heinous in their act of brutality. Look what they did to innocent American contractor Jonson. These are the tell tale signs of Islamic brutality and imagine what they would have done in the early centuries of the invation. Need I have to say?

[Guest guest]

You've both misunderstood me. I wasn't defending Islam. All i am saying is that during the medieval ages, people were constantly fighting for something, be it land or wealth or what you will. Even before the advent of Islam, there were battles, fierce battles for wealth, kingdoms etc., totally unconnected to islam. After the advent of islam too, there have been many battles, like the two world wars, for instance, that had nothing to do with islam. So why blame islam when it is clearly human nature to kill, conquer and destroy? With or without islam, people are fighting, WERE fighting, and will continue to fight, so why can't we be bold enough to face that humans haven't evolved to the level where all wars might end once and for all??? Why pick on Islam, instead of looking at it from an evolutionary angle?

 

Coming back to India, it was very rich, I believe it was called the 'bird of gold', if I am not mistaken. Naturally, people wanted to invade and plunder, and muslims happened to be one of them. No big deal. In those days, and I suspect, even now, people are greedy for wealth, so just imagine India with gold and diamonds...no wonder muslims, brits and every johnny-come-lately invaded this country. Why give it a religious color, I reiterate? It was greed at its best.

[Guest guest]

Dear Guest

 

You must have got a "F' in ur history.I can list out that the muslim invasion was not just for the sake of money alone.

 

1. The muslim invaders destroyed hindu temples and idols and put them as stepping stone for the mosques they build. This has nothing to do with plundering wealth alone.

 

2. During moghal period a non muslim had to forcefully pay the "Jasiya" the tax.

 

3. A sikh guru , i dont remember his name exactly was forced to convert to islam when refused ,was killed by being trampled by an elephant. Where is the wealth plundering here.

 

I can keep on adding,But this thread would turn into something else.

[Guest guest]

Can someone PLEASE tell me what Jasiya means?

Thank you so much : )

[Guest guest]

I tend to agree with proud hindu. The repeated attacks on India had nothign to do with religion. It was the need (or greed) to steal from a rich nation. Even now, india, whihc is supposed to be a poor country, has nearly 30% of world's gold reserves, lots of diamonds and jewels. So in those times, it must've had just too much, and the foreign attackers would've loved to possess them.

[barney 0]

Why than did the impose their belief on the people of the land? Why force the Hindus with sword in the right and quran in the left hand? Why destroy the temples and bilt their mosque on the destroyed temples? Do you have answers for these acts? Do not just listen or read books from Islamci perspective. Read what the real history says about Muslim invasion of India. Hindus would never forget the atrocities commited by the mogul rulers for generations to come. Yes, it's true there are politicians who would like to see peace among the Muslims and Hindus in India but would the fanatical Muslims want to see peace? It is every Hindu's right to claim what has been stolen by the barbaric Mogul and the followers of Islam. Pakistan is part of India and because of the force conversion the new generation of Muslims increased and demanded seperation. Can they return Pakistan to India now? You seem to forget all these. The British only came later and because of the disunity among the Hindus and Mulsims it became a subject and the British decided to support Ali Jinah whose great grandfather was a Hindu and because of the invading forces force converstaion his ancestors became Muslims and so did Jinah. Infact the whole of Pakistan was once Hindus but who converted them inot Islam. Look at Bangladesh, what was Bangladesh before Islam and what is Bangladesh today? Can't you see all these changes and who was behind it?

[Guest guest]

was done by all conquerees, right? When romans invaded other natins, they did the same thing, imposed taxes etc. It was a war economy at that time, and people did these things all too often. And the muslims were no exception. As for partition, well, all i can say that if you have spineless leaders like gandhi, nehru, everybody's gonna have a slice of public property called india. Hiondus are spineless, so why blame others?

[barney 0]

Invation was the order of the day but these invaders did not force the inhabitants to convert of believe in their faith. Infact what the Romans did was convert to the belief of the inhabitants. It happened in Jerusalam. After the crusification of Christ the Roman soldiers converted to Christianity. Today Rome is the official headquarters for Christianity. Hindus are not spinless but obey the leaders decision. Do you know what happened in my country where the official religion is Islam? Some years ago a few Muslim university students went to destroy a Hindu temple during the night. Word got out before their mission. On the night of descration some Hindu yuths waited for them to enter the temple and speared all the five descrators to death. The Hindu youths were arrested for murder and charged in court. A hindu lawyer defended them on the ground of self defence and were set free. So, do not say Hidndus are spineless. I still say the Muslims in India should be free to practice their religion only in the confinement of their home. If they do not like it they can always migrate to an Islamic country where they will have all the fredom. Think again and you might realize the wisdom.

[Guest guest]

Some people like 'guest' here have a wishy-washy mentality. Yes, India was fought for it's wealth (especially by the Greeks) but for the Moghuls it was also their fight for jihad against the hindus who they regared as Kafirs (Infidels).

 

Read about Aurangzeb and Babur and you'll find out they had the desire to convert every single Indian to Islam. It's not just Hindus that were attacked, it was the Jains and Buddhists (who were majority in what is now Afghan and Pak) and in the case of the Sikhs some of their gurus were killed. Guru Gobind Singhs two young sons were killed simply befcause they refused to give up their sikh faith and convert to Islam. Now will you say that is over wealth?

 

I agree that Gandhi and Nehru were spineless and I think someone like Patel had the right no-nonsense attitude, but he was denied the power by these two.

[Guest guest]

Gandhi was not spineless. He was a very brave man, who suffered much indignity for the Hindus. He LEAD them to freedom from the British. He remained strong and faithful to his principle of ahimsa. No matter what the enemy did, he would not let them get the better of him by making him lose his anger and assaulting them. THAT'S bravery.

 

If Gandhi were truly spineless, he would never have dared to lead the Hindus, he would have favoured the British and enjoyed the wealth that he was getting as a lawyer.

 

Don't disgrace his name by accusing him of cowardice. It's good to fight for the Hindus, but by insulting those who've helped you in the past will not do you or anyone else any good.

[maadhav 0]

gandhi failed to stop the division of the country.

a minority gave a threat or civil war, and he could nto hendle it.

 

after the division, he allowed muslims to live in india.

the division created a permanent enemy at the border.

the division could not stop violence.

 

he failed to make the minority muslims non violent, and made the majority hindus cowards instead.

 

he never read koran and hadit to find how barbaric islam is.

 

the brits did not quit india because of gandhii, but because

they were tired/exhausted of the WWII and there was the possibility of army mutiny.

 

 

[barney 0]

I cannto agree with you here. Gandhi set the ball rolling and he had one thing in mind that is to get the British out of India. He told the British India's religious conflict is its own affair and the British should mind their own affairs. Gandhi did not want and bloodshed and innocent people sacrificed and that is why he propogated non violence. He was wise and had the wisdom to see India as a nation. Partition of India was not his idea but collective decission. At that period it was the only option Gandhi had. You seem to be anti Gandhi and I do not know why but please let his soul rest in peace. He is a great man and respected by all throughout the world.

[Guest guest]

Ask this muslim a number of questions:

 

1) what exactly is meant by transgressing against the muslims?

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the

tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection

 

Here the verse is declaring aggressive warfare. Merely refusing to accept Islam is a transgression. This is backed up by other sources:

 

Bhukari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 447:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were in the mosque, Allah's Apostle came out and said, "Let us proceed to the Jews." So we went out with him till we came to Bait-al-Midras. The Prophet stood up there and called them, saying, "O assembly of Jews! Surrender to Allah (embrace Islam) and you will be safe!" They said, "You have conveyed Allah's message, O Aba-al-Qasim" Allah's Apostle then said to them, "That is what I want; embrace Islam and you will be safe." They said, "You have conveyed the message, O Aba-al-Qasim." Allah's Apostle then said to them, "That is what I want," and repeated his words for the third time and added, "Know that the earth is for Allah and I want to exile you from this land, so whoever among you has property he should sell it, otherwise, know that the land is for Allah and His Apostle."

 

Then there is Muhammad’s letter to the Omanis:

"Peace be upon the one who follows the right path! I call you to Islam.

Accept my call, and you shall be unharmed. I am God's Messenger to mankind, and the word shall be carried out upon the miscreants. If therefore, you recognize Islam, I shall bestow power upon you. But if you refuse to accept Islam, your power shall vanish, my horses shall camp on

the expanse of your territory and my prophecy shall prevail in your kingdom."

 

Thus merely refusing to convert is cause to fight and dispossess people from their ancestral land.

 

2) what about Muhammad transgressing limits himself? It was Muhammad who made an enemy of his relatives and citizens. He smashed the idols at kabbah --- that was how he gained his enemies. So what harm was the idols doing to him that he must hurt the feelings of others so cruelly? Why when he himself had declared war does he cry unjust persecution or was he not expecting any protest?

 

3) Then ask him about the theory of abrogation and whether Median sura overrides Meccan ones or not, which means that the more violent verses are to be followed by muslims.

 

5) Ask him why we should not take the commentaries of these muslim scholars on the seemingly peaceful verses as the correct one:

 

Imam Suyuti the author of Itqan Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an “The command to fight the infidels was DELAYED UNTIL THE MUSLIMS BECOME STRONG, but when they were weak they were commanded to endure and be patient”

 

Dr. M. Khan: "[introduction to English translation of Sahih Bukhari, p.xxiv] "Allah revealed in Sura Bara'at (Repentance, IX) the order to discard (all) obligations (covenants, etc), and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the Pagans as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizia with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (as it is revealed in Q. 9:29). So the Muslims were not permitted to abandon "the fighting" against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are STRONG and have the ability to fight against them. So at first "the fighting" was forbidden, then it was permitted, and after that it was made obligatory “

 

6) If these verses refer only to a specific context then what was it doing in a book that is guidance for all eternity?

 

[Guest guest]

Proud Hindu and American Dude, read about muslim invasions in India by Muslim historians themselves. It was not all about wealth, though they of course plundered. Idols were placed in mosques to be trodden by the faithful and masjids raised over temples. Is that not a religious motivation? If wealth was the only motivation then why was the Hindus’ offer to ransom their gods rejected? Why destroy ordinary village temples?

This is what Babar says, “For Islam's sake, I wondered in the wilds

Prepared for war with infidels and Hindus

Resolved myself to meet the martyr's death

Thanks be to God, a Ghazi I became."

Human nature is violent and greedy, and Islam does everything to encourage it.

 

i do not see why there is such uneasiness about realizing that religion can make one do nasty stuff.

[Guest guest]

Jiziya is the tax levied on non-muslims; if they became muslim this tax was remitted.

 

the only upside was that a non-muslim was exempt from military service.

 

However the conditions were that the amount could vary depending on the ruler and also it was supposed to be collected in the most humiliating way possible.

According to muslim theologians, it was a tax of humiliation meant to demonstrate superiority of muslims.

[maadhav 0]

islam no doubt has demonstrted superiority in terrorism to the kafirs ever since it was born till now.

 

the peace loving cointires need to decide if they want islam on their land.

 

[Guest guest]

I understand. "Spineless" was proabably the wrong word to use to describe him, as he did alot for the freedom of India. Both him and Nehru were thrown in jail for the fight for freedom, while Jinnah didn't spend a single day in jail. But I do think he was a little 'soft' or biased when dealing with muslims and people like Jinnah. He tried to pacify them, which went to rediculous lengths. He gave in at the end, when he previously said "partition would be over my dead body".

[maadhav 0]

<< do not see why there is such uneasiness about realizing that religion can make one do nasty stuff. >>

 

by 'religion' i understand you mean islam.

 

very good post. thanks.

 

 

[Guest guest]

ill tell you what jasiya means. it is mentioned in the islamic holy Qur'an in the form of a surah (chapter) (Surah 45). the litrell meaning of is 'crouching' but in depth (and also explained in the surah) the word jasiya means to convince and allow others to believe in the power of Allah and to deliver for Him (and therefore 'couch' in obedience)

ok

[Guest guest]

the "religious" motivation of the muslims was probably veiled economic motivation. people are easier to control if they all follow the same faith. if the muslims had allowed hindus to freely practice (w/o the tax or social stigma) hinduism, the whole place would be very difficult to manage. more converts means more people to fight in the armies, which means more land to exploit and more treasure to collect.

 

also, in order to effectively exploit and command the resources of a country, the establishment can use the power of religion to dominate the masses and make the operation run smoothly.

 

[Guest guest]

if islam converted people with fore then whole india would be a muslim populated sub-contenent. now only one fith of this land is muslim. if islam distroy all the temple then there will be no kashi or any other temple in that region. when islam came to this region india was not the india you see today. it was belong to different kings and queens. you mentioned bangladesh but you didnt say what you ment by that. i born in bangladesh. i think i know the history about bangladesh more then you do. bangladesh wasnt the country you see now. it was a big country (bangla, behar, urish-shar). when british took over they put the country with the indian East India Company rule. when the left we didnt get our land as we should. if you want to critisize religion go through its message not what people are doing. you might talk about ZIHAD as all of you do, have you ever talk about CRUSADE. what was that? have you ever think when,where and why the pope II the urban called for crusade? there was planty muslim in eorope. for instance in spain. what happend to those muslim when the cristian king took over the land. they were forcefully converted in to cristianity. they were asked to eat and hang ham (pork) on there door to show that they were truely converted. if muslim did the same to the non muslim where ever they are there will be no nonmuslim in India in africa or eorope. so we should talk about all of these. end of the day we all want to believe in truth. if you really want to know the truth judje the message and the teaching of any religion. and find the right one. and surely we know will only be one religion which is the true religion, which ever it is. find that one and fellow and tell people about it. hope you understand what i was trying to say.