dogma is necessary
Submitted by bayezid (Bangladesh), Jan 2, 2009 at 04:52
>> Wrangle: : to dispute angrily or peevishly - maybe you are 'wrangling' then."
good, you know your vocab. but that isnt all that wrangle means. if you knew the meaning of it acording to the context, maybe youd feel good about it . lol.
".....but ALLAH already declared it 1400 years ago. "
its a question of having faith. apparently i do. you dont. although the message is clear and staring in your face.
".......the focus here is al quran, not arabs."
yes they do, but belief can come without detailed understanding. one can have a belief about somthing just by knowing it vaguely or superficialy. the point here is that they realized this was a message from ALLAH. and the quran pointed to such phenomenas to show man the glory of HIS creation.
>> It's good to see you find it OK that others can experience peace without following your belief system and that there is no need for Muslims to insist they have a monopoly on peace."
i was only trying to calm you down, but whatever.
the only one with monopoly on anything is ALLAH. never HIS slaves. thought you could use the info.
and as for peace, i wonder how someone can be at peace knowing god but then not obeying him. isnt that deluding the self ? i suppose some people find this situation peaceful. perhaps its because they do not know god .
>> Right - barred to the lowly 'kaffir'. The point being you are free to go anywhere you like including pilgrimage sites in Europe if you liked."
well ALLAH holds these sites in special importance for HIS slaves. those sites are muslim only zones to keep a fully islamic god fearing environment around them. this means maintaining a culture around those places not considered unlawful by god.
non muslims may want to drink or dress scantily as they go out, or lets say conduct behaviour in a manner that goes againt the religion. thats why.
Thank you for the invitation. You have not countered many points I have made. Others you have delivered facile arguments against. For example you've said nothing about my accusing Saudis (and by extension Muslims of hypocrisy and intolerance by not allowing the following of other faiths in their 'holy land'.
then it must mean that the saudis are going against the shariah itself, dosent it? it will be erroneous to equate diffeent local groups with islam. yes many are in the religion, but many hardly know islam well. i mentioned in the previous post that muslims have forgotten their own religion.
again, its better to judge islam based on what ALLAH says than what people say. since the quran is HIS word.
There is no compulsion in religion" (2 : 256)
"Would you compel people that they should become believers?" (10:99 & 13:40).
"Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way" (16 : 125).
Allah tells believers: Do not insult what they call gods that are other than Allah. Prophet (PBUH) promised the Christians of Najran not to harm their crosses or idols. He even allowed Christian delegates from Najran to pray in his mosque at Al Medina.
muslims obey ALLAH and HIS messenger. thats why they are muslims. not because they are saudis or pakistanis or austarlians. or anybody ese for that matter. so if saudis dont do what they shouild be doing, its a case of following a bad example. religion hardly deserves the blame.
No axe to grind. We were not specifically limiting ourselves to discussion of the Koran. You asked the question 'what have Muslims ever done or said that was wrong" - I gave you an obvious answer. No amnesia involved. And you still haven't answered - was it wrong for the Musli leader of the ISLAMIC republic of Iran to suggest a genocidal action as the soultion for the problem he perceives?"
oh now i get it. so you can not just insult the book but anything else that has an inkling of 'islam' in it. lol. joking.
when i asked you about what muslims did wrong or said wrong, i was however speaking in terms of faith and dogma. not politics of the 21st century. but i get your point now. genocide is horrible. especially when it is commited for no reason at all. but this man suggested it after he found something wrong with israel.
we all know about israel. ... so when you consider these, you begin to at least consider the side of the iranian president, if not suport him .
if you still say that there was no reason for him saying that aftre the israelis actually did that, then you certainly have an axe to grind.
"hey at least he was talking bout attacking israel."
haha hamas. nice little decoy the israelis have set up. muslims, and palestinian muslis have niothing to do with hamas. the palestinians arent daft enuff not to realize that suicide bombings will nly dwindle their demographics even more. and need i mention tht this is not the way a muslim is commanded to fight.
and i wouldnt be all that insolent in idnetifying a countys population with a renegade terrorist org that says operates from the country. just as i cant call all lankans members of ltte. common sense, mate.
One question I've oftened asked is why don't the Egyptians, give Sinai to their fellow Muslim Palestinians. They're not doing anything with it. The Palestinians would get better soils, waterside blocks on the Red Sea, mountain view estates, a huge amount of land much bigger than all of israel. etc. The Israelis graciously gave back the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt after their 1967 skirmish. Nothing is being done with it. Why not that area rather than the forsaken strip of desert they presently feel attached to.
He was talking about not just a war crime but a crime against the UN Charter. Yes, he was completely wrong. As expected - in your contrived hatred against a people who have never done you or any other BanglaDeshis harm - ` you cannot see that. You almost have to hate Jews don't you? I mean what sort of Muslim would you be if you didn't? Who could you blame all the Muslim world's troubles on otherwise? I do not hate jews, I do not hate anybody. I don't need to. Hatred is an emotional burden and like jealousy - eats its own heart."
so let me get this straight. if i invade your country and drive you away from it, i can easily make a case of unused land somewhere for you to move to? this is arrogant, insolent and down right criminal. egypt dosent hav to give the palestinians land. the palestinians hd land. their land. it was taken from them. with force. the same way you feel attached to the vast desert wasteland in australia, the palestinians have a bond with their land. fertility or barrenness is not the issue.
so ? and why do you think a people that earned the wrath of ALLAH deserves any love from HIS slaves? what you dont read the bible? the torah or the talmud? the jews werent exactly upstanding citizens. how is it peaceful for someone when that person loves something GOD hates. peace is acquired thru submitting to god. and as naive as you are, it is not a hate that ALLAH tells us to utilize to kill. this is simply disapporioval that ALLAH speaks. muslims arent allowed to kill jews just cuz they are jews. lets get that straight.
>> Again, God is not a legal clerk.
no HE is not a legal clerk. HE is the legistator. the law maker. so yeah, HE has all the right to set conditions on land or anything HE feels is necessary. thats part of being GOD.
ALLAH gave this land to jews conditionally. conditionally. do you pretend to not read the bible or the torah or is it simply becaue you dont know? what did god almighty tell the israelities. that they wuold have this land on the condition that they worshipped him alone and obeyed his laws. they did not do that. tats why the lost it to persians and babylonians and then romans. but in between GOD did forgive them. but then again, HE had a covenant with them. his other action clause had to be activated as well, which is expulsion of the jews from the land. the land received by contract from god. the contract they broke over and over.
Not in the Koran - but there certainly is in other scriptures."
you think so ?
We made a covenant with the children of Israel: "Serve none except God. Be good to parents, relatives, orphans, and the poor. Speak kindly to people. Establish prayer and give alms." Afterward, you turned away, except a few of you, and you were averse. (2:83)
"Indignity is put over them (the Jews) wherever they may be, except when under a covenant (of protection) from God, and from men; they have drawn on themselves the Wrath of God, and destruction is put over them. This is because they disbelieved in the Signs of God and killed the Prophets without right. This is because they disobeyed (God) and used to transgress beyond bounds (in God's disobedience, crimes and sins)." (Quran 3:112)
when it comes to the decision of ALLAH , it hardly matters what policies of HIS the servants agree to or disagree to.
>> What are you - a robot? A lot of things were left out of the Koran - do you need instructions on everything?
robots are the parody of living sentients. and all sentients, be it a lowly animal or a complex human, are creatures of program. the man's program may be more complex than that of a simple animals but it is program nonetheless. we are all creatures that are conditioned. even if you are not religious, you have your set of beliefs and suppositions that you go by. it is an indication that we all need direction.
and with direction comes purpose.
>> Does it say that in the Koran too? What is the Kaffir's fallacy?"
I woulnt hve said it otherwise. ALLAH says that the disbelievers hearts and minds are sealed up. and that no matter howm any proofs they receive, they will never believe. scary situation.
ALLAH says that to hve faith is to believe in the unseen. the disbeliever is arrogant and thinks he knows it all. the point of knowing the unseen means to accept the existence of any possibility that ALLAH can order to come into existence.
>> One of the several is you take things that are metaphorical as literal. By definition that makes you a 'fundamentalist' - as bad as Christian or Hindu fundamentalists."
with all due respect, you do not know what is metaphorical and literal in the quran.
i think what you meant for me was a radical. although i am not one and ALLAH condemns radicals too.
"O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about God except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a Messenger of God and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in God and His messengers. And do not say, ‘Three'; desist—it is better for you. Indeed, God is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is God as Disposer of affairs." (Quran 4:171)"Thus we have made of you an ummah justly balanced, that you might be witnesses over the nations, and the Messenger a witness over you." (HQ 2:143)
The Prophet (saaw) reportedly said,"Beware of excessiveness in religion before you have perished as a result of such excessiveness in religion." (Reported by Ahmad)
"Intends every facility for you; He does not want to put you in difficulties". (HQ 2:185)
i try to be a fundamnetalist. a fundamnetalist is someone who delves deep into the matter. he deals with fundamentals. the core. so as you can see, its a good thing.
couldve fooled me.
>> That would include the possibility that the kaffir is much more aware of and in touch with reality than the Muslim, who generally likes to criticise others with no justification and blame others for his plight while at the same time thinking he had some insight into what we would call 'God.'
then that person would hardly be a kafir. and we wouldnt have this conversation otherwise. muslims are aware that GOD alone originates possibilities and if HE intended some kafir to have the paradoxical quality of a believer, HE would let us know.
The man could consider it a possibility. If however I told that same man there is a gigantic pink rabbit sitting in a depression on one of the moons of Saturn and it is controlling everyone's thoughts on Earth - so well that they could never detect that this is what is happening - would that man believe me? Should that man believe me?"
the man would consider it a possibility. again, it is something the likes of we have never seen or experienced. so it is always unwise for us to choose a polarity with certainty. mabe a rabbit like creature can exist in pink or red or blue, how do you kow? how does anyone know? if you think rabbit like creatures can exist only on earth then it is a shortcoming. just because it dosent seem logical to him dosent mean it is not possible. it just does not conform to his logical premise.
>> and what if the man had never seen even a normal rabbit?
does not matter. it still woldnt give him the ability to say for certain that the laws that apply to your world or consciousness are absolute . you know nothing beyond your own laws of nature. so it is not wise for you to determine conditions outside it that may give rise to things that occur only in the wildest imaginations.
>>Logic is used to deduce information based on facts to arrive at a new hypothesis. Hypotheses can be tested to see if the assumptions are correct.
youre awfully big hearted for a kafir. thanks anyway for the definition even though i did not need it.
facts in question can be multifaceted. theres more than meets the eye. we use logic based on what little we know of things around us. there was a time people thought trees werent living. later they found it was. they thought trees are not stimulated by outside actions. they were wrong now they say trees display anxiety, joy and even sorrow. as time passes, the more we become aware of how less we know. so to say that it int logical for a tree to be happy since its not a possess a brain like us mammals, itll be wrong. the same way it will be wrong if i say dead on, no pink rabbits with psychic abilities dont xist on the moon. its just that it does not seem plausible to me. to me. dosent mean it is totally outside the pale of any possibility. to my smll mind so enamored by the earthly terrestrial logic, it seems imposible.
>> I don't know many sceptics who believe that. Information changes incessantly."
then i dont believe there are too many skeptics nowadys. why is a peron a skeptic? why does a person not believe? because he cannot think of going outside his own logicl premises. a believer says ok i havent seen a demon before, but i believe it exists, judging by the nature of things, anything and everything is possible. a skeptic woould say i havent seen demons and i dont believe in any ither. y not? because it does not ocur to him? just because of that. so he has absolute faith in the static nature of his understanding.rather partial about the truth, isnt he?
>> logic allows us to infer from previosuly known facts."
i agree, however it is not all that it is. how much of facts do we know?
so really, what is logic to you ?
>> Logic doesn't belong to me. It is not 'mine'. We can use logic - we don't own it. If you are trying to say if new facts come along that conflict with what I had previosly assumed to be 'fact' - do I change my opinion? Of course ."
glad we agree.
OK, we disagree on this crucial point. I say that 'God', or Supreme Intelligence or whatever label you give to it is continuously interacting with what we call 'reality'. There have been many 'prophets' and there always will be. In a sense, we are all 'prophets'."
we have no problem with that notion that ALLAH interacts with people. but we also believe there are different levels of interaction. since HE is GOD, it is upto HIM to decide what level of interaction to have with whomever. just because you feel youve been guided by god in a way dosent mean that is it. all is possibe for him, he can talk to someone or sing to somene if he likes. that where prophets come in. best among people. people with extremely lofty caracters that even rare would call rare. ALLAH spke to prophets and guided them in special ways .
So are you indicating the various sects of Islam do not have contradictory fatwas? But there is the possibility that that can occur. So therefore the system has nothing to do with 'Allah', is not what is wanted - and is a totally artifical system."
there is only one islam. based on quran and sunnah. ALLAH makes islam. and HE decided what islam is. HE said it is quran and sunnah. this is somehing we must remember abt islam.
islam has no sects. we create them by disregarding the quran and sunnah. it is entirely our fault. an we are suffering for it.
>> OK, Imams can therefore be misleading their followers."
absolutely right. perhaps the only place i agree with you so wholeheartedly. many imams arent even well versed in the sources. so its no big wonder that their activities mak islam seem what it isnt.
>> But if a Shia was asked - they'd say the same thing about Sunnis - so... where does that leave things? and all the other dozens of sects - they all think they are right of course. If you had been born in Iran - I wonder whether you would be a Sunni.."
im afraid i cant help you much about this. i already told you what makes islam. you only need scroll up. you can verify it yourself and i urge you strongly to do so.
then you can study the shia and see it for yourself.
Here we go - a false premise. YOU say that - but what if others disagree with you? You might be 100% convinced you are right - but still, you might be wrong.
i must say your muslim friend dosent know much. chances are he isnt even a good muslim. he could be westernized for all i know and he could be therefore just doing lip service to islam.
our governemnt is based on our faith. if someone is not ok with it within the state, tough. but his place is ensured within the state of islam. thats the way it is. islam accounts for all the minorities living inside its borders and observes equal rights for them as well as the muslims. fact. so there really isnt much to worry about. minorities propered under slamic rule in the past.
and as for the revelation. ALLAH says that the truth has been sperated from falsehood. in the quran. it is clear. quran dosent say anything strange or new that prior mesages havent proclaimed bit by bit in the past. they have to prove that the quran is wrong. they have to compare their books with this one.
i already explained to you how it works. shariah is important because it is from ALLAH. not from any man. so if buddha wrote one, tough. too bad. ill certainly not follow it. im looking for ALLAH's guidance. and ALLAH says HE sent the criterion for mankind to follow. al quran. HIS words. not mine.
>> The washing powder box in my laundry claims it gives the 'best and brightest wash' too. It is not based on fact - it's just a claim - to get me to buy that brand over another. People will say anything to try to influence others that their beliefs are correct. Mostly it's a security thing."
your powder boxes and the companies making them are in constant competition. the revealed books arent. where one powder company is trying to outdo the other, the books from god are merely adding and modifying the last one. so if you look at religious scriptures as powder boxes, then the manufacturer here is not many, just one. GOD. no cmpetition. only compilation.
>> I see your pont but it's a fictitious claim that Mohammed is mentioned in the Bible as you seem to be saying. You would like to think that - but it is not true. Neither is Mohammed mentioned in the Upanishads or Gita or any Buddhist scripture."
muhammad's pbuh reference in bible -
"AND THE BOOK IS DELIVERED TO HIM THAT IS NOT LEARNED, SAYING, READ THIS I PRAY THEE: AND HE SAITH, I AM NOT LEARNED." (Isaiah 29:12).
muhammad peace be upon him was unlettered. he was not learned in scholarly ways. compare this with what the angel gibrael alyihissalaam said to muhammad peace be upon him. recite ! an muhammad pbuh said, i am not able to, i do not know what to say.
'AND I WILL PUT MY WORDS IN HIS MOUTH.'(Deut. 18:18).
no other prophet ever had the words of GOD put in his mouth. not even moses. nor jesus christ. in no book is it recorded that any prophet had GOD's word put in his mouth.following the rejection of the last Israelite prophet, Jesus, it was about time that God's promise to make Ishmael a great nation be fulfilled (Genesis 21:13, 18)
the prophet muhammad peace be upon him was from th lineage of ishmael. in fact the only prophet from ishmaels lineage.
jesus said, "Therefore, say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruit thereof" (Matthew 21:43
fig tree is a popular symbol of prophethood used by christ jesus.
That nation of Ishmael's descendants (the rejected stone in Matthew 21:42)
"And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken, but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder" (Matthew 21:44).
muhammad peace be upon him in hindu scriptures, purana, prati swarg parv 3 from the works of dr. vidyarth
"a maleccha (foreigner) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions. his name will be Mahamad. Raja bhoj after giving this Mahadev Arab(of angelic disposition) a bath in the panchgavya and the ganges water...........
just follow the link http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/prophhs.html
if inner truth is indeed wht its cracked up to be, it has to be confirmed. there must be reciprocation involved. the TRUTH isnt blind or unmoving to our pleas or questions. inner truth is realizaton of ALLAH . if you have realized god then god will say 'yes, thats it, glad tidings to you.' he will put us at ease. unlike your idea of the truth, the TRUTH responds back to the caller.
scriptures serve that purpose. they are information from HIM.
>> right and where is that God - where do you perceive anything from ? Of necessity it is within (but not limited to) your own consciousness. Consciousness is primary. It is not dependent on anything. Books are symbols - written in characters that make a meaning in your mind. You could give me a Bible or Koran or anything written in Urdu to me - it would be a bunch of meaningless scribbles to me. I could give you a Bible or Koran or Zendavesta written in German - which I could read - but would be meaningless to you. Consciousness and meaning are the primary things. Not words, not books, not rules."
right, and i keep saying that GOD is not GOD if there is a where, when and how involved. hes beyond it. yes ALLAH tells us he governs from the his throne he created just to give us a direction, but HIS essence can never be understood. thats why HE is called god. thats y there is no sense in worshipping a finite thing. thats y idolatry is punished by him.
>> that is not what was said. It means the mind has lost the intention or even the capacity to rob, cheat or steal or malign other people. Protection of other people or self is another thing."
i agree. once truth is realized. but another thing you have to realie about truth is truth also intended for you to be flawed. ecause the truth wants to test you. the truth isnt some force that yoda was talking about. the truth is conscious and has designs for you. so by the will of the truth, you are never outside of comitting a crime. until the after life is reached, that is. so no matter how saintly you may be, you will always have impulses to do bad time to time. you will feel weak to crimes like infidelity, stealing, even murder. realizing the truth is more of a day to day duty.
>> Looked at from the right perspective - it could be. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But would I see a 20 tonne truck 5 metres away, travelling at 100kph , headed straight for me as beautiful? I hardly think so."
how can you say it isnt beautiful. it has to have a certain curious quality about it. i mean i know not most will live to tell his experiences lol but still. thi beauty here is the awe. beauty is in every molecule, in every moment. its just a matter of waking up to it.
>> You do not have to follow a dogma. The purpose of dogma is to get you beyond dogma - to the direct realisation of truth."
isnt that why muslims follow dogma? dogma does have its purpose.
I've wondered about this - who is this 'WE' "
as was my question. just what is this WE?
its the royal we. kings say it. princes say it and queens say it. or used to anyways. this is the problem of transating the arabic in english. ALLAH is referred by HIMSELF in a grand manner. it wasnt exactly a plural we per se in arabic. this is like saying his majesty and eminence or his exquisiteness or gallantry sir this and that.
>> scriptures and books are merely a guide , not the end in themselves - and should be pointing you to an internal truth.and it's not one size fits all. Whereas your inner truth or true potential or whatever name we give to it - is tailor made for you.
the quran is intended to be a guide. thats why ALLAH calls it the criterion. guidance for mankind.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (891) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes