69 million page views

CURMALLY: In the motherland of Islam diya for a woman is half a man's. We reform our religions, Muslims refuse unless forced.

Reader comment on item: Dueling Fatwas
in response to reader comment: Dueling Fatwas- reply to Plato

Submitted by Plato (India), Oct 23, 2010 at 00:08

Curmally your wrote to me:

>>I am replying to you point by point as you do. I think you have done what you did because of a certain insecurity. However, here goes<<

I hope my insecurity gives you some solace.

I hope my insecurity gives you some solace. But from the record Muslims are very insecure about Islam and its prophet. You fail to realize that an long-dead honourable person needs no defence. We not see Christians and Buddhists or Jains having to defend their religion and founder with the violence Muslims do. That itself tells you that your religion and its prophet need violence to keep their soiled reputation under wraps.

>>Akbar did what he did because he needed support for the throne he sat on. Sher Shah Suri and the Afghans were in command then as Sher Shah Suri had chased out Humayun, Akbar's father out of India into Iranbring about a syncreticism of Hindu and Muslim thought. This was the basis of the Indian Muslim Revivalist though that started with Mujadid Alif Thani.<<

What is the point of this bit of history. It shows that Akbar was inclusive in his behaviour (he was only about 20 when he married her). That set off the revivalist behaviour (sounds much like the revivalist movement of the Wahabis). Is syncretism of Hindu and Muslim thought such idea. You have not said anything.

>>About wearing a ring with the word Prabhu inscribed on it.Dara Shikoh's younger brother Aurangzeb had him put to death. This is history.<<

That is what I also wrote. But you seem to have no issue with a brother Aurungazeb killing his brother because suspected he apostatized. I suspect it is because it is death for apostasy in Islam. Apostasy is an interesting concept to pursue. Though they are the cause of many fatwas, I will not pursue for fear of digressing.

>>Aurangzeb moved on to purify Islam in India because the syncreticism that started with Akbar had given cause to a sufism or Islamic mysticism to go overboard.<<

One of his means of purifying Islam was by re-imposing the jiziya tax his forefather Akbar had abolished. I can see how that would have been seen as a re-imposition of Islamic values and pleased the mullahs no end. Aurungazeb ended Muslim-Hindu syncretism and with that he also put signed the death warrant of the great Mughal empire in India. But his de-syncretism did not extend to his army mostly Hindu Rajputs. He had to depend of Akabar's wise move to retain his own power.

>>The death of a foremost mystic Sarmad is a case in point. This led to the rediscvery and reinterpretation of Islam in India.<<

Not death, but execution probably because he was a favourite of Dara Shikoh. Legend has it that Sarmand's execution was the reason for Aurangzeb's troubled rule. He was always at war.

>>A king tried to change it and failed. His sons and grandsons did not agree with what he had done. I'm sorry I cannot give a value judgment that you require because it has happened and there is no way I can change it.<<

Islam kept changing over the centuries. Sufism is still a very strong force all over the world, especially Pakistan and India. The Shias, the Ahmadias all prove that Islam has changed from the original pure variety of the prophet.

>>Which Muslim woman can dress as she please, you say. Haven't you seen Muslim women in India and the way they dress? My Grandmother, Mother, Wife, Daugheter and Daughter in law her mother and Grandmother my cousins their wives and nieces have always dressed as they chose. The Burqa is on its way out in Pakistan. Did you know that ?

What then are the dress codes of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan. Good to know that the burqa is on the way out in Pakistan while it reappears in France, the UK and even in India where it has become very prevalent.

>> Islam never prescribed the Burqa it prescribed modesty.<<

Islam never prescribed circumcision, female genital mutilation, or stoning to death (A hadith says Aisha said it was there in the Koran but a goat ate the only copy which she had kept under her bed during the confusion following the prophet's death)

>>About Jazya, it is a Quranic prescription.<<

I see you have not made a value judgment about this verse. Actually there is no need to make a value judgment as elsewhere in another post you quoted a translation which clearly said jaziya is protection money.

>>The Muslims in India, Afghanistan and some parts of central Asia, follow the most liberal of all Islamic schools of law , the Hanafi school, realized they could not kill all the idol worshippers in the Kingdom, to they turned a blind eye to it but did not encourage it and levied additional taxes on idolators.<<

How lucky for the Hindus and Buddhists of the Indian sub-continent that they came under the Hanafi jurisprudents. You are saying the vast numbers deterred them from massacring the entire population of idol worshippers. This means that if the population of idol worshippers were within manageable numbers even the "most liberal of all Islamic schools of law" would have demanded whole sale decimation. So they decided to make the best of a bad situation and imposed the jizia tax as to protect them from the Islamic sword. And I notice you have not made a value judgment. Despite the Hanafites turning a blind eye to idol-worship which makes Allah go into a rage, over a thousand years Muslims did manage to kill an estimated 60 million.

>>That again is history and you or I can't change it.<<

Right it is history. Now what can you not change? The fact the liberal Hanafis turned a blind eye to idol-worship instead of massacring them?

>>Having Read RadhaKrishnan's translations of the Upanishads I maintain they are great. I will not compare the Quran e Karim which incidentally is a divine revelation with the Upanishads as I will not compare the Bible with the Upanishads. <<

The Bible, the Torah and the Gita are also divine revelations according to their believers. Why do you give that honour only to the Koran? The Koran and the Upanishads are incomparable. One is truth which has to be accepted under threat of punishment and the other is a search for truth.

>>It is not good manners to say anything contrary about any one's beliefs or their religious books.<<

If you believe it is necessary to fight and kill for not believing like you (Koran 9:29, 9:5….) then it IS good manners to say something contrary to prevent mayhem in the world.

>>Our way of prayer is the way the Prophet prayed and we emulate it. I am unable to pray and make prostrations as prescribed, so a chair is …... So what is the point you are tying to make?<<

I have no idea which part of my reply you are referring to but I guess is about the ritual of wudu before prayer and the content of your prayers. If so then I was not talking about blind emulation of the prophet. Prayers as we understand is communion with god or asking him to forgive you for some sin or for some favour. When you recite Surah 111 you are reciting a totally inane verse which is really a curse verse by Allah. So also what is the point of praying by reciting the story of Zainab's unfortunate marriage to Zayed? I hope you get the point I am trying to make now.

>>Yes we have legislated equality or women.<<

How in Allah's name can you do that with verses like 004.011
YUSUFALI: Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females:

Do females siblings get the same as their brothers in Pakistan in explicit rejection of this verse?


002.228 YUSUFALI: ……... And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.. [CONTRADICTION : HOW CAN THERE BE EQUALITY IF MEN HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER WOMEN?]

If you have legislated for equality for women then congratulations, you have managed to break the shackles of sharia.

The Saudis know what Allah wishes for women and it sure is not equality as this report shows:


100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man

50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman

50,000 riyals if a Christian man

25,000 riyals if a Christian woman

6,666 riyals if a Hindu man

3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman

Source: The Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002

This shows Manu is not the only lawgiver who discriminates against women.

>>You forget the First Wife of the prophet( peace be upon him) was a Trader and had her caravans going all over Arabia and Palestine and probably into parts of what is now Turkey and Iran.<<

The first wife of the Prophet was a rich businesswoman much before he married her. Marrying her, he made the jump from being her employee to her husband freeing to enter the prophecy business. If he remained her employee could have he spent days in caves or waiting for revelation to strike him?

The moment she dies he begins his marrying spree. He could not have legislated against women or taken more wives with her alive as he was totally dependent on her for money. So to give the example of Khadija doing business is pretty inappropriate as showing Islam treating women as equals. What it proves that during jahilia times women were freer and could look after themselves instead of depending on men. Koranic verses after the death of Khadija made women subservient and inferiour to men and totally dependent on them. Curmally, prove to me using Koranic verses, or even the hadiths, that women have equality in Islam.

>>It might pay for you to differentiate between religion and social customs. Should you do that, it would be much easier for you to understand the questions you raise.<<

It would have helped to quote anything I said which shows mixing of custom and religion.

>>Plato, you cannot deny that Sati exists even today in India. I cannot say for sure whether this is a religious prescription or a social custom but is known to exist, and therefore I seek an answer from you to enlighten myself on the matter.<<

The last sati I heard of was one in Rajasthan and it created such a hue and cry that if it takes place at all, it must be done in the greatest of secrecy (I would think this is almost impossible except in very remote areas.

I would class sati as a cultural phenomenon as in India even religion is a cultural phenomenon as there are many variations to Hindu beliefs ranging from even atheism to polytheism and monism. You could surf the web to gain more knowledge. I skimmed through this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)

I think like, you will draw a blank on sati if you ask most Indians about it as we are only dimly aware of this practice which was banned by the British.

>>In much the same way female circumcision does exist even today in certain parts of Egypt and surrounding areas. But this is not prescribed in the Quran e Karim. Try and understand that the example and the reference a reader gave, was a Hadith. ….. So there is always an element of social customs in the prctice of religion in any given area. ….. I got a local tasbih that had a hundred beads. Tasbihs should have 99 beads because of thrn 99 names of Allah (swt). This is another example of local customs.<<

Why do you want to be so defensive about FMG? Circumcision is also a form of mutilation and also shows that humans are meddling with Allah's creation. There is no sanction for circumcision in the Koran. Why would Allah create a piece of skin if He wants it removed?

>>Unfortunately, we have had religious fanatics amongst us. They have turned militant. The Pakistani Army took them on and gave them what for. They are scattered today but they exist.<<

They exist because they were bred in the schools and madrassas of Pakistan and nurtured by the government of Zia and now you are finding them too hot to handle. Your nation will spiral into chaos if you continue with the hate that is taught in your schools and madrassas (I hope you have gone through the reference I gave you to what is contained in your school texts).

>>In much the same way, you have the Rashtrya Savak Sangh and other extremist bodies in India.<<

Are you trying to compare the RSS with the LeT, Jamad ud dawa and such other terror outfits? How many RSS incidents have you recorded in Pakistan or Baluchistan.

>>Can you deny that even today you are practicing Shuddi and Sangathan? <<

When you first asked I wondered what the hell is Shuddi and Sangathan. I googled the words.

Conversion and shuddhi

Note: The term 'shuddhi' literally means 'purification'. It refers to the re-conversion into the Hindu fold of non-Hindus, especially of those Hindus who have been converted to other religions by hook or crook. The word 'shuddhi' has been retained throughout in this section. Prohibition of shuddhi or re-conversion was one of the seven shackles that chained Hindu society in Savarkar's time. Savarkar's assorted views on the other six shackles are given in another section. Given below is an English translation of Savarkar's assorted views on 'conversion and shuddhi'



This seems to be a forgotten movement of the early twentieth century to re-convert people back into the Hindu fold. What is so terrible about it. They never went about conversion with a sword or force and it seems to be a spent force now. Not even Muslim friends have heard of it which would not be case if they were a threat.

I googled sangathan also and saw no threatening groups there. The first site was that of schools.

>>Can you deny that laws laid down regarding caste have caused the caste system to cease to exist? After all, the system of castes were prescribed in the Manu Smirti weren't they?<<

The caste system existed for more than a thousand years. It is part of the cultural landscape of the country and you can't expect it to disappear in a generation since the laws banning caste discrimination came into effect. But if you look at the caste composition of our governing bodies you will see interesting figures for changes in their composition since the first elections were held.

The architect of the Indian constitution, Ambedkar, was a victim of Manu's laws. The people who put him in that position were Nehru, Gandhi, Patel, rajgopalacharia and other Brahmins and high castes. Does that tell you something?

>>The Buddhists and the the World at large went haywire when the statues at Bamyan were desecrated. Didn't you read the newspapers or watch tv?<<

I do watch tv which is why I am surprised you say the Budhists went haywire over Bamiyan. Maybe Indian tvs did focus on Buddhists going haywire. All I can recall is Japan pleading with Mulla Omar to allow them to dismantle them and cart them away. I also googled 'Buddhist violence bamyan destruction with not much luck. Some violence in Burma was all I could find. Now try googling "Danish cartoons muslim violence."

>>What was done by the Taliban was wrong.because they didn't destroy statues but hit out at a religion. This is intolerance.<<

Curmally just do a thought experiment: Imagine the Prophet standing in front of the statues sacred to the atheist Buddhists with his army . What would his order have been? Do I need to spell it out? Mullah Omar was only the right thing according to Islam. Don't blame the intolerance of the Taliban, blame the intolerance of Islam.

>>In much the same way Ms Sonia Gandhi was not permitted to become the Prime Minister despite the fact she was the head of the Indian Congress party for the simple reason that she was a foreigner and was not Indian born. Can you deny that? <<

Well Kissinger could not have become the President though he was a citizen but foreign born. That you can put down to the intolerance of the American constitution. In India we do not have such a discriminatory law but social acceptance for such an event is low. But remember nothing important happens in India without Sonai Gandhi's (Italian born) approving nod.

In Pakistan even natural born Hindus, Christians or Ahmedias can ever aspire to be prime minister or president because your constitution has demoted them to second class citizens.

>>As for the Kaaba being blown up, threats of this nature have been made before and we shall see what will happen if such a thing is tried.<<

Who threatened to blow up the Kaaba?

>>Have we asked you to prove Hinduism requires proof of its greatness? Islam is proof in itself and the fact that there are over 1.25 Billion Muslims in the world is also proof of that. Who are you to ask for proof?<<

Show me one sentence from my posts where I have asked for proof the greatness of Islam. All I have done is to show that Islam is not the great religion it claims to be. That is not the same as asking for proof of its greatness.

Numbers do not prove any truth or greatness. Five hundred years ago almost all of humanity believed the sun went round the earth. And almost 5 billion do not think much of Islam. Does that convince you that Islam is false????

>>Have you asked Christians or Jews to give proof that their religion is worthy of respect.?<<

Nor have I asked any Muslim.

>> Be careful of what you say.<<

Another threat?

>>In the USA there have been cases of burning the Quran e Karim wiping themselves on pages of the Quran e Karim after defecating. You should read the CAIR site for examples.<<

There are article on Danilepipes on the deceptions that CAIR indulges in. Just go to the search field on the right hand top corner and put in CAIR and see what comes up: Just a sample:

Of particular note are the American Muslims who reject CAIR's claim to speak on their behalf. The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, publisher of the New Jersey-based Voice of Peace , called CAIR the champion of "extremists whose views do not represent Islam."[4] Jamal Hasan of the Council for Democracy and Tolerance explains that CAIR's goal is to spread "Islamic hegemony the world over by hook or by crook."[5] Kamal Nawash, head of Free Muslims Against Terrorism, finds that CAIR and similar groups condemn terrorism on the surface while endorsing an ideology that helps foster extremism, adding that "almost all of their members are theocratic Muslims who reject secularism and want to establish Islamic states." Tashbih Sayyed of the Council for Democracy and Tolerance calls CAIR "the most accomplished fifth column" in the United States. And Stephen Schwartz of the Center on Islamic Pluralism writes that "CAIR should be considered a foreign-based subversive organization, comparable in the Islamist field to the Soviet-controlled Communist Party, USA." http://www.danielpipes.org/3437/cair-islamists-fooling-the-establishment

According to a CAIR press release issued today, the office manager for its Arizona chapter, Bushra Khan, was shopping along with two other head-scarved young Muslim women on April 29 at the Desert Ridge Marketplace in Scottsdale when a middle-aged couple approached them calmly and asked if they were Muslim. After an affirmative reply, the couple indicated they had just watched the film United 93, became enraged, and told the women, "Take off your f**king burqas and get the f**k out of this country. We don't want you in this country. Go home."

Now, I was not present at the Desert Ridge Marketplace when the alleged incident took place, but I do have my doubts about Bushra Khan's reliability, for CAIR's staff has a history of making claims about "hate crimes" and "Islamophobia" that do not stand up to scrutiny. It has also played loose with the facts in other ways. Here is a bibliography, to be updated as needed, of this problem:


Plus, there is the unforgettable episode uncovered by Robert Spencer at "Stalinism at CAIR: photo doctored for Islamic correctness" that has to be factored in to any discussion of believing what CAIR says. (May 12, 2006)

May 13, 2006 update: Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network notes two points about the alleged incident at Desert Ridge Marketplace. First, it grew and grew in CAIR's propaganda against United 93, to the point that the director of communications for its Sacramento Valley office, Dina El-Nakhal, claimed on the basis of this incident alone that the movie "has affected Muslim communities across the nation." Second, Hagmann investigated what happened at the store and found no confirmation for it. Here is his conclusion: "Although it might well have taken place as described, my investigation found no police report, no incident report on file with mall security, and no independent confirmation of this incident of verbal assault." http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/05/bibliography-my-writings-on-not-trusting-cair

Anyone can put up a web site and put up fabricated stories on it. The above two reports show that CAIR have no compunction if fabricating tall tales of intolerance against Islam in America.

>>Yes my country has seen blood shed and intolerance of the worst type.<<

You are solely responsible for the bloodshed and intolerance. Your schools and madrassas are a breeding ground for such behaviour among Pakistanis as I showed you from my excerpts from a report by Pakistani researchers on what is taught in government run schools. Why do tolerant Pakistanis not rise up against the harm done to young minds in your schools? What are you afraid of?

>>You forget we have been a front line state for 30 years and counting. The damage done to the Pakistani social fabric is enormous.<<

You did the damage to yourself with your accepting the Wahabi invasion of your madrassas and schools. That is what is tearing up your social fabric. Can you name any other reason?

>>As long as our borders are destabilized, we will be this way.<<

If you keep seeking strategic depth in another country and sending terrorists to India and start incidens like Kargil (Musharaff said he had no regrets and is proud of it) how can you expect to have stable borders?

>>But this does not explain the Jammu and Kashmir killings and the Naxalite movement. What is your excuse? <<

The killings are a result of your direct encouragement of 'azadi'. Every nation will fight to preserve its integrity. We do not want a balkanized India which is what will happen if the 'azadi' they have in India is given up for an Islamic kind of 'azadi'. As soon as that happens the Hindus and Buddhists will decline to low percentages that you see of Hindus in Pakistan from the once high numbers (more than 20%). No azadi for them but extermination or expulsion or conversion. That is the excuse.

The Naxalite movement is not going to go away completely as long there is economic disparity in the country. As the economy gathers pace and prosperity trickles down the Naxalite movement will wind down.

>>Neither country has forgotten or forgiven partition .<<

What is there for you to forgive? You were the ones who demanded partition.

>>Perhaps India which claims to be shining could give Pakistan it's share of the assets along with the interest accrued thereon. It was Pandit Jawahirlal Nehru held back Pakistan's share of assets in India.<<

One of the reasons Gandhi got assassinated for was his going on a hunger strike to force Nehru's government to release the money. I believe almost all of it was given. If something remains you owe huge reparations for the wars you initiated (contrary to the history you learned in school. Now even your own historians are sheepishly admitting the Kashmir incursion, '65 war were on your initiative. You treated East Pakistan worse than the British treated undivided India. So don't blame us for the result.

>>I am sad that I have had to say what I have said. I have tried to be gentle. Knowledge is not meant to hurt anyone but is to be used for betterment of this world. Do you agree?<<

Knowledge, in the form information, if biased has hurt more people than you can imagine. A case in point is Pakistani schools where disinformation and hatred about Hindus and India is taught as revealed by your own educationists (read my previous post). I think this is what is hurting not only Pakistan but also the rest of the world in the form of terrorism, the biggest export item from your country. Because you have been hard-wired by your madrassa and school curricula to hate non-Muslims ordinary Pakistanis exult when your export yields bloody results. But the strategy of a thousand cuts instead of bleeding us has resulted in your hemorrhaging from deeper self-inflicted cuts.

Wake your it is time to re-educate yourself on how to live in a multi-cultural, multi-religious world.

With Regards



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".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to CURMALLY: In the motherland of Islam diya for a woman is half a man's. We reform our religions, Muslims refuse unless forced. by Plato

Email me if someone replies to my comment

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".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2022 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)