War ethics ‘n’ rules in Islam..

Without any foreword, I’ld like to draw your attention into the Islamic war rules and ethics to be observed during a war..This post is not an exhaustive one..I am only trying to share what I know..Pls make your own conclusions after reading the post and tell me whether what you see around is islamic terrorism or is it their own version of terrorism..

Islam is a way of life and lays down messages regarding every aspect of life.It is a fact that given the nature of man ,there wouldn’t be a world without any wars. Rules regarding war are based on Quran and Hadiths. As far as I understand it, Islamic rules are in line with the international rules ,and the basic message in all rules is to ensure justice and order.

The true follower of Islam do not wish to hurt people; they want peace, not war. However, God tells us it is a high form of charity to fight in the cause of truth, against cruelty and oppression.

  • Quran 2:216″Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you. “

Islam allows war in cases of

  1. Self-defence
  • (Qur’an 22:39) To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid

   2.   To protect those who have been removed from their homes by force because they are Muslims

  • (Qur’an 22:40), Those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is Allah – For had it not been for Allah’s repelling some men by means of others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft mentioned, would assuredly have been pulled down. Verily Allah helpeth one who helpeth Him. Lo! Allah is Strong, Almighty

  3. To protect the innocent who are being oppressed

  • (Qur’an 4:75). How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth from out this town of which the people are oppressors! Oh, give us from thy presence some protecting friend! Oh, give us from Thy presence some defender!

Islam upholds sanctity of human life, as the Qur’an declares that killing one innocent human being is like killing the entire human race

  • Quran 5:32 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind
  • Quran 6:151 “..and that ye slay not your children because of penury – We provide for you and for them – and that ye draw not nigh to lewd things whether open or concealed. And that ye slay not the life which Allah hath made sacred, save in the course of justice. This He hath command you, in order that ye may discern
  • Quran 17:33 And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right. Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying. Lo! he will be helped.
  • Quran 2:190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

The basic principle in war is that ‘enemies’ should be treated as fellow human beings .Fighting should be stopped immediately when the situation or circumstances of cause cease to exist.i.e,there is no permission to attack someone who ceases to attack you

  •  Quran 2:192 “But if they cease [attacking you], Allah is oft-forgiving, most merciful.”

Muslims have been prohibited from opening hostilities against their enemies without properly declaring war against them, unless, of course, the adversary has already started the aggression.

  • Quran (8:58)  “And if thou fearest treachery from any folk, then throw back to them (their treaty) fairly. Lo! Allah loveth not the treacherous. “

Though war is prescribed when required, the principle of forgiveness is given more stress. For instance, if an enemy surrender, he should not be killed ,instead, it is the duty of muslim army to take him to a shelter for safety.

  • Quran (9:06) And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not.

The practices during Prophet(pbuh) were summarized by his companion,Abubaker,in the form of ten rules for muslim Army.

“ Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy’s flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone. ”

 

Islam has drawn a clear distinction between combatants and non-combatants in any enemy country. As far as the non-combatant population is concerned ,the instructions of the Prophet are as follows: “Do not kill any old person, any child or any woman” (AbuDawood). “Do not kill the monks in monasteries” and “Do not kill the people who are sitting in places of worship” (Musnad of Ibn Hanbal).

  • Quran 4:29 O ye who believe! Squander not your wealth among yourselves in vanity, except it be a trade by mutual consent, and kill not one another. Lo! Allah is ever Merciful unto you

Torturing the enemy, and burning the combatants alive is strictly prohibited. Punishment by fire does not behoove anyone except the Master of the Fire” (AbuDawood).

 
The mutilation of dead bodies is also prohibited. : “The Prophet has prohibited us from mutilating the corpses of the enemies” (Bukhari, AbuDawood). The occasion on which this order was given is highly instructive. In the battle of Uhud the disbelievers mutilated the bodies of the Muslims who had fallen on the battlefield by cutting off their ears and noses and threading them together to put round their necks as trophies of war. The stomach of Hamza, the uncle of the Prophet, was ripped open by the Quraysh and his liver was taken out and chewed by Hinda, the wife of AbuSufyan, the leader of the Makkan army. The Muslims were naturally enraged by this horrible sight. But the Prophet asked his followers not to mete out similar treatment to the dead bodies of the enemies.

 
Harming civilian areas and pillaging residential areas is also forbidden,as is the destruction of trees, crops, livestock and farmlands. Also,the Prophet has prohibited the killing of anyone who is tied or is in captivity.

 
Muslims have been instructed by the Prophet not to pillage or plunder or destroy residential areas, nor harm the property of anyone not fighting. “The Prophet has prohibited the Believers from loot and plunder” (Bukhari, AbuDawood). His injunction is: “The loot is no more lawful than the carrion” (AbuDawood). AbuBakr Siddeeq used to tell soldiers on their way to war: “Do not destroy the villages and towns, do not spoil the cultivated fields and gardens, and do not slaughter the cattle.”
Booty of war from the battleground is altogether different. It consists of the wealth, provisions and equipment captured from the camps and military headquarters of the combatant armies and may legitimately be appropriated.

 
Treat corpse with dignity :In the battle of Ahzab a renowned enemy warrior was killed and his body fell into the trench which the Muslims had dug for the defence of Madina. The unbelievers presented ten thousand Dinars to the Prophet and requested that the dead body of their fallen warrior be handed over to them. The Prophet replied: “I do not sell dead bodies. You can take away the corpse of your fallen comrade.”

 

 

This post is not a well articulated one..I hope to improvise it..I need to stop now as its been lot of time I’ve been spending on the references..Im feeling very sick..Pls drop your comments..Is this what you see around? Obviously not..So,it means that what you see around is not ‘Islamic jihad’ but plain terrorism,terrorism by sick evil people..If we continue blaming each other for the causes,they will win ,making life more hell..God bless..

 

 

 

References:

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-09/10/article03.shtml

http://www.jamaat.org/islam/HumanRightsEnemies.html

http://www.preparingforpeace.org/sajid_islam_and_ethics_of_war_and_peace.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_war_in_Islam

Advertisements
  1. What about those:-

    # “Strike off their [infidel’s] heads. Strike off their finger-tips! … because they defied God and his Apostle [Muhammad].” (Sura 8:12-13)

    # “Make war on them [infidels] until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.” (Sura 2:193)

    # “Seize them and put them to death wherever you find them.” (Sura 4:89)

    # “Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you.” (Sura 9:123)

    # “When the sacred months [Ramadan] are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them; besiege them; and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent [convert to Islam] and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way.” (Sura 9:5)

    Muslims have to take these verses from the Qura’n literally and seriously, since they are the direct word of Allah, then it is easy to see how they could incite violent behavior toward “nonbelievers.”

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    8:12 “Remember thy lord has inspired the angels with the message. Give firmness to the believers and instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite the fingertips of them.” This verse is about a BATTLE – the Battle of Badr – not just some daily affair. A battle takes two sides to occur. Are you under the impression that while these ‘horrid’ Muslims were fighting, the enemies were simply standing there like good little peaceful men

    This verse is to be understood enjoining the verse [60:8] GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable.

    9:5 “When the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters wherever you find them.” This verse is interesting. Non-Muslims almost invariably quote verse 5 but leave out verse 4 and 6. Why? Because verse 4 says, “But the treaties are not dissolved with those pagans with whom you have entered into alliance and who have you subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for God loves the righteous”. And verse 6 says, “If one among pagan ask from asylum, grant to him so that he may hear the Word of God; and then escort him to where he can be secure and safe

    2:193 And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers. ..Funny that you cut,copy paste crop and trim verses..Verses make sense in context and completness.

    The background to each verse is to be taken as to understand it..Quran was revelaed in 23 yrs and not as a book sent to Prophet one fine morning..

    One cannot take a verse revealed for a battle and insist it is if for the daily affairs of Muslims or commands for peaceful times. Pls don’t conveniently leave out verses before and after the quoted verse.

    Welome 🙂

    P.S:Will reply to the rest of verses after some time..I am busy now..Sorry.

  2. “One cannot take a verse revealed for a battle and insist it is if for the daily affairs of Muslims or commands for peaceful times.”

    As I understand it, the Qur’an is not a history book but the direct word of Allah for ALL time. Each and every word is there for a reason. This is what I have been told by people who believe that the Jihad continues till there are no unbelievers left.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 14th, 2008

    I will not point out right away but you have also done the same trimming and quoting out of context in your post.

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    I understand,but doesn the ‘war’ situation as existed then,exist today?

    Yes,Quran is for ever,not a history book..i was just telling that don’t pick verses from nowhere..

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Pls read below..

    009.123
    YUSUFALI: 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.

    Fight in the name of Allah, against those who surround or force to believe anything other than Islam, let them see you are firm to the Truth and you cannot be moved, although, do not transgress, Allah rewards those who fear him.

    (do not take the word ‘fight’ and take it for the physical meaning, you can fight verbally, stand up for what you believe in)

    PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).

    Muslims, disagree with the actions of those near to you, those actions that contradict Islam, show them your disapproval, Allah is on your side.

    (if you really break down the text you can take it for its true meaning, although, i guess, some just cant help but see it in a negative way because they are negative themselves and have a one track way of thinking…on the other hand, they like to ‘cherry pick’)

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Read this too..

    you should read these verses in their textual and historical context. You should read the whole verse and it is better that you read few verses before and few after. Read the full text and see what is said:

    (Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors. And kill 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, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. The prohibited month, for the prohibited month, and so for all things prohibited, there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.) (Al-Baqarah 2: 190-194)
    read the full text:

    (They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): so take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks. Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (Of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them). Others you will find that wish to gain your confidence as well as that of their people: every time they are sent back to temptation, they succumb thereto; if they withdraw not from you nor give you (guarantees) of peace besides restraining their hands, seize them and slay them wherever ye get them; in their case We have provided you with a clear argument against them.?w (An-Nisaa’ 4: 89-91)

    Now tell me honestly, do these verses give a free permission to kill any one anywhere? These verses were revealed by God to Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), at the time when Muslims were attacked by the non-Muslims of Makkah on a regular basis. They were frightening the Muslim community of Madinah. One may say using the contemporary jargon that there were constant terrorist attacks on Madinah and in this situation Muslims were given permission to fight back the “terrorist”. These verses are not a permission for “terrorism” but they are a warning against the “terrorists.” But even in these warnings you can see how much restraint and care is emphasized.

    It is important that we study the religious texts in their proper context. When these texts are not read in their proper textual and historical contexts they are manipulated and distorted.

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Both the above comments are from my friends Oumie and Ninja respectively..Thanks…I copy paste their comment as to give a different perspective..

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Ak,:) ROFL.. good for both of us;-)

    • Milind Kher
    • September 14th, 2008

    @Sagarone,

    A jihad can only be sanctioned by the Imam of the time. Otherwise, only a defensive war (difa) can be waged. Even if the Quran is not a book of history per se, the historical context needs to be understood for the reasons stated below:

    The Quran is the sum total of the word and the book of Allah. It is the map of the universe. Its letters, words, clauses, sentences, chapters, parts, and symbols, jointly or severally, signify the facts of the creation in its circular process. To read and understand any map, a fixed scale is required, without which it would be a meaningless mass of unrelated and irrelevant dots and lines having no value or significance. Therefore, in the case of the Quran, those who do not make use of the “real scale”, remain unattached, go astray and wander in the wilderness of ignorance and confusion. The Quran refers to this fact.

    “Verily, We sent Our messengers with clear proofs, and revealed with them the book and the scale, that mankind may observe right measure (establish themselves in justice):

    • Another Kafir
    • September 14th, 2008

    “The Quran is the sum total of the word and the book of Allah. It is the map of the universe. Its letters, words, clauses, sentences, chapters, parts, and symbols, jointly or severally, signify the facts of the creation in its circular process. To read and understand any map, a fixed scale is required, without which it would be a meaningless mass of unrelated and irrelevant dots and lines having no value or significance. Therefore, in the case of the Quran, those who do not make use of the “real scale”, remain unattached, go astray and wander in the wilderness of ignorance and confusion. The Quran refers to this fact. ”

    First of all, why is creation circular? When does this come to a map? And I have read a lot of books, even religious ones, I do not find any map necessary for reading them. Where does Quran speak of the fact of requiring a scale? (spoiler nowhere) It does say that it is easy to understand and that there is no doubt in understanding it. It does say that Allah has sealed our hearts and that we will be burning in hell where our skin would be burnt, and regrown so that it would burn again. So we will burn because Allah has sealed our hearts.

    Exactly what are you talking about? Never mind the confusion we are in, there are many terrorists who are in this confusion, waiting to kill innocents like you and me. Please then place the verses in contextual scale and disprove the interpretation associated with these verses. Please clarify and prove that a terrorist should not kill people after reading these verses. No need to worry about us, there are many lives to save if you can logically disprove it.

    Response to Nimitha coming up tomorrow.

  3. I don’t think any terrorists believe in any God or care for any religion. Didn’t we see on the TV, a Muslim woman who has lost her husband and two children? Many people of all ages, classes AND religions have died.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 14th, 2008

    IHM, as for those who suffer from terrorism there is no religion to that, agreed. But the terrorists are open about their motives, Quran is thier inspiration.
    If you read their email after the blasts, or any email as such, they start in the name of Allah. They are definitely religious, not atheists.

    • Milind Kher
    • September 14th, 2008

    What I am talking about is very simple – the Quran is prone to several interpretations. The interpretations we need to follow are the ones offered by the scholars. We cannot read our own conjectures into it the way the terrorists do.

    If the Quran indeed taught what the terrorists believe, or claim to believe, the entire Muslim community would have become terrorists.

    They haven’t – which proves that it is the terrorists who are in a minority and in error.

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Ak,

    If you read their email after the blasts, or any email as such, they start in the name of Allah. They are definitely religious, not atheists.

    Pls don’t delude yourself into thinking that they are dumb enough to sent notices ,so that police or CBI can trace them easily..Simply said,I feel that government is lying to us about this emial stuff..something fishy about it..At times,one grop sent email,sometimes,many sent emails..yo,is there a tug of war among them? This is all drama and conspiracy..including,some muslims,some hindus,some christians and all..

    In my observation,many people are coming out of the shell and thinking the way i do..I am not saying that muslims are angels and they are all dressed in white..no,there are many shitty muslims out there..But the whole drama seems fishy to me..

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    IHM,i agree with you..There is no God business here..

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Milind,i agree,but there are many translations by scholars..What if i decided to follow a particular one?As in the case of wife beating,where none agree to what i said..

  4. This verse is about a BATTLE – the Battle of Badr – not just some daily affair. A battle takes two sides to occur. Are you under the impression that while these ‘horrid’ Muslims were fighting, the enemies were simply standing there like good little peaceful men
    No, the “enemies” were bringing trade good from Syria to sell in Mecca. Mohammed’s group of pirates heard about it and set out to ambush them, with the intention of taking loot and female slaves.

    at the time when Muslims were attacked by the non-Muslims of Makkah on a regular basis. They were frightening the Muslim community of Madinah. One may say using the contemporary jargon that there were constant terrorist attacks on Madinah and in this situation Muslims were given permission to fight back the “terrorist”.
    As at Badr, the Meccans attacked to prevent piracy on trade caravans; this makes them “terrorists”. If I needed ammunition to condemn Islam, you’re giving it to me.

    Now tell me honestly, do these verses give a free permission to kill any one anywhere?
    Yes

    • Nimmy
    • September 14th, 2008

    Watercat,i’ll reply tomo..Sorry,i need to go out..bye for now..Good day to all

    • Milind Kher
    • September 14th, 2008

    @Nimmy,

    Follow the scholar who you believe to be the best.

    This is where the concept of a marjae taqlid makes it very easy for all followers. For instance, if some people regard Ayatollah Seestani as their marja, then all over the world, people who are in his taqlid follow his ruling. They do not have to rely on multiple maulanas or local mullahs.

  5. the Quran is prone to several interpretations. The interpretations we need to follow are the ones offered by the scholars.
    like this one
    sodomizing the child is acceptable (Ayatollah Khomeni, Tahrirolvasyleh 1990)

    • Another Kafir
    • September 14th, 2008

    “Pls don’t delude yourself into thinking that they are dumb enough to sent notices ,so that police or CBI can trace them easily..Simply said,I feel that government is lying to us about this emial stuff..something fishy about it..At times,one grop sent email,sometimes,many sent emails..yo,is there a tug of war among them? This is all drama and conspiracy..including,some muslims,some hindus,some christians and all..”

    See I am not being dumb, the emails after both the Ahmedabad blasts and Delhi blasts were sent to media houses and the email adresses are also available. They made a high graphic pdf of their email and these are available for download. Do a simple “delhi blasts email” google search. The emails have come from these same id’s after the formation of Indian mujahideen. They are not dumb, they are daring the govt. they have some good technology in their fold now. The latest email is a rather long one, it is like an editorial, have not read it completely.
    There is no tug of war that you would notice if you paid attention to the news. I see no signs of consipracy as of now, I do not know what leads you to believe so.

    I agree that muslims are now starting to believe more in peace, and I have immense hope that terror can be defeated if the muslims are all in favour of peace, Insha allah.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 14th, 2008

    Small correction, this high graphic pdf was made by the terrorists themselves, (indicating knowledge of good technologies) and not by the media houses. I re-read my comment and the impression coming is something else, so clarifying.

  6. No person was ever honored for what he received. Honor has been the reward for what he gave.CalvinCoolidgeCalvin Coolidge

    • arjun2k
    • September 15th, 2008

    I dont feel any religion will say you have kill someone….Be it Islam,Christianity or Hinduism…Now what is happening is that there is lot of misinterpretation of Islam from the enemies of true Islam….And within the Muslim community they are finding a good no of supporters…

    All religions have gone through this phase of decay/misinterpretation of religion.Be it Hinduism or Christianity….It is only that Islam is going through that phase now….

    I hope more and more people come out save this decay rather than cornering even the secular Muslims…

    • arjun2k
    • September 15th, 2008

    @Nimmy
    Its very upsetting to see some of your statements on SIMI and similar organisations

    “Pls don’t delude yourself into thinking that they are dumb enough to sent notices ,so that police or CBI can trace them easily..Simply said,I feel that government is lying to us about this emial stuff..something fishy about it..At times,one grop sent email,sometimes,many sent emails..yo,is there a tug of war among them? This is all drama and conspiracy”

    Technical methods of investigation and like are used in the process and it is not like you and me running around and blaming,but an organized mission..Pls refer to sources.This is a statement you have used when you replied in a previous post..I have just reframe it to match 🙂

    • Another Kafir
    • September 15th, 2008

    You are mistake arjun, it is the secular peace loving people who are being cornered. On one hand there is blatant use of scriptures to justify all sorts of violence and on the other hand the “moderate” muslims protest if you question the basis of these verses. Either disprove them or stop defending Islam, shielding criminals is also a crime by itself.
    I also agree that it may be a phase, but until the past actions are accepted, until the problem is accepted the solution is not far away. What we have today is a set of people who would do anything to work around an issue and never decide to work on the problem. That is why I think even if this is a phase it will continue unabated if unchecked.
    Arjun, please read the Quran, read the kind of violent verses that are being spoken of, I find them rightly interpreted as violent. I still am waiting for some sort of proof to prove these wrong.

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    AK,

    It does say that it is easy to understand and that there is no doubt in understanding it.

    Allah does says so,but He also says to refer to/obey Muhammed bcoz Muhammad was given the message..When a verse was reaveled,Prophet would explain it to people..

    See Ak,always keep reminding yourself that Quran was sent down in 23 yrs and hence it would be as complicated as it ought to be,dealing all facets of life..TO be honest,I find Quran somewhat complicated bcoz without an extrenal guide or help,one wouldn’t understand that sequences of rules,how one follows the other verse from an entirely different chapter and so on..Translators have done a good job by giving footnotes and references..But then again,there is confusion over which translation to read.And that the cruz of the issue..What if i decided to translate or interpret it differently?Again,that is not possible because not any idiot can interpret a verse picking it from air,and i belive that is what these terrorists do..The verses are there..I translate it in one way,you in the other way ,and terrorist in an entirely dfferent way..Everybody claims there are right!

    Even if we agree on a single translation,there can be difference in the way we perceive it.For eg, the ‘violent’ verse of fighting non believers near you is to be perceived not as literal fight,but to being hostile /unfriendly to those unbelievers who don’t let you practise your religion..But the same word ‘fight’ can be perceived as taking ak47 and shooting them..

    You may ask me,”Pls don’t give me long lectures,im not interested.Im only interested in a peaceful life and it is disrupted by your fellow muslims who interpret ‘fight’ as synonymous to AK47″..Yes,I agree,it is the fault of muslim community for having not imparted the right knowledge and I’ld say it again that as of today,it is the duty of muslims to fight this sick evil as it emerged out from among themsleves..

    But friend,remember that this cannot happen in an overnight.Spreading the word is a tedious task..I far as i understand it,those(atleast many) who are well versed with Quran are not taking much effort to come down to lower strata and spread the word..So,idiotic people like me would have to take Quran from the corener of book shelf,rub away the dust and start learning it and know for themselves and later share it to others..As far as i understand it,there is lot of effort coming up,even lazy fellows like me are learning and understanding..I agree that time is a great factor here and everyday more n more people are getting killed.But i am sure ths is going to end soon as people ,are understanding that this is not sole religious stuff and hence they should be dealt with harsh measures..Pls don’t keep blaming..I respect you for speaking with respect and concern,and i appreciate it more as i have seen and talked to many rude ,dirty non muslims who spit poison alone..The matter is concerning you me and people around us..There sin no point in sidelining,but fighting it halding hand in hand..

    Yo,that was a long rant..Thanks if you read it completely. 🙂

    This comment is not intended to end the discussion..Pls share more thoughts..

    I disagree with you on

    See I am not being dumb, the emails after both the Ahmedabad blasts and Delhi blasts were sent to media houses and the email adresses are also available

    .

    So what?I can create am email alhind_nims@yahoo.com and sent email to all media houses claming that I did all these blasts..It would make more sense as my email is coming from the land of oil money ..lol..;-) I am not arguing that they didn’t do all this..Just sharing a possibility,as i have been reading that lot of related incidents,vhp people dying while making bombs and like,are going unnoticed since media is not talkign about it and that the explosives found with them are those used in Jaipur and Malgoda(not exact spelling)..

    They are not dumb, they are daring the govt

    Yes,I agree..Shitty people are making us fools and puppets dancing to their tones

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Arjun,You are right..Neither yours.nor mine religion preahces to kill people..

    All religions have gone through this phase of decay/misinterpretation of religion.Be it Hinduism or Christianity….It is only that Islam is going through that phase now….

    Yes,I too do believe so..Lets up we come out after doing agnishudhi 😉

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Arjun,i am not amking random comments..

    Most probably,this could be done by some extremist crappy muslims. But at the same time ,i feel that so many other factors go unnoticed. A few recent events, not covered in much detail by the national media, like Kanpur (where two Bajrang Dal activists died while making a bomb), Nanded (bomb making factory discovered in an RSS activist house), Thane (where members of Sanathan Sanstha were caught for planting bombs in theaters), Tenkasi (where activists of Hindu Munnani were caught for planting bombs) need more investigation. All these are linked together and tell me why there isn’t a need for investigating them properly..Even you don’t agree to it right??

    The statement by Bal Thakerey in Saamna where he inspired hindus to make better bombs and explode them in “mini-Pakistans” (a phrase which he chooses for Muslim areas) was indeed a patriotic one..But sicne ours is a secular nation,He can move around easily talking like this,unlike Madani(i hate him too,im reffering to difference in how they get treated). The Bajrang Dal has 12.5 lakh members who indulge in unlawful activities at will, .. Why cannot these well organized groups take out operations like that happened yeaterday?

    Pls don’t tell me taht they are inncoent kids who don’t know how to blast a bomb..So,do you still find my comment a random one?

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    AK,

    What we have today is a set of people who would do anything to work around an issue and never decide to work on the problem.

    Agreed,but remember that it included you and me…

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    @Watercat,I don’t know which portion of history you are reffering to..It would be great if you give me some refernce to your quote..

    Pls don’t open Ayathollah kohmeni chapter..Leave it for some bored sunnis and shias to fight over…

    • arjun2k
    • September 15th, 2008

    There are lots of unlawful activities happening in our country.No need to go to Kanpur , Thane and all..Every month atleast 2 or three bombs are getting exploded in Kannur and rest of Kerala during the process of manufacturing…The main culprits are CPM,NDF and Bajrang Dal.

    Can you please provide the authenticity of the 12.5 lakhs members in Bajrang Dal.Because in my life I havent seen a single BajrangDal activist…I am not saying it doesnt exist but numbers are a slightly exhaggerated… 🙂 You can disagree to my comments.These are just observations…The membership of these organisations are slightly over-hyped…U and me may have been a member of SFI or similar ogranisation during our college days..That doesnt mean you are active participant and you blindly follow it….

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Arjun,it is very funny and annoying to see that you are twisting arguments back to me..lol.. no offense meant..

    What makes you think that my numbers are exxagerated..pls corect me with real numbers

    Can you pls make your stand clear,do you think dal guys are same as muslim terrorists?

    Pls give me your source that there are only handful of dal guys and pls give me one proof that they are impotent of making such blasts..

    you are always talking in favour of these vhp and dal guys..and it is very surprising and sad move from your part…

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Yooooooooooo Arjun,I just re read your comment **bangs my head onto wall**

    Because in my life I havent seen a single BajrangDal activist…I am not saying it doesnt exist but numbers are a slightly exhaggerated…

    What crap..I haven’t seen any muslim terrorist ever in my life,yet i read about them everyday..Does that mean that there are not many terrorists?And I bet even you never saw any muslim terrorist ever in your life:-)

    I haven’t seen any dal guy ever in my life..But that doens’t mean that they are an extinct species and are endangered..No,their numbers are growing as is the same with other side too..

    • lolkoran
    • September 15th, 2008

    @Watercat,I don’t know which portion of history you are reffering to..It would be great if you give me some refernce to your quote..
    I quoted YOU, and you don’t know what I’m talking about?

    Pls don’t open Ayathollah kohmeni chapter..Leave it for some bored sunnis and shias to fight over…
    Ok, yes, let’s ignore this girl’s abuse and murder; it’s too boring, no one should care that her life was nothing but rape and slavery because your sick religion’s HIGHEST AUTHORITY commands it. I was wrong to think you shared the same values as atheists like me, obviously, and to think there are actually ‘moderate muslims’, not just different kinds of terrorists. Thank you all for educating me.

    • arjun2k
    • September 15th, 2008

    All extremist activity should be condemned, be it so-called Muslim terror oraganisation,or Hindu extremists…

    The only difference is in the fact that, the one is a more capable and sophisticated outfit…

    Now reagarding the no:,I am not adamant in my stand…If you prove with authentic data,I am more than happy to withdraw my remarks… 🙂

    “you are always talking in favour of these vhp and dal guys..and it is very surprising and sad move from your part…”

    When did I talk in favaur of these organisations….Even in my previous comments I spoke against NDF, Bajrag Dal and CPM extremists as 2 sides of same coin….

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Watercat,pls don’t put words in my mouth..By now,you’ld have knows what my stand is..I don’t subscribe to any such views lke Kohmeni..But i were to talk against that,we’ld totally divert away from our topic of discussion..

    Let us now talk about war rules..Do you find anything contradictory in the verses i gave?Do you feel these blasters follow any islamic rules? No,so that simply tells the plain fact that they are not islamic..As simple as that..

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Arjun,even i don’t intend to argu on a petty number..BOth you and me know that quality and not quantity that matters..Pls check the link..Wiki is not a reliable source ,but a generally accepted source
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bajrang_Dal

    I’ld like to stick on to the topic..Let us talk on the rules in islam..Pls see for yourself that i have taken verses directly from quran and you can cross check it for authenticity..Allah doesn’t say to go n blast all non muslims..I don’t think Allah is sadistic or egoistic enough to see the whole world filled with muslims..He created the world the way as of today ..Is is dumb to believe that Allah has appointed bomb blasters to work for him….

  7. stay on topic: war rules. OK. You say “Rules regarding war are based on Quran and Hadiths…” and admit yourself they are contradictory: “TO be honest, I find Quran somewhat complicated bcoz without an extrenal guide or help,one wouldn’t understand …” Milind adds “The interpretations we need to follow are the ones offered by the scholars. We cannot read our own conjectures into it….”

    OK, your external guide, and Milind’s scholar, the marja taqlid, Khomeini, interprets the koran’s war rules for you:
    “Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless. …Islam says: Kill the the non-Muslims, put them to the sword and scatter their armies…. ..Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! …There are hundreds of other Koranic psalms and hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

    Guys like him MAKE the islamic rules, so when you ask me, “Do you feel these blasters follow any islamic rules?”–Yes, I do. You say that bomb throwers like him, the supreme authority of Islam, are not islamic? OK, fine; What is Islamic?

    • Another Kafir
    • September 15th, 2008

    Pertinent question, which Islamic authority is Islamic?

    • KP
    • September 15th, 2008

    Who follows these rules which is set in book.

    We are in 21st century their is always amandments in book even in the thinking of human being.

    You are forcing person if he does not perform prayers in a day you will make a Fatva against. No freedom in your religion see world is growing fastly you are becoming islamic terriorist you are going ages behind.

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Watercat,**cough cough**..I don’t mean to offend Milind,but pls don’t refer to Kohmenei,bcoz as far as i know it,he is a very sectorian person..I reccomend Yusuf al Qardawi..You may ask me,”Why difference in scholars among yourselves”..Well,that again is even more complicated..Many sectors..everybody claiming to be right.Yo,im getting crazy..pls give me a break:) I like your qstn and moreover,i expected you or Ak to ask the same..I couldn’t find an answer before you asked …**sigh**

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Ak,that is a one million dollar qstn..lol..You know what you are asking..pls dn’t ask such qstns 😉

    • Nimmy
    • September 15th, 2008

    Kp,you find me a islamic terrorist????

    ****No comments****

    • Milind Kher
    • September 16th, 2008

    @Nimmy,

    No, I am not offended. This is a forum where we exchange our views and enlighten each other.

    For me Ayatollah Khomeini was only an excellent mujtahid, not my marjae taqlid, because before Ayatollah Seestani, I was in the taqlid of Ayatollah Khoi till he passed away.

    Ayatollah Khomeini was a person who needs to be studied in depth for what he was before we pass any judgment on him, which is a chance we should give anybody.

    I personally do not believe in sectarianism. There are many Ahle Sunnat and Aga Khanis that I am very good friends with. Religious polemics are best left to the clergy, the rest of us folks need to find more and more common ground on which we can build a rapport.

  8. Yusuf al Qardawi is on record as approving bomb attacks on Israeli civilians. I doubt you would. Yet you “recommend” Yusuf al Qardawi, who also says that homosexuals and atheists like me should be killed, war or no war. Do you think someone should kill me, Nimmy?

    You don’t seem to. You seem to be a far more moral person than any of these islamic spokesmen. So why undermine your morals by turning to them? Why associate with books and people that support murder? Why not just say, “I, Nimmy, on my own authority, believe this is wrong and it doesn’t matter what the books say, or the imams say?

    Why not just follow Nimmy-Islam, that sanctifies your community, shared customs, friendships and families, and the good parts of your histories and cultures? If there was a god I think it would like Nimmy-islam, but not imam-islam.

  9. @Milind
    Please enlighten; why one could possibly not pass judgment on a so-called man who used children to clear minefields and advocated sodomizing infants; why I should not condemn anyone who praises such a person as “an excellent mujtahid”; and what common ground could possibly exist.

    • Milind Kher
    • September 16th, 2008

    @Watercat,

    There was a lot of false propoganda I read about Ayatollah Khomeini before I read the truth about him. Go through the authetntic books about him and the genuine information concerning him.

    If you wish to condemn me, free will empowers you to do so. If we don’t have any common ground, c’est la vieve. You can’t win ’em all !! 🙂

    • Nimmy
    • September 16th, 2008

    Milind,

    Ayatollah Khomeini was a person who needs to be studied in depth for what he was before we pass any judgment on him, which is a chance we should give anybody

    Yes,and thatz why i didn’t say that “He is a bad person”..I just know some controversial preachings of him,and you know what 🙂

    Religious polemics are best left to the clergy, the rest of us folks need to find more and more common ground on which we can build a rapport.

    I feel great hearing such words of sense,bcoz hardly any sunni or shia says this..Your words are much appreciated…

    • Nimmy
    • September 16th, 2008

    Watercat,thank you so much for your nice words..

    I suggested Qardawi,keeping in mind all what you said now.But I am not knowledgable enough to reccommend anybody else,as i don’t subscribe to any particular sole scholar.

    • Milind Kher
    • September 16th, 2008

    @Nimmy,

    Thanks for your kind words. There is always a far greater joy in finding harmony than creating dissonance.

    Keep up this great blog. It is a platform for sharing positive ideas.

    • nandu
    • September 16th, 2008

    Nimmy,

    I am sad to find you parrotting “It-is-not-the-Muslims-who-are-terrorists-but-a-conspiracy-by-others” which is doing the rounds in Islamic communal publications in Kerala. Anybody who does not have his eyes tightly closed can easily see that these bomb blasts are by MUSLIM TERRORIST OUTFITS. And they do draw inspiration from the Qu’ran.

    All Muslims who read the Qu’ran are not extremists. But why does the Qu’ran give rise to so many? As far as my reading of the Qu’ran goes, you can find verses to justify both war and peace. The Qu’ran, like any other religious text, is full of contradictions.

    You and Milind interpret (or choose interpretations of) the Qu’ran which promote peace. These extremists choose those which promote violence. You have no way of saying one is correct, and the other is wrong.

    Nandu.

  10. OK, you guys; is this propaganda, or is it true?

    Khomeini wrote the book Tehriro Vasyleh, which says
    “A Muslim man can have sexual pleasure with a little girl as young as a baby. But he should not penetrate her vaginally, however he can sodomize her”.

    • Nimmy
    • September 16th, 2008

    Nandu,welcome 🙂

    I disagree,I never said this is ALL conspiracy and propaganda..I was just saying that not 100% of terrorism is by muslims..There is a great difference between two lines..Pls read what i said

    Most probably,this could be done by some extremist crappy muslims. But at the same time ,i feel that so many other factors go unnoticed. A few recent events, not covered in much detail by the national media, like Kanpur (where two Bajrang Dal activists died while making a bomb), Nanded (bomb making factory discovered in an RSS activist house), Thane (where members of Sanathan Sanstha were caught for planting bombs in theaters), Tenkasi (where activists of Hindu Munnani were caught for planting bombs) need more investigation. All these are linked together and tell me why there isn’t a need for investigating them properly..Even you don’t agree to it right??

    The statement by Bal Thakerey in Saamna where he inspired hindus to make better bombs and explode them in “mini-Pakistans” (a phrase which he chooses for Muslim areas) was indeed a patriotic one..But sicne ours is a secular nation,He can move around easily talking like this,unlike Madani(i hate him too,im reffering to difference in how they get treated). The Bajrang Dal has 12.5 lakh members who indulge in unlawful activities at will, .. Why cannot these well organized groups take out operations like that happened yesterday?

    Pls don’t tell me taht they are inncoent kids who don’t know how to blast a bomb..So,do you still find my comment a random one?

    I say it again that most probably,and in most cases,it is brainwashed muslims who are doing this and as AK said it,they think they are doing good for whole muslims,which is their delusion alone..But there are many non muslims who are doing evils in the name/banner of jihadists..Two wrongs doesn’t make it right..That was my point..

    • Nimmy
    • September 16th, 2008

    Watercat,Did i ever say that it is propaganda? Milind said so..pls dn’t attach my name with Kohmeni….I don’t know anythign about Kohmeni and i haven’t read any of his books.Maybe Milind will justify himself

    • Another Kafir
    • September 16th, 2008

    A number of verses were referred here, I will be dealing with all of them, and making an attempt to explain these as I have read and understood them. However regarding the claims that Nimmy makes about rules etc. I am unaware of the source and can not do justice to them. I will not be leaving out the historical or textual context in all of these.
    List of verses
     2.216
     22:39, 22:40
     4:75
     5:32
     6:151
     17:33
     2:190
     2:192
     8:58
     9:06
     4:29

    Sagarone was kind to add to the list
     8:12-13
     2:193
     4:89
     9:123
     9:5
     60:8

    Now let me take them up one by one.

    2:215 They ask thee, (O Muhammad), what they shall spend. Say: that which ye spend for good (must go) to parents and near kindred and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer. And whatsoever good ye do, lo! Allah is Aware of it.
    2:216 Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know
    2:217 They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for persecution is worse than killing. And they will not cease from fighting against you till they have made you renegades from your religion, if they can. And whoso becometh a renegade and dieth in his disbelief: such are they whose works have fallen both in the world and the Hereafter. Such are rightful owners of the Fire: they will abide therein.

    The context of revelation of 2:217 was that a person was sent by Mo with a letter with instructions to open it after 2days. He did so and he was to go to a place on the highway and intercept the carriage of Quraish in which they were carrying food and riches to Madinah. He and four others who saw the carriage coming were in doubt as to whether they should fight because it was the holy month of Rajab. They decided to fight and brought back booty and two prisoners after killing two of them. When they returned Mo admonished them saying that they should not have fought in the holy month. This the people used to question Mo. So God came to their aid and revealed the ayah 2:217 they said that it was a far worse sin on the part of Quraish people to have stopped people from going to the place of worship and to have urged them not to believe in the word of Allah. Both of these things were something which they had not done during the incident in question. Allah goes on to threaten them who renegade their belief and die in disbelief with torment in this world and thereafter. He promises them hell.

    22:38 Lo! Allah defendeth those who are true. Lo! Allah loveth not each treacherous ingrate.
    22:39 Sanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged; and Allah is indeed Able to give them victory;
    22:40 Those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is Allah – For had it not been for Allah’s repelling some men by means of others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft mentioned, would assuredly have been pulled down. Verily Allah helpeth one who helpeth Him. Lo! Allah is Strong, Almighty –
    22:41 Those who, if We give them power in the land, establish worship and pay the poor-due and enjoin kindness and forbid iniquity. And Allah’s is the sequel of events.

    Quite an interesting quotation 22:39 and 22:40 First of all the people were not driven out of Mecca, they were asked to come out by Mo and they were threatened with hell if they did not. He also said that there was an attempt on his life and got them all out of their homes in Mecca. Their family tried to get them back but they would not return. The 22:39 is an infamous ayah which was used by terrorists like Osama to defend their cause. If everyone who was wronged were to take up arms the world would only be a battlefield. Indeed the Islamic terrorists think that it is.
    Nimitha mentions self defence here, self-defence is different, self defence would mean strike only when struck. This verse asks you to strike because you have been wronged. No appeal, no free trial or anything, just go fight.
    Read the other translation/explanation of 22:41 which I find in the sira of mohammed.
    • “Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamatas – Salât: [i.e. to perform Salât (prayer) — the five compulsory, congregational prayers (the males in Mosques)], to pay the Zakat (obligatory charity), and they enjoin Al-Ma‘ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islam has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur’ân as the Law of their country in all the spheres of life].” [22:41].

    So they have given power to the rulers to force salat, collect zakat, to encourage Islam and forbid disbelief. This is absolutely against the verse of there not being any compulsion in religion. For clearly, there is compulsion after you get into the religion of Islam.

    4:75
    4:74 Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.
    4:75 How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth from out this town of which the people are oppressors! Oh, give us from thy presence some protecting friend! Oh, give us from Thy presence some defender!
    4:76 Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil. Lo! the devil’s strategy is ever weak.

    4:74 is another verse where Mo is exhorting people to fight, and he mentions that whether he win or die, he will find place in jannah. That verse holds out a promise of heaven to all those who fight in the cause of Allah. In the quoted verse Allah holds out a promise saying that the people are oppressors and that their women and children are crying under their oppression. You mentioned Al hind, a lady being the ruler of the Quraish, no such thing was allowed for the muslims. Mohammed in fact said that mislead are those who make women their rulers. Mo still holds out a false promise that the women are oppressed in the other tribes and it is their duty.
    And read that 4:76 there, that is hate talk, “the minions of devil” “the devils strategy is very weak”. It displays extreme intolerance.

    5:32
    5:32 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.
    5:33 The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;

    This(5:32) is actually one of the nicest verses, yet it does not apply to muslims. “We decreed for the children of Israel…” , of what relevance might it be here? It does not apply to muslims at all.
    Yet read the verse that follows, read the extreme intolerance of that verse. The ones who make war on the messenger will be killed or crucified. Hands, feet cut off, and expelled out of land. They are degraded in this world and the next. So much for a good lawful war and good treatment of prisoners of war.

    6:151 Say: Come, I will recite unto you that which your Lord hath made a sacred duty for you: That ye ascribe no thing as partner unto Him and that ye do good to parents, and that ye slay not your children because of penury – We provide for you and for them – and that ye draw not nigh to lewd things whether open or concealed. And that ye slay not the life which Allah hath made sacred, save in the course of justice. This He hath command you, in order that ye may discern.
    6:152 And approach not the wealth of the orphan save with that which is better, till he reach maturity. Give full measure and full weight, in justice. We task not any soul beyond its scope. And if ye give your word, do justice thereunto, even though it be (against) a kinsman; and fulfil the covenant of Allah. This He commandeth you that haply ye may remember.
    Here is the other reference of shirk which is the gravest sin according to Islam, which means to associate partners with Allah. How? When you call Jesus the son of God you are associating partners with him, thats how. Allah says and Nimitha quotes that you should not kill your children in poverty. The “thou shalt not kill” of Islam comes with an exception, “except in the course of justice”.
    Rest of the stuff is goody goody but not disallowing killing.

    17:32 And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way. 17:33 And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right. Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying. Lo! he will be helped. 17:34 Come not near the wealth of the orphan, save with that which is better till he come to strength; and keep the covenant. Lo! of the covenant it will be asked.
    The above verse is the Quranic equivalent of tooth for a tooth, qisas. The verse says that whoever was slain wrongfully they have the right to take revenge in form of killing the killer. It goes on to say that one should not do excess of slaying in vengeance. How is that good? I mean when you allow killing in return of killing you are giving a deathly right to the people and then advicing to kill less that does not make it less heinous.
    17:34 is very nice and yet does not echo the feelings of not allowing death etc. and is irrelevant to the subject.

    Both Nimitha and Sagarone have quoted this part of Al-Baqarah. This is actually an interesting part and we should look at it closely.
    “And fight, in the way of Allâh those who fight you; but transgress not the limits. Truly,
    Allâh likes not the transgressors. And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out
    from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah (polytheism or calamity) is worse than
    killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-Al-Harâm (the Sanctuary at Makkah), unless
    they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of
    the disbelievers. But if they cease, then Allâh is O ft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them
    until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all
    and every kind of ) worship is for Allâh (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no
    transgression except against Az-Zalimûn (polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)” [2:190-193]

    I am using the translation as given in the sira and confirmed in the tafsir, the other translation is rather tough to understand here. These are the translation by fellow muslims and not non-muslims. Allah is evidently telling them to fight in the way of Allah and not to transgress the limits. He says polytheism is worse than killing! He says they should be fought till there is no more polytheism and disbelief. If they cease, let there be no transgression, except against the polytheists and wrong doers.
    This is continually persuading fighting against the poeple who are polytheists and who are in disbeliefs. I find this extremely hateful speech, I do not see a bright side to it though Nimitha has selectively quoted it.

    8:57 If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.
    8:58 And if thou fearest treachery from any folk, then throw back to them (their treaty) fairly. Lo! Allah loveth not the treacherous.
    8:59 And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah’s Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.
    8:60 Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them. Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged.

    8:57, the ayah before the one quoted is hateful speech asking the muslims to strike fear in those that are behind them so that they may remember.
    8:58 is the one she speaks of and I disagree with her interpretation. Here Allah is telling the muslims to abandon the treaties of those from whom you “fear” treachery. Allah is telling that they are free to break the treaty if they feel that the other party may do so. And I do agree with her that he says you declare that you are breaking the treaty, and then attack. But why break the treaty at all, why is Allah not trying to avoid war, why should this be the course of the people who so much as fear treachery. Unlike Nimitha’s interpretation I find that this has no connection to aggression on the part of your enemy.
    He goes on to tell them that let them not escape Allah’s will and keep preparing for a war so that none are spared.

    9:06 and neighbouring verses have been quoted by both Nimitha and Sagarone, lets read these carefully too.

    9:3 And a proclamation from Allah and His messenger to all men on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage that Allah is free from obligation to the idolaters, and (so is) His messenger. So, if ye repent, it will be better for you; but if ye are averse, then know that ye cannot escape Allah. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve, 9:4 Excepting those of the idolaters with whom ye (Muslims) have a treaty, and who have since abated nothing of your right nor have supported anyone against you. (As for these), fulfil their treaty to them till their term. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty (unto Him). 9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
    9:6 And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a folk who know not.

    Let me explain what I understand here. Mo is asked to give tidings of doom to the believers who have violated a treaty. Others are saved because they have a treaty of peace. However that is valid only for 4 months for most tribes. After these 4 months Allah is sanctioning the muslims to slay them wherever they find them, to ambush them, and wait for them in each hiding place. What Nimitha is quoting is the continuation of the verse which says that if they convert to Islam then take them to a safe place and convert them. To sum up : Kill them or convert them. For the rest of us, we have two choices to convert or die. Whats good about this?, in fact this is what is worst about Quran, no personal freedom whatsoever.
    Even if I want some abrogation to save my ass that wont happen because this is one of the last suras to be revealed. This is how Islam was spread, convert or die, that is the extent of choice that you have. Once converted, there is no way to come out without being killed or being imprisoned.
    That is how a number of people were converted in India and this is why Guru Tegh Bahadur had to be executed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru_Tegh_Bahadur#Execution

    4:28 Allah would make the burden light for you, for man was created weak.
    4:29 O ye who believe! Squander not your wealth among yourselves in vanity, except it be a trade by mutual consent, and kill not one another. Lo! Allah is ever Merciful unto you.
    4:30 Whoso doeth that through aggression and injustice, we shall cast him into Fire, and that is ever easy for Allah.

    So here Allah is telling muslims that they should not kill each other, how is that peaceful for the rest of us? Well. It is peaceful in avoiding violence among muslims. Quite ineffective though, the muslims started infighting right after the death of Mo, as to who was to take over.
    It goes on to say that Allah will cast everyone else into fire who is aggressive and unjust unto the muslims. Another eyewash, I actually thought there is something peaceful in Quran.

    I will write about the verses discussed in comments a little later, though I have a few corrections. The sura 8 was written after the Battle of Badr and not during it as written by Nimitha. It was infact after the battle of badr when the booty was being distributed. That is why it is called the spoils of war.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 16th, 2008

    Nimitha, my comment seems to be too big to appear here. Can you check what is going wrong? I can mail it to you if you think that you may have to make it into a separate post.

    • Nimmy
    • September 16th, 2008

    *****faints******

    • nandu
    • September 16th, 2008

    Nimmy,

    Thanks for the warm welcome.

    I agree with you 100% that terrorism should be tackled impartially. However, there are one or two points which I want to make.

    Muslim extremists are the ones who openly draw inspiration from their holy book. In fact, the Taliban quoted the Qu’ran while destroying the Buddhist statues in Ba’amian! How can you say that the interpretation of these people are wrong and yours is right, other than from inner conviction? The Qu’ran is pretty equivocal.

    Also, not all Muslims are terrorists, but why are so many terrorists Muslims?

    I am not against Islam, mind you. These are questions which pop up in my mind whenever I read of another bombing.

    I understand that you are a Malayalee. Have you by any chance read Anand’s book “Vettakkaranum Virunnukaranum”? If not, I suggest you read it-very illuminating.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 16th, 2008

    One may point out the historical context wherever I leave it out. I have not found historical context for all of them and some cases it is mentioned in the sira but is absolutely vague. Like 2:190-193 is just given in the context that Allah had given them the permission to fight somewhere between Mecca and Medina as follows. Many other verses have no mention in the sira at all, it will take some digging through the hadiths to get the actual story.
    You can download the sira book, it is available in e-snips and scribd with the name “Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum”
    Quran is available on net in the Univ of Southern California site
    http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

    Again, if I offend anyone, it is not deliberate, I read these verses that were mentioned in the context available to me and I am writing my frank comments. I may be wrong, I would be glad if you pointed it out to me. I am, after all, a human.

  11. If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor.AlbertEinsteinAlbert Einstein

    • Milind Kher
    • September 16th, 2008

    @Nandu,

    Surely you have the saying that “the devil can cite scripture for his purpose”.

    That is precisely what the terrorists, Taliban and others of their ilk are doing.

    If Nimmy and I are (as you say) choosing interpratations that promote peace, is it not good? Don’t we want peace in this world?

    • Another Kafir
    • September 16th, 2008

    No Milind that is good, but that is a mistaken approach. The violent verses need to be disproven or condemned strongly. If we let them be they will be taken up by someone else to justify their cause.
    Indeed it is your supreme humanity that makes you choose the peaceful verses in place of violent ones so that you can maintain peace.
    If you so much as admit the presence of these violent verses and say that they are rather hateful and condemn them, I do not think you would become any less of a muslim. Only you would be a human before being a muslim who blindly accepts misogyny and violence in his religion.
    That is what we all should become, humans first.

  12. @ Milind; I take your craven refusal to answer my question as confirmation.

    The question is not whether we want peace, but what kind of peace. Do we want our kind of peace, where everyone is free and equal? Or the kind of peace where all non-muslims are dead and all women are sex slaves, as advocated by the genocidal pedophiles you call spiritual leaders?

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    Hi Nandu,

    Can you pls tell me how did you conclude that “Anybody who does not have his eyes tightly closed can easily see that these bomb blasts are by MUSLIM TERRORIST OUTFITS”

    Pls go thru the report at http://www.tehelka.com/story_main40.asp?filename=Ne160808thethin_redline.asp

    and the related reports. Lest misunderstood, I do not say that none are works of the so called muslims. But pls proove it in a court properly

    As for Anand’s – a known islamophobe- book, pls try to read the book titled “Anandinte Islam Vimarshanam, Virunnukarum Vettakarum” by VAM Asharaf

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    AK,

    Verse 9:3 to 9:6. Let us start from the last, the verse clearly states that if any idolaters seek refuge, provide them so that they may hear about the Truth. As this is the last ayat, the emphasis is given to provide refuge to anyone who seeks it. It does not say something like convert or else. It does not. A true muslim is supposed to provide shelter to whoever asks for it. Not only that, the muslim is supposed to escort him to the place of safety. This is exemplified by many million muslims in the world through out the ages. You should have heard about muslims (of course as people from other faiths) saving the lives of others in times of great troubles.

    Fore details read more @ (as I am not well versed, I have to depend on others) http://i-keighley.com/commonly-misquoted-quran-verses.php#quote-eight

    We will see the rest of the ayats as well

    • nandu
    • September 17th, 2008

    Najeeb,

    Unless the police, the government and the Hindu communalists are in cahoots, all part of a big conspiracy to persecute “innocent” Muslims, these bomb blasts are by Muslim terrorist outfits. I know that the Muslim communal organisations of Kerala are trying to prove the former: but it will be swallowed by only communalist Muslims. There are so many crimes that are unproven in courts. If we believe only those cases which are proven, then we would be left with no choice but to find the perperators of the Gujarat riots innocent.

    Your calling Anand an “Islamophobe” reveals your true colours, if you don’t mind me saying so. One of my friends-a former Muslim (well versed in the Qu’ran-he deconverted after he became disenchanted with Islam’s teachings) said that Anand was too soft on Muslims! Anand’s advocacy of a tolerant God is unpalatable to fundamentalist Muslims. But the main thing that angered them about the book in question would have been the way he laid bare the atrocities committed by the Muslim invaders of India-a politically taboo subject, if you want to be a “secular” Indian.

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    AK,

    Verses 22:38 to 22: 41

    “of all the people were not driven out of Mecca, they were asked to come out by Mo and they were threatened with hell if they did not”

    Not true. Most were tortured to the maximum extent and the only option they had was to migrate and as ‘Mo’ was the leader, he had to find a way. The suggestion of threatening with hell is also not true. Once a heavy stone was placed on the chest of a follower, just becoz he was a follower and was asked how it felt liked. The reply was that “I do not feel as much pain I would have felt if an ant bites my Prophet’s body’ That was how it worked!!

    “If everyone who was wronged were to take up arms the world would only be a battlefield. ”

    Exactly! However, what is the relevance of this statement in this context? The ayat only says that sanction is given to fight. The difference between fight and taking up arm is pretty clear, if one is without prejudice.

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    Nandu,

    Pls read my post more clearly. For easiness, I will quote myself here: “Lest misunderstood, I do not say that none are works of the so called muslims. But pls proove it in a court properly”

    If you have time, pls read http://indianmuslims.in/victims-of-indias-war-on-terror/

    and this http://indianmuslims.in/terrifying-testimonies/

    I am not sure about what do you mean by a tolerant God. As for the atrocities comiited by the muslims, I am not denying it, though the numbers cited seems to be too exaggerated to be true. But the question is: who does not have a violent past? What has not waged war? We know that Emperor Asoka stopped killing people only after he became a Budhist. Before the conversion, what was he? An athiest? or some thing else?

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    AK,

    a correction: “The suggestion of threatening with hell is also not true. ” should be read as the suggestion of threatening with hell as the cause of migration is not true.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Hi Najeeb,welcome 🙂 I was fuming my head on thinking how to sack more muslims and make them comment here as one man army of mine is depressing,tedious and time consuming..Thanks ..I hope you’ll stay.. 🙂

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    @AK,your loooooong list will be addressed soon,in aother individual new post..Answering here will be messy and unreadable..Pls give me some time..

    The violent verses need to be disproven or condemned strongly. If we let them be they will be taken up by someone else to justify their cause.

    I wonder what keeps you face turned away and ears and eyes kept closed,when all muslim,except terrorirts ,all over the world condemn terrorism and dissasociate themselves fromt hese voilent evil people..Generalizing is more harmful..

    If you so much as admit the presence of these violent verses and say that they are rather hateful and condemn them, I do not think you would become any less of a muslim.

    I am sorry,but you are saying the same thing again again and again..didn’t i amke it clear that the alleged ‘violent and hate’ verses is Quran are reffering to war times,when muslims are attacked first??

    You never answered to me whether you’ld sing a song,or whether you’ld wave a piece of white cloth,or whether you’ld fight back when you,your land and your people are attacked..Pls answer..Quran gives an answer to this qstn..But instead of attacking enemy blindly over anger and emotions,Allah lays down sets of rules as how to fight backIs this simple logic and reasoning too hard for you to understand?I don’t understand why you insist on reading and understanding peaceful and just verses and rules..Why do i have to justify that terrorists are wrong..They are not practising muslims,but just muslims by anme..Period..I don’t tknow where is a scope for discussion here other than discussing Quranic verses..

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Nandu,

    Also, not all Muslims are terrorists, but why are so many terrorists Muslims?

    I disagree..I am going to have a post int his regard..pls hang on…All i would say is that religious terrorism is more peaceful than that of Western terrorism

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    Dear Najeeb,Nimitha, I am not here to “debate”. I read the verses and the context as available to me and I have posted my comment. Nimitha, my mission is not to disprove I am not backed by an army either. Nandu is talking on a topic quite different as mine, Sagarone has long left. Islam, you can see the verses condemn them or disprove them or do whatever else you want with them.
    Incidentally I have only commented on the ones that you quoted and I am already pretty depressed reading this sort of stuff. I do not think I will continue to read the other ones which are actually said to be violent. It is probably as much mental torture for me as it is for you. And unlike you and others who may join you, I do not want to continue this self imposed torture.
    All the sources are available to all on the net, I urge people to read for themselves and do justice as they deem right.

    Replying on the two verses where Najeeb has corrected me, I will rest my case on the 22:38 one, I clearly need to do more reading on those. I’d be glad if you backed your claims with sources of where people put a stone on their chest and all, it will help me read more.
    However if you read the part of the sira where these are shown to be revealed, it is in conjunction with the following ayah in which he is defending the right of people to fight against injustice even if it be in the holy months. And yes taking up arms is different from fighting, you can correct my statement to “if every one who was wronged was to fight the world would be a battlefield” because fight in this context means literal fight.
    As for 9:6, the explanation given in the tafsirs is that take them to a safe place and tell them the word of Allah, they may not convert immediately because they are a folk who know not, be patient and take them to a safe place. If he does not accept Islam even after that, we are back to square one aren’t we. Idolater. Kill. Wherever. You. Find.
    Ibn khatir gave me ulcers when he described 9:5 as the verse of sword, he went on to say that waging jihad is the duty of muslims and it is asked of muslims to do it because Allah wants to test them. I think it might just be better if you responded to him than to me.

    Anyway overall, Nimitha, you can suspend you activity of collecting an army as I feel too depressed to comment on here. I will keep visiting your blog, and commenting other places probably.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    Never mind addressing me, I will not be commenting here or on that new post that Nimitha will make.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    To all people who claim,MOST MUSLIMS ARE TERORISTS..Damn it,who told you they are practising muslims..When the majority of believers say that these violent people do not belong to their group,why do you people still cling on to the argument,MOST MUSLIMS ARE TERORISTS..Are you fooling yourselves..

    As far as i see it,there is no point in saying this MOST MUSLIMS ARE TERORISTS again again and again..They are not muslims..A muslim is a one who follows Quran and hadiths..and they don’t do that..

    We’ll limit our discussion to Quran verses as the other side is pretty lame and prejudiced people are not going to understand anyway and i am not going to waste my time on them..

    • arjun2k
    • September 17th, 2008

    Your previous comments is highly objectionable…Never in any of my comments did I say “MOST MUSLIMS ARE TERORISTS”.Nor did I say any thing similar to that.I want Nimmy to take back remark on me.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Yeah,thatz true..Arjun was the only person who didn’t say that..Sorry,i apologize..

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    I know I said I would not comment but when did I say that either? I am only questioning as to how you say you are following the right version of Islam and they are erring? I am going to the source and exploring it (not any more) as you had adviced.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    And indeed, I have limited my discussion to the verses of Quran, I have not even associated with the debate that nandu is having with you and Najeeb. I have responded on some issues when questioned but as such I do not wish to explore the generalities of this. At this point I do not wish to explore anything for many days actually. I have to go to a marriage soon and I am going to look like I lost a million dollars if I do not cheer up soon. (I know I have issues, I am working on them)

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Ak,lol…Have a great marriage function ahead..Hope you won’t seem like a person with a brain waiting to get exploded..Good day

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    Nimitha, please stirke my name off from that list. I have not made such comments and I am not incriminating the muslims and I think they are wonderful people. I have not spoken besides the subject of the Quranic verses.
    And thanks a lot, I do hope to have a great time.

  13. Hey, Nimmy, when did I say that?

    The conclusion that one arrives thru these comments is that the word of God is highly subjective and anyone can interpret it in such a way as to suit their particular agenda. This discussion can go on forever because every party will keep on feeling that their interpretation is the correct one.

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    A response to comment no. 75
    About the other question you have raised, I will not answer the obvious. Simply because I do not want to continue the debate. You please prove your point and leave it, I do not wish to contest it either. I have read the context as you had asked me to, and I have made my observations.
    And lets not keep going back on the intentions, you made some references in your post and said that the terrorists were not muslims because they are not following these verses, I read up those verses and post it here as a comment. You justify your stance if you wish to, I do not mind if you do not. I would personally want these violent things disproven, and indeed you are making preparations to do that. Godspeed.
    Besides, about the rules you mention, I find them no other place, please give me your source and let me appreciate your point. The sira tells them to fight and does not mention any of the rules that you mention. It does mention some rules but none quite as nice as the ones you write.
    I will take your word to be true but I would like to see the Hadiths that corroborate your findings.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    @sagarone,
    “This discussion can go on forever because every party will keep on feeling that their interpretation is the correct one.”

    yeah..i too agree..But the highly subjectivity can be narrowed down by reffering to hadiths ,bcoz that is why Allah sent Prophet to explain to us what evrses in Quran means..Otherwise,Allah could ahve just courier-ed us Quran in a paper packet…So,without Saying and teachings of Prophet,Quran verses makes no sense..But not many are interested in reading verses inline with hadiths..Why?

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Lol..Everybody wants to strike out their name..Ok..

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    LOL, sagarone’s name is not even mentioned.

  14. It requires a great deal of faith to staunchly keep on defending your position in face of mounting evidence against it. I admire that in you.

    You have at least agreed to the fact that the Book is subject to various interpretations according to the need of the hour. People can use their particular interpretation to put forth their agenda, just as you have been doing and just as the extremists are doing. Do you think that they do not support their understanding with hadiths? You can choose one hadith, they will choose another to interpret the same verse. It is time to accept that there is something wrong here.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Ak,I left his nam bcoz he talked abt verses alone..Yeah,but his tone too was a blaming one..( as i felt it)..Im gonna remove all names..grr…

    Sagarone,my blog started with the note that ‘I realize there is something wrong with muslim community,and i want to know what it and that im gonna learn Qran n hadiths and in the course,share it with you all”..

    i have no ego to accept the fact that things have gone wrong,bcoz as far as i understand it,unless we accept and diagonize the problem,we can’t solve it..

    Lot of muslims are spiritually misinformed and in the process,it is hurting lot of people..

    But who are these people who are misonformed and who are these people who are misinterpreting Quran?Interstingly,I find all/most of them coming from politically unrest areas..Do you think that realization makes some sense and helps in better understanding of the whole scenario..??

    Quran has been here since more than 1400yrs..Why do you think all this terrorism just started recenly,maybe a few decades ago..Why?Quran still remains the same..Its people,their social,ecnomical and political scenarios that changed…Does that realization make some sense and understanding ‘islamic’ terrorism ?

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    Hi AK,

    His name is Bilal and there is an entry in his name at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilal_ibn_Rabah

    But what I described is not mentioned there. Long ago, I have read that in printed material. Need to google more.

    Btw, since you started to have ulcers, we will stop for until it disappears

    Hi Nimis,

    Thanks for the welcome.

    • Najeeb
    • September 17th, 2008

    HI AK,

    His name is Bilal and there is an article about him @
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilal_ibn_Rabah

    Before I stop the discussion as you have developed ulcers and it must be cured before anything else, I would like to point out that more weightage should be given to quotes direct from Quaran and not to Sira which is what Nimis did (comment: 87). No muslim is obliged to follow Sira and there will be millions of muslims who have never seen a copy of sira, not just now but all along the history. But almost all muslims must have seen Quran, though not understood it fully.
    And in my opinion, the historical context during when the book was written must also be considered when using Sira to criticise Islam.

    Hi Nimis,

    Thanks for the welcome.

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Najeeb,your comments make lot of sense..

    I was googling and looking out what Sira is**scratches head**..I just knew it means Story of Muhammad..

    • Another Kafir
    • September 17th, 2008

    Najeeb & Nimitha, I urge you to continue the clarification of these verses, not for me but for yourself and others who are reading. Like I have said already, I am not going to contest your claims. I am most happy to read more if you refer me to new sources.
    Clarification on the sira, the sira is actually the historical story of Muhammed based on the Hadiths. So Sira is the historical context that I am referring of the verses revealed. However, as I said not all verses are mentioned there with context so I would be glad to get more inputs.
    Worry not about my ulcers as I meant that in a figurative, non literal sense. They need not be any reason for you to stop/pause what you have already embarked upon. Take all the time you will and continue to clarify on the verses. You can hereafter address the ones who will contest your claims or the readers as such.

  15. “But who are these people who are misonformed and who are these people who are misinterpreting Quran?Interstingly,I find all/most of them coming from politically unrest areas..Do you think that realization makes some sense and helps in better understanding of the whole scenario..??”

    “Its people,their social,ecnomical and political scenarios that changed…Does that realization make some sense and understanding ‘islamic’ terrorism ?”

    Again Nimmy, the issue you have raised has nothing to do with what we are trying to understand here.

    The fact that the Qur’an can be misinterpreted, or interpreted according to your personal agenda stands.

    And by the way, I understand what you are trying to say in your above quote, actually I have written about that much earlier as well: http://sagarone.blogspot.com/2008/07/bangalore-ahmedabad-bomb-blasts.html

    • nandu
    • September 17th, 2008

    Nimmy,

    I have not said anywhere that all Muslims are terrorists. My question was “why are so many terrorists Muslims?”

    We have sectarian warfare and communal hatred all over the world. Religions, political philosophies, nationalities etc. murder one another. But the concept of “holy war” or Jihad is peculiar to Islam alone. Extremists from no other religion uses religious texts to justify acts of terror. I also believe that people like you and Milind, who use their beliefs to justify peace, are better than those who use them to justify hatred… but as far the authenticity of belief is concerned, their word is as good as yours!

    Najeeb,

    I have not said that Muslims were the only people who committed atrocities: but the “politically correct” stance in India is to close your eyes to such matters, and talk about Hindu atrocities alone. In his book, Anand has tried to explore the roots of communal hatred in India. He has explored each and every religion, and cited historical records wherever required. Any unbiased reader, willing to look into oneself instead of pointing fingers at others, will immediately see it as a remarkably unbiased account.

    One thing that surprises me in India (and this fact is grist to BJP’s mill) is that you can criticise the tenets of Hinduism only with impunity. The moment you start to question the Qu’ran or the Bible, people tag you as a Hindu apologist or communalist or (the new catchphrase) Islamophobe.

    • NInja
    • September 17th, 2008

    Assalaam Alaykum Nimmy/Peace to the others 😉

    Hahahaha I was getting dizzy reading all this comments! Firstly I am sorry for not having time to get to your blog but I am here now, where do you need me LOL Ducky is on board too!

    Okay people please summaries what is happening since my mind is only little cannot take too much in; p

    @ nandu
    “Why are so many terrorists Muslims?”

    Good question, but firstly you must know what the Term Muslim means. It means “A person who submits to Allah and practices the religion of Islam” so basically one who follows Allah’s laws and dos not Transgress them
    Yes Terrorism is Common and mostly ‘Muslims’ are blamed, however one needs to stop and think just because they are born Muslims etc that does not mean they Follow Islam properly. In today’s time the term Muslim has mean distorted since whenever a killing ect takes place they automatically say it was A Muslim doing this in the name of Allah. If our religion promoted hatred, killing etc don’t you think I would have done my fair by now too….? LOL

    Anyway why some ‘Muslims’ go to such extreme in harming others is because I personally know from experience that there is a lot of injustice going on to the Muslims in today’s time, thus some feel helpless and they want to try and help to get rid of the injustice’s that are being done, but in all honestly does the Government really listen….? From what I have seen NO! I am by no means justifying what they are doing is correct as it is not.

    Okay I have ranted enough!

    ((Nimmy)) May you be rewarded for doing your fair share xx

    • Nimmy
    • September 17th, 2008

    Hey hey
    ducky..Salam:) Thanks for coming..

    I hope that answers Naanu’d query..Though not justified,mthe violent acts by muslims can be related to the direct and constnat unrest in their area..and they are just finding a reason to lean upon or justify their actions..If you feel they are right in jsutifying,the next step is too see for yourself what are they claiming to be right..Quran is readily available and so its translation..

    And yes,i know why should non muslims bother to read Quran,and digg into its context,meaning etc etc..I agree,but then you have no right to say that Islam is wrong..Instead,say Muslims are wrong..When one claims or accuse religion to be wrong,they ought to take time to look tino religious texts..

    Its not tough as it seems to be..Even an idiot like me can understand it with little effort..

    And Quack quack,keep coming:)

    • nandu
    • September 17th, 2008

    Ninja and Nimmy,

    No, I don’t think it’s so easily explained.

    Most of us belong to a religion because we are born into it (yes, there are the converts, but in today’s world they are a minority). Our relationship to our religion is like our relationship to our mothers: we love it, warts and all. Most people don’t probe into what their religion means; they just believe.

    Others, like Nimmy, want to justify their religion in terms of their worldview. So they bend over backwards trying to interpret verses according to their moral framework-sadly, it works only for the believers. When I read the Qu’ran, I find lots of contradictions, like any other religious text. And there are verses in the Qu’ran which advocate war against non-believers-which the extremists are taking literally.

    A literal reading of any religion leads to intolerance. This is especially true for the Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

    The Hindu extremists you mentioned above cannot quote a religious text to justify their actions because Hinduism is such a vast tapestry encompassing all kinds of thought, they would be hard put to find a justification for finishing off “unbelievers”. The most they can do is to quote the Bhagavad Gita to prove that killing, when it is your duty, is justified. Extremist Islam benefits from those parts of the Qu’ran which can be interpreted as exhortations for war against the infidels.

    How can one say that one interpretation is “right” and the other is “wrong”?

  16. @ninja

    firstly you must know what the Term Muslim means. It means “A person who submits to Allah and practices the religion of Islam” so basically one who follows Allah’s laws

    How does one know what Allah’s laws are?
    –read the koran
    And how does one understand the koran?
    –ask the mujtahid.
    The mujtahids advocate terror. (see comments 21, 41, 49)
    –therefore: follow Islam = be a terrorist

    Can you tell me where this logic has gone wrong?
    Do you need mullahs to be a muslim?
    Do you need the koran to be a muslim?

    • Najeeb
    • September 18th, 2008

    watercat,

    I will tell you where the logic has gone wrong: you are limiting the definition to mujtahid alone, and again you are limiting the definition of mujtahid to what do you think.

    I redefine it:

    How does one know what Allah’s ‘laws’ are
    -read the koran

    And how doe one understand the koran?
    – ask Nimis and or read more!! And if you really want to follow (taqlid) a mujtahid, you can judge the person based on what you have already understood and the choose accordingly

    Nimis advocates peace
    -therefore: follow islam= be a peaceful, moral person.

    As for Kohomeni’s quote on sodomy, if he has ever said it so – since we know how they spinned the words of Nejad about Isreal (http://www.counterpunch.org/tilley08282006.html & http://www.counterpunch.org/gowans12162006.html & http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp06062007.html) -, definitely it is not deduced from Quran or are you able to show me from what premise he reached this conclusion. By the way did you read the book yourself or just quoting others?

    One more fact is that I have never seen any Shia or other muslims sodomising a child by claiming that Khomeini has approved it or shia or other web sites or publications approve such behaviour on the basis such quote. Only anti- oh I better stop it here othewise Nandu will say anybody who criticises Islam will be attacked and called names where as in the case of Hinduism, everyone is free to do whatever they want!

    This is what YA has to say about the quote by Khomeini on bestiality: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070808160947AAxTenr

    Here is the discussion about the book http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tahrir-ol-vasyleh#Alleged_Persian_version and this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ruhollah_Khomeini/Archive_2

    • nandu
    • September 18th, 2008

    I have learnt one valuable thing from this discussion, and it has reinforced my earlier convictions.

    Religion is what you make it out to be, based on the value system which “feels” right to you.

    In fact, each one of us creates our god in one’s own image.

    • Milind Kher
    • September 18th, 2008

    @Najeeb,

    Thanks so much for answering. I was unfortunately not able to attend the blog for time and technology related constrainsts.

    My craven refusal to answer had unfortunately created a void which you have filled adequately.

    • Nimmy
    • September 18th, 2008

    @Nandu,it is very simple friend..Im gonna have a new post now…

    • Nimmy
    • September 18th, 2008

    Thanks Najeeb ..Yeah,I never heard of any shia doing that..Also,from my reading,its just a false info…

    @Nandu,I agree 99% to what you said..Each person loves and prays to Godmperceived in his own way..But basic concept of God is the same..Well,Isn’t that good? Bcoz each can relate lot to what he attach himself to…

    • Najeeb
    • September 18th, 2008

    Hi Nandu,

    You are almost correct in your conclusion. It is not just religion, is true about God too.

    Here is one Hadith Qudsi :

    “I am as My servant thinks I am (1). I am with him when he makes mention of Me. If he makes mention of Me to himself, I make mention of him to Myself; and if he makes mention of Me in an assembly, I make mention of him in an assembly better than it. And if he draws near to Me an arm’s length, I draw near to him a fathom’s length. And if he comes to Me walking, I go to him at speed.”

    http://sacredhadith.com/hadith-qudsi-15/

    • Najeeb
    • September 18th, 2008

    HI Nandu,

    Since we were mentioning about how police works in India, you may want to read the service written in Mathrubhumi weekly (dated Sept 14 & issue # 28) by Jathaavedan Namboothiri. He describes how the police concocted a story about a convict who surrendered himslef to Jathadevan. He handed over the convict to another police office in the next district as crime was committed there. The police there published a story saying that he was captured by a Dy.SP with sword, pistol etc!! and then the police officers who took part in the operation were rewarded!!

    Think now about how police will act towards those muslims accused of being terrorists when we know how police acts in even ‘secular’ cases and how police such as Gujarat’s and Bombay’s and UP’s (PAC) are biased.

  17. @ Najeeb
    Thank SO much for answering. I don’t know what is ‘nimis’ but even so you’ve explained well.
    Also, –though it doesn’t affect my main point–thank you for finally clearing up the Khomeini issue. Very enlightening response.

    • Milind Kher
    • September 18th, 2008

    @Najeeb,

    I will complete that Hadith Qudsi for you.

    “And if he comes to me with sins the weight of Mount Uhud, I will forgive him provided he has not ascribed partners to me”

  18. In the sunset of dissolution, everything is illuminated by the aura of nostalgia, even the guillotine.MilanKunderaMilan Kundera

  19. I think people resist freedom because they’re afraid of the unknown. But it’s ironic….That unknown was once very well known. It’s where are souls belong….The only solution is to confront them–confront yourself–with the greatest fear imaginable. Expose yourself to your deepest fear. After that, fear has no power, and fear of freedom shrinks and vanishes. You are free.JamesDouglasMorrisonJames Douglas Morrison, lead singer of The Doors

  20. A man who tells lies, like me, merely hides the truth. But a man who tells half-lies has forgotten where he put it.ClaudeRainsClaude Rains, as Mr. Dryden, Lawrence of Arabia, 1962

  21. The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary.DonaldKendallDonald Kendall

  22. I always wanted to be somebody, but now I realize I should have been more specific.LilyTomlinLily Tomlin

  23. It is a custom. More honored in the breach than the observance.WilliamShakespeareWilliam Shakespeare

  24. The sourness of this world is sweetness of the next world while the sweetness of this world is the sourness of the next one.AlibinAbiTalibAli bin Abi Talib, the Fourth Caliph of Islam

  25. When George Bush tells us that he is the most devoted Christian since the Apostles, we should believe him, take him at his word and we should therefore conclude that he certainly has memorized, over and over again, in his Bible reading classes and in church, the famous definition of ‘hypocrite’ that’s given in the gospels. Namely, the hypocrite is the person who applies to others standards that he refuses to apply to himself. So if you are not a hypocrite you assume that if something is right for us then it’s right for them and if it is wrong when they do it, it is wrong when we do it.NoamChomskyNoam Chomsky, From Distorted Morality: America’s War on Terror?, Feb 2002

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: