Sir
How are you ?
I am curious to know the reason Salman's book Satanic was banned.
What did he wrote which made his head the costliest in the world.
Regds
Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
I am not sure what Dr. Engineer can tell you about "The Satanic Verses", but it may be better for you to read the book yourself. It has a complex plot and is actually rather funny. The exploits and antics of Gibreel Farishta, Saladin Chamcha, Mahound, Ayesha (two of them!) and numerous other characters are described using complex prose peppered with Indian slang, reminding one of James Joyce or Nabokov.
It seems Muslims get insulted very easily. This book attacks self-righteous orthodoxies and delights in a bacchanalian rebellion against authority. "True" believers of any faith have thin skins indeed. They simply can't stand any criticism of their religion. "Off with their heads!" is their clarion call against infidels and apostates. In a small way the bohras also display symptoms of such intolerance, as Dr. Engineer will attest from his personal experience. Khomeni himself is also caricatured in the book. For example, after witnessing a revolution he is shown trying to freeze time by destroying all clocks in the land! So it is not surprising he was pissed off and issued a fatwa, howling for Rushdie's blood.
Read the book yourself and then judge the case against him using your own intelligence. Why rely on someone else when you can do it yourself?
It seems Muslims get insulted very easily. This book attacks self-righteous orthodoxies and delights in a bacchanalian rebellion against authority. "True" believers of any faith have thin skins indeed. They simply can't stand any criticism of their religion. "Off with their heads!" is their clarion call against infidels and apostates. In a small way the bohras also display symptoms of such intolerance, as Dr. Engineer will attest from his personal experience. Khomeni himself is also caricatured in the book. For example, after witnessing a revolution he is shown trying to freeze time by destroying all clocks in the land! So it is not surprising he was pissed off and issued a fatwa, howling for Rushdie's blood.
Read the book yourself and then judge the case against him using your own intelligence. Why rely on someone else when you can do it yourself?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
I wold agree with Kalim, read the book yourself. Of course, Rushdie has written better books - but this one got every true Muslim's goat because it portrays the Prophet in a light less flattering than what we have been taught to believe. The title "Satanic Verses" comes from the controversial incident when the Prophet allows the worship of three goddess - apparently to win over the stubborn Meccans. Later the Prophet abrogates these verses saying they were inspired by the Satan. This episode brings the key Islamic doctrines into question. By admitting - even temporarily - the worship of idols, the Prophet seems to have negated the unity of Allah, the central monotheistic pillar of Islam. Second, withdarwing the verses seems to cast doubt on the "uncreated" character of the Quran. If verses can be added and edited then it follows that it cannot be the word of God.
Of course you will never hear disucussion of this in Muslim circles, for obvious reasons.
Anyways, to better understand and appericiate the "blasphemy" of Rushdie's book it's better to have a little knowledge of the Quran and Islam. Also, Rushdie is not the first "Muslim" to challenge and deride the mullah orthodoxy, there have been many in the past and there will be many in the future. And that gives me hope.
Of course you will never hear disucussion of this in Muslim circles, for obvious reasons.
Anyways, to better understand and appericiate the "blasphemy" of Rushdie's book it's better to have a little knowledge of the Quran and Islam. Also, Rushdie is not the first "Muslim" to challenge and deride the mullah orthodoxy, there have been many in the past and there will be many in the future. And that gives me hope.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Humsafar,
The controversial incident seems to be your or Rushdie's personal creation.
And if somebody lies about the prophet why shouldn't the muslims get upset?
If someone says that your father was a bastard and he raped your mother and you were born as a result, will you be happy about someone having a different opinion about you?
The controversial incident seems to be your or Rushdie's personal creation.
And if somebody lies about the prophet why shouldn't the muslims get upset?
If someone says that your father was a bastard and he raped your mother and you were born as a result, will you be happy about someone having a different opinion about you?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Tsk, tsk anajmi. You are so full of charm you barnacled defender of faith. Your vision is so straight and narrow, and your faith so deep and impenetrable that you will permit no light in the dark crevices of your fnanticsm. So your response is typical and expected.
You can call my father, mother, myself whatever you want, it won't hurt me because I know it's not true. I'll be angry and enraged only if it were true. Truth hurts. The problem with religious people is that they have a deep faith in their creed but do not have confidence in its truth. That's why they are so easily hurt; they are sensitive, touchy, irritable at the slightest hint of doubt. You make a fine exhibition of it all.
You can call my father, mother, myself whatever you want, it won't hurt me because I know it's not true. I'll be angry and enraged only if it were true. Truth hurts. The problem with religious people is that they have a deep faith in their creed but do not have confidence in its truth. That's why they are so easily hurt; they are sensitive, touchy, irritable at the slightest hint of doubt. You make a fine exhibition of it all.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Humsafar,
I was just checking the thickness of a kafir's skin. And believe me from your post, it doesn't appear your's is any thicker than mine.
I was just checking the thickness of a kafir's skin. And believe me from your post, it doesn't appear your's is any thicker than mine.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Just one more point. When it comes to religion, a non-believer, who is supposed to be more logical, cannot think logically.
Let us for a second assume that the quran was from the prophet himself and not from Allah, and the controversial incident about the verses about lat and uzza was true, why did he have to expunge them? If he had let them be in there, he would've been king of mecca a decade earlier and he and his family and his friends wouldn'tve had to go through what they did.
And this brings me to the "furan" that you were going to write and convert every body to it's religion. How many ayahs have you written in the last couple of months? Here is the challenge. The prophet completed the quran in 23 years and at the end of it the entire Arabian peninsula had accepted Islam.
I give you 25 years to finish your "furan" and convert just one city block of people who live around you.
Let us for a second assume that the quran was from the prophet himself and not from Allah, and the controversial incident about the verses about lat and uzza was true, why did he have to expunge them? If he had let them be in there, he would've been king of mecca a decade earlier and he and his family and his friends wouldn'tve had to go through what they did.
And this brings me to the "furan" that you were going to write and convert every body to it's religion. How many ayahs have you written in the last couple of months? Here is the challenge. The prophet completed the quran in 23 years and at the end of it the entire Arabian peninsula had accepted Islam.
I give you 25 years to finish your "furan" and convert just one city block of people who live around you.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
By the way, why would you be angry and enraged even if it were true? Aren't you supposed to be a progressive who doesn't believe in the traditional values?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
For the same reason I mentioned in my previous post: because these verses made a mockery of what the Prophet had been preaching all along, namely the unity of God, the strict monotheism, that there is no god but one god.Let us for a second assume that the quran was from the prophet himself and not from Allah, and the controversial incident about the verses about lat and uzza was true, why did he have to expunge them?
The prophet, given the difficulties of his mission, had a nose of strategic and tactical action, but on this matter thankfully his common sense got the better of his expediency. He desperately wanted to win over the Meccans but not at expense of compromising the basic integrity of his preaching.If he had let them be in there, he would've been king of mecca a decade earlier and he and his family and his friends wouldn'tve had to go through what they did.
I can't recall promising to write such a thing. Even so, I must have meant it as a joke. But then starting a new religion is always a good business proposition - there are always enough fools in every era to follow a trickster.And this brings me to the "furan" that you were going to write and convert every body to it's religion. How many ayahs have you written in the last couple of months?
Unfortunately though, I neither have the personality nor the guile to start a new religion.
I need not go through all that trouble. A number of men (and women) far better and wiser than I have written far better and wise books than the Quran. But before the believers get upset let me add - and I have said this many times before - that he Quran no doubt was a radical and path-breaking manifesto of and for its time. Human knowledge has progressed ever since. Today we have better guidelines and manifestos to help us live a decent, peaceful and just life.I give you 25 years to finish your "furan" and convert just one city block of people who live around you.
If I were to write the "furan" it would be no different from the Universal Declarations of Human Rights - the UN's 1948 charter. This document is the distillation of the progress we have made as a human race. The majority of the world accepts it voluntarily; it has more adherents than all the major religions combined; significantly it was never rammed down people throats on pain of death.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Correct. But we are social creatures, it hurts to be told something which is socially looked down upon. It may be true but it still hurts because that's how we are conditioned. One's progressive thinking helps one to rationalise it - but one may still feel angry and enrged, if only momentarily.By the way, why would you be angry and enraged even if it were true? Aren't you supposed to be a progressive who doesn't believe in the traditional values?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Correction...
... had a nose for strategic and tactical action
... had a nose for strategic and tactical action
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Dear anajmi: You are mistaken to attribute the incident of the "satanic" verses to Rushdie. This incident is mentioned in numerous early biographies of the Prophet. For example, I will quote below from Ibn Ishaq for your benefit as you may not have the book handy. Ibn Ishaq was, as you may know, is the earliest biographer of the Prophet and on whose work most other biographies are based. Here is the relevant quote (from "Sirat Rasul Allah", Ibn Ishaq from the edition of Ibn Hisham, pages 165-166). (The passages are long so I have left out some sentences. The text in [] are my notes.)
"Now the apostle was anxious for the welfare of his people [referring to the persecution of Muslims in Mecca], wishing to attract them as far as he could. It has been mentioned that he longed for a way to attract them, and the method he adopted is what Ibn Hamid told me that Salama told him [chain of narrators follows]: When the apostle saw that his people turned their backs to him and he was pained by their estrangement from what he brought from God he longed that there should come to him from God a message that would reconcile his people to him. [Anxiety of the prophet is described]. Then God sent down: 'By the star when it sets your comrade errs not and is not deceived, he speaks not from his own desire,' and when he reached His words 'Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat the third, the other,' Satan, when he was meditating upon it, and desiring to bring it [reconciliation] to his people, put upon his tongue 'these are the exalted Gharaniq [high flying Numidian cranes] whose intersession is approved.' When the Quraysh heard that, they were delighted and greatly pleased at the way in which he spoke of their gods and they listened to him; [prostration of the Prophet as a seal of proof of the revelation is described]. Then the people dispersed and the Quraysh went out, delighted at what has been said of their gods, saying, 'Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion. He alleged in what he read that they are exalted Gharaniq whose intersession is approved.'
"The news reached the prophet's companions in Abyssinia, [return of some Muslims to Mecca is described]. Then Gabriel came to the apostle and said, 'What have you done, Muhammad? You have read to these people something I did not bring you from God and you have said what He did not say to you.' The apostle was bitterly grieved and was greatly in fear of God. So God sent down (a revelation), for He was merciful to to him, [God consoles the Prophet]. So God annulled what Satan had suggested .... Then God sent down: 'We have not sent a prophet or apostle before you but when he longed Satan cast suggestions into his longing. But God will annul what Satan has suggested. Then God will establish his verses, God being knowing and wise.'"
After this, Ibn Ishaq says the persecution of Muslims began once more. In fact, "the polytheist became more violently hostile to the Muslims and the apostle's followers."
Today most Muslims reject this incident because it poses a danger to their faith. How can the Prophet, even for a brief while, tamper with God's revelation? How can other verses be truly from God and not from Satan? However, modern scholars like Fazur Rahman say that we must except this incident if we are to trust Ibn Ishaq on other matters. He further says that God himself corrected the Prophet's mistake and so there is no need for us to fuss too much about it.
Anyway, this incident was relegated to the footnotes of history till Rushdie dug it up and used it in the title of his novel. But it was not the "satanic verses" themselves that got Rushdie into trouble, it was mainly his caricature of Khomeini and the Prophet's wives (Both Ayeshas in the book are shown to be evil or insane) that prompted the fatwa. If Muslims were truly tolerant they would have let the matter go and most likely the book, being difficult to read, would have hardly sold many copies and would be soon forgotten. But instead we are now in a situation in which everyone has heard of Rushdie and the Satanic Verses.
"Now the apostle was anxious for the welfare of his people [referring to the persecution of Muslims in Mecca], wishing to attract them as far as he could. It has been mentioned that he longed for a way to attract them, and the method he adopted is what Ibn Hamid told me that Salama told him [chain of narrators follows]: When the apostle saw that his people turned their backs to him and he was pained by their estrangement from what he brought from God he longed that there should come to him from God a message that would reconcile his people to him. [Anxiety of the prophet is described]. Then God sent down: 'By the star when it sets your comrade errs not and is not deceived, he speaks not from his own desire,' and when he reached His words 'Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat the third, the other,' Satan, when he was meditating upon it, and desiring to bring it [reconciliation] to his people, put upon his tongue 'these are the exalted Gharaniq [high flying Numidian cranes] whose intersession is approved.' When the Quraysh heard that, they were delighted and greatly pleased at the way in which he spoke of their gods and they listened to him; [prostration of the Prophet as a seal of proof of the revelation is described]. Then the people dispersed and the Quraysh went out, delighted at what has been said of their gods, saying, 'Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion. He alleged in what he read that they are exalted Gharaniq whose intersession is approved.'
"The news reached the prophet's companions in Abyssinia, [return of some Muslims to Mecca is described]. Then Gabriel came to the apostle and said, 'What have you done, Muhammad? You have read to these people something I did not bring you from God and you have said what He did not say to you.' The apostle was bitterly grieved and was greatly in fear of God. So God sent down (a revelation), for He was merciful to to him, [God consoles the Prophet]. So God annulled what Satan had suggested .... Then God sent down: 'We have not sent a prophet or apostle before you but when he longed Satan cast suggestions into his longing. But God will annul what Satan has suggested. Then God will establish his verses, God being knowing and wise.'"
After this, Ibn Ishaq says the persecution of Muslims began once more. In fact, "the polytheist became more violently hostile to the Muslims and the apostle's followers."
Today most Muslims reject this incident because it poses a danger to their faith. How can the Prophet, even for a brief while, tamper with God's revelation? How can other verses be truly from God and not from Satan? However, modern scholars like Fazur Rahman say that we must except this incident if we are to trust Ibn Ishaq on other matters. He further says that God himself corrected the Prophet's mistake and so there is no need for us to fuss too much about it.
Anyway, this incident was relegated to the footnotes of history till Rushdie dug it up and used it in the title of his novel. But it was not the "satanic verses" themselves that got Rushdie into trouble, it was mainly his caricature of Khomeini and the Prophet's wives (Both Ayeshas in the book are shown to be evil or insane) that prompted the fatwa. If Muslims were truly tolerant they would have let the matter go and most likely the book, being difficult to read, would have hardly sold many copies and would be soon forgotten. But instead we are now in a situation in which everyone has heard of Rushdie and the Satanic Verses.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Let me demonstrate to you guys the hypocrisy of the thick skin non-muslim world. You want the muslims to be tolerant towards anything and everything that is said against the quran or the prophet but when a muslim says something against you all of you thick skinned kafirs are up in arms against them.
A recent event comes to mind when the president of Iran spoke against the holocaust. The entire world was ready to condemn him. What happened to your thick skins then?
Just in this thread, when I said something that humsafar did not like - here are the excerpts of what he said.
"Tsk, tsk ... Your vision is so straight and narrow, and your faith so deep and impenetrable that you will permit no light in the dark crevices of your fnanticsm. So your response is typical and expected."
So my response is typical and expected and you guys are the ones with thick skins??
As far as the charter and other books are concerned, humsafar, you seem to be living in a dream world, keep on dreaming.
Enough said.
A recent event comes to mind when the president of Iran spoke against the holocaust. The entire world was ready to condemn him. What happened to your thick skins then?
Just in this thread, when I said something that humsafar did not like - here are the excerpts of what he said.
"Tsk, tsk ... Your vision is so straight and narrow, and your faith so deep and impenetrable that you will permit no light in the dark crevices of your fnanticsm. So your response is typical and expected."
So my response is typical and expected and you guys are the ones with thick skins??
As far as the charter and other books are concerned, humsafar, you seem to be living in a dream world, keep on dreaming.
Enough said.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Sorry, I did say enough said but I have to say this - it didn't take Israel 20 years to shove the charter down the drain and a little more than 50 for the US to shove it down the drain!!
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
You've gotto make up your mind humsafar. You are talking about the integrity of a person who according to you was about to play a major hoax on billions of humans for all eternity!!He desperately wanted to win over the Meccans but not at expense of compromising the basic integrity of his preaching.
-
Average Bohra
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:01 am
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
You want the muslims to be tolerant towards anything and everything that is said <u>against the quran or the prophe </u> but when a muslim says something against you all of you thick skinned kafirs are up in arms against them. A recent event comes to mind when the president of Iran spoke against the <u>holocaust</u>. The entire world was ready to condemn him. What happened to your thick skins then?
If you take a deep breath and think rationally, you will realize that the holocaust was a documented event in history, and we are speaking of faith here. Your analogy is misplaced. Furthermore, your obsession with this issue and hatred is why, unfortunately, the Palestinian cause remains unsresolved. The Arabs need your preoccupation and focus on Israel else you are bound to look inward and ask for accountability.
If you take a deep breath and think rationally, you will realize that the holocaust was a documented event in history, and we are speaking of faith here. Your analogy is misplaced. Furthermore, your obsession with this issue and hatred is why, unfortunately, the Palestinian cause remains unsresolved. The Arabs need your preoccupation and focus on Israel else you are bound to look inward and ask for accountability.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Non-faith based people have the right to fuck faith based people as and when they want and faith based people need to be more tolerant.
I get the message.
I get the message.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Besides, the american pre-occupation with Israel is a bigger reason why that issue remains unresolved.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
kalim,
You know, there is a reason why Allah is going to fry the kafir's ass in hell.
Now read that in context with what humsafar posted earlier.However, modern scholars like Fazur Rahman say that we must except this incident if we are to trust Ibn Ishaq on other matters. He further says that God himself corrected the Prophet's mistake and so there is no need for us to fuss too much about it.
So if Muslims accept that incident as fact, we have a problem, and if we do not accept that incident as fact, we have a problem.This episode brings the key Islamic doctrines into question. By admitting - even temporarily - the worship of idols, the Prophet seems to have negated the unity of Allah, the central monotheistic pillar of Islam. Second, withdarwing the verses seems to cast doubt on the "uncreated" character of the Quran. If verses can be added and edited then it follows that it cannot be the word of God.
You know, there is a reason why Allah is going to fry the kafir's ass in hell.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
As a side note, the most authentic books of Islamic history or the prophet's life and traditions are the books by Bukhari and Muslim followed by others like Abu Dawood and Tirmidhi.
These books do not mention this incident. Is it any wonder that non-muslims hate these authors?
These books do not mention this incident. Is it any wonder that non-muslims hate these authors?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Please retain the context.
The issue is not authenticity of the episode of "al-ash'aar al-shaytaniyyah". Its authenticity was questioned even by the original writer, Ibn Hisham. The latter just wrote down what was going around at the time which was 150 years after the death of Muhammad. Thus, its authority is as disputable as that of the later ahadith.
The issue is the use Salman Rushdie made of the alleged episode to write an entertaining novel at the expense of Muslim sensibilities. That is no different than what many on this board do at the expense of Kothari sensibilities.
Fifteen years since the novel was written, it has become apparent that right royal war has resumed with uncharacteristic ferocity to decide which cult will dominate. Christians, Jews and Hindus have ganged up against Muslims, a backward and regressive civilization. Muslim rage is an expression of their powerlessness against superior economic, social and military forces.
Reformists have a problem in that none of the cults are sufficiently attractive to support and yet they cling to a romantic notion of reform without radical transformation of cults.
In time, these messages (Quran, Bible etc.) will be seen for what they really are. They are "channelled" writings. Lots of psychic mediums have produced writings "channeled" to them by their spirit guides or angels. I found "Conversations with God" series quite illuminating. It is some combination of the Christian and Hindu cultic scriptures.
So, instead of justifying "eye for eye" philosophy of revenge and retribution for imagined tribal insults, it is time to look at alternative vision of cult-free world.
The issue is not authenticity of the episode of "al-ash'aar al-shaytaniyyah". Its authenticity was questioned even by the original writer, Ibn Hisham. The latter just wrote down what was going around at the time which was 150 years after the death of Muhammad. Thus, its authority is as disputable as that of the later ahadith.
The issue is the use Salman Rushdie made of the alleged episode to write an entertaining novel at the expense of Muslim sensibilities. That is no different than what many on this board do at the expense of Kothari sensibilities.
Fifteen years since the novel was written, it has become apparent that right royal war has resumed with uncharacteristic ferocity to decide which cult will dominate. Christians, Jews and Hindus have ganged up against Muslims, a backward and regressive civilization. Muslim rage is an expression of their powerlessness against superior economic, social and military forces.
Reformists have a problem in that none of the cults are sufficiently attractive to support and yet they cling to a romantic notion of reform without radical transformation of cults.
In time, these messages (Quran, Bible etc.) will be seen for what they really are. They are "channelled" writings. Lots of psychic mediums have produced writings "channeled" to them by their spirit guides or angels. I found "Conversations with God" series quite illuminating. It is some combination of the Christian and Hindu cultic scriptures.
So, instead of justifying "eye for eye" philosophy of revenge and retribution for imagined tribal insults, it is time to look at alternative vision of cult-free world.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Dear anajmi: You surprise me with your lack of knowledge of Islamic sources. I expected more from you. Do you suppose Bukhari and company are sources of the Prophet's biography? Do you understand the difference between a biography and collection of traditions? Are only those books which reinforce your beliefs authentic?
The earliest biographer of the prophet was Ibn Ishaq. He was born in 85 Hijri in Medina. The recension we today posses is due to Ibn Hisham. Note that at the time of Ibn Ishaq the concept of isnad was not fully established. So there is no way to fully verify the chain of narrators for this "satanic verses" incident. It may well be false. However, an impartial person can't simply say that because so and so narrative does not appear in Bukhari et. al. it is false. Further the collectors of traditions can only verify the reliability of the chain of narration and not always the narration itself. Most Muslims reject it because it is a threat to their faith. They seem not to read ahead to God correcting the Prophet's mistake as evident in another Quranic verse. If God considered it normal for even prophets to be swayed by Satan who are believers to question?
Anyway, whether true or false, Rushdie used it in his title and Muslims made a big fuss about it. As porus said it may be time to reject all supernatural belief systems and start anew without primitive tribal boundaries. I have consistently said that secular humanism is the only solution to end this centuries old war of this religion against that. It does not seem god is so concerned about humans, so why should be bother and enforce this or that scriptural percepts? Maybe believers are fighting crusades and jihads for a being as real as Santa Clause.
The earliest biographer of the prophet was Ibn Ishaq. He was born in 85 Hijri in Medina. The recension we today posses is due to Ibn Hisham. Note that at the time of Ibn Ishaq the concept of isnad was not fully established. So there is no way to fully verify the chain of narrators for this "satanic verses" incident. It may well be false. However, an impartial person can't simply say that because so and so narrative does not appear in Bukhari et. al. it is false. Further the collectors of traditions can only verify the reliability of the chain of narration and not always the narration itself. Most Muslims reject it because it is a threat to their faith. They seem not to read ahead to God correcting the Prophet's mistake as evident in another Quranic verse. If God considered it normal for even prophets to be swayed by Satan who are believers to question?
Anyway, whether true or false, Rushdie used it in his title and Muslims made a big fuss about it. As porus said it may be time to reject all supernatural belief systems and start anew without primitive tribal boundaries. I have consistently said that secular humanism is the only solution to end this centuries old war of this religion against that. It does not seem god is so concerned about humans, so why should be bother and enforce this or that scriptural percepts? Maybe believers are fighting crusades and jihads for a being as real as Santa Clause.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
porus,
I am sorry, but I missed the context of your post.
kalim,
Coming from a person who trusts Rushdie for the knowledge of Islamic resources that is some statement you make. I did not expect anything more from you.
I don't think I have anything more to add.
I am sorry, but I missed the context of your post.
kalim,
Coming from a person who trusts Rushdie for the knowledge of Islamic resources that is some statement you make. I did not expect anything more from you.
I don't think I have anything more to add.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Well, I have something to add.
Bukhari tells about everything the prophet did, how he ate, how he slept, how he fought, how he used the restrooms (whatever they had back then), every dua he said from the time he woke up to the time he slept. The smallest to the biggest act he performed.
If that is not history, I am not sure what is.
Please don't expect anything else from me after this.
Bukhari tells about everything the prophet did, how he ate, how he slept, how he fought, how he used the restrooms (whatever they had back then), every dua he said from the time he woke up to the time he slept. The smallest to the biggest act he performed.
If that is not history, I am not sure what is.
Please don't expect anything else from me after this.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Hi all
One thing this discussion has proved , that most of the people here are basically against Islam not the Kothar or Dai , in that case your frustrations are well founded.
Why listen, follow or believe someone whose faith we do not share.
You are kafirs , meaning non believers in Islam or Prophet , and I say this after reading your messages , so if you don't like Dai , thats perfectly understandable.
One thing this discussion has proved , that most of the people here are basically against Islam not the Kothar or Dai , in that case your frustrations are well founded.
Why listen, follow or believe someone whose faith we do not share.
You are kafirs , meaning non believers in Islam or Prophet , and I say this after reading your messages , so if you don't like Dai , thats perfectly understandable.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
In the initial period of Islam an incident took placed. The Prophet of Islam was invited by some Jews priests for discussion promising that if they are convinced they will adopt Islam. Prophet accepted the invitation but some of his Arab companions who knew these priests advised the Prophet not to go for discussion as they thought it was a trap to harm him. Then Prophet waited for God’s instructions (vahi). He saw Gabriel coming and giving him God’s massage that he should go ahead and that he would be successful. So the Prophet went for discussion with Ali and Abu-Bakar. But the movement they entered in the tent of those priest there was heavy stoning and the Prophet and his companions had to run to save their lives. Lateron the Prophet realised that those verses were not from God but they were from Satan who appeared in the form of Gabriel.
Salman Rushdie has based his novel on this historical incident and has tried to say that today the whole world is working on Satanic verses thinking they are divine verses. I have read the novel and I think it a symbolic masterpiece. But friends it is my personal understanding and opinion as a poet and writer and I am sorry if I have heart anyone’s feelings.
Salman Rushdie has based his novel on this historical incident and has tried to say that today the whole world is working on Satanic verses thinking they are divine verses. I have read the novel and I think it a symbolic masterpiece. But friends it is my personal understanding and opinion as a poet and writer and I am sorry if I have heart anyone’s feelings.
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Hello All: Talking with over-zealous religious bigots seems like banging ones head against the wall. Anajmi: Please show me where I said that we should trust Rusdie for Islamic resources? You are like an ostrich who has buried its head in the Bukhari sand: you don't seem to be aware of anything beyond him and his pals. Even great exponents of Sunni Islam like Gazhali have never deliberately misrepresented their opponents. Read his "Incoherence of the Philosophers" to see the care he takes to outline his opponents views. Take a cue from these great people and stop misrepresenting people.
Those who freely call others "kafir" are no different than those who curse the first three khalifas: it seems that their arrogance knows no bounds, to judge those they have never met or those whose view points they have not spent time to understand. Maybe Hj786 is a prophet, receiving revelations from God, for only God knows who is a kafir and who is not. As they say: "Allah knows best".
Those who freely call others "kafir" are no different than those who curse the first three khalifas: it seems that their arrogance knows no bounds, to judge those they have never met or those whose view points they have not spent time to understand. Maybe Hj786 is a prophet, receiving revelations from God, for only God knows who is a kafir and who is not. As they say: "Allah knows best".
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
hj786?
His choice of id betrays his superstitious ways. 786, a figure representing Bismillah worked out from ancient middle eastern numerology; astrological portents for arranging events; special prayers and behavior during solar and lunar eclipses - these are truly the ways of Kafirs.
Kafir is one who conceals the "Truth". Many of us on this board want to get the Truth out into open and subject it to incisive analysis.
Analyse the ways of Kothar. Are they guiding you to fearless examination of scriptures or are they more interested in concealing the Truth they convey? Then answer who is Kafir?
His choice of id betrays his superstitious ways. 786, a figure representing Bismillah worked out from ancient middle eastern numerology; astrological portents for arranging events; special prayers and behavior during solar and lunar eclipses - these are truly the ways of Kafirs.
Kafir is one who conceals the "Truth". Many of us on this board want to get the Truth out into open and subject it to incisive analysis.
Analyse the ways of Kothar. Are they guiding you to fearless examination of scriptures or are they more interested in concealing the Truth they convey? Then answer who is Kafir?
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
Anajmi,
If you think Bukhari is the authentic source, then are you prepared to accept every hadith he records? Read him in full and you will have a hard time swallowing things he reports about the Prophet. And be prepared to find justification for all that you find in there.
As for the label “kafirâ€
If you think Bukhari is the authentic source, then are you prepared to accept every hadith he records? Read him in full and you will have a hard time swallowing things he reports about the Prophet. And be prepared to find justification for all that you find in there.
As for the label “kafirâ€
Re: Satanic Versus - Question to Mr. Engineer
I am really enjoying this discussion and am awed by the participants' knowledge. Thank you for making me understand my religion and making me a better person. Please continue. Aanjmi can be a pain sometimes but I hate to admit: I am beginning to like him.