Progressive Muslim Youth .. an Oxymoron?

[Muslim First]

.

Br. barwani

AS

Here is something more for you about Halaal and Zibah requirements in Islam. Please read it at:

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=7329

Wasalaam

.

[Muslim First]

.

Br. barwani

Thank you for pointing out Nigerian episode as Islamic intolarance.

Do you scan other stories of intolarance. By other cultures and other religions?

How about some pronouncements by VHP, Bajarang Dal and Shiv Sena. How about Right wing Jewish org. against Palastinains?

May I ask who gave right to these writers to "yell fire in crowded theater?"

Islam is Whipping boy right now. Join the club my brother.

Let me end it by just cut and pasting what brother Hussain posted somewhere else:

"Dear Brothers in islam
True followers of islam have patience and are at peace. when values are misplaced by individuals the blame is made on the group which is not right .Every one wants to exercise his will or wish without thinking at the greater picture . A very sorry state of affairs "

Wasalaam

.

[barwani]

Br. Muslim First,

<I>Thank you for pointing out Nigerian episode as Islamic intolarance.

Do you scan other stories of intolarance. By other cultures and other religions?

How about some pronouncements by VHP, Bajarang Dal and Shiv Sena. How about Right wing Jewish org. against Palastinains?

May I ask who gave right to these writers to "yell fire in crowded theater?"</I>

I agree, there exists intolerance in every community. What the Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena, and the VHP did in India was horrible (I was in Lucknow when the riots happened), but that doesn’t justify any sort of reaction by the Muslims.

No one has a right to “yell fire in a crowded theater.” So why do we allow so many Muslims to do it? Forget allowing it, we also defend it by saying that others do it as well. And that’s even worse!

We don’t want to have this “victim mentality”, it’s very dangerous. Look what it has done to the State of Israel and how it treats what it considers “threats to its identity”.

There is an article in this week’s issue of The Nation written by a Professor in Israel about how scary the political situation is getting there and how the Israelis are now thinking of expelling the Palestinians. Signs are up everywhere saying:

“Transfer = Peace and Security”

The whole world is on the defensive, everyone is bracing themselves for war and a “clash of civilizations”. One of my philosophy professors (Actually a very well respected figure in American philosophy, someone most people would consider to be extremely open minded) mentions this “Clash of Civilizations” during every one of our lectures and rambles on about how “We have to kill them before they kill us.” He’s said so many ignorant things about Muslims, and many times I’ve tried to correct him, but the fact is that no one wants to listen, because they are so set in their ways of thinking.

This is defiantly a very distorted view of the situation, and sadly, I think a good amount of people in the United States feel that this is true. And on the other side, I think Muslims feel, as you have said, that “Islam is Whipping boy right now.” So everyone is on the defensive, and as soon as a situation arises, the hawks on both sides don’t hesitate to “yell fire in a crowded theater”. But the people who react with violence are normal everyday people, they may react with outward violence, or inner violence, both of which are harmful.

I think what we need right now is some good old Gandhian love, respect and compromise. We can not let our frail egos stand in the way. We have to stop considering ourselves the victim and start acting positively, and in order to do this we have to be as self-critical as possible.



But our debate within the Muslim community is dreadfully restricted. If someone says anything that is remotely critical of the Muslim identity he/she is shot down as a heretic and a traitor. This needs to be changed!

Let us be thankful on this extremely ironic day. Let us be thankful that we have so much, but let us also be saddened that so many have so little. Let us be thankful that we live in our nice homes, and drive our nice cars, but let us also remember that the reason we have all this due directly to the genocide of the natives of this land. Let us be thankful that we as Muslims have so much freedom to practice our religion, but at the same time let us be hurt by the fact that other minorities do not share the same rights as us in the Muslim countries of the world.

We must let go of the belief that we are the only ones that are right and that our way is the only right way.

Let go.

Happy thanksgiving.

sh

[anajmi]

Brother Barwani,

I am truly amazed at your argument. Isn't a parent supposed to force a child to do what is good and not do what is bad?

What you think is that religion is a matter of convenience, no its not. For those who believe, it is more important that even eating and drinking. That is why they fast a whole month!!

When a child decides to take drugs, isn't it the parents duty to force them not to? Similary when a child decides not to take medicine, isn't it the parents duty to force them to?

After a child grows up, no parent can force the child to take a medicine or not take drugs, it is the values that have been inculcated during your childhood days that either make you or break you.

If your parents did not force you to pray during your childhood does not mean that they valued your freedom, it justs means that they themselves did not have enough faith to force you to pray and here I hope I am wrong.

[nausicaa]

I disagree with some of the points here.

I agree, there exists intolerance in every community. What the Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena, and the VHP did in India was horrible (I was in Lucknow when the riots happened), but that doesn’t justify any sort of reaction by the Muslims.

What do you mean this doesn't justify any reactions? There will be reactions. You cannot rape and burn someone's family and not expect them to have any reactions. Now, at the community level whether your reaction is a knee-jerk one or a calculated, rational one remains to be seen but not reacting at all would be encouraging the perpetrators.

I think what we need right now is some good old Gandhian love, respect and compromise.

Good old Gandhian love works only on people who are compassionate and good. As it has been often said if Gandhi was against the Nazis instead of the Bristish he would have been sitting in a gas chamber without having any major impact on the world.

But our debate within the Muslim community is dreadfully restricted. If someone says anything that is remotely critical of the Muslim identity he/she is shot down as a heretic and a traitor. This needs to be changed!

This I wholeheartedly agree with. Muslims need fresh ideas.

Let us be thankful that we live in our nice homes, and drive our nice cars, but let us also remember that the reason we have all this due directly to the genocide of the natives of this land.

Directly? Its been a long time since the natives were killed. Moreover, the natives would have happily killed the britishers if the britishers hadn't killed them. The world was just as vicious then as it is now. In general, more ruthless cultures will take over more peaceful cultures. That's the way things are unfortunately.

-N

[barwani]

<I>What do you mean this doesn't justify any reactions? There will be reactions. You cannot rape and burn someone's family and not expect them to have any reactions. Now, at the community level whether your reaction is a knee-jerk one or a calculated, rational one remains to be seen but not reacting at all would be encouraging the perpetrators.</I>

I meant to say violent reaction. (Now you can disagree with me all you like.)

<I>Good old Gandhian love works only on people who are compassionate and good. As it has been often said if Gandhi was against the Nazis instead of the Bristish he would have been sitting in a gas chamber without having any major impact on the world.</I>

I don’t think Muslims are facing the Nazis right now. Compromise and compassion can still be used to better their position – after all, the biggest enemy the Muslims think they have, says that Islam is a “religion of peace”. There is still a lot of room for love and respect to bring about progress.

<I>Directly? Its been a long time since the natives were killed. Moreover, the natives would have happily killed the britishers if the britishers hadn't killed them. The world was just as vicious then as it is now. In general, more ruthless cultures will take over more peaceful cultures. That's the way things are unfortunately.</I>

Can’t we be just a little idealistic? The systematic murder of the native Americans and the amount of effort spent, even during this century, to wipe out their culture has been well documented. Their whole way of life, their land, their language, their entire heritage has been stolen from them, and sadly this process still continues because of the flawed utilitarian calculus of our government.

In anticipation of a question:

Should there never be any violent reaction?

I’m not sure, but I think we should try our best to work it out without violence, and after we have exhausted that option, then we must do whatever is necessary for our survival.
And at this stage, there exists a tremendous amount of room for non-violent reaction on the part of the Muslims.

sh

[barwani]

Br. Anajmi

<I>I am truly amazed at your argument. Isn't a parent supposed to force a child to do what is good and not do what is bad?</I>

You can beat your kids all you want. I’m not going to stop you.

<I>What you think is that religion is a matter of convenience, no its not. For those who believe, it is more important that even eating and drinking. That is why they fast a whole month!!</I>
Good for you.

<I>When a child decides to take drugs, isn't it the parents duty to force them not to? Similary when a child decides not to take medicine, isn't it the parents duty to force them to?</I>

You’re supposed to teach your kids, not force them.

<I>After a child grows up, no parent can force the child to take a medicine or not take drugs, it is the values that have been inculcated during your childhood days that either make you or break you. </I>

I agree, but you should teach your kids, not beat them. What lesson does that teach?

<I>If your parents did not force you to pray during your childhood does not mean that they valued your freedom, it justs means that they themselves did not have enough faith to force you to pray and here I hope I am wrong.</I>

Thanks for questioning my parents’ faith. This is exactly what I was talking about earlier, how Muslims are so nauseatingly self-righteous.

sh

[anajmi]

Brother Barwani,

I guess I have to end this dialogue over here. I have nothing more to add.

[nausicaa]

I meant to say violent reaction. (Now you can disagree with me all you like.)

This makes things a little bit clearer. Though I would still disagree with it. I am not much of a pacifist. Sometimes violent reaction or the possibility of violent reaction can make the other person rethink his actions. One of the reasons I like US is that it allows you to arm yourself. This makes organised suppression movements against minorities less likely. Though I'll agree that this discriminates against the poor since they are less likely to be able to buy guns legally.

I don’t think Muslims are facing the Nazis right now. Compromise and compassion can still be used to better their position – after all, the biggest enemy the Muslims think they have, says that Islam is a “religion of peace”. There is still a lot of room for love and respect to bring about progress.

Point taken. The biggest enemies of muslims are mostly muslims.

Can’t we be just a little idealistic?

You can be as idealistic as you want. It usually doesn't change much. This is a process that has happened all throughout recorded history. Most empires and cultures spread through conquest of other people and this is still happening. Sometimes cultures were assimilated into other cultures but that was sadly much rarer compared to the frequency with which cultures and peoples were obliterated and a new culture was forced onto a region.

Interestingly, early Islam was somewhat better than other cultures in this respect due to which Arabs tended towards spreading the knowledge of other cultures far and wide rather than destroying it. E.g., taking mathematics from Indians and spreading it to Europe, etc. Also, Quran to some extent guarantees basic rights for non-muslims and more importantly allows non-muslims to be taxed (jizya) which meant that a ruler would lose an important source of revenue if everyone was forced to convert to Islam.

The systematic murder of the native Americans and the amount of effort spent, even during this century, to wipe out their culture has been well documented. Their whole way of life, their land, their language, their entire heritage has been stolen from them, and sadly this process still continues because of the flawed utilitarian calculus of our government.

I agree with all this but I am not sure what you want to do about this now. Entire native american tribes don't exist any more. Native Americans in some ways are like Muslims these days, rooted in the thoughts of a glorious past and unwilling to come out of that. As an aside, one of the reasons that there was such a wholesale slughter of natives took place in North America while South Americans were relatively spared was that the Church of England took its own sweet time deciding whethere the "Indians" had souls or not. So Europeans in the early days in North America never thought they were killing humans at all. South America was mostly occupied by Spaniards and the Portuguese and their church had granted "Indians" human status so they were somewhat protected.

-N

[Muslim First]

.

Br. barwani

I will have more comments after Ramadaan.

We practicing Muslims do not celebrate thanksgiving once a year. Out thanksgiving is every day.

Wasalaam

You have good Ramadaan and Eid

Wasalaam

.

[barwani]

<I>Interestingly, early Islam was somewhat better than other cultures in this respect due to which Arabs tended towards spreading the knowledge of other cultures far and wide rather than destroying it. E.g., taking mathematics from Indians and spreading it to Europe, etc. Also, Quran to some extent guarantees basic rights for non-muslims and more importantly allows non-muslims to be taxed (jizya) which meant that a ruler would lose an important source of revenue if everyone was forced to convert to Islam. </I>

Agreed. And that was 14 centuries ago! It hurts me to imagine what a wonderful world it could have been …. I guess those are just shitty pipe dreams. (Sorry, but it’s the only phrase I could think of, damn the movies! )

<I>I agree with all this but I am not sure what you want to do about this now. Entire native american tribes don't exist any more. Native Americans in some ways are like Muslims these days, rooted in the thoughts of a glorious past and unwilling to come out of that. As an aside, one of the reasons that there was such a wholesale slughter of natives took place in North America while South Americans were relatively spared was that the Church of England took its own sweet time deciding whethere the "Indians" had souls or not. So Europeans in the early days in North America never thought they were killing humans at all. South America was mostly occupied by Spaniards and the Portuguese and their church had granted "Indians" human status so they were somewhat protected.</I>

Take it as a lesson maybe?

When I was young, and I watched Indiana Jones and went to Islamic school, I always used to believe that there really was a holy grail or an ark of the covenant. I believed that there really was an Adam and an Eve, and all the rest. I believed that this was all true and we would some day “go to heaven” and if we did bad “we would go to hell”. I believed in the devil and angles and that God really took Muhammad on a “night journey” to in to the heavens. That was until about the age of ten. Then my social studies teacher taught a lesson on the Indians of America, and how they came over from Asia across a land bridge thousands of years ago and the settled throughout Canada and traveled all the way down to South America and how they believed in the natural forces and worshiped them.

And I began thinking to myself about why they didn’t believe in Jesus or Moses, devils or angles, heaven and hell, or even Adam and Eve. Wasn’t the God of Abraham everyone’s god? Weren’t we all children of Adam and Eve? Why didn’t they believe in this stuff? Then I began thinking to myself, why didn’t the Hindus or the Chinese believe in these stories? God couldn’t have just chosen this one dude in the middle of the desert as the sole heir to the knowledge of the world.

Slowly I began to realize that every different culture, according to its own experiences in the world, devised a mechanism to mold its community’s world view. This world view allowed them to position themselves with their environment and give themselves and their environment meaning. The questions they probably asked themselves, were the same. How did we get here? Who are we? What is our purpose? If there is someone/something who got us here, how do we interact with it? So each culture in turn needed to formulate explanations – the Vedic culture said that Manu was the first man on earth and everyone descended from him and that Brahman was the creator.

The Jews said it was Adam, and since he was such a bad boy God had to kick him out of the garden of Eden. These explanations were necessary for the survival of a group, they gave the group identity. And it was this identity that made us all very different, and in my opinion very beautiful. But within the last couple thousand years our world has gotten smaller, and our group egos a lot bigger. And its not surprising to me that the “western world”, especially Islam and Christianity have spread so far because they share three common factors:

1. Both think that their world-view is the only right world-view
2. Both feel it is necessary for them to spread it in order for the survival of man kind as a whole.
3. Both are amazing propagandists

So I asked myself.. what’s the point in making everyone believe in tribal gods of the Hebrews and Arabs, Yahweh or Allah? Why can’t a Hindu just believe, if he wants, in Brahman or Krishna? Why can’t the natives believe in the spiritual forces of nature? Why can’t that the derived morals of all these world-views are all the same? And proceeding from the latter, why can’t we see that since they are all the same, they are not specific to this god or that god or her demanded rituals, but rather are a scientific necessity for survival?

…..

OH MY GOD!!!!

You won’t believe it if I told you! Jehovah’s witnesses just came to my door!!!!!

….

I don’t think the native Americans are really “rooted in their glorious past” the same way as the Muslims, they never really propagandized their religion, and they understood that it was just their world view and their way of living with the land. To some extent, it was a necessity that the Bohras kept similar traditions and rituals to those of the Hindus and how the Chinese Christians (actually all converted peoples) still retain a lot of their ancient traditions. You can even see it with the early Christians who were Romans, who kept a lot of their traditions even though they accepted the Jewish god. And personally I don’t find anything wrong with that.

I’ll say it point blank. I’m not an Arab, and there is no way I’m going to make Arab culture my culture. I don’t care how “Islamic” people think it might be, but it’s not Islam. Islam was supposed to be a catholic message, not the tribal culture of the Quraish or the al-Sauds! Islam can fit in perfectly well with any culture or tradition of the world, the message the Quran has to offer is very simple. On that same note, the world view that the “Arabized Muslims” are trying to force on the Muslims is very dangerous, it will lead to nothing more than hatred and hostility!

Oh, and Brother Anajmi,

<I>I guess I have to end this dialogue over here. I have nothing more to add.</I>

Why?

And Brother Muslim First,

<I>Out thanksgiving is every day.</I>

Agreed, we should be thankful every day.

sh

[Khairan]

barwani,

> I meant to say violent reaction. (Now you can disagree with me all you like.)

I think one of the reasons Islam gets such a bad rep for being a violent relgion is because it rejects the Biblical "turn the other cheek" idea. Muslims are told that it is better to endure, but in the end, oppression is an evil that must be fought. Of course, people often ignore the fact that war is not the only means of "fighting", and often is less effective than more subtle avenues such as politics and trade, all methods which the Prophet himself employed in his fight against the Quraysh.

As far as the cultural ego-centrism that you speak of, it was considerations like those that finally got me to taking seriously the idea while the Qur'an is meant to be a literal work, it is also deeply allegorical. The Qur'an uses stories to illustrate many of its points, and even goes so far as to call several of these parables "similitudes". The stories were told initially to the Arab people, but their lessons are far more universal. It is only when one becomes lost in the insistence upon unchanging interpretations of the literal word that the message of Islam becomes culturally bound and loses the potency of its pan-humanisim.

[Khairan]

barwani,

p.s.:

I wish I could give you a cookie for using the phrase "flawed utilitarian calculus."

cheers

[anajmi]

Brother Barwani,

Let me ask you a question, do you believe in the existence of God (Allah and not Brahma or some other such)?

Well, actually let me ask you one more, if you do believe in Allah, then do you believe in Prophet Mohammed (saw)?

[anajmi]

An interesting article by Dilip D'Souza

The Implication Being

Of course, everything is always a muslim's fault.

I mean he is a muslim after all, it has to be his fault right?

[GodBless]

Well one can read that and feel victimized.

What is more important is asking why such is the case in various parts of the globe these days ? As unfortunate as these instances are where innocents are involved, there is no vision among the Muslim lpolitical leadership or the clergy beyond proclaiming Islam is a religion of Peace .

Unless and until there is some substance and leadership backing those words, all we will be seeing in the meantime are images of civilians being blown up in Kenya, shooting civilian planes, bombings in Bali killing civilians, suicide bombings in Kashmir and Palestine, violence in Afghanistan.....

I mean he is a muslim after all, it has to be his fault right?

Perception is hard to change and Islam is in dire need of leaders right now.

[anajmi]

Islam sure is in dire need of leaders right now. What it does need is people to be leaders instead of people complaining about them.

[nausicaa]

Barwani,

How I wish this board was threaded so it would be easy to figure out what was being replied to.

Take it as a lesson maybe?

The lesson here has to be learned by communities in danger of becoming like the native americans not by communities which took over them. The people who took over them benefitted from it, the only lesson they would take here is that doing such a thing is beneficial for their interests. The Jews learnt this pretty well after the Holocaust, "NEVER AGAIN" is their motto, in the pursuit of which they are ready to sacrifice the rest of the human race and possibly themselves too.


When I was young, and I watched Indiana Jones and went to Islamic school, I always used to believe that there really was a holy grail or an ark of the covenant. I believed that there really was an .
.
.
we all children of Adam and Eve? Why didn’t they believe in this stuff? Then I began thinking to myself, why didn’t the Hindus or the Chinese believe in these stories? God couldn’t have just chosen this one dude in the middle of the desert as the sole heir to the knowledge of the world.

I used to believe a lot of these tales too. At some point all the inherent contradictions got to me and I thought of the tales as basically illustrative myths but still believed in a God. Finally after a lot more thought, I gave up a belief in a God concept too.

There comes a time in most childrens' lives when they question these fairy tales. The questioning spirit is usually beaten out of them with dogma soon enough though. A small minority has intelligent enough parents who allow their kids to look around the world critically and they eventually move out of the rigidly religious viewpoint into something more suited to their own understanding of the world.

..lots of snippage..

1. Both think that their world-view is the only right world-view
2. Both feel it is necessary for them to spread it in order for the survival of man kind as a whole.
3. Both are amazing propagandists

1 is fairly common in almost all faiths. 2 and 3 are probably what has been responsible a large part of bloodshed and misery that the world has seen.

So I asked myself.. what’s the point in making everyone believe in tribal gods of the Hebrews and Arabs, Yahweh or Allah?

Well, it allows the preacher of his proxy to rule over them. That's a pretty clear enough point.

Why can’t a Hindu just believe, if he wants, in Brahman or Krishna?

Why can't I believe in the 'Invisible Pink Unicorn'?

Why can’t the natives believe in the spiritual forces of nature? Why can’t that the derived morals of all these world-views are all the same?

That's where the problems occur. The derived morals for different communities are quite different. While Islam believes that fornication is punishable by death for women, lots of tribal cultures and most modern ones are fairly okay with it. While Islam tells you to cover women from head to foot, in traditional Japan it is quite okay for a woman to show her breasts. Also, some communities in Tibet practice polyandry, something very antithetical to both Chritianity and Islam. A lot of Native South American and Indian Gods demand human sacrifices. Thankfully, most of them get only symbolic sacrifices now. There are sects within Hinduism which consider it okay to eat the flesh of burning bodies. There are very few activities, like murder or theft, which are pretty much universally prohibited, everything else is left to specific cultural influences.

And proceeding from the latter, why can’t we see that since they are all the same, they are not specific to this god or that god or her demanded rituals, but rather are a scientific necessity for survival?

Scientific necessity for survival? How did you get to this? I don't believe in any Gods and am surviving pretty fine. No animals, besides humans, have shown belief in any Gods and they survive too. I know lots of people who don't believe either and they are doing pretty fine. In all cases, they are much better than when they used to be believers.

You won’t believe it if I told you! Jehovah’s witnesses just came to my door!!!!!

Haha. I get Mormons a lot for some reason.

I don’t think the native Americans are really “rooted in their glorious past” the same way as the Muslims, they never really propagandized their religion, and they understood that it was just their world view and their way of living with the land.

I think I wasn't clear there, "rooted in their glorious past" meant that they believe that all ills in their communities are due to the advent of the white man and if the palefaces hadn't come everything would be hunky dory. I am not saying that they didn't undergo a rather brutal past, but I think a couple of centuries should be enough to get over it now. Also, its not like they were totally innocent, they used to fight pretty often amongst themselves which allowed the Europeans to play the good old divide and conquer strategy with them.

Islam can fit in perfectly well with any culture or tradition of the world, the message the Quran has to offer is very simple.

I wouldn't think so. There is no way, unless you take some pretty heavy liberties with the interpretation of the Quran, that you could get it to agree with, say, a culture which practices polyandry or the 'swinger' subculture in the US or a hippie commune. The Islamic message collides head on with quite a few things that many other cultures think as natural.

On that same note, the world view that the “Arabized Muslims” are trying to force on the Muslims is very dangerous, it will lead to nothing more than hatred and hostility!

Agreed.

-N

[barwani]

Br. Anajmi

<I>Let me ask you a question, do you believe in the existence of God (Allah and not Brahma or some other such)?

Well, actually let me ask you one more, if you do believe in Allah, then do you believe in Prophet Mohammed (saw)?</I>

Do I believe in God … hmm ... for the meantime, yes. But who knows what tomorrow holds. I’ll let you know if I change my mind. (BTW: You’re simplifying God by limiting him to being called Allah.. do you claim to grasp the power of God? For some reason the more we say the word God the more meaningless it becomes.)

Prophet Mohammed? That’s a harder one. What do you mean .. “do you BELIEVE in Prophet Mohammed”?

Nausicaa,

<I>The lesson here has to be learned by communities in danger of becoming like the native americans not by communities which took over them. The people who took over them benefitted from it, the only lesson they would take here is that doing such a thing is beneficial for their interests. The Jews learnt this pretty well after the Holocaust, "NEVER AGAIN" is their motto, in the pursuit of which they are ready to sacrifice the rest of the human race and possibly themselves too.</I>

So are the Jews right in what they are doing?

<I>There comes a time in most childrens' lives when they question these fairy tales. The questioning spirit is usually beaten out of them with dogma soon enough though. A small minority has intelligent enough parents who allow their kids to look around the world critically and they eventually move out of the rigidly religious viewpoint into something more suited to their own understanding of the world.</I>

Agreed

<I>1 is fairly common in almost all faiths. 2 and 3 are probably what has been responsible a large part of bloodshed and misery that the world has seen.</I>

Indeed

<I>Well, it allows the preacher of his proxy to rule over them. That's a pretty clear enough point.</I>

OH! Duh! I think I’m too darn idealistic, I guess I’ll never change.

<I>Why can't I believe in the 'Invisible Pink Unicorn'? </I>

Do you?

<I>That's where the problems occur. The derived morals for different communities are quite different. While Islam believes that fornication is punishable by death for women, lots of tribal cultures and most modern ones are fairly okay with it. While Islam tells you to cover women from head to foot, in traditional Japan it is quite okay for a woman to show her breasts. Also, some communities in Tibet practice polyandry, something very antithetical to both Chritianity and Islam. A lot of Native South American and Indian Gods demand human sacrifices. Thankfully, most of them get only symbolic sacrifices now. There are sects within Hinduism which consider it okay to eat the flesh of burning bodies. There are very few activities, like murder or theft, which are pretty much universally prohibited, everything else is left to specific cultural influences.</I>

All of the things you described in respect to the other communities aren’t the underlying morals, they are cultural variations in practices and rituals.

The underlying morals are simple, murder and theft are the two big ones. You can add honesty and humility to the list also.

<I>Scientific necessity for survival? How did you get to this? I don't believe in any Gods and am surviving pretty fine. No animals, besides humans, have shown belief in any Gods and they survive too. I know lots of people who don't believe either and they are doing pretty fine. In all cases, they are much better than when they used to be believers.</I>

I wasn’t talking about the scientific necessity in believing in God, I was talking about the underlying morals. Don’t you think that being honest and humble, and not committing murder and theft make you a likable person?

<I>I think I wasn't clear there, "rooted in their glorious past" meant that they believe that all ills in their communities are due to the advent of the white man and if the palefaces hadn't come everything would be hunky dory. I am not saying that they didn't undergo a rather brutal past, but I think a couple of centuries should be enough to get over it now. Also, its not like they were totally innocent, they used to fight pretty often amongst themselves which allowed the Europeans to play the good old divide and conquer strategy with them.</I>

I’m not sure what I think about them “getting over it”, I think their situation is a little more complicated than that. … With native tribal populations I think it is much harder for them because they are losing every single part of their identity, their occupation, their religion (which is heavily tied to the land), their history, their land, their language.. I mean that’s a lot to lose and you really can’t expect some hot shot Harvard graduate in DC trying to quickly amalgamate these people in to the “common public” without them missing a beat. They have nothing to fall back on. At least when the British (later on) took over India or wherever they still allowed the people to keep their religion, their language, their ways of dress, I mean there was still the ability to identify themselves with their history. But the Natives who have lived on the American continent for so long, they’ve lost everything.

<I>I wouldn't think so. There is no way, unless you take some pretty heavy liberties with the interpretation of the Quran, that you could get it to agree with, say, a culture which practices polyandry or the 'swinger' subculture in the US or a hippie commune. The Islamic message collides head on with quite a few things that many other cultures think as natural.</I>

I was again talking about the underlying morals. But yes, “The Islamic Message” spread by the mullahs collides head on with what I believe too.

sh

[nausicaa]

So are the Jews right in what they are doing?

I wouldn't say they are right. As Neitzsche said,"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you." It seems they have become the monster that once threatened to annihilate them. But the risk that what happened to them in the early part of the last century will happen to them again is very low.

Do you?

Not really, but it is the fovite deity of the denizens of alt.atheism.moderated and while holding discussions with rabid Christians or theists of other colors it is useful to put it up as a counterexample to God or Yahweh or whatever .

All of the things you described in respect to the other communities aren’t the underlying morals, they are cultural variations in practices and rituals.

The underlying morals are simple, murder and theft are the two big ones. You can add honesty and humility to the list also.

Practices and rituals make up the morals of a society to a large extent. Moreover, if you were to go a public place and ask a random person about morals, he or she is far more likely to say something about playing the meat flute than about murder or theft. I understand honesty as a good point but isn't being humble almost equivalent to being dishonest?

I wasn’t talking about the scientific necessity in believing in God, I was talking about the underlying morals. Don’t you think that being honest and humble, and not committing murder and theft make you a likable person?

Again, I am honest and haven't killed anyone or indulged in theft. I am not particularly humble for the most part. If I am good at something, I wouldn't mind saying so. In fact, I find false humility an extremely annoying quality in a person. Genuine humility would be shown by someone who doesn't have anything to be proud of or someone low in status. I don't think I would want to be in either category. Or maybe you mean something else by humility and I'm not getting it.

I’m not sure what I think about them “getting over it”, I think their situation is a little more complicated than that. … With native tribal
.
.
.
identify themselves with their history. But the Natives who have lived on the American continent for so long, they’ve lost everything.

I just meant that they cannot expect those times to come back. The world has moved on. Just as car manufacturers have no obligation to make sure that horse buggy manufacturers make a living as they always did, the present americans have no particular obligation to make sure that Indians be able to survive as they were used to doing. They might be entitled to a compensation but it would be extremely difficult to figure out who should get what given that most of the people who really suffered are already dead. The US constitution does allow them to practise and promote their religion, lifestyle, and language.

I was again talking about the underlying morals. But yes, “The Islamic Message” spread by the mullahs collides head on with what I believe too.

Could you elaborate on what you mean by underlying morals?

Thanks,

-N

[anajmi]

Br. Barwani,

That is the reason why I wanted to end the dialogue. Since you are not sure about what you believe in, what is the point in discussing what I believe in!!

[barwani]

Br. Anajmi,

I told you I believed in God, but you were unclear about believeing in Ph. Mohammad. Yes I do believe that he had a message and the message was from God, but NO, I don't believe that we should do everything thing that is attributed to him in the Hadith. That's worshiping a personality, and thats wrong.

sh

[barwani]

Nausicaa,

<I>I wouldn't say they are right. As Neitzsche said,"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you." It seems they have become the monster that once threatened to annihilate them. But the risk that what happened to them in the early part of the last century will happen to them again is very low.</I>

So I guess they didn’t learn their lesson.

<I>Practices and rituals make up the morals of a society to a large extent. Moreover, if you were to go a public place and ask a random person about morals, he or she is far more likely to say something about playing the meat flute than about murder or theft. I understand honesty as a good point but isn't being humble almost equivalent to being dishonest?</I>

Had to go and mention the meat flute.. I disagree, I think when you ask most people, what good human qualities are or what they think the underlying morals should be for everyone, most people will say honesty and the like.

<I>Again, I am honest and haven't killed anyone or indulged in theft. I am not particularly humble for the most part. If I am good at something, I wouldn't mind saying so. In fact, I find false humility an extremely annoying quality in a person. Genuine humility would be shown by someone who doesn't have anything to be proud of or someone low in status. I don't think I would want to be in either category. Or maybe you mean something else by humility and I'm not getting it. </I>

In regard to the fake humility, I agree, but there does exist fake humility and honest humility, you can just see which person is truly humble and which is not. It comes through with the personality. There is no point in being humble if you are going to fake it, because that cancels out two morals, humility and honesty. Why not just be honest. I’m not saying that everyone is going to be a totally “moral” person with respect to my “underlying morals” – and you just said that you find people with “false humility extremely annoying” – but I bet most people really find people with NO humility thoroughly annoying as well. I know I do. I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

That’s not true that genuine humility would be shown by “someone who doesn’t have anything to be proud of or someone in low status”, showing your talents to other people isn’t a bad thing, making it the only thing you talk about, is. The same goes with religion, being religious isn’t a bad thing, but trying to force it on everyone and advertising it is bad.

<I>I just meant that they cannot expect those times to come back. The world has moved on. Just as car manufacturers have no obligation to make sure that horse buggy manufacturers make a living as they always did, the present americans have no particular obligation to make sure that Indians be able to survive as they were used to doing. They might be entitled to a compensation but it would be extremely difficult to figure out who should get what given that most of the people who really suffered are already dead. The US constitution does allow them to practise and promote their religion, lifestyle, and language.<I>

As I said before, they’ve lost !!everything!!, they have Nothing to tie them back to their roots. But I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this point.

<I>Could you elaborate on what you mean by underlying morals?</I>

See above.

sh

[barwani]

Br. Anajmi,

I meant to say "it's wrong" according to even what "muslims" are supposed to believe.

Take care,

sh

[anajmi]

Br, Barwani,

There are some Muslims whose beliefs define their actions and then there are some Muslims whose actions define their beliefs.

All of us fall into one of the two categories. One category is better than the other. Which is which, I leave it up to you.

Thank you.

[Muddai]

I give up.

Which one is it ?

[Muddai]

I'm still stumped, come on tell me anajmi ! This is a toughie...

There are some Muslims whose beliefs define their actions = Osama bin Laden

there are some Muslims whose actions define their beliefs = Osama bin Laden

[barwani]

Br. Anajmi,

<I>There are some Muslims whose beliefs define their actions and then there are some Muslims whose actions define their beliefs.

All of us fall into one of the two categories. One category is better than the other. Which is which, I leave it up to you.</I>

How can actions precede beliefs? (they can’t) You must believe in something before you act. For example, you want to turn on the television in your living room. First, you have to believe that you are sitting in your living room, and believe that there is a TV in front of you and in addition you also have to believe that you are a human being with motor skills and that you can move your hands, grab a remote and believe that when you press the “ON” button, the TV will turn on because of some law of physics. Now, lets take a twist in the story. What if the remote doesn’t turn the TV on after continuously pressing the “ON” button? Are you still going to believe that the remote (in its current state) will turn on the TV? A rational person would obviously see that his belief was wrong, and now he has to remedy the situation.

In anticipation of a question/comment: “Belief in Allah is not the same as belief in a remote control.”

As human beings all our beliefs are represented inside our minds the same way as any other belief. The belief in God is no different, not to say that it is an invalid belief, but in our minds, it is represented in much the same way as the belief “that the sky is blue”. You and I, both know that “the sky is blue” (maybe not in Bhopal or Mumbai), but what if we are proven wrong tomorrow? It obviously seems unlikely, but there still exists a possibility. So regardless of how small the possibility is, it still exists. Therefore, we should keep our beliefs, and with them we should keep our minds open to the fact that we are human as well, and we do not know everything (past, present, and future).

I’m sorry Br. Anajmi, but you made no sense there. Please reformulate your criticism so that it has at least a little worth.

But maybe I can be of some help. See, experience can define beliefs, and if you don’t rely on your experience you aren’t a rational creature and there must be something wrong with you. (you as in “an individual”) Even if we look into the Quran, it tries to tell people to be as rational and as sensible as possible. It does not require unreasoned belief.

Thank you,

sh

[nausicaa]

Barwani,

So I guess they didn’t learn their lesson.

They learnt the lesson that they cannot trust others to keep them safe. It seems to be effective in protecting them as of now. I don't think they are justified in what they are doing but it does show human nature that people who have been treated cruelly are more likely to be cruel to someone weaker, kids who have been bullied are more likely to become bullies and people who have been humiliated are more likely to want to humiliate a weaker person to get revenge. The target is obviously not going to be person responsible for the original act but someone lower down the chain.

Had to go and mention the meat flute.. I disagree, I think when you ask most people, what good human qualities are or what they think the underlying morals should be for everyone, most people will say honesty and the like.

I respectfully disagree. Every time Islamists talk of high morals of Islamic countries they mean, oh those western women are so loose. Every time Christian ministers talk of high morals, they talk of people who of keep their legs crossed before marriage. Honesty is good and all that, its just not high in the list of things that people consider moral. Honesty might be desirable but truth is, to some extent, undesirable in society. People like flatterers and glib talkers not people who tell things like they are.

That’s not true that genuine humility would be shown by “someone who doesn’t have anything to be proud of or someone in low status”, showing your talents to other people isn’t a bad thing, making it the only thing you talk about, is. The same goes with religion, being religious isn’t a bad thing, but trying to force it on everyone and advertising it is bad.

Okay, we had different definitions of humility in mind. What you seem to think of humility is "not showing off", what I think of humility is "afraid to show that you are better than others (if you are)".

As I said before, they’ve lost !!everything!!, they have Nothing to tie them back to their roots. But I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this point.

As said in Fight Club "It's only when you have lost everything that you are able to do anything."
Anyway, I am not even sure what we are disagreeing about so I'll just call it quits on this point:).

-N

[Khairan]

nausicaa,

> As said in Fight Club "It's only when you have lost everything that you are able to do anything."

I'm not sure what you intended with this statement, but I think you have summed up nicely the position of many extremist Muslims today.

They have been put in a position (or put themselves in one -- pick your poison) in which they feel assailed and disempowered. I think it is unequivocally true that the past is lost and the only place lies in the future. As is true of any culture, Islamic culture must adapt to and reconcile itself with the modern world, or die.

If evolution involves a perceived abandonment of core values, then adapting does become tantamount to losing everything, and the only option becomes to destroy that which is forcing the change.

Rightly or wrongly, modernity, and the Occident as its harbinger, become scapegoats.

whither Islam...?