Does an innocent Muslim has to share blame of terrorist activity if it was done in the name of Islam ? Absolutely not. And people shouts that Islam is the religion of peace and these persons are doing this for their own greed and evil motives. This is where I didn't agree a bit with all of them. Then, you have to see countless videos on youtube with people proclaiming their religion as best and elimination of Jews from the earth in the name of Islam. The point of difference is that these so called terrorists don't act barbaric for their own good but perform it voluntarily for bringing reign of Islam. Don't even get me started over hate teaching education to next generation.
Of course, one has to distinguish between Islam and Muslims. The source of the problem is in Islamic doctrine, and not in cultural accretions. Stereotyping all Muslims as backward thinking is wrong way to have an opinion on Islam. Islam became rigid in hands of Mullahs that want to define every walk of life through religion only. The identification with Islam have became in such an ethical orientation flow pattern, which is largely about the theological concepts haram - the Forbidden - and halal - the Permitted - structured. These prohibitionists made a serious miscalculations: they reacted to their failure by demanding the laws be tightened even more.
It is the fear of understanding the other and eventually becoming the other. For if Muslims understood their motivations, they would have to accommodate their worldview in themselves and that would be very problematic indeed for Mullahs army dictating Koran. Mullahs calls for punishment or at best, forgiveness, but never understanding.
When Mullahs ban a popular addiction (sex, alcohols) that millions of people want, it doesn't disappear. I have not even started about books, painting, kite flying or any other entertainment stuff. Instead, it is transferred from the daily life into the hands of criminals. Even the attempts done on moralistic approach fails because they were, beneath all the blather, a war on human nature.
We must not forget that too much divine power in a priest’s hands would corrupt him as much as that in any other individual’s hands. Zealous priests who can preach deliverance cannot rule.
"Islam became rigid in the hand of the Mullahs" - Yes because these group uses Islam to assert their power. In a rural outset people are desperate to earn their livelihoods. They don't bother much about religion. But the Mullah of a rural Masjid is revered (because of ancient Masjid based Muslim cultures)and he uses this position to use religious sentiments to strengthen his power. But should we let it happen?
ReplyDeleteI will provide you an example. Bangladesh judicial system follows the age-old British law (just like India) and some laws date back to the Nineteenth century. It does not have Sharia introduced like Pakistan did in 1978. However we have seen incidents of some Fatwa and because one of them Taslima Nasrin had to leave the country.
Now some people questioned the legitimacy of Fatwa in the country and a 2001 court ruling confirmed that Fatwa is banned in Bangladesh. Did that change much? People in general don't know that they can ask remedy from rule of law if someone issues a Fatwa. Taslima Nasrin is still not back in Bangladesh.
Recently the Bangladesh Awami League is talking about banning religion based politics - however is facing much resistance from quarters.
Religion is an opium - and without proper awareness this will be used by power mongers and interest groups across centuries..
Thanks Rezwan for your influx of views here. I was not having such insightful information about Bangladesh. Fatwa has become laughable stock to rational minds these days. Poeple don't work considering Fatwa in daily basis but works rather on economic needs. A small fraternity upholding their version of the religion of the majority in Bangladesh or anywhere always will lead to disaster in the name of purity of religion. And yes religion is an opium and source of power, that's why we have to keep power among people only through democracy, not theocratic form of governanace.
ReplyDeleteIt gladdens my heart to see someone separating Islam and Muslims. One can always criticize a way of thinking, but to extend that criticism to every man, woman and child who subscribes to it is unjust.
ReplyDeleteIn reality, the mullahs are losing their power over regular Muslims. Which is why they want the laws to be tightened. This also shows that people are changing despite religion, restrictive societies, and authority.
In fact, this behavior spans all types of communities and religions. Just like the khaps want the marriageable age to be lowered to 15 and want intra gotra marriage to be banned, the mullahs want their own restrictive laws - which will never happen.
It's all about control
[Note: Received and error message when I tried to submit this comment the first and second time. This is my third attempt. Delete the first two if this is a repost.]
ReplyDelete"Mullahs calls for punishment or at best, forgiveness, but never understanding."
Interesting statement. You made me stop and think about it. And I'm happy to say I happen to agree with you on this. Mullahs do call for either punishment or forgiveness, but never understanding.
But, and I'm just thinking out loud here, doesn't forgiveness usually come out understanding? Don't we forgive when we sympathize? And isn't sympathy usually because of understanding?
However, when I think about it, I don't think when the Mullahs speak of forgiveness they mean it that way we understand the meaning of the word forgiveness. I think what they mean is to forget retribution for now, and promise you God's justice in the after-life. It is delayed punishment, not forgiveness.
So you might be right here as far as the Mullahs are concerned. They do not call for understanding.
Also in reference to the motives of the terrorists; in my observation, in most cases, people's motives are not formed by some religious doctrine they might subscribe to. It is their religion which follows their desires and motives. Be it greed or whatever. Religion is simply used as a moral justification. So if it is my desire to dominate and if Islamic doctrine or any other doctrine like communism, or even Hinduism can be used to justify my desire, then I will use it for my own purposes. I will make it say what I want it to say.
I firmly believe, a good natured person will be the same no matter which religion he or she might subscribe to. A follower of a Hindu religious philosophy like Gandhi, can lead a secular political party and help in the formation of a secular democratic country for all religious communities as equals. And a follower of the same Hindu philosophy like Advani can lead fascist political party with the aim to form a fascist Hindu nation.
Ultimately, it was not their religion who formed their ideology. It was they who constructed a religion of their liking by taking from it what appealed to them. Same is true with people in every other religion, in my opinion.
Hmmm, debatable issue
ReplyDeleteBhagwad, I have very strong criticism for those who bow to authority without inquiring about it. This approach has pitfall that it never promote independent thinking and make that person a follower.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes its about control over society. As the power is slipping from the hand of Mullahs, they are in state of panic and using Muslim votes for their usage in democracy. Now, the sad/ironic point is that some groups ended up issuing edicts calling for blood or head of persons advocating strong opinions against Islam. Now, that level of tolerance is low by any levels.
There are many religious conflicts bound to happen in the future. Better prepare with arsenal of logic to counter such faith oriented followers.
Abdusalaam, forgiveness called by Mullah is never borne due to understanding of other person. It is inherited in Mullahs as they assume themselves morally superior than anyone else. The way we understand the meaning of the word forgiveness is completely different from a religious priest of any religion.
ReplyDeleteReligion is simply used as a moral justification for wrong causes. That is biggest worry for us. And we all know that other religions are Islamophobeic because of their interaction with Islamic world is brutal and violent; Christianity has also spread more through missionaries and murder of natives. One more faith based approach for greater good.
Yes, the interpretation of religion is also a different topic. Example of Advani and Gandhi is good one. Here in this, I have major complain against Abhrahmic religion, that belive in commandments or book of God. Eastern religion have no such strictness. Hindus don't quote Manu Smriti or Veda for their views on world. Because, they are obsolete now.
Koran and Bible has many versus supporting execution to infidel to forgivesness for all. Hence, such contradictory teachings can't be taken as primary source of learning. Without teaching of logic and reasoning, parrot reading of any book le is dangerous. Koran should be openly, freely and publicly subjected to the kind of historical and philological scholarship. People take words in literal texts and seldom see behind them. You are so much ease to dissect wrong versus to right due to your rational education that allows to question anything unacceptable.
Advani, RSS or a Islamic terrorist are driven by religious purity point of view. RSS wants hindu hindustan. And SIMI wants rule of Islam all over thw world. Their personal goal is embeded in the religious text that unaccepts other religions as equal.
Each religion claims to be morally superior and only correct way to God. There lies our core problem. Man with his greed of power uses religion as tool for success. I am not only against Islam but stand for abolition of all religions from the world.
Mayank, if its debatable issue then post your thoughts also.
ReplyDeleteThe Hope !
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAfUMfCtcDA
Arora, watched it dude. Its okie only.
ReplyDelete