Clearing up misconceptions about Islam ( the religion ) , and a request . . . . . .

aneeshm

Deity
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
6,666
Location
Mountain View, California, USA
I have found that whenever I make a criticism of or observation on Islam on this forum , I am swamped by posts which claim that whatever point I raise is not "true" Islam , it is just a corruption/perversion/whatever . I've become sick of this rationalisation , and I've decided to end it once and for all ( at least for myself ) . Whenever someone tries to rationalise my criticism away this way , I will point him to this thread .

In response to this rationalisation , and to make sure that my opponents at least a basic knowledge of the points on which I base my arguments , I will provide a set of links which I request the forumer to read before trying to naively attack me . They will also serve as ammunition for those who are my allies on this point .

Here is the collection of links :

a) Regarding the core religion itself :

1) Understanding Islam through the Hadis -> A book which , as it says , tries to analyse ( and to confine its analysis to ) Islam through its traditions , laid down by the Prophet himself .

If anyone is interested in further reading on this subject , I highly recommend Arun Shourie's "The World of Fatwas" , in which he examines not just past , but also present and current fatwas , issued by different schools of Islam , their commonalities , and their divergences , and also their basis .

2) Jihad - The Islamic Doctrine of Permanent war -> An examination of Jihad through the Quran and the Hadis , and also its attendant subjects ( i.e. , the rules regarding the division of plunder given in the Quran and the rules regarding slaves and their allotment from the prisoners of war ) . Also deals with Jihad historically , from the point of view of India , and its effects here .

3) Arun Shourie's articles with a mention of Islam -> Mostly irrelevant , but some of them are concerned with the core of the religion .

b) Regarding the results the religion had on history and the world ( from the point of view of India )

1) The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India -> A book dealing with the history of spread of Islam in India , the methods used for the spread , and the consequences ( both historical and current ) .

2) The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India -> Pretty self-explanatory

3) Hindu Temples - What Happened to them , Volume One ( A preliminary survey , with a list of over a thousand temples which were destroyed )
and
Hindu Temples - What Happened to them , Volume Two ( The evidence of Islamic historians themselves )




All six of these links point to books , books which quote both the Quran and the Hadis . They also do a thorough job of completely demolishing the rationalisations that many people want to stay secure in , to save themselves from facing the truth .

I shall , unfortunately , be unavailable to see the progress of this thread for the next few days , but I urge forumers to discuss this topic without prejudice ( eternal optimist that I am ) . Another thing - attacking me , my beliefs , my religion , or my country is not going to , in the smallest extent , detract the efficacy of my arguments . Posters are requested to stay on the topic ( rationalisations WRT religion ) , and not discuss me or stray off topic .
 
Why is it still unbalanced towards the rights of women?
 
It would be helpful if the thread starter could summarize exactly what misconceptions he perceives people to have and what exactly he thinks about Islam. I'm left only with the sense that he thinks it is bad somehow, which is not much to go on for the purpose of starting a useful discussion.
 
Clearing up misconceptions - mostly about some mythical , mystical "pure" Islam , which is free of all the defects or criticisms that can be aimed at it . Some idea that the religions is not responsible for anything and everything that the follower may do , and has done .

In it's most concrete forms , the micsonceptions are

a) Islam is a peaceful , accepting religion , tolerant of other faiths

b) Jihad refers only and only to some internal Jihad , not to Holy War against infidels

c) That the Quran can be explained away by looking at the context ( it cannot , because Islam holds it to be the absolute , eternal , and unchanging word of God ) , or the historical situation at the time ( what of the "eternal , unchanging , word of God" then ? )

d) That the dictates of the Ulema ( the Mullahs , the Ayatollahs , etc. ) are not valid , or not in accordance with the religion ( check up the Quran and the Hadis , and you will find that what they say is very well in accordance with the said teachings )



Note : My criticisms are always to be held to be against the teachings of the religion , and not against its followers . Please keep this distinction in mind .
 
slozenger said:
Why is it still unbalanced towards the rights of women?

According to the Quran , that is because Allah made them defective , and gave them only one out of a thousand virtues , the other nine hundred and ninety nine being given to men . As this is revealed by Allah himself , no reform is possible ( for it would contradict what Allah says ) .
 
As far as I understand it, his general argument about Islam is that the Islamic fundamentalists that we are currently familair with are actually following the basic tenents of Islam most closely, and that it is the "peaceful Muslims" who are in fact deviating from their faith.
 
SeleucusNicator said:
As far as I understand it, his general argument about Islam is that the Islamic fundamentalists that we are currently familair with are actually following the basic tenents of Islam most closely, and that it is the "peaceful Muslims" who are in fact deviating from their faith.

And that would be different from fundamentalist Christians how?
 
aneeshm said:
In it's most concrete forms , the micsonceptions are

a) Islam is a peaceful , accepting religion , tolerant of other faiths

When the Moors controlled Iberia, they allowed Jews and Christians to practice their faith. When the Christians conqured Iberia, the Moors were told to convert or leave.

Religious intolerance works the same way in all faiths.
 
sysyphus said:
When the Moors controlled Iberia, they allowed Jews and Christians to practice their faith. When the Christians conqured Iberia, the Moors were told to convert or leave.

Religious intolerance works the same way in all faiths.

Errr...how long ago was that?
 
I love the occasional "Enlightened view that will change your life" thread.
Bravo, you gave me something to laugh at.
 
Why do certain people keep trying to muddy the discussion of what Muslims are doing NOW by bringing up what Christians did over 500 years ago? :mad:
 
MobBoss said:
Errr...how long ago was that?

The point is that the fundamentals of Islam do not prevent religious tolerence.

Over the course of history, Islam has actually been one of the more open-minded religions, espousing new ideas, all through the time Christians were burning "witches" and stretching people on racks just for being a bit unconventional.

Today, interloance amongst muslims has grown, but one simply cannot say that at the core of Islam is intolerance. That is simply not true.
 
DBear said:
Why do certain people keep trying to muddy the discussion of what Muslims are doing NOW by bringing up what Christians did over 500 years ago? :mad:

The discussion is not what Muslims are doing NOW, but what the core tenets of Islam are. These are timeless.
 
sysyphus said:
When the Moors controlled Iberia, they allowed Jews and Christians to practice their faith. When the Christians conqured Iberia, the Moors were told to convert or leave.

Religious intolerance works the same way in all faiths.
the same happened during Saladins time, he allowed people to leave the cities if they did not like him. Richard and the crusaders did not. Saladin was also very cultured and understanding of CHristianity. again the crusaders were not. Many christians are not very tolerant, take for example that Christian fundimentalist who, on the day after 9/11, picked up a gun and drove around town, after finding a muslim man walking down the street, he shot him and the fellow who he was talking to. When he was arrested the police found that not only had he shot a muslim, but also a sikh. just goes to show you how tolerant and educated some christians are of other religions.
 
And that post, Robopig, just showed how blind you are of knowing the difference between the few exceptions, and the majority. That man in your story was an exception to the rule, just as the Muslim extremists are part of that same execption.

Your ignorant blanketing of all Christians based on a few foolish exceptions of the rule only breeds more intolerance, more hatred based upon a person's individual faith.
 
In Saladin's day, Christians were a very considerable proportion of the population in the Mid-East (they're still ~10% of Egypt's population, 40% of so in Lebanon, and about 5% of Palestinians) - a ruler who had driven them out or otherwise alienated them too badly would have destroyed the economic basis for his dynasty.
 
Back
Top Bottom