Debate: Is Islam a Threat to the West?

[Francis Earl]

I am most familiar with the Chishti (initiated) and Naqshbandi (affiliation) orders...

They are essentially Tantra using the Quran instead of Veda.

 

[Francis Earl]

Many Muslims base their notion of the Quran on the earlier verses...

If you are familiar with the tradition at all, you know that the later verses cancel the earlier.

There is utter lack of tolerance in the later verses, it goes on telling you to kill unbelievers, especially polytheists - and something like 250 million dead Indians show the Muslims took this very seriously.

I think, on an individual basis, people will genuinely take what is useful to their lives from any tradition.

The problem is that it's simply fact that extremists are actually closer to the historic Muhammad than his peace-loving followers.

As I said, I have loved the Sufi's, I find no tradition more beautiful. I think that if it could be separated from Islam entirely it would be the most beautiful tradition on earth...

The problem is it is impossible to overlook the character of Muhammad.

We can justify all we want, but when we acknowledge that this is supposed to be the perfect exemplary of Allah, we understand the foolishness of this.

He isn't even a good person, let alone a perfect example.

We have examples of him changing rules to suit his actions... what kind of Muslim is this? No, he is driven by ego and power, to call him religious at all is to defame religion.

He belongs in the category of Hitler and Khan, not Buddha and Jesus.

 

[farhan]

See, there is a mode of debate, where you bring all your huff n puff and then claim the other side is liar or mentally incompetent so he doesnt deserve to be heard. This is not debate. This is giving the dog a bad name before hanging him. Labeling muslims evil before funding terrorism in their lands. And then bombing the whole country to kill those terrorists etc. All colonials do that, you arnt the first one.

You dont bring any stuff, what to debate? you have the comprehension skills of a child, and an attention span so small that you cant read 4 sentences of Quran at a time, let alone reading the oral tradition behind it. And you have also read hadith? Around 2+4+4 books of sunni hadith? Or quarter of a sentence that you were told to read?

You have quoted 2:191 but forgot 2:190

Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.

What were you expecting? Do not fight those who fight you, just let them kill you?

Muhammad proposed to Safiya, she converted and married. Rest are kinky western fantasies. Too much porn does that.

Sufism as an exoterically visible movemant started around Iraq (Junaid Baghdadi school) and eastern Iran (Khawajagan). None of them had anything to do with Advaita (The hindu philosophical school of Adi Shankar). If you think every philosopho-mystical school that doesnt care to differentiate between monotheism and monism is advaita, you are wrong.

Tantra, how do you define it? Every breathing/meditation practice is not tantra. Modern Naqshbandi curriculum was devised mainly by Ahmad Sirhindi. Ever heard of him? Regarding Chishtis, are you following some Inayat Khan lineage?

Just to let you know, Moinuddin Chishti invented Qawwali to bring Hindus closer to Islam. Thats what get marketed as Indian Sufi music in the world. And it does its job.

Regarding abrogation, according to Shah Waliullah, following are the five verses that are considered abrogated

(1) Al-Anfal 65 by Al-Anfal 66;
(2) Al-Mujadilah 12 by Al-Mujadilah 13;
(3) Al-Baqarah 180 by Al-Nisa’ 11;
(4) Al-Ahzab 50 by Al-Ahzab 52;
(5) Al-Muzzammil 1 by Al-Muzzammil 20.

Now you might think differently, but Islam is not some wax nose that any Tom, Dick or Harry can twist.

No 250 million hindus were killed anywhere. Unless you were counting the skulls.

 

[Francis Earl]

Sufism as an exoterically visible movemant started around Iraq (Junaid Baghdadi school) and eastern Iran (Khawajagan). None of them had anything to do with Advaita (The hindu philosophical school of Adi Shankar). If you think every philosopho-mystical school that doesnt care to differentiate between monotheism and monism is advaita, you are wrong.

I have not said every, I have said Sufi.

The simple fact of the matter is Sufism has flourished in India exactly because of this.

It is also the reason many Muslims are utterly against Sufis, and have gone on killing them through history.

Muslims are utterly against monism as a rule, they deny the very possibility of it because Allah cannot be part of the creation according to them. This is experientially fallacious, one of many errors Muhammad makes about Truth.

Tantra, how do you define it? Every breathing/meditation practice is not tantra. Modern Naqshbandi curriculum was devised mainly by Ahmad Sirhindi. Ever heard of him? Regarding Chishtis, are you following some Inayat Khan lineage?

I have been initiated by his order, yes.

No 250 million hindus were killed anywhere. Unless you were counting the skulls.

You're simply wrong, but I guess for you there is no historic basis for why India and Pakistan divided?

Note, I am not suggesting it was in one go, but over time no one has felt the wrath of the Muslims more than the Indian.

 

[Francis Earl]

Muhammad proposed to Safiya, she converted and married. Rest are kinky western fantasies. Too much porn does that.

This is what a lot of Muslims say about it, but lets be real...

She had JUST watched her husband get beheaded, now she is going to marry the man that killed him?

If you think this is true, you have no basic understanding of human emotion.

Most would rather die than be subjected to this.

Of course, as a Muslim, you want to insist Muhammad is perfect.

Would you kill a man and then marry his wife? What kind of God would support this? Can you, as a moral human being, justify it at all?

Please actually consider it.

 

[Francis Earl]

For me, the very fact you can be so nonchalant about it at all answers the question the thread posits.

The same is true of the Aisha story, no matter her age - whether she is 8 or 16 - Muhammad was in his 50's, what kind of union is this?

Now, there are Hadith that say Muhammad had to wait until she began her period to have sex with her, so to suggest she is in her teens when they married is laughable, but lets put that aside for now...

Again, it is not reasonable to write it off as standard for people of his time, this is not supposed to be an average man. This is the man Allah has chosen to be the final message to the world, the perfect man, the example for all who will ever live after him.

Either Allah is not moralistic, or Muhammad made the whole thing up.

What is worst about this is whether you accept the hadith or not, there ARE young Muslim girls today even dying from trauma due to older men trying to consummate their marriage... there is a real world affect to this...

Yet, to justify your belief system, you will pretend these things are ok.

 

[farhan]

The simple fact of the matter is Sufism has flourished in India exactly because of this.
It florished because Sufis were much humane than Brahmins. They fed untouchables and honoured them as equal humans. While rest of the muslims had started their own class system

It is also the reason many Muslims are utterly against Sufis, and have gone on killing them through history.
A bunch of wahhabis are against Sufism, thats it. Many of the greatest scholars and wariors of Islam have been Sufis

Muslims are utterly against monism as a rule, they deny the very possibility of it because Allah cannot be part of the creation according to them. This is experientially fallacious, one of many errors Muhammad makes about Truth.

Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The example of His light is like a niche within which is a lamp, the lamp is within glass, the glass as if it were a pearly [white] star lit from [the oil of] a blessed olive tree, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil would almost glow even if untouched by fire. Light upon light. Allah guides to His light whom He wills. And Allah presents examples for the people, and Allah is Knowing of all things. (24:35)

This is monism at its poetic best. According to the Sunni Creed, God is both transcendent and immanent. Non-immanent God is incomplete

I have been initiated by his order, yes.
You can get more if you follow something stringent

You're simply wrong, but I guess for you there is no historic basis for why India and Pakistan divided?
Muslims would have been a minority in a united democratic India, and Hindus had started their slash and burn stuff and political subjugation. Which made muslims think they need a separate country.

 

[farhan]

This is what a lot of Muslims say about it, but lets be real...

She had JUST watched her husband get beheaded, now she is going to marry the man that killed him?

If you think this is true, you have no basic understanding of human emotion.

Most would rather die than be subjected to this.

Of course, as a Muslim, you want to insist Muhammad is perfect.

Would you kill a man and then marry his wife? What kind of God would support this? Can you, as a moral human being, justify it at all?

Please actually consider it.

In absolutely realpolitik parlance, she converted and married to the king to be. Perfect choice. She must have her reasons. I am nobody to pass judgements on her. If it was anybody but Muhammad, she would havebeen raped and killed (or raped till killed).

 

[Francis Earl]

This is monism at its poetic best. According to the Sunni Creed, God is both transcendent and immanent. Non-immanent God is incomplete

You don't understand monism...

This is an utterly dualistic statement.

If God is immanent according to the Sunni, why have they killed people who say "Ana 'l-Ḥaqq"?

Why is the Muslim so utterly against Jesus being an incarnation of God if their creed is monistic?

If there is only One, it MUST be within you and I too... else there is something other than God and your notion ceases to be monistic.

You can get more if you follow something stringent

I cannot disagree more, I think your understanding will be utterly lacking if you only follow a single path.

Further, this is the primary error of most seekers, they want to "get more"... this is the complete opposite of fana, which is the only way towards actual truth.

It isn't about what you can get, it is about dropping yourself completely.

 

[Francis Earl]

Of course, ultimately fana leads to baqaa... life as God.

Yet, ask any Muslim you meet, and they will wholeheartedly deny the possibility.

It is actually the principle argument they make against Christians...

The whole notion is absurd to them.

Then the creed isn't monistic... sorry.

 

[BigJoeNobody]

Are you suggesting the Quran allows heaven to be something other than another world?

This has nothing to do with what I said... I said it is not just the next phase for all... which is obviously your interpretation, based solely on "everyone should be rewarded" theory.

Quran 2:191 is as good a start as any...

again, nothing to do with the "hellish psyche" of Jannah. Maybe you are not using the quotes correctly. BTW 2:191 has been explained in the previous posts.

The Indian schools all recognize Advaita to be a huge influence on their notion of Tawhid.

I understand you enjoy this manipulation, but that doesn't make it any more substantial or better for anyone else.

I cannot find the particular hadith, but it centers around Saffiya... I see no reason why Muslims would claim such a thing if it didn't happen, this isn't something I or others are making up... perhaps you should read more hadith yourself?

Farhan already answered about the circumstances behind Saffiya being different than you claimed, married and not raped. And I am not sure as to her reasoning as accepting him as her husband. There are many examples today of such where a man beats a woman's husband and she chooses the stronger man, been that way throughout history. Now you also throw into the mix that this defeated husband was her proof that Mouhammed's (PBUH) God was superior and that he claims to be a Prophet of said God. That is quite a force for some people.

It is impossible to be perfect when your ideal is a mass murdering brute.

Bolded part is true for all average people. The second part you keep harping on is unwarranted. Winning battles is not murder.

I base it on the fact that I'm still alive despite the Quran and Hadith not permitting anyone that isn't a Muslim to live.

Again, not a claim made in either. Both encourage peaceful coexistence.

This is stupid, he has offended the locals and then claims their reaction forced him to be a war monger? Again, before he began waging war, there were not 100 followers... his religion was simply a failure on intellectual grounds.

No their reaction was to attack. His was to defend. with a smaller army. Again, I'm certain at this point you has a poor teacher. The religion was not completed until there were examples from both minority and majority status of power. Nor did it by any argument fail on intellectual grounds. This sounds very "I didn't understand so it must be wrong"-ish.

Fallacy, when he moved his followers became violent. There would be no Islam today if they hadn't started killing everyone that disagreed.

seems to be a common theme of yours, yet no actual reference. For such a well known issue, I'm sure you would have no problem finding legitimate sources.

Except that the Quran doesn't teach equality at all... it teaches that no unbeliever should live and that a womans sole purpose is to bare children...

False a woman's purpose is the same as a man's to pass her test and reach Jannah. Having children is a blessing, ask any mother.

further, do we have to bring up basic things like the claim of the Quran that the earth doesn't revolve?

Where? Aya's pertaining to Earths roundness and turning have been a source of proof for thousands. Where does it claim otherwise?

will complete later

 

[Francis Earl]

I'm done here, there is no point disputing.

Nothing will be accomplished at all... the Muslims will continue killing everyone irrelevant of our views.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Hey, he gave up! Joe wins!

 

[Francis Earl]

For Joe:

 

[BigJoeNobody]

I'm done here, there is no point disputing.

Nothing will be accomplished at all... the Muslims will continue killing everyone irrelevant of our views.

And so will Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Theists, Deists, Taoists, Luciferians, Satanists, Pagans, etc. It is a problem with People.

All in all I don't care if you make claims against, just be willing to show where you get the information. I certainly will not change my view simply because you say it's bad, nor will I consider it without substantial proof. too much misinformation gets passed around today to allow that to sway me, or represent me or my beliefs.

Hey, he gave up! Joe wins!

Hey that's not possible, nobody really wins a debate...

 

[Francis Earl]

And so will Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Theists, Deists, Taoists, Luciferians, Satanists, Pagans, etc. It is a problem with People.

Agreed, when we take beliefs to be more important than reality, we are capable of heinous things.

There is no exception.

All in all I don't care if you make claims against, just be willing to show where you get the information. I certainly will not change my view simply because you say it's bad, nor will I consider it without substantial proof. too much misinformation gets passed around today to allow that to sway me, or represent me or my beliefs.

I think this is an important distinction... I in no way believe that your being Muslim means you're a bad person.

I have discussed briefly my affiliations with Muslims, and many I have met are great people.

You, individually, are not the topic of the thread, however you have become offended because of your own identification.

The simple fact of the matter is that extremists are not pulling their actions out of thin air... they ARE copying the actions of Muhammad.

This is not debatable, and is a serious threat today.

Which IS the topic of the thread.

I want you to know that I posted the video to show my love for Muslims.

You are not my problem, my problem is how Islamic doctrines can be interpreted.

I cannot personally say "look at this other group, they say the same thing!"

For me, this is reason to reject both groups, not justification for one or the other...

Hey that's not possible, nobody really wins a debate...

It is true, hence I have dropped it.

There is no real dialog happening, we simply disagree.

You were not quite so bad, but farhan has become very offensive.

I think, again, this very identification is the real problem.

Only through belief, through thoughts, are we really different.

I believe each human being is seeking love and companionship...

I think how we attempt to find that, at times, can be a problem.

 

[Francis Earl]

Salam Walaikum

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

you have become offended because of your own identification.

I see no indication that he acts offended, he's seen worse, just because you are offensive here doesn't mean it will get to people.

 

[BigJoeNobody]

Agreed, when we take beliefs to be more important than reality, we are capable of heinous things.

not sure we are agreeing.. yu see belief as a hindrance to finding truth, a very hindu/Buddhist approach if I'm not mistaken (people feel free to correct me). Whereas I see that the truth has already revealed itself, and that our feeble minds are incapable of understanding it all. The one who created us is a far more intellectual than we can hope to be even if we all worked collectively.

The simple fact of the matter is that extremists are not pulling their actions out of thin air... they ARE copying the actions of Muhammad.

The actual fact of the matter is you aren't providing any evidence. I have read the Quran enough times to know what they are doing is against Shariah, and I have read enough Hadith to know Mouhammed (PBUH) has not acted like that in any measure in his lifetime. Now where I think you and me (and quite frankly every Muslim) differ is you were ready to accept any Claimed Hadith as true, whereas there are many weak and even false Hadiths spread around, especially in this day and age. There are Thousands of examples I could give where a society based on a true Islamic Political structure would solve many issues with the world, but until a righteous minded person actually ascends to a rank of power, these Ideas will simply be disputed because "look at [Insert Islamic Dominant Country]".

This is not debatable, and is a serious threat today.

just because you claim it is not debatable doesn't make it so, please refrain from claiming absolute truth in your words, as any Muslim could probably prove your claims false, if you even attempted to provide evidence.

You were not quite so bad, but farhan has become very offended.

FIFY, and that is solely because you refuse to back up your claims when denouncing our entire religion as both false and evil, and our Prophet (PBUH) as the most heinous of things. Your arguments don't really make sense from a blind look, much less with mountains of evidence against it.

I see no indication that he acts offended, he's seen worse, just because you are offensive here doesn't mean it will get to people.

Agree, I've seen worse, and when someone makes blind accusations and claims their statement is indisputable, I know the person has no clue what they are talking about. I'm the one who asked for your posts to be reinstated so that we could actually show we aren't just deleting posts to hide anything, but rather that you really didn't have anything to offer to begin with.

 

[Nasruddin]

not sure we are agreeing.. yu see belief as a hindrance to finding truth, a very hindu/Buddhist approach if I'm not mistaken (people feel free to correct me). Whereas I see that the truth has already revealed itself, and that our feeble minds are incapable of understanding it all. The one who created us is a far more intellectual than we can hope to be even if we all worked collectively.

No correction, but an addition. I always hate to say "yeah, but..." when I can say, "yes, and..." As a practicing Buddhist, I would say that my belief can be honored while seeing that it may not accurately reflect the way things really are. This awareness, that my thinking about things and what those things are may be two different things, for me anyway, is the root of compassion. Thus there is a gap between my understanding of reality and reality itself. When the Buddha saw how this gap created suffering for people he was moved to teach relief from such suffering.