For Hindus all non-Hindus are mallechh, of a low origin, for an upper cast Hindu all low cast Hindus are mallechh. For a Muslim all non-Muslims are disbeliever, lower.
Yes Changez, may be Hindus had discovered Quran earlier to yours.
Saudi sheik: ‘Slavery is a part of Islam’
Leading government cleric, author of country’s religious curriculum
Posted: November 10, 2003
5:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
A leading Saudi government cleric and author of the country’s religious curriculum believes Islam advocates slavery.
“Slavery is a part of Islam,” says Sheik Saleh Al-Fawzan, according to the independent Saudi Information Agency, or SIA.
Sheik Al-Fawzan
In a lecture recorded on tape by SIA, the sheik said, “Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.”
His religious books are used to teach 5 million Saudi students, both within the country and abroad, including the United States.
**Al Fawzan – a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body – says Muslims who contend Islam is against slavery “are ignorant, not scholars.”
“They are merely writers,” he said, according to SIA. “Whoever says such things is an infidel.” **
Al-Fawzan’s best-known textbook, “Al-Tawheed – Monotheism,” says most Muslims are polytheists, and their blood and money are therefore free for the taking by “true Muslims.”
SIA said although the Saudi government claims religious curriculum is being reformed, Al-Fawzan’s books are still in wide use.
Al-Fawzan is a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, Saudi Arabia’s main center of learning for the strict Wahhabi interpretation of Islam.
**SIA noted Al-Fawzan, a leading opponent of curriculum reform, opposes elections and demonstrations as Western influences, is against Arab women marrying non- Arab Muslims and has issued a fatwa forbidding the watching of television. **
Al-Fawzan has threatened to behead a Saudi writer and scholar, Sheik Hassan Al-Maliki, for his criticism of Wahhabism, according to SIA. Al-Maliki was fired from his position with the ministry of education after writing a 50- page paper criticizing Al-Fawzan’s book “Al-Tawheed.”
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35518 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35518
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by soul: *
**Saudi sheik: 'Slavery is a part of Islam'
Leading government cleric, author of country's religious curriculum*
[/QUOTE]
Here we go again...
Hopeless , can you guys stick to the topic for a change. I mean every time discussion starts it becomes an insult throwing competition.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by yahudi: *
For Hindus all non-Hindus are mallechh, of a low origin, for an upper cast Hindu all low cast Hindus are mallechh. For a Muslim all non-Muslims are disbeliever, lower.
Yes Changez, may be Hindus had discovered Quran earlier to yours.
[/QUOTE]
As always, you disappointed me. Point was that the discussion is on castism in HINDUISM, stay away from other religions and their books. Try defending your religion by your own standards/books.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by soul: *
**Saudi sheik: 'Slavery is a part of Islam'
Leading government cleric, author of country's religious curriculum*....
[/QUOTE]
So that approves castism in Hinduism?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
So that approves castism in Hinduism?
[/QUOTE]
humans create and twist relgious text to justify exlcusiveness.
they slip some text in between to fulfill selfish interests.
His religious books are used to teach 5 million Saudi students, both within the country and abroad, including the United States.
i thought this was an april fool's joke, then i remembered that it wasn't april
oh yeah, we were discussing castism in yindooism, and how eeeeviiiLLL it is....tch tch!!
*A friendly general note to everyone: Please get back to a respectful discussion of the issue of casteism in Hinduism. If this thread continues to degenerate, it will be closed. If anyone has problems with this, please drop me a pm. *
Changezji, why do you expect me to defend castism? Many of our Hindus have given excuses, reasons for cast system. They just follow your way of defense. It is not courageous.
If we can say a total ‘no’ to cast system, that will be better.
‘Defend your religion’ why? Have courage and say ‘no’ to any idiocy of your religion.
I will always disappoint you, if you are looking for an edict in me.
*Originally posted by yahudi: *
Changezji, why do you expect me to defend castism? Many of our Hindus have given excuses, reasons for cast system.
Well, I didn’t really mean to “defend” it, what I wanted was discuss it properly instead of throwing stones at other houses.
They just follow your way of defense. It is not courageous.
Why follow “our” way? Don’t they have their own way of doing it? Or do they not know any? “our” way is common way, so lets not say it “your way” or “our way” etc.
If we can say a total ‘no’ to cast system, that will be better.
:k: much better.
**‘Defend your religion’ why? Have courage and say ‘no’ to any idiocy of your religion.
I will always disappoint you, if you are looking for an edict in me. **
When I said “disappointment”, it was regarding your words on Quran. Had Hindus found Quran earlier, there wouldn’t have been any castism.
[QUOTE]
Had Hindus found Quran earlier, there wouldn't have been any castism.
[/QUOTE]
are you sure??
Soul i think you have been missing the point from the start. If you so badly wish to express your opinions about islam or anyother religion than may be you should start a new thread as "this" thread is basically talking about origins of cast in hinduism. I fail to see how your bashing of other religions is adding to the topic.
you dont undestand the comlexity which even crosses relgious barrier
A special telegram from the Brahmin President of Varnashram Brahman Sangha was received recently by a Muslim delegate, Mr. Gazanavi. It was a message that Muslims should cooperate with orthodox Hindus in opposing the Untouchables temple entry movement. It was also suggested that, if India gets freedom, it would be dangerous to the religion of both Hindus as well as Muslims, and so the religious Muslims should be careful about the swaraj like religious Hindus.
rvikz lemme paste for you what Wise One originally said at the start of this thread:
[quote]
Ok don't get all defensive i am only interested in knowing whats hindu belief considering casts. And on what criteria some casts are better than others. So if knowledgable hindu is around enlighten me please
[/quote]
He is only interested in what Hindu religion has to say about castes and the how they are defined and who/what decides who is superior to other. He is not interested in how castes are related to Pakistan's constitution (I removed your earlier post where u try to bring that in). He is also not interested what religious barriers this system crosses. He asked a simple question and if you guys want to derail the thread, its not adding to any healthy discussion.
My co-mod Samarra has already pointed out in a friendly way. Lets not push it.
Thanks
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by 5Abi: *
rvikz lemme paste for you what Wise One originally said at the start of this thread:
He is only interested in what Hindu religion has to say about castes and the how they are defined and who/what decides who is superior to other. He is not interested in how castes are related to Pakistan's constitution (I removed your earlier post where u try to bring that in). He is also not interested what religious barriers this system crosses. He asked a simple question and if you guys want to derail the thread, its not adding to any healthy discussion.
My co-mod Samarra has already pointed out in a friendly way. Lets not push it.
Thanks
[/QUOTE]
it wil change only when country becomes comepletely western type
indutrial country. united states econlmy is only 2% agricultural
while india is 25%. rural economy will alway remain feudal until
industrialisation occur.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
When I said "disappointment", it was regarding your words on Quran. Had Hindus found Quran earlier, there wouldn't have been any castism.
[/QUOTE]
Thank God they didn't. We might not have had 'castism' but some other undesirable characteristics would have been inherited. Now don't get defensive, this thread is not about Islam, I'm just being earnest in replying to your misplaced assumption that Islam would have been a better bet than Hinduism.
Casteism is something that we can still fight to eradicate, but most likely we would not have had democracy and westernization to the extent we have now, under Islam. I would not trade that.
From what I understand about the caste system, it came with the Aryans of Persia. The Aryans were fair and had decidedly superior mathematical and business abilities as compared to the native Dravidians. The Persians worshipped fire and their priests wore the sacred thread and white clothes, traits which are seen in HIndu priests too. The tribals converted to the new religion but power was held in the hands of the Aryans who did not want to dilute the purity of their blood. Hence the caste system evolved. You had to be born into a Brahmin family to sit in a temple. Because the Brahmins spent years studying science, scripture and the art of war, they were revered as scholars and became counsellors to Kings. No one could supercede them. They however had a duty to be the moral conscience of society and rulers.
Today there are some temples which have a dalit priest. The dalits have been suppressed for long, and it will take some more time before education, intermarrying and economic growth will obliterate their seperation from the rest of the population.
[QUOTE]
Casteism is something that we can still fight to eradicate,
[/QUOTE]
You can not, nobody can, Its human nature to divide itself into different camps and ghettos....tell me in US are blacks or browns equally treated as Whites?? law has nothing to do with it...its human nature.
[QUOTE]
From what I understand about the caste system, it came with the Aryans of Persia. The Aryans were fair and had decidedly superior mathematical and business abilities as compared to the native Dravidians. The Persians worshipped fire and their priests wore the sacred thread and white clothes, traits which are seen in HIndu priests too. The tribals converted to the new religion but power was held in the hands of the Aryans who did not want to dilute the purity of their blood. Hence the caste system evolved. You had to be born into a Brahmin family to sit in a temple. Because the Brahmins spent years studying science, scripture and the art of war, they were revered as scholars and became counsellors to Kings. No one could supercede them. They however had a duty to be the moral conscience of society and rulers.
[/QUOTE]
Oye Karina, You are partly right, but Dravids were not natives.
Dravids came from mesopotamia[sumeria] to india. They too had their caste system...Its a misconcept to think that dravids are dalits.
Dalits were sudras or dasas....they were usually POW.
And Hinduism is not an imported religion, its very much has its roots in India. It was originally called DHARMA....well thats a name of the religion in vedas.
Karina, if you are an Indian, have you ever wondered what India was called in anceint times,before persians named it Hindoostan??
[stan is a farsi for land]. Sorry, this is a total off topic question.
[QUOTE]
Ok don't get all defensive i am only interested in knowing whats hindu belief considering casts. And on what criteria some casts are better than others.
[/QUOTE]
Okay in simple layman language.
There are four main caste, the priest,the warrior, the trader, the slave.
The priest is the one that performs religious rites, runs schools, preaches dharma, and is suppose to be the most knowledgable...so he is entitled to be and advisor to the king....[for eg. Chanakya,Chaitanya, Adi sankracharya] and his offsprings take up the same proffession of their father.
The Warrior is entitled to become a King, rest ofcause, he is a general, major, soldier etc.
And again his offsprings have to countinue their father's proffession.
The trader, does not necessary learn Vedas, but are entiled to the knowledge of sanskrit numbers. If you remember Zero was invented in India. It was this trader class that are beleived to have been responsible. And Again his children takes over the business from him.
The Sudras were POW, kept as slaves. They were ill treated, and subjugated. again their offsprings become slaves after them.
Now, The only terrible parts are slavery [whichis abolished] and Imposing proffession on ppl. If a carpenter's son wants to become a warrior or a priest, it was not allowed....So thats grave human rights violation. And i condemn it.
But now, such reservations are almost removed....but ofcause caste factor dose play a significant role in finding matches for marriages...and its far rampant in rural northern India than metros.
Now does this answer your questions??
Yeah it does soul and thnx for writing it