hi folks!
i heard and searched alot for “stanic verses” but as it is banned here in pakistan so i couldnot get it to read .
now if any of u have read it than tell me about the book.
i wanna know what points the auther had raised on prophet’s(pbuh) life..
do let mee know if u have read it .
bye.
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smile.gif
and make other
Yes I read it before it became famous.
This is a brief description of what it is about’
=============================================
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V109/N7/turkoz.07o.html
Muslims everywhere are outraged by the publication of the book The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. Even if Rushdie’s convoluted satirical style is construed as a literary device, it is clear that he went out of his way in using highly repugnant and revolting language to insult and distort Islam. Personal belief is one thing, but freedom of expression stops where vilifications and misrepresentation of facts start. No civilized society can condone the publication of explosively misleading material disguised as “literature.”
Rushdie meticulously describes a supposedly fictional background which is precisely the same as the very well documented Islamic history. He then depicts his “fictional characters” as the moral antithesis of those they were clearly meant to portray. This is nothing but vilification by proxy.
Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him), whose example one billion people aspire towards, is depicted as a lecherous “conjurer” of rules who had “no time for scruples.” He is also attributed with fabricating the Qur’an (totally against Islamic belief). It is falsely imputed that the Qur’an, which has been preserved in its original form to this day, was freely manuscribed. Prophet Abraham (p.b.u.h.) is called a “bastard.” The Archangel Gabriel is reduced to being a “pet” obeying its master. The wives of the Prophet Muhammed, who are reverently called the “Mothers of Muslims,” are compared with prostitutes. Salman-al-Farsi and Bilal, two reputable early Muslims, are depicted as profligates. Rules and practices having no basis in Islam are falsely attributed to it and real laws are ridiculed, not argued against.
=============================================
BTW BholaiBadsha, Are you based in Pakistan?
hi and thanks alot Mr Xtreme:
the answer of ur above asked question is :
yup…100%
bye the way bye and thanks again..
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smile.gif
and make other
Yes dear ! Few months back, I bought the book from the local library but couldn’t afford to read it further after the first few pages. The way it is written clearly shows the writer has no background info about any religion. It is narrated in a very humiliating way with flowing words of ignominy and disgrace. All this clearly shows a step against Islam - a deep conspiracy by the westerns.
Unfortunately due to free media in these countries the book is readily available and it is sad to see that its part of academic courses in some universities like Concordia at Montreal.
It is amazing that so much has been written about Salman Rushdie's book Satanic Verses yet no one has analyzed possible motives (other than profit) or tried to explain where the ideas might have come from. Instead of understanding the motives behind it, Muslim nations have focused and supported the Khomeni's fatwas - which have been universally condemned.
It is an undeniable fact that Penguin Publishers and Rushdie have made a lot of money from the book - perhaps most of it is attributable to the publicity surrounding it. It is impossible to believe that more than a small percentage of purchasers have actually read the book. The average English reader has not only to enter Rushdie's psychotic trance but also has to put up with the book's tedious literary style incorporating innuendoes in words and names that mean little to him. Who knows the meaning of ekdumjaldi, tinkas, and so on? Moreover, to make any sense the reader also has to be familiar with characters from Hindu mythology and Islamic history and tradition. Obviously there was no sense to the book unless the intention was to mock and defame.
::: MOTIVES: It is interesting to note that the title Satanic Verses is a plagiarism from "Muhammad at Mecca" by the Scotsman Professor W. Montgomery Watt. What a revelation! Indeed, one could be forgiven for believing that Rushdie's book - the parts relating to the Prophet were actually written by Professor Montgomery Watt. The similarities of presentation are uncanny. One difference is that Watt's book is a serious one subject to academic review and scrutiny. But, his book is known only to a handful of scholars. It is ironic that none of the vociferous Muslim ulema have picked up on these points made by Professor Watt in 1953!. Rushdie, on the other hand can argue that his book is only a novel - a fiction that cannot be debated.
It is stranger indeed to note that Rushdie did not acknowledge the principal source for his book other than an oblique reference to those who must remain anonymous. Such a blatant omission, coupled with the provocative title, the subject matter and subsequent events, is difficult to explain.
::: POSSIBLE OBJECTIVES: First, to hurt Iran's sensibilities as it had failed to bow down to Western might and influence in the face of overwhelming pressures. Second, to besmirch the good reputation and name of Islam by exploiting the inevitable over-reaction of the Khomeni regime.
Predictably, the book has succeeded in exploiting the fundamental departures from true Islamic values and traditions that have been invented by Muslim fundamentalist groups. Such fundamentalists have only themselves to blame.
It is not the time to scribe fatwas and start a wave of bloodbath - Its time to declare jahad, not with ‘swords’ but ‘pens’.
[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited July 26, 2000).]