ok
I believe that religions are in general intolerent. Of course, they do believe that their religion is ONLY right one. How can there be two things true or right, particularly if the contradict each other. Now the contradictions may not matter for a person busy in his day-to-day job, like if Adam and Eve indeed lived in heaven and then they ate the apple or if Brahma was one who created world and told Vishnu to take care of it afterwords. But the folklore is different, theories are different. Folklore is picked up from the region where religion is born. So Muslims stil have Adam and Eve, Islam being from Palestine and Buddhhist have their version of Ramayana.
Now one may think that since it does not matter if one god runs the world , or many gods run it or world does not need god and runs on its own, thus there is no reason for bloody battles. But the battles during inquisition or of Jehads are bloodiest since they believe they are killing for higher reason, god or whatever. Read Iqbal's poetry. How proud he is for being the idol-breaker. That is precisely the fundamental spirit of religions.
Then there are people who will claim that all religions are basically good. Hindus should become better Hindus. Muslims should become better Muslims. Christians become better Christians and problems will be solved. If not so pure Hindus and Muslims could lead to holocaust which killed/drove away all Muslims of East Punjab and all Hindu-Siks of west punjab then pure Hindus and pure Muslims would have probably run a havoc.
Get rid of religions. They have no place in modern society.
[This message has been edited by PG (edited March 18, 1999).]
I don't see why anyone should say I believe Islam is the truth but maybe hinduism is true too or etc
If anyone believes in their religion its because they think its the truth
PG
r u socialist?
Being a good Muslim doesn't solve problems although it eases Islamic solutions. Application of Islamic laws solves problems.
Islam is an ideology with solutions that benefited humans far longer than any other ideology. Capitalism was the first to die like marx has predicted and socialism also died because like capitalism it failed to understand humans. It is only Islam which is still here although it exists only in our hearts.
Capitalism and communism have never and can never achieve the results Islam has.
[This message has been edited by Mudasser (edited March 21, 1999).]
What results Islam has achieved, say in Afghanistan or Sudan or Nigeria or Iran or wherever? How they are better than, say, those that would be achieved if people worshipped mango trees.
Coming back to original post, I would repeat that religions are INTOLERANT in general.
Assalam O Alaikum
Intolerant, what does this word mean ??
If it means not to tolerate those who differ to you, then Islam is tolerant as well as intolerant in some cases. For example Islam does not orders to kill a hindu or a jew or christian without any reason. But then even a Muslim can be killed due to some reason. (do you remember a Muslim who had some dispute with a Jew and they went to Prophet SAW and Prophet SAW gave the decision in favor of the Jew which was fair ofcourse but the Muslim was not satisfied and went to Hazrat Umer Bin Khattab RAA and when Hazrat Umer RAA heard that a Muslim is going against the decision of Rasoolullah, the Muslim lost his head).
Now a question that how people who worship Allah SWT are better than those who worship mango trees or any thing else. Well, you see even those who worship mango trees or anything else will get what they pray for, because ultimately all questions go to Allah SWT.
Let me compare the people of Afghanistan during the Jihad with Soviet Union or more prefereably the Prophet SAW and his Companions which are the best examples of Muslims, their Jihad with the idol worshippers of Makka. Now tell me how will you justify their win. They were less in numbers, didn't had weapons. How come they succeeded in Jihads. Well as per Quran Allah SWT says that he desends angels who fight with them.
Another difference between Muslims and those who worship mango trees is that they do not believe in Quran and Sunnah of Prophet SAW which have even knowledge of heavens and which gives guidance in each and every walk of life.
Another point, is it right to think that the religion we are following is the only true religion? again the religion tells about it, and this is a part of believe. If a Muslim thinks that Hinduism is also right, will you call him a Muslim, nope, because then Islam has lost its identification. The person is neither a Hindu nor a Muslim. For every religion there are a set of believes which you must have faith in, inorder to be a member of that religion. For example in Islam, you should not believe in idols or worship them, you should not worship sun, you should not worship mango trees or whatever because we know that these are creations of Allah SWT and not Gods. And if i start thinking that Hinduism is also right so it means i lost my faith in Islam, so ultimately lost Islam.
Wallah O Alam
Assalam O Alaikum
[This message has been edited by Abdulla (edited March 21, 1999).]
NY Ahmadi wrote: "...is it OK to think of one's own religion being the ONLY right religion and all other religions not right. Please shed some light on it..."
Yes it is ok. An individual who wishes to enter into a religion and commit themselves to the set of values and beliefs of that particular religion does so after evaluating other religions and discrediting them. Such an individual decides after careful consideration to become an adherent of a certain religion and does so believing strongly that the particular religion he/she has embraced is the "only right religion" - only right in the eyes of their new found spirituality and God(s).
In terms of "tolerating" the presence of other religions and accepting the fact that other religions exist side by side your own faith - all great religions accept this fact and all great religions preach "tolerance". The religions may not accept other faiths as being "right" in their interpretations of spirituality, but they do accept the right for the other religion(s) to exist. And they do accept and in many cases uphold the rights for the adherents of these differing faiths to the same sanctity and value of life bestowed on the believers of their faith. Transgressions on the boundaries of tolerance have evolved, not out of the religious teachings of Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, or Buddha, but rather out of the misinterpretation of the religious scriptures left by these individuals and in many cases, in the pursuit of other worldly gains.
The calls of early Christian zealots to the "holy war" of the crusades, and the calls of Islamists to the cries of "Jihad" are not synonymous with the teachings of their Prophets.
Jesus - "Judge not and you will not be judged."
Qur'an - "There is no compulsion in religion."
Similar teachings can be found in the words and works of other great religions. Tolerance is central to the teachings of religion - intolerance is the product of mans desires not the product of divine revelation. God does not teach His creation intolerance, quite on the contrary - and this is true regardless of the God you believe in.
Achtung ;)
achtung wrote a very nice essay.
anyways, i would take this opportunity to discuss another aspect,
mudasser stated:
"If anyone believes in their religion its because they think its the truth."
my observations make me disagree to this statment. i would rather say:
" if anyone believes in their religion its because their parents believe in it."
how right am i?
No! I have never said all religions are true. In fact, I personally believe that none of them is.
I was just saying that there are some people who said that all are true (Gandhi being the prime propagandist of this idea.) I also said that this is illogical and you agree with me. good.
Coming to tolerence, it should mean the following
a)Freedom of Worship: I should be able to convert to religion A or out of religion A without any problem. (Islam does not allow 'out of' possibility.)
b)The state should give me equal opportunities whichever religion I belong to and my taxes should be independent of religion. (Islam does tax differently, treat differently. In fact in some Islami countries even compensation for accident is different for Muslim and non-Muslim. However, taxing people out of religion definitely there even in old times.)
c)Freedom of preaching: I should be allowed to spread my religion and its preachings without intereference from state.
Intolerence in Hinduism is worse. It is targetted to people within the religion. But I will not go in it right now since the problems start when you have a theocratic state. We have theocratic states only in Islam right now.
[This message has been edited by PG (edited March 21, 1999).]
Assalam Alaikum
Achtung,
‘‘The calls of early Christian zealots to the “holy war” of the crusades, and the calls of Islamists to the cries of “Jihad” are not synonymous with the teachings of their Prophets.’’
Are you saying that Jihad is not an obligation? Sorry in advance if I misunderstood you.
PG,
‘‘What results Islam has achieved, say in Afghanistan or Sudan or Nigeria or Iran or wherever?’’
At this moment Islam is not being implemented anywhere. I know you’re not going to like what I just said because in order for your argument to have some weight those countries that you mentioned would have to be Islamic states.
http://www.erols.com/zenithco is a good page to visit if you want to read about Muslim contribution to the modern world.
All religions say that humans are here to serve a purpose. If you claim that all religions are false then why are we here?
I’ll assume that you came to your conclusion after analysing all religions and that your idea is not based on a personal whim or desire.
jewels
I agree and disagree. Although my parents taught me the basic rules of Islam they didn’t teach me how to be a Muslim. When I try to teach them about Halaal and Haraam they get angry. Some people are like that, they only follow Islam where it benefits them.
Mudasser:
When I was discussing Jihad, I was not discussing the necessity of violence in certain circumstance, which Islam permits. I was not discussing the necessity of violence in the face of the forces of oppression. And I was not discussing Jihad in terms of internal "struggle".
I was discussing those who falsely claim that Islam allows for and encourages compulsion in religion. I was discussing the false translation of Jihad - to mean "holy war" - of which there is no such thing in Islam. Muslims (to the best of my knowledge) are permitted (and encouraged if other means fail) to utilize physical force in a select few circumstances.
Achtung ;)
three types of wars have been allowed to the muslims, and that is what allah says in the koran.:
1) to defend oneself
2) as a punishment, i.e. blood against blood
3) for freedom against those who interfere in religion and freedom of conscience.
the war is to be fought with the feeling of utter dislikeness to it, and ways should continuosly be sought out, to end the war. the war should be ended on any possible treaty, as early as possible, even if it apparently goes against the interests of the muslims.
the current "jehad" as preached by the molvis, is infact included in interference in religion, and is against islam!
kisi ko us ki religious beliefs pay katal kerna badmaashon ka tareeka hai, na kay naikon ka!!
So be on watch for a day when heaven shall bring a manifest smoke
covering the people; this is a painful chastisement. 'O our lord remove thou from us, the chastisement; we are believers.' How should they have the reminder? seeing a clear Messenger has already come to them, then they turned away from him, and said,' A man, tutored, possessed!"
( the koran, verse 11-14, chapter 44, Smoke, the nuclear explosion.)
three types of wars have been allowed to the muslims, and that is what allah says in the koran.:
1) to defend oneself
2) as a punishment, i.e. blood against blood
3) for freedom against those who interfere in religion and freedom of conscience.
the war is to be fought with the feeling of utter dislikeness to it, and ways should continuosly be sought out, to end the war. the war should be ended on any possible treaty, as early as possible, even if it apparently goes against the interests of the muslims.
the current "jehad" as preached by the molvis, is infact included in interference in religion, and is against islam!
kisi ko us ki religious beliefs pay katal kerna badmaashon ka tareeka hai, na kay naikon ka!!
So be on watch for a day when heaven shall bring a manifest smoke
covering the people; this is a painful chastisement. 'O our lord remove thou from us, the chastisement; we are believers.' How should they have the reminder? seeing a clear Messenger has already come to them, then they turned away from him, and said,' A man, tutored, possessed!"
( the koran, verse 11-14, chapter 44, Smoke, the nuclear explosion.)