radical islam says all other system have to be proven wrong
As a universal religion, Islam envisages a global political order in which all humankind will live under Muslim rule as either believers or subject communities. In order to achieve this goal, it is incumbent on all free, male, adult Muslims to carry out an uncompromising “struggle in the path of Allah,” or jihad. As the 14th-century historian and philosopher Abdel Rahman ibn Khaldun wrote, “In the Muslim community, the jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Islamic mission and the obligation [to convert] everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.”
And now look at what I wrote in green text. I clarified I did not mean “rakhis” (original that I wrote was “Rakshis”) Please note, it was you who first wrote “Rakhis” instead of Rakshis …
Now you blamed me instead, for writing “Rakhis” where you yourself wrote it in the first place….
Below is what I tried to clarify the blame that I am lieing. Yet, it is you who has in the first place written the wrong word and blamed on me…..
And now you have cleverly tried to mislead everyone as if I am lieing or changing words. Whereas it is you who in the very first place wrote the word “Rakhis” (which in fact means the ribbon that the Hindu girls tie to their brothers wrist). See how cleverly you turned it over to me …
Now tell me who wrote Rakhis in the first place and who is being blamed?
This tells about your own intentions. It is to cleverly blind others of small words. I’ll keep clarifying your tricks in the same manner.
You are loosing your credibility Yidishthir. You are a Hindu I am a non-Hindu. You should know what you are writting and what you are quoting buddy. Mistakes on my part are not gonna make me look bad but such acts from your part is gonna backfire on you, just as this one did…
Alright Lahore981, I am sorry. I apologize for accusing you wrongly. I should have seen what you wrote, more properly. It was Rakshis not Rakhis.
But remember, there is no such thing as Rakshi (may be in dalitstan.org dictionary, but not in Sanskrit).
On googling "rakshi" I found that its an alcoholic drink in Nepal. But the very 4th result is a rakhi site (the thread I refered to). So you see, even the search king Google makes mistakes......
^ Just don’t resort to personal attacks. I am here to discuss not to fight…….I like to discuss with you becaue at least YOU are knowledgable in your own faith. Rest are just empty vessels making much noise.
Read this….
This ‘revealed scripture’ comprises 2684 verses, divided into twelve chapters presenting the norms of domestic, social, and religious life in India (circa 500 BC) under the Brahmin influence, and is fundamental to the understanding of ancient Indian society.
SOURCE: http://hinduism.about.com/library/weekly/aa051303a.htm
Okay read this info.
Traditionally accepted as one of the supplementary arms of the Vedas, ‘The Laws of Manu’ or ‘Manava Dharma Shastra’ is one of the standard books in the Hindu canon, and a basic text for all gurus to base their teachings on.
SOURCE: http://hinduism.about.com/library/weekly/aa051303a.htm
Manu (Hinduism)
In Hindu Mythology, Manu is a title accorded the progenitor of humankind, first holy king to rule this earth, the indo-European Noah who saves mankind and the Vedas and the priesthood from the universal flood. He is honest which is why he is called “Satyavrata”, or faster on to the truth. Answers - The Most Trusted Place for Answering Life's Questions
Okay the real point of “Sati” disappeared in this “rakshis”. Lets get back to it. Sati is as prescribed in Manu Samriti (I mean derived from Manu Samriti)
“Sati” was declared illegal around 1827, by the British courts in subcontinent (if you have read the history). It was 1827 when the last case was officially reported. Raed this…
There are no reliable figures for the numbers who died by sati across the country. A local indication of the numbers is given in the records kept by the Bengal Presidency of the British East India Company. The total figure of known occurrences for the period 1813 to 1828 is 8,135, thus giving **an average of about 600 per year. **
Bentinck, in his 1829 report, states that 420 occurrences took place in one (unspecified) year in the ‘Lower Provinces’ of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, and 44 in the ‘Upper Provinces’ (the upper Gangetic plain). Given a population of over 50 million at the time for the Presidency, this suggests a maximum frequency of immolation among widows of well under 1%. YOUR FAVORITE SOURCE:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice
The extent of bride-burning is astonishing. " Government figures show that at least 7300 women were killed by their in-laws in the first nine months of 1995 for bringing inadequate dowries." This custom of dowry has divine sanction, since the Ramayana explicitly mentions that Sita brought a huge dowry for Rama. http://www.geocities.com/realitywithbite/hindu.htm
Many of us are trying to explain things to a guy like Lahore, who doesn't want to understand, its been explained many a times that Hinudism isn't a religion of book....
Why are many of you wasting your time on him... Make your point and move ahead ....
Throughout India, juxtaposed with tradition, superstition, religiosity, poverty and squalor, there is progress, modernity, prosperity and tolerance. Many Hindus are deeply religious, but they pursue their varying creeds in individual and personal ways, as opposed to the dogmatic, congregational and collective rituals of Muslims. There is a deity here and an idol there, and a bow or a nod to the god
There are extremist Hindus just as there are fanatical Muslims. But one is struck by the tolerance of the vast majority of Hindus towards Muslims and their religious places and practices. Many Hindus are known to patronise Muslim shrines, such as Khwaja Muinuddin Chishti’s in Ajmer, Hazrat Nizamuddin’s in Delhi, Shaikh Salim Chishti’s near Agra and Baba Haji Ali’s in Mumbai. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\04\06\story_6-4-2006_pg3_4
Arey koi samjhaao yaar usko, as I am tired and wont bother to reply after this.
Lahore, what vineshvk has said is 100% true, take it or leave it. And you havent answered my questions.
Lahore, I can produce 101 articles on Honour killings in Pakistan, on how cruel the Hudood ordances are against women (crueller than Manusmriti), how women in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries are denied basic rights (like driving or voting), but I dont bother to post them, as they arent following any religion.
So why are you wasting the memory of Gupshup server by posting something like Manusmriti which no one follows?
Or maybe the Arab countries have adopted the ManuSmriti ? :D
If you think he wants to understand you are wrong..
Manusmriti is described by many the reason of evils in Hinduism, its one of the 180+ Upanishads (Books on Interpretatoin of vedas), but he keeps going.
As well he is doing more research (without trying to understand) than you and me, so that credit we have to give him........ :-)...
Okay so you say, we do not “follow” ManuSamriti. OKay fine with me. I do understand that since begining buddy…
But it is clear that you accept it is a sacred book (your statement does acknowledge)
Rahul67 bhaiya,
You say Hinduism is not a religion of Book. Then why are there so many sacred books around? Why do they even exist, ever thought about it ??? I hope you do understand the point I am making
Arey mamoo,
if you go back, I have pointed out to your earlier two statement where you say, it was written by “some fanatic” and the links I provided say that it was written by the “father” of mankind i.e. Manu…
Then you made a statement that it is written while I provided the link that says it is revealed…
Then you said Manusamriti is NOT a book of Hinduism whereas the links I provided say that it is regarded a sacred text of Hinduism (even look at the link provided by rvikz post # 92) despite many of its laws are controversial… Why are you acting so blind. I hope now my point is clear to you…
Once again, I am trying to stick to the topic and I ask you to stick to the topic too…
Instead, why don’t you come to the point about “sati” and “wife burning”. I have provided statistical figures about the incidences and you people aren’t even looking at them and wasting time and bandwidth by arguing about Manusamriti not being a book in Hinduism…
Arey mamoo,
apun boley to aik baar phir sooch ley is par…
Don’t worry about memory. Its the job of Admin to keep track of…
Do you think you people understand what I am trying to say? Everybody among you is writting different statememnts… And I think the credit goes to Nicols_jhon …
Why don’t you tell us about “Sati” and the info I posted about “sati” with statistical figures…
I provide you other references for the injunction of "sati". Have a look dudes.......:)
" It is the highest duty of the woman to immolate herself after her husband " Brahma Purana.80.75
" On her husband's death, the widow should observe celibacy or should ascend the funeral pyre after him." Vishnu Dharmasutra XXV.14
" The 8 queens of Krishna, who have been named, with Rukmini at their head, embraced the body of Hari, and entered the funeral fire. Revati also embracing the corpse of Rama, entered the blazing pile, which was cool to her, happy in contact with her lord. Hearing these events, Ugrasena and Anakadundubhi, with Devaki and Rohini, committed themselves to the flames." Vishnu Purana.V.38
