First of all Quran was not book written by any man . Muslim believe verses of Quran was reveled by God through angels and was written by man and God himself took responsibility to preserve its message from any sort of distortion and it address all humanity not just Muslim and is valid for all ages. Secondly Quran is not against any kind of progress and positive change in society. If something was written centuries ago don’t become invalid today. You people are ignorant about Islamic fiqh(Islamic jurisprudence) as you don’t know that Muslim have concept like ijma(consensus of jurists and expert), ijtihad(human reasoning), giyas(analogical deductions) etc to address the issue of modern society. These all concepts cater the growing needs of society and muslim have been asked to use common sense and reasoning about something they are not sure.
Now message of Quran is open for interpretation. Many concepts of quran are very clear and no difference of opinions there while in many other things peoples have difference of opinion because of difference in interpretation. Some Muslim just make their mind and then go and try to interpret verses to make it fit with their own opinions while some just interpret Quran literally without understanding the historical context in which some verses were reveled . Why we see Taliban have strict or literal interpretation of Islam its because they are not educated. They cannot have research for themselves. They rely on opinions of those illiterate molvi who never went in school and never got basic education which is important for understanding the religion properly. When someone bring wrong interpretation of religion, we try to correct him because it give bad name to our religion islam. When someone will kill innocent in suicide attack and will consider it jihad then we would oppose him that such jihad is not Islamic. Well because he commit this wrong act considering it religious obligations that’s why sane people bring verse from his religion to point out that its wrong even according to his religion.
And yet the point that Koran can be misinterpreted remains valid. And that is the source of all problems. So why, when someone talks nonsense and says that Koran justifies it, do the others have to start quoting koranic verses. Why cannot someone say(and a minority does say) that
even if the Koran says so, in today's day and age, what you are saying and doing is plain stupid - Stop it!
All it requires is some common sense. People should know that there is a world beyond Islam. For example cutting off someone's hand is not considered acceptable by most societies today. Now if someone says put sharia and make laws to cut off a thieve's hand, that would not be acceptable today.
I personally feel blind nationalist is as dangerous as blind religious. My experience on this forum is that no Indian or Pakistani take any criticism on their nations from others . Nationalists are such blind that they call anyone traitor who say negative things about their country or say positive thing about enemy country as they assume their country is perfect and all evils belong to land of their enemy. Such approach is very close minded while a religious person who consider islam before nationality will be able to see the errors on both side because he know that country is run by politicians who can be corrupt and can create such conflicts which let people of both countries suffer.
I remember rahual gandi was labell as ISI agent because he said hindu extremist are dangerous for india then you read about khan who try to please Indians as much as possible by ignoring Islamic teaching but they also get label of traitor if say anything positive about Pakistan even salman khan has to make apology after commenting on 26/11 to please the sensitivity of Indians about their nation. Every second day you hear nationalist crying on how dare he insulted my flags. How dare he speak against my nation ? how dare he said anything positive about country of enemy? Why he don’t move to Pakistan if he like anything there?
You are substituting blind nationalism with blind religiosity.
So for example today if people are not willing to accept any criticism of their nation. If you substitute religion, then people would not accept any criticism of their religion! Dont people call others who say that Koran and all cannot be a basis of today's laws as it is a arabian tribal laws being forced on everyone as kafir and traitor? Or the same for Christians or Hindus.
What difference did that approach make? You substituted one for the other.
Intelligent nationalists on the other hand always take the right approach. Despite Shabana Azmi or Arundhati Roy being branded by those who dislike their work as traitors and whatnot, they are felicitated in India. They are also nationalists!
Regarding Salman Khan and other people who had to make and then retract their statements, it is obvious that you donot say certain things at certain times even if they are true (or not). You dont goto someone's house where a death has occurred and say 'ok that guy died but you know he deserved it because he has killed many people'. You respect the occasion. This is all there is to it. Also, regardless of who said what, Purohit is in Jail and in trial. What more can i say, that should be evident enough.
You see that is the problem with attitude of nationalist. They don’t look at themselves but put all efforts to find the errors in countries of others and I don’t know which channel you are talking about but whatever you said about conversion is true for india as well
[video]
102 Muslims Convert to Hinduism at Noida ,Uttar Pradesh-January,2012 - YouTube[/video]
[video]
Muslims Convert to Hinduism-25 dec,2011-Aligarh, U.P, India - YouTube[/video]
[video]
75 Muslims Convert to Hinduism in Kolkata- 29 Jan, 2012 - YouTube[/video]
And trust me you can find many such videos. You can find all evils in India what you are looking in Pakistan. Its just matter of attitude and approach. There are also many zakir naiks in india who consider themselves muslim before india. There are also many hindutva who talk about hindu nationalism and not Indian nationalism because when they say "hindu" nationalism they exclude muslim and Christian because most of them think hindu is someone whose religion originated in this land.
You are deliberately trying to confuse the issue. When did i say that conversions donot happen? At any given moment there is always a churn in the religions - people converting in and out of their religion. That is a given. It happens in India and sure as hell happens in Pakistan. People convert out of Islam in Pakistan as well. Would you like to see a prime time national telecast of a person converting out of Islam to Hinduism?
The difference i was pointing out and i am rather sure you got it was a
prominent TV channel displaying it on
prime time television in Pakistan. That sort of a thing is hard to imagine in India. You are displaying random youtube videos here? Do i need to point out a difference? Anyone can upload videos.
Now such an act in India is hard to imagine because the channels would know that the next day morning they would have govt prosecutors at their doorsteps and a few days hence, their channel licence would be revoked. This because the channel grossly hurt the sentiments of a(any) community in India. Would this ever happen in Pakistan? No.
If you were putting nation before religion you would know the disastrous consequences of alienating a minority. However, it was good for Islam as it got a new follower.
Im sure you are intelligent enough to get the point i was/am making here.
Sure you are right about approach of some really secular people but modi is still walking freely. Its like arresting the member of gangs but not the head of gangs when those who got convicted saying it openly that Modi and police help them in killing Muslims.
It is nowhere accepted that Modi did it. If you happen to look at his interviews, he gives a blow by blow account of what actions he took. Do you think that it is possible that Congress govt
might be deliberately trying to increase/show his culpability for political gains?
Now with senior ministers being convicted by Court, i would say its a thumping show that no one is scared of anyone. With a whole array of people lined up against Modi, with the Courts being out of Gujarat, if he is culpable, he will be booked.
My discussion was not the aftermath of riots but my point was why religious riots should happen in the first place when sense of nationality is stronger than religion? If all Hindu consider themselves Indians before hindu then they should not killed other innocent Indian Muslims just because they were Muslims and same is true for Muslims. Same logic apply to all other religious debate and conflicts of masjid and mandirs as they all become irrelevant when you place nationality or nation above religion.
Because people react. People are emotional humans. There are moments of insanity when we get swept away. I never said India is irreligious. I said most people put India before their religion most of the times. There are exceptions. Fortunately in India however, they are a minority.
And the times when these sad acts occur. As i said before - its what happens after these acts is what makes the people and the nation. The Muslim and the Hindu community will get balm by these convictions. They will be rewarded for their patience. And they are now being rewarded steadily by the convictions!
You see the problem of blind nationalism there. You are expecting Muslims of India to be anti-pak to prove their loyalty with India. Anti-pak would mean good indian patriot. It would also mean good open minded human beings. I have observed that it will not problem for Indian hindus as much as for indian muslims to say anything positive for Pakistan because they will be told to move in Pakistan or will label as traitor . Well some muslims in india had no choice but to stay in India.
Being nationalistic is better than being religion oriented any day. It teaches you a sense to live in diversity. Yes Indian Muslims are anti-Pak because they like the Indian Hindus and Indian Budhists and Indian Christians have suffered terrorism at the hands of Pakistan.
They also have greater familial ties with Pakistan. It makes them more balanced. Its a simple case that some Indian Muslims put their religion before Nation. Then they get open to be misguided and act against their Nation. And unfortunately they then put a stigma to the whole community because of their actions. But at the bottom the fact remains that most Indian Muslims are as anti-Pak as Hindus. It is Pakistan's actions which will make Indians like or dislike Pakistan.
As time progresses in a few decades, those who label Indian Muslims as traitors for just praising Pakistan will quieten down. Because nationalism is growing in India. And we only yell at others when we are insecure. That insecurity is dying down primarily because we are running ahead of Pakistan now. In a few decades we will make the lead big enough to be in a comfortable zone. India and Pakistan were equal rivals till 2 decades back, it takes time to get out of that competitive comparative mindset.
I personally feel Muslims of sub continent would have never demanded separate land if their Hindu friends would have treated them fairly and would have given them equal political and social rights. Think about it if all was well then why this trouble of struggling for new land? Why founder of Pakistan joined secular party congress and then left it and joined Muslim league?
Muslims of sub continent demanded separate land not because of being treated unfairly. But because they were threatened that the erstwhile prominent position they enjoyed in the Indian society will end as democracy ushers in.
They did not demand equal rights! They demanded rights far greater than being equal! They demanded representation in Parliament FAR greater than their percentage presence in the subcontinent. This loss of unchallenged power of yesteryears was what made them try for a separate nation.
It was not just about religion but hey it was difficult for them to get these rights when some dalits are still struggling to achieve this social equality in india because some Brahman living in some village of India are Brahman before Indian
Hey, every decade with greater literacy and greater economic empowerment we demolish this system. Today it is no longer half as prevalent as it used to be. Give us two or three decades more and you will loose the favourite whip used against India.
my point is very clear - the trendlines in India are very steady and point at one direction. We are steadily reducing poverty, reducing social evils, reducing illiteracy, reducing unemployement.
All our social indicators go up with each passing decade. And they are improving at a faster rate each decade. That prominently includes social evils.