What's new

‘Celebrate Hyderabad Liberation Day’

So you bring an Islamophobic site as a reference. Since what you quoted must be somewhere in Islamic texts like Quran. You should have quoted them directly....
 
Do you know why KHALSA (Sikhism) was founded?

Indian history is full of such stories... You have to change your history books.

Moodi vows to convert the whole of India to Hinduism. Was there any Muslim King in the Indian history who vowed for any similar plan?

In the 'State of Hyderabad' during Nizams' regimes, there no Hindu-Muslim riots. All the dirt started up after Bharat's occupation. In the State of Hyderabad, Hindus and Muslims lived in perfect harmony.
 
Okay....

"Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing." Surah 2:225

"Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief, except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty." Surah 16: 106

The noted Islamic commentator, Al-Tabary explained Surah 16:106 as a verse that had been revealed to Mohammed after he learned that Ammar Ibn Yasser was forced to deny his faith in Mohammed when kidnapped by the Banu Moghera tribe. Mohammed consoled Ammar by telling him, "If they turned, you turn." (Meaning: if they again capture you, you are allowed to deny me again.)

These and similar passages from the Quran clearly reveal that Muslims' unintentional lies are forgivable and that even their intentional lies can be absolved by performing extra duties. It is also clear that if forced to do so, Muslims can lie while under oath and can even falsely deny faith in Allah, as long as they maintain the profession of faith in their hearts.

In the Hadith, Mohammed, emphasizes the same concept.

From "Ehiaa Oloum al-Din," by the famous Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, Vol. 3: PP.284-287:

One of Mohammed's daughters, Umm Kalthoum, testified that she had never heard the Apostle of Allah condone lying, except in these three situations:

For reconciliation among people.
In war.
Amongst spouses, to keep peace in the family.
One passage from the Hadith quotes Mohammed as saying: "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies except those uttered to help bring reconciliation between Muslims."

Another says, "Aba Kahl, reconcile among people."(Meaning: even through lying.)

The following quote demonstrates the broadness of situations in which the prophet permitted lying. "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with these exceptions: During war because war is deception, to reconcile among two quarreling men, and for a man to appease his wife."

The principle of Al-Takeyya

The Arabic word, "Takeyya", means "to prevent," or guard against. The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.) But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah." Surah 3: 28

According to this verse a Muslim can pretend to befriend infidels (in violation of the teachings of Islam) and display adherence with their unbelief to prevent them from harming him.

Under the concept of Takeyya and short of killing another human being, if under the threat of force, it is legitimate for Muslims to act contrary to their faith. The following actions are acceptable:

-Drink wine, abandon prayers, and skip fasting during Ramadan.
-Renounce belief in Allah.
-Kneel in homage to a deity other than Allah.
-Utter insincere oaths.

So you bring an Islamophobic site as a reference. Since what you quoted must be somewhere in Islamic texts like Quran. You should have quoted them directly....
 
i am getting tired of the anti-islam propaganda forwarded by so many indian members. :(
Chill mate, you haven't seen much. Even some of your very friends could be closet Islamphobes, its just that virtual world gives them the space to spew which otherwise is not possible in the real world...
 
I dont want to discuss religion here.Only makes us feel bad. So, please let us abstain.
 
Okay....

"Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing." Surah 2:225

"Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief, except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty." Surah 16: 106

The noted Islamic commentator, Al-Tabary explained Surah 16:106 as a verse that had been revealed to Mohammed after he learned that Ammar Ibn Yasser was forced to deny his faith in Mohammed when kidnapped by the Banu Moghera tribe. Mohammed consoled Ammar by telling him, "If they turned, you turn." (Meaning: if they again capture you, you are allowed to deny me again.)

These and similar passages from the Quran clearly reveal that Muslims' unintentional lies are forgivable and that even their intentional lies can be absolved by performing extra duties. It is also clear that if forced to do so, Muslims can lie while under oath and can even falsely deny faith in Allah, as long as they maintain the profession of faith in their hearts.

In the Hadith, Mohammed, emphasizes the same concept.

From "Ehiaa Oloum al-Din," by the famous Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, Vol. 3: PP.284-287:

One of Mohammed's daughters, Umm Kalthoum, testified that she had never heard the Apostle of Allah condone lying, except in these three situations:

For reconciliation among people.
In war.
Amongst spouses, to keep peace in the family.
One passage from the Hadith quotes Mohammed as saying: "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies except those uttered to help bring reconciliation between Muslims."

Another says, "Aba Kahl, reconcile among people."(Meaning: even through lying.)

The following quote demonstrates the broadness of situations in which the prophet permitted lying. "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with these exceptions: During war because war is deception, to reconcile among two quarreling men, and for a man to appease his wife."

The principle of Al-Takeyya

The Arabic word, "Takeyya", means "to prevent," or guard against. The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.) But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah." Surah 3: 28

According to this verse a Muslim can pretend to befriend infidels (in violation of the teachings of Islam) and display adherence with their unbelief to prevent them from harming him.

Under the concept of Takeyya and short of killing another human being, if under the threat of force, it is legitimate for Muslims to act contrary to their faith. The following actions are acceptable:

-Drink wine, abandon prayers, and skip fasting during Ramadan.
-Renounce belief in Allah.
-Kneel in homage to a deity other than Allah.
-Utter insincere oaths.
There we go, thanks for the post. Now please go through your post again. The concept simply states that "In order to protect yourself from harm" and has never stated that "In order to harm others". See the difference...

I dont want to discuss religion here.Only makes us feel bad. So, please let us abstain.
Sure, I believe its you who brought religious quotes in here..
 
My great Grandfather, the picture in my avatar, worked for the Nizam of Hyderabad. Hyderabad was a Hindu majority state, I have no problem with it being with India. But only if these two faced hypocrites would give Jammu and Kashmir the same treatment.
 
What does protect yourself from harm signifies?

It is not the age of kings and queens where you have to protect yourself from harm.

In present context, muslims can appear to be liberal, secular community until they grow in strength and numbers. Once they grow and they feel that they can no longer be harmed, they will demand Shariah and what not.
There we go, thanks for the post. Now please go through your post again. The concept simply states that "In order to protect yourself from harm" and has never stated that "In order to harm others". See the difference...


Sure, I believe its you who brought religious quotes in here..
 
Was he stingy only for his personal expenses or for his whole public?


The source may be his mindset not any reference book.


Moodi vows to convert the whole of India to Hinduism. Was there any Muslim King in the Indian history who vowed for any similar plan?

In the 'State of Hyderabad' during Nizams' regimes, there no Hindu-Muslim riots. All the dirt started up after Bharat's occupation. In the State of Hyderabad, Hindus and Muslims lived in perfect harmony.

I'm sure you think that a guy who didn't take a bath for several years and wore the same smelly clothes because he wanted to hold on to every cent he ever earned is going to be concerned for 'public'. And my @$$ there were no 'riots', what he did with the Razakars is very well known. In any case we don't have to bother about his claims. The Indian republic does not give power to shitty little kings whose forefatehrs somehow managed to captured power. You get elected - you rule. Anyone else who has any other pretentions- he either leaves on his own or we'll boot him out without any remorse.
 
What does protect yourself from harm signifies?

It is not the age of kings and queens where you have to protect yourself from harm.

In present context, muslims can appear to be liberal, secular community until they grow in strength and numbers. Once they grow and they feel that they can no longer be harmed, they will demand Shariah and what not.
Now you are deviating from the topic and getting into your ranting mode. Please refrain doing so. If you have something to state about Taqqiya with proper sources them I am all ears else move on...
 
Leave it yaar. Dont have enough energy left to debate.
Now you are deviating from the topic and getting into your ranting mode. Please refrain doing so. If you have something to state about Taqqiya with proper sources them I am all ears else move on...
 
My great Grandfather, the picture in my avatar, worked for the Nizam of Hyderabad. Hyderabad was a Hindu majority state, I have no problem with it being with India. But only if these two faced hypocrites would give Jammu and Kashmir the same treatment.

what two faced hypocrites. We have 2 principles
- India is secular so religion has no place in any narrative
- India is democratic so no system other than elections will be allowed

In compliance with the above 2 principles we removed the Nawab and threw his 'heirs' into the dustbin. And we didn't do that only to muslim kings, we threw out each and every hindu king also form power. They wanna trun their palaces into 5 star hotels, no problems. But anyone that thinks that he's gonna 'rule' will find himself socked by the butt end of a rifle.
 
Oh yes, enough was not done, how can they leave all these non-HIndus alive. There was a need of many more Babu Bajrangis during those times even though there were many then. You can still correct the mistake. No? Always knew about your intentions, good to know that you are being more assertive about it.


Yes I know you are cold blooded...


Source please?
Yes, the Sunderlal Report as quoted by frontline does mention that the razakars had it coming. Look at the conclusion. They should have been cleaned. The time is now gone. Even then de franchising is an option that can be looked into.

You tell me. From the perspective of protecting Indians, Hindus, Christians, ordinary Muslims, Sikhs etc ...is it not beneficial to prevent you from voting?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom