Saudi arabia and attitudes towards non-arab muslims.

[Hulk]

Why you guys are trying to align everything by religion. IMO country comes first and then within country religion. If religion is everything then why we have so many countries of Muslim majority. My dear friend everyone associates itself with country first then religion. I do not know why for Pakistan it is other way round.

 

[Hulk]

saudi- is a nation by itself and will only cater to its own interests........

pakistan is the only nation that is obsessed with being muslims and helping all those who are muslims.....

it still baffels me-why do you even care ?
in an other thread abt an indian girl disproving einstein or something...one of the members asked why was the fact that she being muslim was not mentioned in the article.......(i could not ans that coz i was banned at that time)....the answer
is ...no one in the world especially india do not care abt the religeon of people who accomplish things even if a hindu had done that no one would go and say that a hindu did that,,,,,its only people of pakistan who are obscessed with religeon-this i still dont understand? anyone here care to enlighten me over here

I agree, after reading here in PDF I am getting the feeling that, if a Pakistani meets someone new first thing he wants to know is his religion and then based on what his religion is he will respond. I hope I am wrong, if this is true then IMO Pakistan has taken religion too far. I keep my religion separate from all other thing including work. I discuss religion rarely less then 1 time in a month.

 

[FireFighter]

Friend, use your head not your heart. It affects you most in Pakistan, because no matter what India does is wrong in your eyes. You may hate the fact that you originated from India, but thats the truth, and no matter how many times you bathe to get rid of this fact, it will still not go away. Like it is written, there are muslims in various percentages all over the world , everytime there is a disagreement between muslims, dont expect Saudi or any other muslim country to intefere, ultimately it would work against the muslims themselves. This is what diplomacy is all about, all angles are considered before any action is taken, dont think the Saudis didnt take that to heart. By the way. You go on about muslims and Saudi, do you know how you Pakistanis being muslims are treated in these muslim worlds. My friend , it would break your heart.

Muslims are still treated better in Saudi and gulf countries than they're in their "home" country, India. Its a fact and its really hard for you to comprehend, but i think many of you indians need a doze of reminder about that. The Saudis aren't occupying a foreign territory and have over 500,000 soldiers systematically oppressing muslims, do they? Saudis dont sponsor or indulge in communal violence and discriminate muslims at the state level? The Saudis have a rule that they don't give citizenship to anyone regardless of race, religion or nationality, etc. and thats that. Pakistan has extremely good military and political relations with the Saudis and millions of Pakistanis live in Saudi peacefully says something about their relationship. Infact Saudi Army trains with Pakistan Army more than they train with any other Army in the world should tell you how close our relationship is.


Secondly, the good thing is that the whole concept of "Ummah" or collective Islamic brotherhood still exists in the hearts and minds of most muslims across the world. Its embeded in our culture, our scriptures, roots that it cannot be simply taken out that easily so long as people remain Muslims. It's just that the corrupt politicians, beaurocrats and ruling class statesmen have sold out their countrymen for petty $$$ and sold the concept of "ummah" as well. They're not true representatives of their constituents; they're rather there for their own interests more than anything else.

 

[Hulk]

Muslims are still treated better in Saudi and gulf countries than they're in their "home" country, India. Its a fact and its really hard for you to comprehend, but i think many of you indians need a doze of reminder about that. The Saudis aren't occupying a foreign territory and have over 500,000 soldiers systematically oppressing muslims, do they? Saudis dont sponsor or indulge in communal violence and discriminate muslims at the state level? The Saudis have a rule that they don't give citizenship to anyone regardless of race, religion or nationality, etc. and thats that. Pakistan has extremely good military and political relations with the Saudis and millions of Pakistanis live in Saudi peacefully says something about their relationship. Infact Saudi Army trains with Pakistan Army more than they train with any other Army in the world should tell you how close our relationship is.


Secondly, the good thing is that the whole concept of "Ummah" or collective Islamic brotherhood still exists in the hearts and minds of most muslims across the world. Its embeded in our culture, our scriptures, roots that it cannot be simply taken out that easily so long as people remain Muslims. It's just that the corrupt politicians, beaurocrats and ruling class statesmen have sold out their countrymen for petty $$$ and sold the concept of "ummah" as well. They're not true representatives of their constituents; they're rather there for their own interests more than anything else.

We do not associate Kashmir with religion and if you talk about oppression do not forget how many time Muslim rulers have attacked India greater then 20 times, and here some people talk about India expansion plans which exists only on internet or minds of few people in India (Govt does not have any plan and that matters).

 

[IceCold]

Can anyone answer why do we consider Saudi-arabia as our elder brother? The way i see it its embarrassing to begin with. I mean i never ever came across another country that considers a different country as its elder brother. What impression does it leave? our we really that pathetic that we need so called brothers to survive. Khushamad kis cheez ka lia?

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Alright – I have a Big Question for all of you:

Why is it that any one of regardless of his color, creed faith or affiliation can upon fulfillment of certain criteria like, duration of stay, marriage, investment etc, qualify for citizenship in the West, protected by its laws with equal status at par with any of its other citizens.
But no Muslims from our part of the world can ever qualify for a Saudi and a couple of other Arab countries citizenship, even if we have lived our entire lives in those countries.
And forget about marriage to any Saudi women – you know what the sword can do to your neck.
The West being much more advanced than these Arab countries.
Israel grants automatic citizenship to any Jew, living in any part of the world.

What kind of Muslims are we? And what kind of brotherhood do we speak of?
I am totally confused here. Any help in understanding this will be much appreciated.

Sounds like a quote in the novel "Animal Farm":

"We are all equal. It just happens that some of us are more equal than others."

 

[FireFighter]

We do not associate Kashmir with religion and if you talk about oppression do not forget how many time Muslim rulers have attacked India greater then 20 times, and here some people talk about India expansion plans which exists only on internet or minds of few people in India (Govt does not have any plan and that matters).

Historically, Kashmir was never a part of Hindustan or India so to speak. Although hindus have existed for thousands of years, they were all disunited and separated by caste, language, region in the sub-continent. all the smaller states like Maharashtra, Bengal, kashmir, Gujrat, etc. were small kingdoms. It was the Moghuls Muslims that established "India" by uniting all the smaller territories and turned it into a proper Civilization that prospered so much that it controlled 30% of the world's trade compared to what like 4% it is today.

So, on what grounds do you believe Kashmir or Bengal or whatnot is part of India? Do you believe it because your scriptures says so, if so, then provide proof? Or you believe in it because BJP or Congress says so?

 

[SeaGull]

Sounds like a quote in the novel "Animal Farm":

"We are all equal. It just happens that some of us are more equal than others."

SinoIndus - An 'ANIMAL FARM' sure it is.

 

[Hulk]

Historically, Kashmir was never a part of Hindustan or India so to speak. Although hindus have existed for thousands of years, they were all disunited and separated by caste, language, region in the sub-continent. all the smaller states like Maharashtra, Bengal, kashmir, Gujrat, etc. were small kingdoms. It was the Moghuls Muslims that established "India" by uniting all the smaller territories and turned it into a proper Civilization that prospered so much that it controlled 30% of the world's trade compared to what like 4% it is today.

So, on what grounds do you believe Kashmir or Bengal or whatnot is part of India? Do you believe it because your scriptures says so, if so, then provide proof? Or you believe in it because BJP or Congress says so?

Can you point me where I said Kashmir was part of India etc. I did not want to bring Kashmir into discussion.
Secondly even if Mughals united India it was still oppression. People were treated badly in the name of religion, tax was levied on Hindus which made many Hindus convert to Islam.

 

[fhassan]

tax was levied on Hindus which made many Hindus convert to Islam.

Tax was also levied on the muslims known as "Zakah", the non-muslims had to pay the "Jizya" tax which was traditionally lower than the Zakah, so I don't see what the problem is.

Do you expect the Hindus to live tax free with only Muslims having to pay the tax?

The fact that we ruled you for over a thousand years, and that today most of you are still Hindus is proof that we did not forcefully convert you. We could have easily put a sward to your throats over those thousand years, and forced you to convert - but we did not do that.

 

[Hulk]

Tax was also levied on the muslims known as "Zakah", the non-muslims had to pay the "Jizya" tax which was traditionally lower than the Zakah, so I don't see what the problem is.

Do you expect the Hindus to live tax free with only Muslims having to pay the tax?

The fact that we ruled you for over a thousand years, and that today most of you are still Hindus is proof that we did not forcefully convert you. We could have easily put a sward to your throats over those thousand years, and forced you to convert - but we did not do that.

Never heard of tax on Muslim. And by the way there was no way sword could have been used on such large population without revolt.

 

[KSRaj]

It was the Moghuls Muslims that established "India" by uniting all the smaller territories and turned it into a proper Civilization that prospered so much that it controlled 30% of the world's trade compared to what like 4% it is today.

A single statement that has managed to get its History, Economics and Culture wrong FireFighter!

 

[R.A.W.]

Historically, Kashmir was never a part of Hindustan or India so to speak. Although hindus have existed for thousands of years, they were all disunited and separated by caste, language, region in the sub-continent. all the smaller states like Maharashtra, Bengal, kashmir, Gujrat, etc. were small kingdoms. It was the Moghuls Muslims that established "India" by uniting all the smaller territories and turned it into a proper Civilization that prospered so much that it controlled 30% of the world's trade compared to what like 4% it is today.

So, on what grounds do you believe Kashmir or Bengal or whatnot is part of India? Do you believe it because your scriptures says so, if so, then provide proof? Or you believe in it because BJP or Congress says so?

Ever heard of Mauryas.... Ever heard of Chandragupta Maurya and chanakya. Ever heard of Ashok. India was united then...... and Kashmir was the part of India....

And your theory of "you" ruling India well sir you were also ruling India when APJ Abdul Kalam Azad was the president.....................

And India was ruled by Hindus for 5000 years before that and you were part of India. But we do not consider them valid enough to bring this into legitimate discussions.

 

[fhassan]

Never heard of tax on Muslim.

Indeed, there is a tax. It is called Zakah, and it must be paid by every adult Muslim who is; mentally sane, free, and financially able, in order to support specific categories people:

"The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarers; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is knower, Wise." (The Holy Qur'an 9:60).

Every Muslim pays it, and it is roughly 2.5% of ones annual income. More info:

IslamiCity.com - Zakat

And by the way there was no way sword could have been used on such large population without revolt.

I agree.

In fact, I made my initial remark in the hope of you rebuking me the way you have. Allow me to explain:

On the one hand, you suggest that imposing taxes during the Mughal Empire, also payable by Muslims, was a sufficient impetus for Hindus to convert to Islam, yet you deny that forcefully converting them by the sword is possible.

according to you, Hindus were docile enough to convert through taxation, yet are militant enough to resist conversion through the sword. These is a paradox.

I do hope that you understand my point, and this should be sufficient to prove that the Hindus were not impelled to convert to Islam. as I recall – they were even given “people of the book” status.

 

[R.A.W.]

Indeed, there is a tax. It is called Zakah, and it must be paid by every adult Muslim who is; mentally sane, free, and financially able, in order to support specific categories people:

"The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarers; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is knower, Wise." (The Holy Qur'an 9:60).

Every Muslim pays it, and it is roughly 2.5% of ones annual income. More info:

IslamiCity.com - Zakat



I agree.

In fact, I made my initial remark in the hope of you rebuking me the way you have. Allow me to explain:

On the one hand, you suggest that imposing taxes during the Mughal Empire, also payable by Muslims, was a sufficient impetus for Hindus to convert to Islam, yet you deny that forcefully converting them by the sword is possible.

according to you, Hindus were docile enough to convert through taxation, yet are militant enough to resist conversion through the sword. These is a paradox.

I do hope that you understand my point, and this should be sufficient to prove that the Hindus were not impelled to convert to Islam. as I recall – they were even given “people of the book” status.

Aurangzeb
On 11 November1675, Aurangzeb publicly executed the ninth Sikh Master, Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji for not converting to Islam. The Sikh Guru chose to be publicly beheaded with the sword of the executioner rather than be forced to change his religion. This marked a turning point for Sikhism, which now was even further militarised by their last Prophet, Guru Gobind Singh. Aurangzeb was responsible for the forced conversion of millions of non-Muslims to Islam. Aurangzeb was also responsible in the death of the four sons of the tenth Guru. Sikhs believe that the Zafarnama (Notification of Victory) sent by the tenth Guru resulted in Aurangzeb realizing his mistakes and in him losing the will to live and finally to his demise.

Aurangzeb's harsh treatment of Hindus led to uprisings in the western Deccan plateau, especially by the Marathi rebel Shivaji. So fierce were these conflicts around the Deccan that Aurangzeb eventually left the Mogul capital Delhi to take up residence in nearby Kirki, now known as Aurangabad, and he remained there until the end of his reign.

Unlike his predecessors, Aurangzeb left few buildings. He created a modest mausoleum for his first wife, sometimes called the mini-Taj, in Aurangabad. It pales in comparison to his father's masterpiece, made with cheaper material and simple decoration. He also built in Lahore what was, for a long time, the largest mosque outside Mecca: the Badshahi Masjid (Imperial Mosque) or Alamgiri Masjid, as it is also known after its builder. He also added a small marble mosque known as the Moti Masjid (or Pearl Mosque) to the Red Fort complex in Delhi.


It is a well know fact that among many Hindus the name of Aurangzeb evokes the same passionate hatred as do the names of Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammad of Ghori. It was Aurangzeb who ordered all temples destroyed, among them the Kashi Vishwanath temple, one of the most sacred places of Hinduism, and had mosques built on a number of cleared temple sites. Other Hindu sacred places within his reach equally suffered destruction, with mosques built on them. A few examples: Krishna’s birth temple in Mathura; the rebuilt Somnath temple on the coast of Gujarat; the Vishnu temple replaced with the Alamgir mosque now overlooking Benares; and the Treta-ka-Thakur temple in Ayodhya. The number of temples destroyed by Aurangzeb is counted in four, if not five figures. Aurangzeb did not stop at destroying temples, their users were also wiped out; even his own brother Dara Shikoh was executed for taking an interest in Hindu religion; Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded because he objected to Aurangzeb’s forced conversions.


This is just a singular example if you need I can provide you with further examples.