From: dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: Idols RE: Why did Muhammad Break Temples
Date: 18 Dec 92 20:05:37 CST
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <1gtp46INN3e5@crcnis1.unl.edu>, fall217@cse.unl.edu () writes:
>  You have mentioned two major points:
> 
> 1) Why we can not pray to Ideal and why it is not acceptable for muslim?
> 
> 2) why Muslim asked for the secular ism in the socity which is not muslim?

  First, I am confused as to what you want to say. (Please write down on a
  sheet of paper what you want to say, check it, and, then post.)
> 
> 1) It is very simple that you can not make a perfect idol of God. Is it true
> no metter how beutifull it may be it might not be even close to God. then how come you can represent perfect with an imperfact.  
> 
> To say that it is just to represent God in the form may be seen by human is to 
> challange God that we can change his nature.( astaghfirrullah).

  Astagfirrullah - whatever it may mean, is what I am not trying to say.
  Nowhere it is claimed that the idol is God. It is one of the manifestations
  of the several forms. Just as if you have a brother, then both of you do
  represent as memebers of the family, but, your whole family is not in any
  way *only* the two of you ? (Or perhaps it is - by your astagfirrullah logic
  :-) ?)

  Since Almighty is The Seer, The Knower, The All Wise, it is simply stupid
  to assume that He will get angry thinking that some mortals have started
  a rebellion since they have resorted to worship thru' idols. God does not
  have any White House or a Space ship - He is more powerful than all these.

  God therefore knows what a human *wants* to do. However, he has given you
  a free will. Therefore, if you want to conceptualize a form in order that
  when you try to shut your eyes and pray (again a form of kriya but could be
  most convenient), a form or an "image" surfaces. From a mundane point, this
  form convenient for humans, is given an artificial shape. This shape helps
  to realize a particular form of the multitude of forces in Nature. What is
  wrong with that ? 
 
   The Christians also pray before the Holy Cross ! What is wrong there ?
 
   I think that Muhammad (570 - 632 A.D) broke the temples because he had to
   exercise his military influence. The people, worshippers of Al-Lat, had
   become oppressive. They engaged in extremely putrid exchanges and sheer
   tyranny. Thus Muhammad, upon realizing this, had shown his protest, by
   breaking the idols in order to show that mere idols were not God. But that
   does not mean that you have to fanatically break all idols whereever you
   go ! However, I am assuming that one can assume the scriptures are all
   subject to scrutiny and revision. Nothing is more holy than a pure deed. 
> 
> These excuses to use different idols for one God does not make sence to me.

  The different idols are different because one must accept that there are
  forces in nature of various type and each idol is attributed with a force.

   The early Aryans - who came/ invaded India did not worship idols. The
   concept of idol worship cam with the later ages - probably with the 
   Dravidians - whom it is reported , Aryans displaced down South. 
> 
> Because these reasons I belive that to worship an Idol is to disgress God.
> Why we should worship an Idol if we can worship him without seening but 
> seening his powers and belassings.
> Idol worshiping may be acceptable for you but for muslims it is not.  
> I belive if you have the right to belive what you think is right then every 
> body else has the same right.
>

   True. But then that defeats the basic idea of breaking the idols by
   Muhammad (570-632 A.D). He knew that they were *not* God. But he broke
   them when he could have chosen another military way to exercise his
   lordship. By this I mean that one who believed that idols were a
   manifestation of the Alimighty (at least to worshippers), was denied
   his/her right of worship. Why so ? If some idol-worshippers were 
   cruel and were oppressive, then they could have been punished in a more
   different way - i.e sent them to jail or etc. 


> 2)
> No other religion has mentioned any room for other religion but islam have 
>did.

   You know what ? Your English is astaghfirullah ! Anyways, assuming that
   you want to claim that Islam is tolerant, I will say that please wash 
   your eyes, or go thru' a religious ablution, and, re-read the Qur'an. (It
   is one of the most violent religious scriptures - at least to me.)

   I have read the Qur'an, prayed in a mosque in Aqbah (Jordan) been to
   Israel and have touched other parts of the mid-east. I have also read
   and seen what Islamic practices are. Thus, claiming Islam is tolerant
   and protects minorities will make the Nobel Committee give you the 
   prize for "original History". Man, what are you made of ?

> to say that rights of minorities are gien under any secular goverment are not
> the same as islam has given.  Being a muslim I felt better when I read that 
> GO.pakwill rebuild those temples who were destroyed. Eventhough atleast some 
> of them were abandand by their followers.

 The Babri Mosque was built in 16th century and was also abandoned for one
 century. Muslims in India are a pampered class who use Islam any which way
 they want. (Not that there are good liberated Muslims in India, but, on a
 regular basis, these "hypocrites" are shunted by "true" Muslims and in many
 cases threatened physically.) Then again, the "true" Muslims claim that Islam
 was spread thru' peace !!!! This is the end of the 20th century Mr. ! There
 is a limit to bluffing. Talking about India, I am quite certain that this
 outburst is not just a "fluke". Other people were angry with Muslims for
 a long time. I am afraid to say, thaht the question of BJP, VHP, RSS etc.
 is not the point. People are angry with Muslims and their don't-care
 attitude. I am also of the opinion that the worst is not yet over in India.
> 
> 	In any system people who are the part of that system they have the 
> right to ask right given under that system.

  In no way it means that you can do what you want. (We Indians claim that 
  India is a civilized democratic country). There should be a single law
  for all Indians. Why should Muslims be given the freedom to do what they
  want and to misuse/ insult the Constitution ? Can you do that in the U.S ?

  Can you marry 4 times and say that you will be judged according to the Sharia
  laws instead of the Federal laws - since you are a Muslim ?????? 

> thanks 
> syed agha saeed naqvi
>

   - deb chatterjee
  (a good samaritan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh