From: qzuhair@milton.u.washington.edu (Newton)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Re: "...... to castrate the Hindus ..."
Date: 14 Dec 92 05:50:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Dec14.055007.13342
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Dec14.044340.22869@udel.edu> godura@hercules.cis.udel.edu (Ruchir Godura) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.212714.905@u.washington.edu> qzuhair@milton.u.washington.edu (Newton) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec13.153757.2511@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> nrai@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (neeraj.rai) writes:
>>
>>and rituals of hinduism, but from what you have stated above, it seems that
>>the laws of hinduism and its rituals were changed in the past and are still 
>>being modified. But, an essential feature of religous doctrines should be
>>that those doctrines are appliciable in all times and only then the 
>>completeness of the basic religous principles is assured. SO,  why the
>>doctrines of hinduism were modified in various ages?
>>
>>
>>NEWTON...(just curious)
>>
>That is exactly what is right with Hinduism. I dislike pointing out what
>I perceive as flaws in other religions publicly, but, since you have
>touched the topic, here goes.
>First of all, sati was never a part of hinduism. Please have the sense
>to differentiate between social practices that developed in parts of a
>hindu society, and actual practices sanctioned by our holy books.
>As far as change goes, it is the greatness of this religion to tolerate
>all change as is percieved necessary by enlightened individuals. These
>changes brought about by reformers do not affect hinduism as such,
>because they mostly relate to social practices, and are thus not a part
>of the religion.
>The notion that what was written by some wise man hundreds of years ago,
>will be valid for all time is foolish.There will be hundreds of muslims
                              ^^^^^^^^

  I appreciate this provision of  information about hinduism, your 
misundertanding of Islam and the "nice" remarks about glorious Quran(see
the sentence pointed, below). I was rather expecting an informative reply than
the criticism and insults since my posting was simply an inquiry. Even though,
I can give the answers to your questions as related to Islamic rules, I cannot
do it now due to the lack of time. But if i do, I would be "purely" informative
Yeah, I touched the topic, but I did not find flaws.

BTW, Quran was not written by some "man".

>that will cry themselves hoarse that the Quran is the answer to all
>problems in society for ever more. But look at it yourself. Are there no
>banks in Isalmic countries ? Don't they charge interest ? What is it
>that your religion says about inteest? 
>Look at the position of women in islamic societies ? Oh they are fine,
>you will say. Who's asking you ? I would like a muslim woman to answer
>that.


--> Do you cut off the hands and ears and balls or whatever of thieves, as
                         
>is directed in the Quran ?
>Look at the middle east. They have an embarrasment of wealth, and they
>are still such backward societies. It is because islam is so inflexible
>.. or rather, the mullahs who run islamic societies, and bestow upon
>themselves the undisputed right to interpret the Quran, are so
>inflexible.

>-- 
>Ruchir Godura | godura@cis.udel.edu | (302) 292-0668 (H) (302) 831-1949 (W)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan