Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH



I have a very close friend. He is Hindu. He was a professor of a renowned university of Bangladesh. Now he lives in a America. He is an atheist. Some of the comments he makes in Facebook are nothing but crude bashing of Hindu religion. I had an opportunity to read one of his ugly comments about goddess Kali in Facebook. This is called crude bashing. This does not help us. 
Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 25, 2014, at 8:03 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:

 


Subimal Chakraborty Said: "I agree with Farida apa: crude bashing of Islam and for that matter any religion is indefensible. It is not only childish, it also provokes a fanatic and leaves in their hands 'weapons' to make an attempt to stop the progress of human thoughts and ideas. Therefore, critiquing of a religion should be objective and analytical with no preconceived hatred for it in the critic's mind." 
 
Who hates who? I do not think anybody here hates anybody personally; people just put forward opinions. The above statement means some people have hatred against some other people in this forum. This is a misguided notion.
 
Now - what's the meaning of "crude bashing?" All we have heard so far from Ms. Majid and Mr. Rahman are terms like - "Islam bashing" and "hatred for Islam," when they run out of arguments to counter criticism. To them, every criticism of their religion is out of hatred for their religion. Now, an atheist is joining that cohort; this smells like a political stand, not ideological.
 
The fact is – criticism of one's favorite object will always hurt his/her feeling; it does not matter how objective or analytical  criticism may be. Also, how can someone defend a blind faith with a sound logic? They can't. Blind faith logic will always sound ridiculous to an open minded person. Mr. Rahman thinks that he knows the authentic version of Islam. Isn't it a ridiculous claims also? How could anyone be so sure that he/she has the most authentic version of religion, unless it's his faith.

Lately, I am hearing from Mr. Rahman that judging Prophet needs proper context. To me,
a noble man is always a noble man; no context or excuse is needed to evaluate a noble man.
 
Jiten Roy


On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:33 PM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Yes, you are so right about the collapse of the Persian empire. That removed the best wall that was ever built in the western frontier in that era. Had that been intact, we would have been saved from this abysmal mediocrity.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:05 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Nothing is more blasphemous and moronic to think that a passionate and almighty God sent his best and last messenger to a community of desert oasis and forgot about his best creation since then.  Even a blind could see that the last messenger was a failure till he adopted dacoits, blunder and mayhem of the weak Jewish communities from the hideout of Yatrib.   It was the collapse of the Persian Empire due to war of succession that made Islam the winner.  But again, the Ummayads, the archenemy of the Hashemites in which the Prophet belonged, was the winner.  As Ms. Majid is a closet fundamentalist, she gets irritated by a correct analysis of Islamic history. 

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:

 
Maybe, we all should hide in a cave because the vicious mob will be angry and start killing innocents? Is that the thinking? A white flag with out a fight? We should only talk about flowers? Right?
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:04 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Your imbecile mind will not comprehend the seriousness of the political situation with the vicious Jehadists in Bangladesh -- innocent people will eventually be the victims.
 But you and the troll don't care a hoot . . .

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:48:38 -0800
From: shahdeeldar@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
To: farida_majid@hotmail.com; mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com

If brother Shalom wants people to know the prophet and a religion better, then people have no choice but to ask some tough questions. If you do not like the heat, stay out it and be in peace. But ordering how a discussion should be moved forward is not really a Muktomona motto. You got your pet subjects and you are totally free to push forward whatever you think right for your taste. Please stop browbeating others in regards to what should be discussed and what not. That is called censorship. If I remember correct, we were equally critical about the authentic Marxism of Sankar-da when he tried to feed us with a different cool-aid.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:00 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Please STOP posting this religious stuff in mukto-mona.  We've had this crude Islam-bashing type of writings day after day, month after month, year after year.


From: subain1@yahoo.com
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:16:21 -0800
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH

 

The talk of 'context needed to understand Mohammad' is essentially nonsense talk.

There is no need to understand a man who lived on Earth some fifteen hundred years back. What the world needs to do is to see the actions of people today, and reward, stay indifferent or punish those actions, depending on the virtue, innocence and criminality, respectively, of those actions. Mohammad does not need any such reward, indifference or punishment.

The problem with the soft-sellers of the Islamic doctrine is that they w


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Please read





__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Video





__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH



Not even God is above criticism, why should a self claimed prophet be so?  What is the reason behind Subimal considering bashing of any religion indefensible?  Where has God mentioned the blasphemy rules?  Many a God and his religion has died in course of history.  The surviving ones would also face disintegration.  No faith monger could save them.

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 26, 2014, at 8:03 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:

 


Subimal Chakraborty Said: "I agree with Farida apa: crude bashing of Islam and for that matter any religion is indefensible. It is not only childish, it also provokes a fanatic and leaves in their hands 'weapons' to make an attempt to stop the progress of human thoughts and ideas. Therefore, critiquing of a religion should be objective and analytical with no preconceived hatred for it in the critic's mind." 
 
Who hates who? I do not think anybody here hates anybody personally; people just put forward opinions. The above statement means some people have hatred against some other people in this forum. This is a misguided notion.
 
Now - what's the meaning of "crude bashing?" All we have heard so far from Ms. Majid and Mr. Rahman are terms like - "Islam bashing" and "hatred for Islam," when they run out of arguments to counter criticism. To them, every criticism of their religion is out of hatred for their religion. Now, an atheist is joining that cohort; this smells like a political stand, not ideological.
 
The fact is – criticism of one's favorite object will always hurt his/her feeling; it does not matter how objective or analytical  criticism may be. Also, how can someone defend a blind faith with a sound logic? They can't. Blind faith logic will always sound ridiculous to an open minded person. Mr. Rahman thinks that he knows the authentic version of Islam. Isn't it a ridiculous claims also? How could anyone be so sure that he/she has the most authentic version of religion, unless it's his faith.

Lately, I am hearing from Mr. Rahman that judging Prophet needs proper context. To me,
a noble man is always a noble man; no context or excuse is needed to evaluate a noble man.
 
Jiten Roy


On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:33 PM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Yes, you are so right about the collapse of the Persian empire. That removed the best wall that was ever built in the western frontier in that era. Had that been intact, we would have been saved from this abysmal mediocrity.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:05 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Nothing is more blasphemous and moronic to think that a passionate and almighty God sent his best and last messenger to a community of desert oasis and forgot about his best creation since then.  Even a blind could see that the last messenger was a failure till he adopted dacoits, blunder and mayhem of the weak Jewish communities from the hideout of Yatrib.   It was the collapse of the Persian Empire due to war of succession that made Islam the winner.  But again, the Ummayads, the archenemy of the Hashemites in which the Prophet belonged, was the winner.  As Ms. Majid is a closet fundamentalist, she gets irritated by a correct analysis of Islamic history. 

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:

 
Maybe, we all should hide in a cave because the vicious mob will be angry and start killing innocents? Is that the thinking? A white flag with out a fight? We should only talk about flowers? Right?
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:04 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Your imbecile mind will not comprehend the seriousness of the political situation with the vicious Jehadists in Bangladesh -- innocent people will eventually be the victims.
 But you and the troll don't care a hoot . . .

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:48:38 -0800
From: shahdeeldar@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
To: farida_majid@hotmail.com; mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com

If brother Shalom wants people to know the prophet and a religion better, then people have no choice but to ask some tough questions. If you do not like the heat, stay out it and be in peace. But ordering how a discussion should be moved forward is not really a Muktomona motto. You got your pet subjects and you are totally free to push forward whatever you think right for your taste. Please stop browbeating others in regards to what should be discussed and what not. That is called censorship. If I remember correct, we were equally critical about the authentic Marxism of Sankar-da when he tried to feed us with a different cool-aid.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:00 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Please STOP posting this religious stuff in mukto-mona.  We've had this crude Islam-bashing type of writings day after day, month after month, year after year.


From: subain1@yahoo.com
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:16:21 -0800
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH

 

The talk of 'context needed to understand Mohammad' is essentially nonsense talk.

There is no need to understand a man who lived on Earth some fifteen hundred years back. What the world needs to do is to see the actions of people today, and reward, stay indifferent or punish those actions, depending on the virtue, innocence and criminality, respectively, of those actions. Mohammad does not need any such reward, indifference or punishment.

The problem with the soft-sellers of the Islamic doctrine is that they w


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH




Subimal Chakraborty Said: "I agree with Farida apa: crude bashing of Islam and for that matter any religion is indefensible. It is not only childish, it also provokes a fanatic and leaves in their hands 'weapons' to make an attempt to stop the progress of human thoughts and ideas. Therefore, critiquing of a religion should be objective and analytical with no preconceived hatred for it in the critic's mind." 
 
Who hates who? I do not think anybody here hates anybody personally; people just put forward opinions. The above statement means some people have hatred against some other people in this forum. This is a misguided notion.
 
Now - what's the meaning of "crude bashing?" All we have heard so far from Ms. Majid and Mr. Rahman are terms like - "Islam bashing" and "hatred for Islam," when they run out of arguments to counter criticism. To them, every criticism of their religion is out of hatred for their religion. Now, an atheist is joining that cohort; this smells like a political stand, not ideological.
 
The fact is – criticism of one's favorite object will always hurt his/her feeling; it does not matter how objective or analytical  criticism may be. Also, how can someone defend a blind faith with a sound logic? They can't. Blind faith logic will always sound ridiculous to an open minded person. Mr. Rahman thinks that he knows the authentic version of Islam. Isn't it a ridiculous claims also? How could anyone be so sure that he/she has the most authentic version of religion, unless it's his faith.

Lately, I am hearing from Mr. Rahman that judging Prophet needs proper context. To me,
a noble man is always a noble man; no context or excuse is needed to evaluate a noble man.
 
Jiten Roy


On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:33 PM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Yes, you are so right about the collapse of the Persian empire. That removed the best wall that was ever built in the western frontier in that era. Had that been intact, we would have been saved from this abysmal mediocrity.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:05 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Nothing is more blasphemous and moronic to think that a passionate and almighty God sent his best and last messenger to a community of desert oasis and forgot about his best creation since then.  Even a blind could see that the last messenger was a failure till he adopted dacoits, blunder and mayhem of the weak Jewish communities from the hideout of Yatrib.   It was the collapse of the Persian Empire due to war of succession that made Islam the winner.  But again, the Ummayads, the archenemy of the Hashemites in which the Prophet belonged, was the winner.  As Ms. Majid is a closet fundamentalist, she gets irritated by a correct analysis of Islamic history. 

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:

 
Maybe, we all should hide in a cave because the vicious mob will be angry and start killing innocents? Is that the thinking? A white flag with out a fight? We should only talk about flowers? Right?
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:04 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Your imbecile mind will not comprehend the seriousness of the political situation with the vicious Jehadists in Bangladesh -- innocent people will eventually be the victims.
 But you and the troll don't care a hoot . . .

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:48:38 -0800
From: shahdeeldar@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
To: farida_majid@hotmail.com; mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com

If brother Shalom wants people to know the prophet and a religion better, then people have no choice but to ask some tough questions. If you do not like the heat, stay out it and be in peace. But ordering how a discussion should be moved forward is not really a Muktomona motto. You got your pet subjects and you are totally free to push forward whatever you think right for your taste. Please stop browbeating others in regards to what should be discussed and what not. That is called censorship. If I remember correct, we were equally critical about the authentic Marxism of Sankar-da when he tried to feed us with a different cool-aid.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:00 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Please STOP posting this religious stuff in mukto-mona.  We've had this crude Islam-bashing type of writings day after day, month after month, year after year.


From: subain1@yahoo.com
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:16:21 -0800
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH

 

The talk of 'context needed to understand Mohammad' is essentially nonsense talk.

There is no need to understand a man who lived on Earth some fifteen hundred years back. What the world needs to do is to see the actions of people today, and reward, stay indifferent or punish those actions, depending on the virtue, innocence and criminality, respectively, of those actions. Mohammad does not need any such reward, indifference or punishment.

The problem with the soft-sellers of the Islamic doctrine is that they would call the absolutely non-criminal objective looks at Islam as 'not knowing the context', 'ignorance' and even 'hatred against Islam'; while at the same time they remain inactive and soft-supporters of Islamic criminals that act upon their use, misuse, abuse, 'not knowing the context' and 'ignorance' of Islam. While the soft-sellers of the stupidity and hatred of Islam remain mostly inactive and soft-supporters of hatred and atrocities against non-believers of Islam, they hardly ever push for serious punishments against the real criminals who do their crimes proclaiming to be on behalf of and for the protection of Islam.

I think mukto-mona, being a thinkers' forum (as opposed to blind-believers' forum), should mostly expunge the slavish, brainwashed, and illogical soft-selling of religion by people like QR.

SuBain

============================================


On Monday, February 17, 2014 3:53 AM, QR <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
Dear all,

I welcome your initiative to critic Islam and prophet Muhammad (PBUH). However when you take out of context events, it may confuse and misguide a lot of people. I am forwarding a part of history which is important to know to be able to UNDERSTAND some of the decisions taken by the last messenger of God Muhammad (PBUH).

Specifically he gave multiple chances to Jewish tribes who not only broke singed treaties with the state of Medina but conspired to murder Muslims of that city (By becoming traitors during war).

If you have questions, feel free to ask.

Shalom!


-----Original Message-----
tes

 

Life of the last prophet -PBUH




Following the expulsion of the treacherous Jewish tribes of Banu Qainuqa' and Banu Nadeer for breaking the treaty with the Muslims, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam exiled the remnants of these to Khaybar on the outskirts of Madinah.
Awaiting a decisive defeat of the Muslims by the Quraish which didn't materialise, the deceitful Jews grew in discontent and hatched a new conspiracy against Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam in the fifth year after hijrah.



Being too cowardly to face the Muslims in battle, 20 Jewish chiefs went to Makkah to draw the Quraish into a negotiation by forming a "coalition". In return for the Quraish attacking Madinah, full support would be provided to them by the Jews and both parties thereafter would be rid of Muhammad sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and his followers once and for all. Smarting from successive humiliating defeats at the hands of the Sahaabah radiallaahu 'anhum, the Quraish jumped at the offer.


The Jewish delegation toured Arabia inciting the various tribes to take up arms against the Islamic State of Madinah. In Shawwaal, the Confederates (various tribes from Arabia under the leadership of the Quraish) converged on the outskirts of Madinah boasting a combined force of 10,000, which outnumbered the total Muslim population of Madinah at the time.

Based on surveillance reports of impending attacks, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam ordered the digging of trenches to protect Madinah based on the advice of Salman al Farsi radiallaahu 'anhu. The period spent digging the trenches was one of the most difficult times endured by the Muslims in defense of Islam. The digging took several days and during this time, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and the Sahaabah radiallaahu 'anhum endured fatigue and near starvation. At the completion of the trenches, 3000 Muslims came out to guard Madinah against any advances by the kuffaar (disbelievers).
Witnessing the trenches was a great psychological setback for the kuffaar and although they tried to cross it was to no avail. Apart from the exchange of volleys of arrows, there was not much in the way of physical combat. This was more a battle of nerves as the Confederates grew more frustrated with each passing day.







__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH




Subimal Chakraborty Said: "I agree with Farida apa: crude bashing of Islam and for that matter any religion is indefensible. It is not only childish, it also provokes a fanatic and leaves in their hands 'weapons' to make an attempt to stop the progress of human thoughts and ideas. Therefore, critiquing of a religion should be objective and analytical with no preconceived hatred for it in the critic's mind." 
 
Who hates who? I do not think anybody here hates anybody personally; people just put forward opinions. The above statement means some people have hatred against some other people in this forum. This is a misguided notion.
 
Now - what's the meaning of "crude bashing?" All we have heard so far from Ms. Majid and Mr. Rahman are terms like - "Islam bashing" and "hatred for Islam," when they run out of arguments to counter criticism. To them, every criticism of their religion is out of hatred for their religion. Now, an atheist is joining that cohort; this smells like a political stand, not ideological.
 
The fact is – criticism of one's favorite object will always hurt his/her feeling; it does not matter how objective or analytical  criticism may be. Also, how can someone defend a blind faith with a sound logic? They can't. Blind faith logic will always sound ridiculous to an open minded person. Mr. Rahman thinks that he knows the authentic version of Islam. Isn't it a ridiculous claims also? How could anyone be so sure that he/she has the most authentic version of religion, unless it's his faith.

Lately, I am hearing from Mr. Rahman that judging Prophet needs proper context. To me,
a noble man is always a noble man; no context or excuse is needed to evaluate a noble man.
 
Jiten Roy


On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 7:33 PM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Yes, you are so right about the collapse of the Persian empire. That removed the best wall that was ever built in the western frontier in that era. Had that been intact, we would have been saved from this abysmal mediocrity.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Sunday, February 23, 2014 7:05 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Nothing is more blasphemous and moronic to think that a passionate and almighty God sent his best and last messenger to a community of desert oasis and forgot about his best creation since then.  Even a blind could see that the last messenger was a failure till he adopted dacoits, blunder and mayhem of the weak Jewish communities from the hideout of Yatrib.   It was the collapse of the Persian Empire due to war of succession that made Islam the winner.  But again, the Ummayads, the archenemy of the Hashemites in which the Prophet belonged, was the winner.  As Ms. Majid is a closet fundamentalist, she gets irritated by a correct analysis of Islamic history. 

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 19, 2014, at 6:32 AM, Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com> wrote:

 
Maybe, we all should hide in a cave because the vicious mob will be angry and start killing innocents? Is that the thinking? A white flag with out a fight? We should only talk about flowers? Right?
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 7:04 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Your imbecile mind will not comprehend the seriousness of the political situation with the vicious Jehadists in Bangladesh -- innocent people will eventually be the victims.
 But you and the troll don't care a hoot . . .

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 15:48:38 -0800
From: shahdeeldar@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH
To: farida_majid@hotmail.com; mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com

If brother Shalom wants people to know the prophet and a religion better, then people have no choice but to ask some tough questions. If you do not like the heat, stay out it and be in peace. But ordering how a discussion should be moved forward is not really a Muktomona motto. You got your pet subjects and you are totally free to push forward whatever you think right for your taste. Please stop browbeating others in regards to what should be discussed and what not. That is called censorship. If I remember correct, we were equally critical about the authentic Marxism of Sankar-da when he tried to feed us with a different cool-aid.
-SD

 
"I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues."
-Seuss



On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 6:00 PM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
Please STOP posting this religious stuff in mukto-mona.  We've had this crude Islam-bashing type of writings day after day, month after month, year after year.


From: subain1@yahoo.com
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 07:16:21 -0800
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: context needed to understnad life of prophet Muhammad PBUH

 

The talk of 'context needed to understand Mohammad' is essentially nonsense talk.

There is no need to understand a man who lived on Earth some fifteen hundred years back. What the world needs to do is to see the actions of people today, and reward, stay indifferent or punish those actions, depending on the virtue, innocence and criminality, respectively, of those actions. Mohammad does not need any such reward, indifference or punishment.

The problem with the soft-sellers of the Islamic doctrine is that they would call the absolutely non-criminal objective looks at Islam as 'not knowing the context', 'ignorance' and even 'hatred against Islam'; while at the same time they remain inactive and soft-supporters of Islamic criminals that act upon their use, misuse, abuse, 'not knowing the context' and 'ignorance' of Islam. While the soft-sellers of the stupidity and hatred of Islam remain mostly inactive and soft-supporters of hatred and atrocities against non-believers of Islam, they hardly ever push for serious punishments against the real criminals who do their crimes proclaiming to be on behalf of and for the protection of Islam.

I think mukto-mona, being a thinkers' forum (as opposed to blind-believers' forum), should mostly expunge the slavish, brainwashed, and illogical soft-selling of religion by people like QR.

SuBain

============================================


On Monday, February 17, 2014 3:53 AM, QR <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
Dear all,

I welcome your initiative to critic Islam and prophet Muhammad (PBUH). However when you take out of context events, it may confuse and misguide a lot of people. I am forwarding a part of history which is important to know to be able to UNDERSTAND some of the decisions taken by the last messenger of God Muhammad (PBUH).

Specifically he gave multiple chances to Jewish tribes who not only broke singed treaties with the state of Medina but conspired to murder Muslims of that city (By becoming traitors during war).

If you have questions, feel free to ask.

Shalom!


-----Original Message-----
tes

 

Life of the last prophet -PBUH




Following the expulsion of the treacherous Jewish tribes of Banu Qainuqa' and Banu Nadeer for breaking the treaty with the Muslims, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam exiled the remnants of these to Khaybar on the outskirts of Madinah.
Awaiting a decisive defeat of the Muslims by the Quraish which didn't materialise, the deceitful Jews grew in discontent and hatched a new conspiracy against Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam in the fifth year after hijrah.



Being too cowardly to face the Muslims in battle, 20 Jewish chiefs went to Makkah to draw the Quraish into a negotiation by forming a "coalition". In return for the Quraish attacking Madinah, full support would be provided to them by the Jews and both parties thereafter would be rid of Muhammad sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and his followers once and for all. Smarting from successive humiliating defeats at the hands of the Sahaabah radiallaahu 'anhum, the Quraish jumped at the offer.


The Jewish delegation toured Arabia inciting the various tribes to take up arms against the Islamic State of Madinah. In Shawwaal, the Confederates (various tribes from Arabia under the leadership of the Quraish) converged on the outskirts of Madinah boasting a combined force of 10,000, which outnumbered the total Muslim population of Madinah at the time.

Based on surveillance reports of impending attacks, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam ordered the digging of trenches to protect Madinah based on the advice of Salman al Farsi radiallaahu 'anhu. The period spent digging the trenches was one of the most difficult times endured by the Muslims in defense of Islam. The digging took several days and during this time, Rasulullah sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam and the Sahaabah radiallaahu 'anhum endured fatigue and near starvation. At the completion of the trenches, 3000 Muslims came out to guard Madinah against any advances by the kuffaar (disbelievers).
Witnessing the trenches was a great psychological setback for the kuffaar and although they tried to cross it was to no avail. Apart from the exchange of volleys of arrows, there was not much in the way of physical combat. This was more a battle of nerves as the Confederates grew more frustrated with each passing day.







__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190





__,_._,___

Newer Posts Older Posts Home