no victim is ever innocent in the eye of the killer. Therefore, this edict does nothing in practice.
Islam does allow people to take them to courts but it is NOT permissible to kill another human being without trial (As long there is no physical attacks involved). Only confused or misguided person can kill another person for verbal insults. It is only permissible if it is decided by a court. Mob justice is not justice. No matter if some so called Muslims are promoting it.
Let's take another one – Islam forbids punishment without a due trial. The fact is - most heinous acts and punishments are done with proper religious sanctions
How can you complain about "Religious sanctions" when we don't even follow Islamic laws in our counts?
For instance, a trial can be arranged in presence of a Moulana, and a judgment (or Fatwa) can be obtained before the punishment is rendered.
>>>>>>>>> It looks like you are giving example of "Salish" or settlements practices in most Bangladeshi villages by local elders. These verdicts are NOT binding and most of the time these people know next to nothing about what Islam says.
For example, what happened with Babri mosque is not an example of how Indian system works. Rather it is an example of what happens when it does not work "properly".
Most Islamic scholars of Bangladesh loudly protested against taking laws in our hands (In case of Rajib murder). Maybe you don't know since you don't live here. But people are united against mob justice and even some BAL leaders were saying, we have to be a country which respect our courts. ( I was watching a lively discussion at RTV-round table few hours ago).
People are smart, and they know how to manipulate a system
>>>>>>>>> This can be said about ALL systems of the world. What is new?
The important thing to remember is when such "Manipulation" takes place, we need to fix the manipulation not going against the "System" itself.
Shalom!
-----Original Message-----
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Mar 7, 2013 6:50 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013, 5:58 AM
I count myself as a true "Mukto-Mona", so I have no attachments with any political parties. In this forum, I made in abundantly clear, I am against ALL sort of "Violent politics". Unfortunately all major political parties have "Violent people" among them and frequently they are "Used" by their respective parties. I think we have to go beyond name calling and take legal and solid measures to stand up against violence. Unfortunately our highly educated members in this forum (Most of them) are UNABLE to get out of their party affiliation and think FREELY.
Mullah Omar was no a tool used by ISI. Don't think they had "Promotion of Islam" in their hearts!! I have given you some SPECIFIC examples of countries which I called "Work in progress". NO matter what system we prefer, we have to honor democratic system (So power always stays to common people).
Islam have shown the world how to live in a mufti-religious country. So we have hundreds of years of experience to fall back into. One member recently said, even in India, religion was NOT imposed by Muslim rulers.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are NO system, where you don't find "Power struggle". Don't know why this simple fact escaped your imagination. :-)
Shalom!
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 4, 2013 8:35 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; history_islam@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2013 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
>>>>>>>>>>>> Partly true. There are millions of people around the world believes in it without having any political ambitions.
but those who use religion to capture power absolutely are. These people are divisive.
>>>>>>>>> I agree. Religion should NOT be "Abused" as a tool to get to power.
However since Islam offers a complete solution, it can be offered as an alternative to whatever other choices people may have. Therefore, we should NOT be banning any system from "Free people", rather allow people to pick the best system of their choice.
This is the situation in Egypt and Turkey today. Both place have Islamic parties came to power via pure democratic process and if they FAIL to deliver, people will retain the power to revert back to a better system for themselves.
Jamat is a prime example. It is not possible for them to offer a peaceful and cooperative pluralistic society. They have other vices too.
>>>>>>>>>> This is a popular perception of Jamaat and unless they work hard to change this, they will have VERY hard time to be accepted to common people.
The era of Khulafa-e-Rashedeen ( or Kingdom of Ashoka to take as another example) may be an exception although that period was also not free from internal conflicts.
>>>>>>>>>>> Having a theocratic state is NOT an utopia but assuming there are some system which will ALWAYS remain "Conflict-free" is an utopia/pipe-dream. Even the best among us always had some opposition or some groups who actively opposed them.
You can think of Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus son of Mary (PBUH), Muhammad Bin Abdullah (PBUH), Hazrat Ali (RA) etc. Even Rabindranath had quite a few serious critics during his time. Therefore, even the best countries of the our world have to have police, army, courts etc to punish bad people and preserve peace for rest of us.
You will probably never aspire to live in an Islamic theocratic state like Talibani Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or even Iran (don't take this personally as this applies to anybody who believes and loves theocracy.) You will probably prefer your kid being in Harvard to being in a world renowned madrasah.
>>>>>>>>>>> Most Islamic countries are "Work in progress". Every civilized country needs time to "EVOLVE" and mature. So it is absolutely UN-realistic to compare Afghanistan to USA or Canada. Even it took the USA hundreds of years before it became a "More perfect union". I would argue a person like you (Most likely non-white) would have even get the chance to migrate to the USA until 60's (Unless you were satisfied in your status as a slave to a white man) and you would preferred many Islamic countries (Even as imperfect they are) over them to living in Alabama or Georgia until the 70's.
Also it took many hundred years to create a "Harvard" and it will take much less time for Muslims to produce world class universities.
3. I hope you have heard about Kautilya's "Arthashastra" and "Manusanhita" both of which were writeen about 2000-2500 years ago. These two and many others (Dharmashastra is good compilation from different sources including the Mahabharata) constitute the complate code for the society in the field of ethics, moral values, politics, social issues, and so on. But it would have been quite wrong for the founding fathers of India to include them in the Indian constitution. That was the right spirit.
>>>>>>>>>>>> If they were a better choice than "British common laws", people would have thought of it. But pre-Islamic India was a basket case when it comes to any rights for non-Hindus or even most Hindus. In fact before Muslims came to India, there was no "Greater India". Rather it was a land with many nation states which were constantly fighting against each other with massive genocides taking place quite frequently.
Islamic systems on the other hand have solid history of ruling a good portion of civilized world for hundreds of years and inspiring modern Europe to reform and stepping to the "Enlightened era" from the "Dark ages".
With all due respect, it is NOT even a fair comparison.
4. We need to shun our religious ego and be pragmatic. Religions through new interpretations can be made universally appealing.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Islam offers such an option. It is known as "Ijtihad".
Similar to "Interpretation" of constitution of the USA. There are thousands of constitution lawyers continually looking at constitution and judging "Intend" of founding fathers to find direction to new laws of the land. Right now there is a hot debate about second amendment which deals with "Fundamental" right to protect each citizens. Which allows average American to carry guns for self-protection. This idea of "Self-protection" is fundamental to American constitution BUT the debate is if most of us needs a semi-automatic or automatic machine gun to protect us!!
American Muslims are also working on this issue and click here for an entry to their thought process.
Therefore, we can preserve and protect our values and fundamentals of Islam. At the same time, it offers enough FLEXIBILITIES to each of us to re-think interpretations WITHOUT violating core values and clear laws.
A religion (like any other human identity---linguistic, tribal, national, etc.) can well be a basis for organizing a group for social upliftment or even for economic, social or political emancipation, but the ultimate must goal must not be a theocracy to be run by religious zealots.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zealots of all kinds are threats to safety, security and rights of common people. Secular zealots murdered more people in last 100 years than all other kind of zealots combined since men started to walk on mother earth.
As far as Islam is concern a good Muslim HAVE to be humble. Without humility one cannot run an Islamic state. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said,
As I said many times in this forum, We need more education on authentic Islam and with more education and practice, Islamic values can make us better people. Also it would more effective to combat arrogant people who abuse the name of Islam to promote their own personal goals.
Shalom!
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:06 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
It is the ONLY religion which has well preserved codified laws which other faith traditions had to "Invent" or copy from others.
For example, Muslims were the first civilization which introduced large scale pluralistic societies to the world. When it was "Dark Ages" for Europeans, Muslims lead the way and established the most progressive community in Spain and creators of modern Europe took inspiration from it.
Since Islam is a global religion, it has some local issues. To me, the top issue for our area is lack of Islamic education. For example, member Ahmed said,
There are many intellectual discussion/opposition against Islam/Muslim and that is fine. Go ahead and do that as much as you wish. He made a very acceptable point of view. He did NOT shun criticism but reminded us that, prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has a very special place in our heart and requested not to throw slander or libel in his way.
Albeit I have a different way of handing ignorant idiots who love to insult without knowing much about the noble prophet (PBUH) himself.
For example, if I go and slaughter a big cow in a main street of Kolkata, I might not violated any laws but I would manage to hurt a lot of people. Among those hurt, if even 1% react in a violent way that can cause a lot of havoc in that city and even in the whole region.
Similarly most Muslims are VERY tolerant of criticism but even if 1% cannot handle their emotion that can cause a lot of problem. Member Ahmad probably requested in that line. If you look at the post positively, you can find of a lot of sympathy and concern for atheist and non-Muslims in it.
The problem ALSO lies within some members of the forum, who quickly take all post by theist members as negative. Which shows a little intolerance.
In Islam, a Muslim is prohibited from insulting other faiths
>>>>>>>> Absolutely. We Muslims have to do a better job of reminding this to our fellow Muslims about this aspect of Islam. It is written in the Qur'an and more we learn about Islam, we'll have more peace and harmony among all people of faiths/tradition.
Shalom!
__._,_.___
****************************************************
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
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
I am always willing to learn new things. However my statements can be backed up by authentic information/data. If it sounds too much idealistic for your taste, I can not help you. However these are facts about Islam.
>>>>>>>>>>> However I am not aware of any time when people were allowed to kill another person for simply verbal insults according to the practice of our last messenger (PBUH). In fact, he was more willing to forgive such incidents than any other leaders of his time.
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe you are confusing with George Bush's handling of "Muslim suspects" and what is happening in Bangladesh. Last time I checked, Bangladesh is not even "Islamic republic" and our laws are based on "British common laws". So if you feel our courts are promoting "Most heinous acts and punishments", please take it to where it applies.
Yes, getting "Islamic perspectives" from you is like hearing stories from grandmother. Middle Eastern peninsula may have been served better under Caliphate than what they have now. But, what good that story does today, except providing some historic perspectives. Yes, there was a time in history when human psyche was not so complex as it is today, and religious edicts were good enough to serve most needs of the society; not anymore. No one can bring back that era.
Let's take the edict – Islam forbids killing of innocent people. The fact is – there is always a reason behind a killing, and no victim is ever innocent in the eye of the killer. Therefore, this edict does nothing in practice.
Let's take another one – Islam forbids punishment without a due trial. The fact is - most heinous acts and punishments are done with proper religious sanctions. For instance, a trial can be arranged in presence of a Moulana, and a judgment (or Fatwa) can be obtained before the punishment is rendered. It's like – seeking Judge's orders before carrying out search in someone's home. Person committing the act knows it. As a result, he/she will make the act "Halal" before committing it. So, this edict does nothing also.
People are smart, and they know how to manipulate a system.
Jiten Roy
I was only trying to offer an explanation from "Islamic perspective". Since some of the members are not aware of some information. If you feel strongly about secular system, I respect your opinion.
5. I have mentioned the period of Khulafa-e-Rashedeen as one of the best periods in Islamic history. My point was that even this period, although run under the complete guidance of God, could not guarantee a system free from power struggle.
-----Original Message-----
1. Nobody will say that people enjoyed less religious freedom during the time when one of the state principles was secularism. Introduction of religious flavor in the constitution by Zia and Ershad was obviously for political purpose. People in general don't care. It is the political elements (they may not have any personal political ambition) who try to convince them about the necessity of mingling religion with politics, legal system, and socio-economic system. The so called educated people should stop doing this. They do not realize that knowingly or unknowingly they are simply encouraging Jamat kind of politics only to divide the country.
2. I really wonder why you do not consider Jamat as a fascist force. Look at its history. Particularly reflect on the anti-Ahmadiya riot it incited. Look at its present activities. Look at its attitudes towards our independence.
3. Work-in-progress! Was Afghanistan under Mollah Omar not a finished good? Or was it still a work-in-progress? Can you please mention some countries that can be called works-in-progress? I am curious.
4. The modern world is multi-religious. Any particular religion must not get priority. If Manu, for example, has any thing good in it, it will obviously have respectable place in the legal system or constitution. It does not need to be specifically mentioned. The constitution and legal system of any modern secular state are the best that one society can have. It has evolved over time. And it is still evolving. It has captured every thing good in the various religious, social, legal, and political systems from the past. Take a particular religion of your choice and compare it with, for example, 1972 constitution of Bangladesh. Do you really need any thing different from the 1972 constitution except the fact that it can still be improved?
5. I have mentioned the period of Khulafa-e-Rashedeen as one of the best periods in Islamic history. My point was that even this period, although run under the complete guidance of God, could not guarantee a system free from power struggle.
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
1. The concept of "complete code of life" stretched beyond personal religious life is nothing but a political slogan by those who want to capture the state power.
Abdullah ibn Mas'ud reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, "No one who has the weight of a mustard seed of arrogance in his heart will enter Paradise." Someone said, "Indeed, a man loves to have beautiful clothes and shoes." So the Prophet said, "Verily, Allah is beautiful and He loves beauty. Arrogance means rejecting the truth and looking down on people."
-----Original Message----- From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Fri, Mar 1, 2013 8:15 pm Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
1. The concept of "complete code of life" stretched beyond personal religious life is nothing but a political slogan by those who want to capture the state power. Religious values (obviously after being reinterpreted in the light of the new social realities) can be a good foundation for moral and ethical values for a practicing believer. These people are not dangerous for the society, but those who use religion to capture power absolutely are. These people are divisive. They are so much obsessed with their own version of religion that they discriminate against and persecute those whom they think are heretics. Jamat is a prime example. It is not possible for them to offer a peaceful and cooperative pluralistic society. They have other vices too.
2. A perfect theocratic state is a utopia. Even a near perfect one has hardly earned much respect. The era of Khulafa-e-Rashedeen ( or Kingdom of Ashoka to take as another example) may be an exception although that period was also not free from internal conflicts. That was very natural as the affairs were run by humans with human limitations in the name of God. You will probably never aspire to live in an Islamic theocratic state like Talibani Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or even Iran (don't take this personally as this applies to anybody who believes and loves theocracy.) You will probably prefer your kid being in Harvard to being in a world renowned madrasah.
3. I hope you have heard about Kautilya's "Arthashastra" and "Manusanhita" both of which were writeen about 2000-2500 years ago. These two and many others (Dharmashastra is good compilation from different sources including the Mahabharata) constitute the complate code for the society in the field of ethics, moral values, politics, social issues, and so on. But it would have been quite wrong for the founding fathers of India to include them in the Indian constitution. That was the right spirit.
4. We need to shun our religious ego and be pragmatic. Religions through new interpretations can be made universally appealing.
5. A religion (like any other human identity---linguistic, tribal, national, etc.) can well be a basis for organizing a group for social upliftment or even for economic, social or political emancipation, but the ultimate must goal must not be a theocracy to be run by religious zealots. Unfortunately because of the failures of the secualr and democratic forces to organize the oppressed people, leadership is sometimes being given by the religious zealots.
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
These political Islamists are tarnishing the image of Islam as a complete code of life.
>>>>>>>>>>> Politics can be for good and it can also bring bad results. In our country frequently it brings bad results, so there is a negative connotation to the term "Politics". It is true Islam offered solution to most problems we face and give us "Hints" to solve rest of the problem we have.
-----Original Message----- From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 28, 2013 5:11 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
The meaning of the term "complete code of life" has been over stretched by the over enthusiastic propounders of theories on political Islam. This new interpretation seems to be not even a hundred years old. Many Great teachings of Islam (charity, regularity and cleanliness involving daily prayers, restraints that come with annual fasting, compassion, respect, encouragement to acquire knowledge, savings, etc.) can easily constitute a complete code of life to any practicing nonpolitical Muslim. As a matter of fact in my life I have been in close touch with many Muslins like this. Political Islam is ruining every thing. This new trend needs to be resisted. These political Islamists are tarnishing the image of Islam as a complete code of life. Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 26, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
"Islam is a complete code of life."- If so, why even bother to learn or use anything that is not Islamic in origin?
2013/2/26 Mir Ahmad <mirahmadf@hotmail.com>
Please read it carefully and get it clear - in Islam religion and politics are not separate as the west separates. Islam is a complete code of life. I hope you understand what it means.
If anyone (no matter where s/he live or ethnicity/nationality) insults/ridicules Islam and the Prophet (pbuh), a person who cares least (like me who is a non-political person) about BD (because it's already a DEAD COUNTRY) will protest against it in the strongest possible terms. We'll unfold the faces of these culprits and ask the authority for severe punishment for such provocative behavior. There are many intellectual discussion/opposition against Islam/Muslim and that is fine. Go ahead and do that as much as you wish. BUT PLEASE DO NOT INSULT our faith and our Prophet (pbuh). Our Prophet (pbuh) is much dearer to us then our own lives. In Islam, a Muslim is prohibited from insulting other faiths. For better harmony, I hope you could do the same.
From: Shah Deeldar
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 6:04 PM
Cc: Bazlul Wahab ; Kazi Muazzem ; Mir Ahmed ; Faizul Momen ; bhin golardho ; munir1062@yahoo.com ; bangladeshi googlesgroups ; khabor ; mokto mona ; chottala yahoogroups
Subject: Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে
LOL! Empty vessels make the most sound! Leave Islam alone and do your fascist politics as much you can. Islam does not need you and nor I see anything that is remotely Islamic with you. Bloggers have not destroyed any religion as far as we know. Now, if you want your pure Wahabi version of Islam, you should start chopping some bloggers' heads to quench your blood thirst. We will see whether Jamatis can rule with their daggers in the East? -SD
2013/2/25 Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com>
আওয়ামী লীগ ইসলামের বিরুদ্ধে যুদ্ধ ঘোষণা করেছে। তারা এবারে ক্ষমতায় এসে সংবিধান থেকে আল্লাহর উপর আস্থার বানি সরিয়েছে। শুধু সে টুকুতে তারা খুশি নয়। এবার চায়,দেশ থেকে ইসলাম নির্মূল। আল্লাহ ও তাঁর রাসূলের বিরুদ্ধে মুসলিম নামধারি কোন ব্যক্তি কিছু লিখলে বা বললে সে আর মুসলমান থাকে না। সে পরিণত হয় মুরতাদে। ইসলামের বিরুদ্ধে প্রচণ্ড ঘৃনা নিয়ে বহুকাল ধরে ইন্টারনেটে লেখালেখি করেছে রাজীব নামের এক ব্লগার। শাহবাগ সমাবেশের একজন অন্যতম আয়োজক।ব্লগারদের সাথে আওয়ামী লীগ সরকারের যোগসূত্র যে কতটা গভীর তার একটি তথ্যবহুল রিপোর্ট ছেপেছে দৈনিক আমার দেশ তার ২২/০২/২০১৩ তারিখের সংখ্যায়। নিম্নে তা থেকে কিছু উদ্ধৃতি দেয়া হলোঃ "গত ২০১২ সালের ২১ মার্চ হাইকোর্ট ধর্মদ্রোহী মুরতাদদের ব্লগারের বিরুদ্ধে আইনানুগ ব্যবস্থা নেয়ার নির্দেশ দিলেও তাতে পাত্তা দেয়নি হাসিনার সরকার। বরং উচ্চ আদালতকে বৃদ্ধাঙ্গুলি দেখিয়ে শাহবাগের কথিত প্রজন্ম চত্বরের নেতৃত্বদানকারী ব্লগার আসিফ মহিউদ্দীন লিখেছে,'সম্পূর্ণ সজ্ঞানে সচেতনভাবে ঐ যুক্তিহীন অন্ধ ষাঁড়ের মতো উৎকট দুর্গন্ধময় ধর্মীয় অনুভূতি এবং ঐ যুক্তিহীন ধর্মীয় অনুভূতির রক্ষক আদালত,দুই জিনিসেরই অবমাননা করলাম।"
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:00:51 -0800 From: bazlul@yahoo.com Subject: Re: এই জলে আগুন জ্বলে To: kazi4986@yahoo.com; mirahmadf@hotmail.com; faiz208@hotmail.com; golardho@yahoo.com; munir1062@yahoo.com; bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com
I have the following question:
হাসিনা বঙ্গবন্ধুকে নিয়ে কটুক্তি করার জন্য বেশ কয়েকজনকে গ্রেফতার করা হয়েছে বিভিন্ন সময়ে। আর আমাদের প্রিয়নবী হযরত মুহাম্মদ (সঃ) কে নিয়ে অশ্লীল ভাষা ব্যবহার করে অসংখ্য ব্লগ লেখার পরও কাউকে গ্রেফতার করা তো হলনা বরং একজন নাস্তিককে শহীদ বলে ঘোষণা করা হল। বাংলাদেশী মুসলিমদের জন্য Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) চেয়ে কি হাসিনা, বঙ্গবন্ধু বড়?
I want to clarify one thing. I've been writing about current govt's failures and because of that I heard some are branding me as 'pro BNP'. Actually only blind AL supporters would think that way, as they don't like to hear about the govt's failures. To them, AL is above the interest of Bangladesh. When BNP was in power, I was very vocal against some BNP activities. Whoever knows me well are aware of this. Of course, at that time, I was not part of google group. I try my best to see the interests of Bangladesh ahead of AL, BNP petty politics. People of Bangladesh are much more important tha
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional