CURMALLY: Which Muslim has the freedom to worship as he wishes? Even a Mughal prince was decapitated for hobnobbing with Hinduism

Submitted by Plato (India), Oct 16, 2010 at 12:57

Curmally, you write:

>>The problem that we faced was the Din e Elahi which Akbar created to harmonize both islam and the Hindu faith.<<

Though Akbar the Great was attempting an impossible task one must admire him for trying despite stiff resistance from the clerical class. When on the one side you have an always angry Lord and Master who tolerates no competition in the creation and law-giving departments and, on the other Hindus have as many deities as you can think of, all doing their own thing and mostly having fun doing them what kind of harmony was the great Akbar expecting?

>>We had to rediscover Islam.<<

You mean a mortal king's dabblings could threaten an Allah protected religion.

>>Did you know Dara Shikoh wore a ring bearing the word Prabhu?<<

Are you saying a ring bearing the Sanskrit word for Almighty or Lord (probably in reference to a Hindu deity) was a great crime? His younger brother thought so and had him decapitated. Dara's translating the Upanishads into Sanskrit was perhaps an even bigger crime for letting Muslims have a glimpse of a much gentler and more rational scripture than the Koran.

>>Islam does not ties us down or deny us freedom.<<

Really? Which Muslim has the freedom to worship as he wishes? Which Muslim woman has the freedom to dress as she wishes or defy her husband? Muslim concept of freedom is badly mangled version of what kaffirs know as freedom.

>>Yes idolators had to Jaziya or a tax.<<

Jaziya is just a tax? Why then does Koran 9:29 say they have to pay it humbly? The taxpayer is paying good hard earned money as this tax, so why should he be humble in front of the collector of the money? Should it not be the other way around?

So you think Jaziya was just an ordinary tax? The Jaziya collectors were authorized to do interesting things to the payer. For instance he could spit in the mouth of the payer, he could hit him on the back of his head and the poor man had to literally grovel in front of the mighty Islamic jazia collector. And now modern scholars ashamed of the implications of this tax claim this was to protect them and exempt them from military duty. Who were they to be protected from. The non-dhimmis i.e. Muslims?

>> We have legislated female equality and safety of a women in the work place and from abuse at home.<<

If you have really legislated for female equality (I suppose you mean equality with men and not among women) then you have legislated against the sharia which I cannot for one moment believe. Does not the Koran instruct you that women are a degree below men and during their menstruation they are diseased? Has your country legislated that woman shall inherit equally with her male sibling?

Good for you that you have legislated safety for women in the work place.

>>Was sati a Muslim practice?<<

Was female genital mutilation (or male genital mutilation for that matter) a Hindu practice. Hundreds of thousands of Muslim girls still suffer and often die from this barbaric practice. Not much condemnation (in fact some Islamic scholars even support it) of the practice. Sati is literally universally condemned in the country and the law (most of Manu's laws have been overturned through legislation and those who practice them regularly go to jail) takes care of the perpetrators.

>>All that I had asked of the other writers was some respect for Islam and not to make fun of our Prophet.<<

Prove to the writers that Islam is worthy of respect. Respect is earned it cannot be forced. The modern world will not tolerate hatred based on religious differences. The modern world will not let half of humanity be shut away behind veils and walls.

A fifty year old man marrying a six year old. This man marrying his own daughter-in-law after having had her divorced via the claimed agency of god. The same old man marrying a seventeen year old girl widowed only a few hours before by the same man having had her husband tortured and killed for money. The man also gets into trouble with an official wife because she discovered him in her bed with a slave girl. This created such a ruckus that God himself had to intervene to silence his wife. If you read this history about a man and you heard that millions considered him the greatest person ever to walk the earth would you dissolve in laughter or horror?

>>But it seems that is too much to ask of them. Today its known that Islamophobia exists in the world.<<

When the terrorists stop saying Allahu Akbar while carrying out terror attacks and when terrorists stop reciting verses from the Koran as they saw off an infidel captive's head or put out videos of suicide bombers taking solace from the Koran, Islamophobia will die a natural death.

>>Were I to write Jesus on a piece of Paper and give it an American, I don't think he'd care to burn it.<<

Not many would. Nor would many burn a piece of paper with Mohammed written on it. But some Americans do worse with their religious symbols like exhibiting the cross in a bottle of urine and not many eyebrows were raised. Did the Buddhists go haywire when you destroyed the Bamian statues. What would you do if the Christians blew up the Kaaba? You are good at tit but can't take tat.

>>The Quran mentions The Prophet Jesus (may peace be upon him) over 25 times and the Prophet Moses (may peace be upon hiim) is mentioned over 120 times. Our Prophet Mohammed (may peace be upon him) is mentioned only four times. They think nothing of this and burn the Quran e Karim.<<

Curious logic. You seem to think that because Biblical names are mentioned more times than Mohammed THE Christian was insulting his own religion. I also notice that you have used the word "they". You are trying to implicate all Christians with the desecration. Why so? Hundred of Muslim terrorists are involved in terrorist actions and every time you claim that the actions of a few (FEW??) should be blamed on Islam or on all Muslims. That is being hypocritical.

>>I say this because of the history that is shared by us is common and that you haven't forgiven the Muslims for ruling over you for a thousand years.<<

The thousand years is certainly not forgotten but if it had not been forgiven India would be a much bloodier place than Pakistan. In Pakistan you have basically only Muslims yet you slaughter each other not only on the roads but also in mosques. Here have you seen or heard of any mosques or dargah under police protection.

>>I know the prejudices and I know the Hindu caste system and the hatred that exists between our countries. Let us leave it at that and move on.<<

What has the caste system got to do with the hatred between the countries? I suppose you hate the fact that the caste system existing nowadays throws up prime ministers and presidents who are not even Hindu with a lady of foreign origin thrown in as the most powerful person in the nation. The legislators are filled with people of the lower caste and Muslims. So tell us what you know about the caste system.

As to the hatred that exists between our two countries only one has constantly sent terrorists (and the world knows who controls those terrorists) to the other and created mayhem in their parliament, their financial centres, their transport system. Yet during an international games recently the country that suffered had the biggest cheer for their tormentors. The terrorists see this as some sort of weakness. But we would rather be weak in this sense than export terror from our country.

>> You go your way and I go mine.<<

Good thought. Let us wait and see which way leads where.

With Regards

Plato

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".