The pointless discussion

Submitted by Hamzah (United Arab Emirates), Dec 26, 2021 at 11:36

I was too bored with life and ended up here for some reason.

I read yours and Abdul Hadi's discussion and there was one thing I observed: You both are piled up with education but lack edification.

(I read the whole discussion but I'm just replying to a random one)

To start off, yes, Ghaznavi did invade the Somnath temple, but was it really for religious reasons?
While Ghaznavi was raiding the Somnath temple, there were thousands of temples in between, why didn't he touch a single one of them? because all he wanted was the loot from it. While he was raiding the Somnath temple, the top 5 genral soldiers in his army were Hindus; when he finished looting it, the one in charge of all the goods there was a Hindu, and talking about temples being destroyed, the Marathas that you guys are so proud of were once raiding Tipu Sultan and while the raid was going on, they broke one of the temples that Tipu himself was in charge of. Tipu got so infuriated that he ordered all his troops to go out and defeat the Marathas. When the Marathas finally retreated, Tipu rebuilt the temple. Another accusation on him is that he killed a lot of Brahmins; well, his chief advisor, Purniya, was a Brahmin. So why would his chief advisor, a Brahmin, advise him to kill Brahmins? When our so called "Arab masters" invaded India the ones who saved India from being demolished were also Muslims. And talking about kingdoms, take the Rajasthan empire and Maratha empire, combine them, and then take the Mughal empire under Aurangzeb and compare them, see what's bigger and write your observation. And if Muslim rulers were so bad after all, why was India called the "golden bird" in their rule? Ram Puniyani, a historian has said that no more than 16 million Hindus were killed in the 800-year Islamic rule, and as far as I know, Ram Puniyani is a way more respected and well-known historian than K. S. Lal.

On to Islam itself, the grammar mistakes in the Qur'an aren't actually mistakes, because the Qur'an is written in Arabic that was used way back in those times. It was ancient and a way more complex Arabic compared to the standard one spoken now. Comparing these two is like taking the word "hath" from Shakespearean and calling it a grammar mistake only because we use the word "has" in this generation, it's utter stupidity!

The 6-year-old girl our prophet married was named A'isha, and her father, Abu Bakr, was in agreement to this because he was a man constantly at war and marrying his daughter to the prophet meant that she was now under his protection. The prophet still treated her like a kid and had no intimidate relationships with her. It was more of a sign that she is now under the prophet's protection than a marriage. There was no legal age of marriage at that time so anything like that was allowed and accepted.

And for God's sake, please stop misinterpreting each other!

And you were demanding an apology from him for a wrong statement that he stated, but I didn't see you apologizing for any of the times he proved you wrong.

And you were calling him a wannabe Arab only because he was an Indian Muslim, well, you're going against one of India's main ideologies of our beloved India: secularism. So, if we look at it from that perspective, he is more Indian than you are.

As a Muslim myself, I know how disrespected he would've felt when you called him صلى الله عليه وسلم.

I actually felt proud and badass when I used to see Mahabharat on television, but people like you ruined it all for me.

I wrote a short poem for the both of you:

Let's become Hindus who say Salam,
And Muslims who say Pranam;
Let's become Hindus who say Allahu Akbar,
And Muslims who say Jai Shree Ram!

I would leave by presenting a quote to the both of you:

"For great men, religion is a way of making friends; small people make religion a fighting tool."
― APJ Abdul Kalam

---

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".