Why do nonmuslims treat muslims so badly (a)?

Two of the world’s greatest and most beloved muslim leaders and scholars discuss the holy Koran, Hadiths, Pakistan. They discuss what being a muslim means.

34 minutes in, they discuss how Imam Ali went to Usman (also written Othman or Uthman) and presented him Ali’s copy of the holy Koran, also called the book of Ali or book of Fatimah. These were Imam Ali’s and Fatimah’s notes on the Koranic versus as they were revealed. As an aside Dr. James White and Jay Smith discusses how the holy Koran was composed:

Quietly Islamic scholars discuss this frequently but are afraid to discuss this in public for fear of retaliation at the hands of Islamist extremists. Please also watch the exceptional Islamic scholars Abdullah Gondal and Abdullah Sameer discuss the formation of the holy Quran:

After discussing the holy Quran, Imam Tawidi and Tarek Fatah discuss how and why Raswa Hind was written right after the holy prophet Mohammed pbuh passed away; which called for the conquest of Arya varsha (Iran, Turan, SAARC and related civilizations in South East Asia) and Asia. Tarek Fatah’s next book–“The Hindu is Not My Enemy”–elaborates on this. Many muslims believed that Pakistan was prophesied  in the holy Koran and by Mohammed pbuh because of Raswa Hind. Pakistani psychosis is discussed.

They mention how the numbering system of the Koran comes from India and how several of the Hadiths were written by muslims long after Mohammed pbuh passed away when muslims came to India–including the Hadith on how male monkeys stoned a female monkey for engaging in physical relations without formalizing her wedding with a male monkey  (at that time monkeys only lived in greater India).

They discuss the nexus of soft Islamists and their nonmuslim collaborators that now greatly influence and control America, Europe and much of the world. They often intimidate, oppress and harm patriotic good muslims. One of the ways they do this by accusing good muslims such as Tarek, Imam Tawhidi and Maajid Nawaz of being Islamaphobes. They are banned from many networks, publications, newspapers; and are on no fly lists. But despite this attempt by nonmuslims and Islamists to stifle them; their popularity and legitimacy among muslims continues to soar.

After watching this video, please see this very interesting discussion between the wise compassionate Jaʿfari jurisprudence extraordinaire Imam Tawhidi and the great atheist Bengali Islamish scholar Mufassil Islam moderated by Lebanese Canadian heart throb Gad Saad:

Continue reading Why do nonmuslims treat muslims so badly (a)?

Is Erdogan the Turkish Modi?

Erdogan has consolidated his power in yesterday’s election. This post was sparked by a Facebook friend’s (Indian Muslim) comment “why do Muslims in India hate Modi but love Erdogan.” Shashi provides some context here:

Comparisons are generally invidious, especially when they involve political leaders from different countries. But, while Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan rose to power 11 years before Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, there is much about their personal and professional trajectories that makes comparison irresistible.

Both Erdogan and Modi come from humble, small-town backgrounds: Erdogan sold lemonade and pastries in the streets of Rize; Modi helped his father and brother run a tea stall on a railway platform in Vadnagar. They are self-made men, energetic and physically fit – Erdogan was a professional soccer player before becoming a politician; Modi has bragged about his 56-inch (142-centimeter) chest – not to mention effective orators.

Both Erdogan and Modi were raised with religious convictions that ultimately shaped their political careers. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) and Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have both promoted a religiously infused, nationalist creed that they argue is more authentic than the Western-inspired secular ideologies that previously guided their countries’ development.

History has definitely not come to an end; Turkey and India (Israel/Hungary) seem to be on the vanguage of nationalistic revivals. Thankfully none of these countries border each other.

Related: Modi believed Vajpayee’s wooing of Muslims in 2004 was a fruitless exercise

Ps: All comments welcome except abusive or overwrought ones. Tone and tenor of any conversation (on my posts at least) must be calm and measured.

Africa’s only Hindu island

https://www.facebook.com/drewbinsky/videos/1792525924117662/

I’m pretty sure that Mauritius is a secular democracy but it is 52% Hindu.

As an aside it would be interesting to study the evolution of Hindu island diaspora culture around the world (Suriname, Guiana, Fiji, Mauritius etc).

There doesn’t seem to have been much Brahmin migration and it was mainly done by farmers/labourers. The early 20th century into East Africa seems to have had much Gujarati merchant castes but if memory serves me right they also served as labourers for the railways so it’s all a bit complicated and understudied.

Disregarding the Out of India migration theory (but there must have been a pulse with the Mitanni in the Levant); India has periodically pushed out waves of migrants to spread its culture, script and religion. To my mind though the only Hindu society, outside of core South Asia, to have a strong Brahmin presence is Bali.

It’s brings a further observation is that can Vedic and Hindu be separated. The reason I suggest this is that the Hinduicisation of South India seems to have primarily mediated by Brahmin migrants from the north. They seem to have found local hierarchies and adapted it to the caste system (the Reddys seem to be indigenous Dravidians).

I’m still unclear what the original nucleus of Hindu society would have been. After the collapse of the IVC culture it seems that Indian/Hindu civilisation (I’m treating them as equivalent since we are talking about BC) was continually shifting towards Haryana than Western UP and then Bihar. It’s only the Islamic incursions in first millennia AD that shifted it back towards Delhi and plugged India back into the Turkic network.

Of course the Buddhist interruption can’t be ignored but the role of Brahmins in the coherence of Hindu civilisation simply can’t be ignored. What is interest is that all the Hindu islands sans Brahmins seem to become very relaxed creole island cultures that resemble Sri Lanka. All of sudden the pulsating sensuality and tropical sexuality that is so repressed in North India/Pakistan emerges and the hidden matriarchy also peaks through.

Much as the Muslim invaders were very obviously symbols of patriarchy and a stern nomadic culture; its not unreasonable to supposed that the Aryans represented much of the same stream and applied that to a relatively relaxed pagan Dravidian/AASI South Asia. It would make sense that Indra, a masculine thunder god, is Aryan but Lingala worship is an indigenous feature.

The model we would be looking at is Mother Goddess worshipping AASI with naturistic pagan beliefs being coopted by Dravidian farmers. It would be a classic case of farmers and hunter gatherers coexisting in the same spaces; most of the farmer culture and genes winning out over the generations. Then come the Aryans with their migration/invasion but progressively Sanskritise the rest of South Asia with a much more masculine pantheon.

A question comes to mind that if Malaysia/Indonesia had a strong and resilient Brahmin network, would they have become Muslim? Had the spread of Buddhism undermined Brahminism as it seems to have done in the northern Punjab/Bengal peripheries of the Subcontinent.

Ps: Smart comments welcome (as in the Climate Change thread) – I’m simply speculating. I’ll delete anything overwrought; everyone featured in this post (except the Mauritians) are long gone.

Brown Pundits