57 Pakistani Hindus Convert To Islam 'under Pressure'

[shaheediyan]

Actually, intellectuals make some of the best warriors, and vice versa.

Hindustan does not have a monopoly on reasons and philosophies, if it did, 10 women wouldn't still be burnt every hour, nor would Dalits still be treated worse than animals or Indian have highest female infantcide rate in the world. The above has nothing to do with Islam, and is prevailent in our very own community along with a whole generation of youth who are drug addicts.

[jaikaara]

there r sizeable druggies in muslims internationally, in fact many of the suppliers r muslims , but they wake out of their 'high' to fight 'infidels'

[dalsingh101]

Don't forget using drugs themselves as weapons against 'infidels'.

[shaheediyan]

Sounds similar to how aboriginal communities have been destroyed worldwide by Europeans.

[dalsingh101]

Sounds similar to how aboriginal communities have been destroyed worldwide by Europeans.

That's a different story.

When you have all that you took for granted taken away and your whole world-view shattered. Plus you are disenfranchised on your own turf it can cause serious, deep community wide psychological issues. Drugs and alcohol are then commonly used to alleviate the cycle of hopelessness.

[Kaljug]

Actually, intellectuals make some of the best warriors, and vice versa.

Hindustan does not have a monopoly on reasons and philosophies, if it did, 10 women wouldn't still be burnt every hour, nor would Dalits still be treated worse than animals or Indian have highest female infantcide rate in the world. The above has nothing to do with Islam, and is prevailent in our very own community along with a whole generation of youth who are drug addicts.

This is the very important difference: Sikhi does not tolerate female infanticide, misogyny, or caste prejudice. In fact, Sikhi speaks against all of them to the extent that a Sikh who commits female infanticide is thrown out of the Panth. On the other hand, the ills of Islamic societies are as a direct consequence of the teachings of that religion.

K.

[dalsingh101]

This is the very important difference: Sikhi does not tolerate female infanticide, misogyny, or caste prejudice. In fact, Sikhi speaks against all of them to the extent that a Sikh who commits female infanticide is thrown out of the Panth. On the other hand, the ills of Islamic societies are as a direct consequence of the teachings of that religion.

K.

I don't know how to take this?

In one respect sullay at least have the excuse of following their religion as the cause of their acting like ar5eholes....us on the other hand, have been explicitly not to do certain things but still find ourselves acting like ar5eholes......

I don't know who is worse?

I should add.....I don't see ANY sullay critically reflecting on their own behaviour like this which is why their arseholeyness is so prevalent I imagine.

Edited June 10, 2010 by dalsingh101

[Kaljug]

I don't know how to take this?

In one respect sullay at least have the excuse of following their religion as the cause of their acting like ar5eholes....us on the other hand, have been explicitly not to do certain things but still find ourselves acting like ar5eholes......

It's not that difficult for a kalyugi person to follow a religion like Islam that panders to the basest desires of the lowest common denominator.

K.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Kaljug

[dalsingh101]

They do sanctioned bewakoofi, whilst we do unsanctioned bewakoofi...lol

We should aim higher collectively....

Edited June 10, 2010 by dalsingh101

[Parchand]

its not right to generalise entire people in this way. their faith isnt completely messed up. there have been so many muslims who have contributed beautifully to the path of sikhee its unbelievable and our Gurus were not so closed-minded as to purge themselves or the lands of their company.

[Kaljug]

its not right to generalise entire people in this way. their faith isnt completely messed up. there have been so many muslims who have contributed beautifully to the path of sikhee its unbelievable and our Gurus were not so closed-minded as to purge themselves or the lands of their company.

It's not Muslims I'm talking about, but Islam itself. While there have been - and are - many great Muslims, it is despite the tenets of Islam rather than because of them that they are good people. I'm sure Hitler was kind to his friends and his dog, but that doesn't make the philosophies of National Socialism any more palatable.

K.

[Parchand]

Ironic since Hitler borrowed many ideas for National Socialism from the Indian subcontinent, does this mean those ideals should be called Nazi?

i highly doubt Sheikh Fareed or Bhikhan or other Sufis were great despite the tenets of Islam. nor in the case of many Shia Emporers. Its doubtful they were simply druggies, waivering mystics or worldly wise and much more likely they had a bank of spiritual knowledge else our Gurus would not have supported them.

[Kaljug]

Ironic since Hitler borrowed many ideas for National Socialism from the Indian subcontinent, does this mean those ideals should be called Nazi?

i highly doubt Sheikh Fareed or Bhikhan or other Sufis were great despite the tenets of Islam. nor in the case of many Shia Emporers. Its doubtful they were simply druggies, waivering mystics or worldly wise and much more likely they had a bank of spiritual knowledge else our Gurus would not have supported them.

The Indian Subcontinent is not Sikhi. FYI, Hitler also thought highly of Mohammed, and it is not difficult to see why when you compare their philosophies of a super race, their hatred of the jews, and their complete disregard for human life.

Had Sheikh Fareed or Bhikan followed the advice in the Quran to force non-Muslims to pay jizyah or to kill them, to compel others to accept Islam, to keep women as slaves, to slay idolaters, etc etc, would they still be great? Or are they great because they chose not to follow these Islamic teachings?

K.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Kaljug

[Parchand]

they followed the teachings and were great. would Sufis not say they follow Allah, the Koran and Islam?

did the Shia Emporers our Gurus supported impose Jizyah? why did our Gurus go so far and offer so much help for such people to get the throne?

conversely islam is being purged of Sufism and this is a great shame. some are using this purging as an opportunity to malign entirety of islam and this is also a great shame.

when time comes for malechh to be destroyed that does not simply mean all muslims it means those who do not see God or put their faith into true practise.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Parchand

[Kaljug]

they followed the teachings and were great. would Sufis not say they follow Allah, the Koran and Islam?

Did they or did they not follow the teachings I mentioned above? Precisely which Islamic teachings did they follow that made them great? Would you still consider these people great if they went around, or simply encouraged, slaughtering idolaters and owning sex slaves (both Quranically inspired pastimes)?

Your average member of al-Qaeda or the Taliban also say they follow Allah, the Koran, and Islam - and they have plenty of scriptural backing for their barbaric practices. Are they great also? If not, doesn't this suggest to you that "greatness" is something independent of Islamic teachings?

did the Shia Emporers our Gurus supported impose Jizyah? why did our Gurus go so far and offer so much help for such people to get the throne?

I don't know why the Gurus did anything. Do you? Do you truly believe the Gurus supported the discriminatory practice of jizyah?

conversely islam is being purged of Sufism and this is a great shame. some are using this purging as an opportunity to malign entirety of islam and this is also a great shame.

You do realise that Sufism is a sect within Islam and is not a generally accepted interpretation of Islam, right? Islam was around a long time before the Sufis emerged to civilise the barbarism of the Quran and to give it a spiritual dimension.

when time comes for malechh to be destroyed that does not simply mean all muslims it means those who do not see God or put their faith into true practise.

I'd say a malechh is anyone who practices what the Quran preaches. If there are Muslims out there who do serious bhakti and who reject the more reprehensible teachings of the quran, and who acknowledge that Mohammed was a seriously flawed being whose example should not be emulated, then I am happy that they have chosen true greatness over insanity. Unfortunately, they would be considered infidels and apostates by the Quran's standards and by the majority of Muslims.

K.

Edited June 10, 2010 by Kaljug

[Parchand]

it makes little difference if a path is commonly accepted or not, only whether it can connect a soul with God.

where did i say greatness is restricted to islam? isnt greatness just greatness wherever it is found? this is probably why Sheikh Fareed, Kabir and Bhikhan are eternal in Guru Granth Sahib Ji?

our Gurus did not support Jizyah but supported the Shia Emporers yes? did these Islamic Emporers seek to implement it?

if these people were considered infidels how did they sustain an empire? and for the others were these people ever charged as being infidels under any law? was shariah imposed on sikhs by those kings?

so you're saying these Sheikhs, Pirs and Kings that our Gurus supported, blessed, seated on thrones and in some cases immortalised in Guru Granth Sahib - either they acknowledged "Mohammed was a seriously flawed being whose example should not be emulated" or are Malechh?

and this is what Guru Nanak went to Mecca and as far as Baghdad saying?

good luck with your crusade against islam.. LoL.. i'm out

Edited June 10, 2010 by Parchand

[Xylitol]

dharmic islam is different from rajneetik islam. dharmic islam, such as what some mystics have followed, involved ignoring aspects of rajneetic islam which are taught by koran, is it not?

Guru's didn't support muslim emperors, simply recognised that the raj was in their karam. it was in their karma to rule. gurus made a adeal wiht them, rule fairly, you keep your raj. when they stopped ruling fairly, the guru smashed his body pot on the emperor of delhi's head (as says in Gurbani), meaning that Guru ji destroyed thier raj karams through his kurbani.

[shaheediyan]

Kalyug, I know you like doing research. Look up Sufism, especially the oldest scripts, you will be very surprised how long it has been around.

Also, Sufism is not some minority sect, many Muslims in India are of Sufi following, there are also large Sufi populations in North Africa, China, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Bangladesh and Indonesia, not to mention the biggest, in India (where Islam was spread via Sufism).

They believe in Islam, Quran Sharif and Prophet Mohammed. It would be good if you directed your understaning/questions towards them and shared your answers with us here (there are Sufi forums).

All those Muslims that helped/befriended the Gurus and remained Muslims, it would naive to think that they rejected the Prophet, if you reject the Prophet, then there is no Islam left, its more a matter of understanding their interpretation.

If you have read the Quran (not just selective bits) you will see there appear to be contradicitons, this is where different Muslim groups differ, taking different meanings.

All Sufi groups trace their parampara back to the Prophet, and spiritual practices like dhikr (simran) and the intrinsic teachings of fanā and baqā, are clearly historically linked back to Mohammed Sahib, even though they have abandoned on th large part by Wahhabi Sunnism - this in itself is something to think about, if as you imply Wahhabis represent the strict and complete Islam, why have they abandoned historical practices.

I myself have tried to introduce some Sunnis I know to these practices, but they have politely declined to accept them. These massive divergunces which have occured are real and something to consider.

If Islam was some evil dharm, then all those that believe it would be evil, we clearly know that is not the case. The notion of evil Islam and good Muslims is a contradiction in terms.

[dalsingh101]

Another factor to consider is like it or not, Islam is here to stay.

The way it is growing should give us Sikhs food for thought as our own quom seems to be shrinking. This growth is not only the result of forceful/underhand conversions (although these play an undetermined part) but also successful debate, cross marriages and outsider integration into that quom.

Personally I find it hard to believe that Mohammad was a dharmic man myself, but I would let sullay be, as long as they don't stick their hook noses into our affairs.

Yes, there are problems with certain Muslim communities and by this I mean mainly from Pakistani quarters. This in itself would quickly resolve itself if Sikh bundhay acted like bundhay insread of pajama geeks or giddarhs but you can say that till you're blue in the face and things still wont change. In the modern world we are still mainly concerned with career, house, car, material wealth and status etc. over dharam. Which is understandable or at least human.

The only thing we need to focus on is our own leadership and youth and re-aligning ourselves as a quom to make us stronger and remove the many negative trends that have become attached to us.

Edited June 11, 2010 by dalsingh101

[Kaljug]

Shaheediyan:

Firstly, Islam was spread in India via the sword, not marauding hordes of long-haired Sufi hippies carryinhg flowers and copies of the Quran in their hand. Seriously, what hope do you have of seeing Islam for what it is when you cannot even read history without liberating yourself first from political correctness and Islamic propaganda?

Secondly, those practices which make the Sufis great are commonly found in every religion. Most of their practices are identical to Christian quietism and some of the more visionary practices are clearly derived from Jewish Merkabah and Hechalot mysticism with a healthy dose of Hellinstic thinking thrown in. Hell, they even have a little kundalini yoga from India thrown in for that extra spicy kick.

At the end of the day, what makes them Muslims is their rigid adherence to Sharia and the belief that everything that Mohammed did was by definition perfect - regardless of how revolting and reprehensible his acts might seem to reason. I do not care how neat and lofty-sounding Sufi teachings sound, the fact of the matter is that if they cannot clearly say that child molestation, assassination, murder of non-Muslims, genocide of Jewish tribes, rape, the keeping of women as sexual slaves, the robbing of caravans - all things that Mohammed engaged in and all things that are encouraged for Muslims in the Quran - are completely wrong and morally reprehensible, then they are just a bunch of malechh spinning themselves into greater depths of stupidity.

Thirdly, sure, given that the hadiths record everything about Mohammed down to what he liked to eat at breakfast and his irrational hate towards gecko lizards (he said that the gecko lizard was an infidel and an enemy of the believers!), it might be possible to trace Sufi terminology back to Mo. But that's not the point, is it? The point is that the must disgusting acts of depravity and evil can be traced back to Mo also in the same hadiths, but Muslims are incapable of doing the honest thing and saying that these things were wrong and that no Muslim should ever engage in such things.

K.

[Kaljug]

dharmic islam is different from rajneetik islam. dharmic islam, such as what some mystics have followed, involved ignoring aspects of rajneetic islam which are taught by koran, is it not?

This distinction does not exist in Islam. Even the majority of Sufis teach that one must adhere to Sharia first before engaging in mystical practices. Also, the fact that Sufis do not engage in collecting jizyah and looking behind rocks for jews to kill does not mean that they do not believe such things to be acceptable.

K.

Edited June 11, 2010 by Kaljug

[Kaljug]

See here for the historical links between Sufi orders and jihad. To imagine that the Sufis are the enlightened and peaceful adherents of an enlightened Islam is historically false.

K.

[shaheediyan]

Well, having studied and taught Indian Classical Musical history, including the Islamic development of Raags and timelines, I beg to differ.

Islam may have spread by the sword by 'some' rulers, but before they were even heard of, Sufi Mystics had already travelled, integrated and achieved massive followings in the sub-continent, there influence being so far reaching it is found in some of the earlierst medieval raag granths.

I don't expect you to take this on board judging by your one sided 2 minute Sufi research, so again, I choose to digress.

[Kaljug]

I don't expect you to take this on board judging by your one sided 2 minute Sufi research, so again, I choose to digress.

Veera, you need to stop jumping to conclusions about another's lack of study simply because their views do not accord with your own beliefs.

If you like, I can supply you with a number of texts that deal with the Sufi relationship with jihad, but given that I've recommended such books in the past and it is clear that you and others have not even bothered to look at them, being comfortable with the PC version of Islamic history and a comfy state of ignorance, I'm sticking to providing short essays (such as the one above) which have plenty of sources that those who are interested can look into themselves.

K.

[shaheediyan]

Veer, that source seems like a typical Christian American reaction to the ever growing Sufi popularity in the US (and worldwide for that matter).

If I saw anything but a totally negative and one sided demonisation of Sufism (Islam), I may have taken it just a little more seriously.

Baba Farid Ji was of the same Chisti order your American article demonises. There are said to be tens of millions of followers of Baba Farids in China, Africa, Arabia, Pakistan and not to mention India.

This is the danger when we try and interpret worldy hate, propoganda, history, interpretation and personal bias in confliction with our own faith, of which Baba Farid Ji Maharaj is an integral part.

Rather than reading one sided reactionery propoganda on Sufis, I would highly recommend reading Sufi readings, just as our very own Seva Panthi Sampryada used to do.