You're this DattaSwami?

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Iwannaplato
Posts: 8553
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Walker wrote: Sun Dec 25, 2022 9:03 am As for the rest of what you wrote, I've already addressed the tyrannical need to change ....
You don't want to banish, it seems, but the frantic urge to change others has been clear since DS started posting and others did not react with the reverence you think he deserves.

Or perhaps it just seemed that way. Perhaps that's good for you to know, how you seem, since you frame others reactions in ways to suit yourself, to the point of changing their words (re:Lacewing).
Walker
Posts: 16389
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Walker »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sun Dec 25, 2022 9:16 am
Walker wrote: Sun Dec 25, 2022 9:03 am As for the rest of what you wrote, I've already addressed the tyrannical need to change ....
You don't want to banish, it seems, but the frantic urge to change others has been clear since DS started posting and others did not react with the reverence you think he deserves.

Or perhaps it just seemed that way. Perhaps that's good for you to know, how you seem, since you frame others reactions in ways to suit yourself, to the point of changing their words (re:Lacewing).
You couldn't be more asinine if you tried.

Since your topic is Me ...

- I have no frantic urge to change others.
- I don't care how others react to dattaswami.
- I respond to how others react to dattaswami.
- I do not care how you treat dattaswami.
- I do not think he should be treated with reverence.
- I do not think he should not be treated with reverence.
- I do not think he should be treated in any particular way.

- I think you should be treated, as I am treating you, because of your stupid comment.

Lacewing is not touched by anything I write, I can assure you.


*

Do you want me to make the topic, you?
Walker
Posts: 16389
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Walker »

Talk about the Principle.
This is a Philosophy Forum.

Quit your bitching.

*

Good grief!

Dattaswami is pouring over the border of PN!

Build that wall!


:lol:


(That is the principle)
Iwannaplato
Posts: 8553
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Iwannaplato »

Walker wrote: Sun Dec 25, 2022 9:23 am Do you want me to make the topic, you?
You mean like when you gossiped to DS that I let my strident emotions rule me. Or when you said I was trying to be a jerk. And there's more of the same. LOL.
See, that's the thing Walker. You're not honest. You do things and then pretend you don't do them and act as if only others do them and are clueless as to why they might.
It's a wonderful base for your spirituality. Your 'I am just contemplating.'
But perhaps you weren't panicked and trying to change us. Perhaps you just behave that way.

And the regularity with which you twist things said by others.
Lacewing is not touched by anything I write, I can assure you.
I didn't mention let alone focus on Lacewing getting touched by what you wrote.
I said the way you changed her words - by responding as if she said something else - indicated emotional triggers on your part.

Oh, saw the next post....
Walker:
Quit your bitching.
Yeah, you don't try to change people. You just tell them to change. How you manage to hide yourself from yourself...it's impressive.

I'm happy to leave it here. You'll notice that you complain but pretend it's only others who do, or you won't. You'll notice your being triggered, or you won't. If you want to start making posts about me or others or behaving panicked again, you'll do it, or not. I'm not going to pretend that this is dependent somehow on my wishes or behavior. These are things you do on your own, but seem to resent when others do them, especially in reponse to your doing them.
dattaswami
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by dattaswami »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Dec 24, 2022 7:09 am
One of the friends of mine also asked a similar question and I was thinking to answer this. The original background was different. When some of My devotees were fortunate to have some visions on seeing Me, a point was noted by them. In all those visions the face was My face only. The devotees who did not have such visions were anxious to hear about the visions from the other devotees.

Based on the explanations some devotees decorated My face in different forms so that the other devotees may have some satisfaction by seeing the visions indirectly. Originally these photos were restricted to the circle of My devotees only.

When the Universal Spirituality was started as a Mission, My devotees suggested using these photos. I agreed based on one concept, i.e., when the same face is present in all the pictures it would give a psychological impression that the same God appeared in different forms. The face is the real identity of a person. Unfortunately, the pictures of various deities and incarnations were only the imaginary drawings of artists. But, they included different faces in these imaginary diagrams.

This will give an unconscious impression that the deities and incarnations are quite different and the idea of one God does not become strong. I have super imposed My face on the faces of deities and incarnations for whom the real photos were not present. Don’t you think that a real face is better than the imaginary face? My face and the imaginary faces on the photos are constituted by five elements only and there is no difference.

I did not agree to super impose My face on the face of Shri Shirdi Sai Baba, because His real photo exists. For this concept of one God, this single face helps. This single real face need not be mine only. In fact you can also super impose your face in the faces of these deities and incarnations to explain that concept. It is only just a pictorial model. I will appreciate equally for two merits. 1) The face is real and not imaginary and truth is better than false imagination. 2) The face is single and this point does not exist in the imaginary faces.

In the spiritual field the only two impurities, which are the two layers that cover our two eyes are egoism and jealousy. Nobody is exceptional in these two impurities. Sadhana is only the eye operation to remove these two layers from our two eyes. Then only one can accept the existence of God and finally accept the existence of God in Human incarnation.

When two eyes are completely covered by these two layers, one does not accept even in the existence of God. If the two layers are partially operated, the human being accepts the existence of God but not the human incarnation. When these two layers are completely removed, the devotee recognizes the human incarnation like Hanuman recognizing Rama. Because of these two layers many people did not recognize the human incarnations.

Some recognized and respected but did not worship. A few recognized and also worshipped. Sometimes the human incarnation was also killed due to the intensity of these two layers as in the case of Lord Jesus. Lord Mohammed also had to fight with people constantly because He tried to unite the various sub-religions in Islam. Sankara was killed by black magic because He condemned all the sub-religions and united them. Swami Dayananda tried to bring out the real heart of Vedas and was killed by food poisoning.

Therefore, we must carefully watch the various effects of these two layers present within us before we analyze the object. The subjective analysis is very important before the objective analysis. Sankara told that unless the mind is purified from these impurities (Chitta Suddhi), recognition of God and recognition of Human Incarnation finally (Jnana Yoga) is not possible.

I have answered not only your question but also the root of your question. Previously the super imposition of face might not have been done due to the absence of photography and computer graphics. However, when Hanuman did not agree Krishna as Rama, Krishna did the same computer graphics by His divine power and super imposed the face of Rama on His face.

You may not believe if I say that the same face of Lord Krishna was decorated by the dress of the face of Rama. Due to change in the dress the face appears different. You will find this fact in My photos also. Actually, it is the same face but appears different due to different external dress. Thus the human body is only the external dress and the single actor present in all these roles is the same Lord. Hanuman could not recognize Krishna as Rama due to this external dress only.

When we see a film actor in the role of Rama in the cinema, the devotees look him as Rama only. They do not see the inner actor but only the external role. But some people call him by the name of the actor and they see only the inner actor and not the external role. When the Lord comes as human incarnation the inner actor is the Lord and the outer role is the human being.

This is just reverse of the above. In the case of human incarnation also the devotees see the Lord who is the inner actor and not the external role, which is the human being. But ordinary people see only the external human being and not the inner actor who is the Lord. Therefore, whether it is the world drama or a drama in this world, devotees only look at the Lord and the other people only look at the human being.

When I was decorated in the dress of the Lord, I told My devotees like this "The Lord is hidden in Me and wants to give the fame to this external human being. I am just reversing this point and brought out the inner Lord to outside in the form of this decoration and hidden Myself inside the decoration. I want to say that the inner hidden Lord must be seen by all of you, who has done all these wonderful things and you must give credit to the Lord only. The Lord hided the truth and I revealed the truth".
Last edited by dattaswami on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13975
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

You look like a dickhead.
dattaswami
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by dattaswami »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 2:28 am You look like a dickhead.
When I said that God is in my human body, who is delivering the spiritual knowledge, my reference is my devotees who strongly believe me in spite of my several objections. My statements vary according to the level of the devotees. Some times I say that I am devotee or a messenger to ordinary people.
I say that God is in me to the devotees who have partial faith in me. I say that the God pervaded all over my body and became one with me to strong devotees who have reached the climax of the faith.

Jesus also told like this to different levels of devotees. He claimed himself as messenger of God to lower devotees. To the middle level He claimed that He is son of the God. To the top devotees He claimed that He and His father are one and the same. You should not transfer one statement from one level to the other level.

In my case, for your information, I say every one that I am just a devotee of God. But the devotees forced me with their opinions and finally I responded according to their firmness of faith. Even there I tried my level best to distort their faith through several tests. Therefore, you cannot generalise my statements to all the humanity. In fact you cannot generalise the statements of Jesus also to the entire humanity because all the human beings have not believed Jesus. Only some believed and His statements relate to such fraction of devotees only.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 15722
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

DattaSwami a Bullseyes for Islamists?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

dattaswami wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 1:19 am
Image

Based on the explanations some devotees decorated My face in different forms so that the other devotees may have some satisfaction by seeing the visions indirectly. Originally these photos were restricted to the circle of My devotees only.

When the Universal Spirituality was started as a Mission, My devotees suggested using these photos. I agreed based on one concept, i.e., when the same face is present in all the pictures it would give a psychological impression that the same God appeared in different forms.
It is not a critical issue with most religions and their believers but
when they put your face within the "Islam" it is as if you are the person "Muhammad" representing Islam.

It is a blasphemy and the greatest sin to represent Islam and Muhammad with any face or idol; many those who committed such blasphemy had been killed by fanatics who believe that are commanded to kill those who blasphemy against Islam and Muhammad and will receive 10 folds the reward.
  • Quran 5-33: Those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger,
    and go about the earth spreading mischief1
    -indeed their recompense is that they either be done to death, or be crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off from the opposite sides or be banished from the land.2
    Such shall be their degradation in this world; and a mighty chastisement lies in store for them in the World to Come
    — Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi
The critical word here is 'mischief' i.e. "fasadin" [root Fasād (Arabic: فساد [fasaːd]) is an Arabic word meaning rottenness, corruption, or depravity] which has a very loose meaning extending to anything negative against the religion.

This is why those who drew cartoons of Muhammad are accused of having done 'mischief' [fasadin] against Islam and thus commanded to be killed; which is so evident.

Given that there are over 200 millions of Muslim in India and if only 0.5% are fanatics that is 1 million :shock: :shock: ; they will gleefully take care of the above blasphemy as commanded in 5:33 to get their promised rewards with a bonus of 72 Vs.

Suggest you delete your face from the "Islam" circle.

Btw, if you are supposedly wise, you should not be committing "blasphemy" here by posting religious-related-threads all over the forum here. I believe members can post as many threads [complying with rules of the forum] as they like but they should be posting them in the right section which in your case is in the Religious section or General Section.
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
dattaswami
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: DattaSwami a Bullseyes for Islamists?

Post by dattaswami »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:09 am
Btw, if you are supposedly wise, you should not be committing "blasphemy" here by posting religious-related-threads all over the forum here. I believe members can post as many threads [complying with rules of the forum] as they like but they should be posting them in the right section which in your case is in the Religious section or General Section.
OK i agree. We also shall know the background in which the Quran was written. In the time of the divine Prophet Mohammad, the atmosphere of a specific region was horrible in which several religions appeared with several Gods and all were fighting with each other. The fight brought climax of Chaos and people were killing each other based on the religious differences. Then, Allah appeared in human form called Prophet Mohammad. He established a religion which is the actual Islam proposing only one God called Allah. If this religion gets established, the quarrels will stop and killing each other will end. There was a vigorous necessity to establish Islam even by force to stop mutual fights. Naturally, those ignorant and blind religions opposed the Prophet.

This means that their religions should continue and the killing also should continue without end. To bring them to the concept of one God and to avoid the mutual fights and mutual killing, the Prophet went to the last resort of even killing those leaders and rigid followers of various religions so that eternal peace will be established for future generations.

Hence, orders like ‘fight non-Muslims’, ‘cutting off the hands and feet of those against Allah and His messenger’ etc., were passed in that context and in that specific region in which such worst situation existed. These comments of the Prophet were confined to that time and to that region only where people were fighting and killing with each other based on different religions.

In normal situations same Prophet Mohammad advised the followers to protect anybody in problem and to become the escort up to his/her house. Then, preaching about Allah should be done and to leave him/her without any force. Here, in this context, the world Allah means one God only and not several Gods since He established His religion in the context of rejecting many Gods only. Similarly, Lord Krishna, a human incarnation conducted a mighty war to destroy the injustice completely in a specific region and in a specific old span of time. This does not mean that whenever injustice grows, a mighty war is always inevitable.

In a specific region and in some span of specific old time, a divine human incarnation preached the required spiritual knowledge to that place and that context of time and underwent crucifixion silently so that the hearts of those people get reformed by repentance. This does not mean that any spiritual preacher of any time in any area should undergo crucifixion silently to reform the hearts of the people. Today, crucifixion is never allowed on the grounds of spiritual knowledge and even on the grounds of political issues.

Today, in all regions of the world all religions co-exist with mutual love and respect to each other. Even if there are differences in religions, situation is limited to some hot discussions and debates or at the maximum abusing each other very rarely. You can’t bring those comments of the divine Prophet confined to that context and that place to the present context and present world. You should not implement those punishments on non-Islamic religions because that situation was very serious and this situation is very normal.

The divine Prophet Mohammad means ONE GOD as the meaning of the world Allah because the entire lifelong context in which He was placed was horrible fights based on religious differences establishing different Gods. The punishments suggested by Him were in the context of forcible suppression of multiplicity of God by even wars to stop mutual killing based on wrong spiritual knowledge. Today also, many religions and many Gods based on wrong spiritual knowledge exist, but, the situation is not as worse as that of that time.

In that context, wars and severe punishments were inevitable and in this context of today, propagation of right spiritual knowledge is sufficient. You should not extend the statement of one context blindly to other different context of the same event also. Today, the solution can come by cutting the wrong arguments with the help of right arguments and hands and feet need not be cut with knives. The whole problem arises by blindly bringing the comments of God made in one context to another different context due to ignorance without little common sense and a trace of analysis!

Similarly, issues of inheriting the property, control of women, concepts of marriage, the status of adopted sons etc., present in that context and in that region were analysed with justified logic and judgements were passed by the divine Prophet Mohammad. Everywhere, every time, we must not miss the basic point that these judgements were specific to those situations only. If the situation is exactly same, anytime, anywhere, you can simply extend and apply the same judgement word to word. But, if situations were different, the same judgement of past different situations should not be applied to the new situations without suitable modifications.

How to tranform a terrorist

Even a terrorist has some logic by which only he is practically behaving in that particular way. By your sharp analysis, you have to change that logic and then only reformation and realization comes even in terrorist. You must enlighten the misinterpretation of the scripture like Jihad, which is the fight for justice in the context of killing each other due to difference in the religions existing in the time of Prophet Mohammad.

The situation of killing each other can be controlled by fight and sometimes in extreme conditions by removing some limbs like hands, legs etc. Killing can be stopped by fights or such severe punishments. Today when such context of killing is not there, you cannot bring the concept of Jihad to the context of today.

Today, only oral arguments and oral fights are going on between religions. In this context, only perfect rational analysis is sufficient to rectify the situation. Like this, we must understand the word of the Prophet with reference to the then existing context. You should not generalize a specific context to all the times and all the regions. Then only harmony between religions and world peace is possible. You must also remember that the Prophet told to teach about Allah to a human being after helping it and the final decision is left to the free will of the human being.

Shri Datta Swami gives clarification on the some of the controversial verses in Quran

A woman inherits half of what a man inherits: Qur'an 4:11
A woman's witness testimony is half of that of a man's: Qur'an 2:282

Women(Qur'an 4:11, 2:282, Qur'an 4:34): In that old context, women were terribly suppressed in all aspects by the ignorant men. This situation existed in every religion and in every region of the world. When you suppressed by somebody, he/she will react and revenge in silent or open ways. Women couldn’t revolt in open ways due their weaker physical strength compared to men.

Showing difference by caste and gender is the climax of ignorance and stupidity. Naturally, women revolted in silent ways by becoming more alert and intelligent than men. Women became experts in cold war. They were trying to retort injustice through curved ways called cheating. Men blamed women as cunning liars. This was true in that situation but such retort was not unjust since diamond should be cut by diamond only.

You cannot blame those women in view of their unjust suppression. Hence, the witness of two women was felt necessary for the truth to come out because of the non-unity of women in those days. Wife being left half of the husband, witness of one man was said to equal to the witness of two women. Suppression of women from education and property made them to become weaker sex.

The divine Prophet gave equal right of property to the women because wealth or money is the basic strength of the entire world. Even in Hinduism the Veda said (Putrebhyo daayam...) that issues (Putra) should divide the property equally. As per Sanskrit grammar (Ekashesha sutra) the word ‘putra’ means both son and daughter. But, the word putra was misinterpreted by men to have the only meaning ‘son’. Selfish souls always pollute the scripture and analysis is the filter to be used for cleaning.

Discipline of the family is essential and one head of the family should exist, be father or be mother. In the old context father (man) remained as head and the entire family including mother (woman) was obeying the head. In the case of disobedience, the family looses unity and discipline. In such case beating was recommended just to induce fear and control.

In this way, if understood properly, this gives justified colour. If misinterpreted in wrong way, it shows atrocity against women. This topic should be carefully and patiently understood and everywhere misinterpretation drags you to side. Today, there are several families in which the woman is the only earning member and happens to be the head of the family. In such case if the husband or children become disobedient, she, as the head of the family can beat her husband or children. Headship is important and not gender.

In the old context, the head was always male, it is said that a disobedient wife should be controlled even by beating. Here, head controlling others is real focus and man controlling women is misinterpreted false focus. If the discipline comes by punishment, the anger should no more continue and no injustice should be done to anyone in anyway keeping past in mind (‘do not seek a way against them...’).

A man may marry the wife of his adopted son: Qur'an 33:4

Adopted son(: This son is not given by God. This type of son is got by the man only. There is no blood relationship between father and adopted son. The widow wife of such adopted son can be married by the father provided both are willing. This applies to a case of mutual willingness and not force to be applied in every case. Extension of it to all cases is again misinterpretation of selfish people.

Turned into Apes: Qur'an 2:65


Apes: Those who oppose the word of God, become undisciplined criminals to be treated as animals and not at all human beings. Animals have no ethics at all. In the animals also apes are very much unstable in psychology. Hence, such unstable criminals doing various types of sins without ethics are best addressed as apes.

A man can have sex with prisoners of war: Qur'an 33:50

Prisoners: The widows of prisoners are to be supported by providing peaceful family life. Here, wedding means maintenance. Husband means he, who maintains a woman (Bibharti iti bhartaa) and wife means she, who is maintained by the husband (Bhriyate iti bhaaryaa). The wedding with Prophet or human incarnation means that such unfortunate widow shall be maintained and supported by God. The word wedding should be taken as in the sense of supporting the widow and her children.

If the widow and the supporter (man) are mutually willing, both can get further children through the sex. This applies to specific cases only to avoid the secret sexual dealings of a widow with many men and marriage with a man is better than that bringing deceases. Rules of ethics differ from case to case and no single rule exists that should be applied to all the cases in all the contexts.

A man can marry a girl who hasn't reached puberty: Qur'an 65:4

Marriage before puberty: This existed in Hinduism also in a specific span of time and not necessary for all the times. The Manusmuruti says that a girl should be married in her 8th year (Astavarshaa bhavet...). The Veda says that the girl should be married after 16th year (Maa me dabhraani...).

This difference is based on the different contexts. A time was there when the girls were forcibly taken away for marriage. But, if the girl was married, she was leftover. To this context the first scripture applies. The normal context of all times was that such danger of looting unmarried girls was absent, which is even in the present time and to this context the second scripture applies.

In such normal span of time, a grown up girl has grown up mentally also to select her husband. This process called svayamvaram existed in which a grown up girl interviews various grooms directly and makes her own selection with full freedom. Hence, such rules are specific for specific contexts only and this is very very important point.


A man may marry four wives: Qur'an 4:3


Four wives: This rule again applies to a specific context of time and region in which a man was marrying many many girls based on his power of money and rowdy nature. Such infinite number is reduced to four and here one is also suggested. Hence, from case to case the number varies from one to four. A soul can’t do justice to more than four based on the condition of health in that time.


"Cut off their hands": Qur'an 5:38 & Qur'an 5:33

Cutting hands of thieves: This again differs from context to context. When the sin of stealing reached climax and not controlled by any punishment, the last resort of the punishment was this. This can’t be applied to another context where the sin is under control.


Sura 5:33 orders the cutting off of the hands and feet of those who wage war against Allah and his Messenger.



Cutting hands and feet of opponents of Prophet: Jesus was the Prophet before Mohammad as agreed by Islam also. His hands and feet were cruelly nailed. Such criminals opposing God should be given this punishment. Jesus indicated that He and His father are one and the same (Monism).

The anger for crucifixion came at this point. Jesus told the absolute truth as said by Shankara. The ego and jealousy of other co-human beings reached climax and Jesus was brutally killed. To avoid this horrible crime from which no involved soul can ever be excused by God, Prophet Mohammad established dualism (God and soul are totally different) and separated Allah from His messenger. Though He was human incarnation of Allah, to avoid such anger of God on souls, He rejected monism based on the context.

In fact, both theories are correct and one and the same. When current flows through wire, current (God) is inseparable from the wire (messenger) and the electrified wire shows the property of electricity (shocking) whenever and wherever touched. For all practical purposes though both are different, remain as one and the same. The electrified wire is called as electricity itself.

Prophet Mohammad criticized Jews and Christians in old context only and not in all contexts of all times. The reason for such criticism was only in the context of crucifixion of Jesus, since He was crucified on twisted background of political offence of anti Government, though the hidden real reason was the disliked spiritual knowledge of Jesus.

He was aiming at the religious leaders and their followers only, who plotted the crucifixion in most cunning way and hence friendship with such people should not be done. The latter generations should repent to do such act again and this was the main aim of criticising their latter generations after a long time and this criticism subsequently applies to all.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 15722
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: DattaSwami a Bullseyes for Islamists?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

dattaswami wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:13 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:09 am
Btw, if you are supposedly wise, you should not be committing "blasphemy" here by posting religious-related-threads all over the forum here. I believe members can post as many threads [complying with rules of the forum] as they like but they should be posting them in the right section which in your case is in the Religious section or General Section.
OK i agree. We also shall know the background in which the Quran was written. In the time of the divine Prophet Mohammad, the atmosphere of a specific region was horrible in which several religions appeared with several Gods and all were fighting with each other. The fight brought climax of Chaos and people were killing each other based on the religious differences. Then, Allah appeared in human form called Prophet Mohammad. He established a religion which is the actual Islam proposing only one God called Allah. If this religion gets established, the quarrels will stop and killing each other will end. There was a vigorous necessity to establish Islam even by force to stop mutual fights. Naturally, those ignorant and blind religions opposed the Prophet.
You are so ignorant and naive re Islam.
Btw, I spent 3 years full time researching on the Quran.

I repeat my point 5:33 again;
    • Quran 5-33: Those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger,
      and go about the earth spreading mischief1
      -indeed their recompense is that they either be done to death, or be crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off from the opposite sides or be banished from the land.2
      Such shall be their degradation in this world; and a mighty chastisement lies in store for them in the World to Come
      — Tafheem-ul-Quran - Abul Ala Maududi
    The critical word here is 'mischief' i.e. "fasadin" [root Fasād (Arabic: فساد [fasaːd]) is an Arabic word meaning rottenness, corruption, or depravity] which has a very loose meaning extending to anything negative against the religion.

    This is why those who drew cartoons of Muhammad are accused of having done 'mischief' [fasadin] against Islam and thus commanded to be killed; which is so evident.

    Given that there are over 200 millions of Muslim in India and if only 0.5% are fanatics that is 1 million :shock: :shock: ; they will gleefully take care of the above blasphemy as commanded in 5:33 to get their promised rewards with a bonus of 72 Vs.
The IMMUTABLE Quran as the last and most perfect is supposed to be an Exemplar for all of humankind till eternity. How can all the evil acts therein the Quran be taken as an Exemplar for all humans for all times?

In contrast, note the words of Christ in "Gospels" which are the sole representation of Christianity is 100% pacifist [love all, even enemies, give the other cheek] and allow no room for any evil acts at all, is a good exemplar till eternity.
The 'Compassionate to all' in Buddhism is 100% pacifist as an exemplar.
In certain Hindu beliefs there is Ahimsa.

Re Quran 5:33, WHO ARE YOU or any Muslim apologist or even any Muslim to interpret otherwise and subvert God's words.
It is a blasphemy to reinterpret the words of Allah other than its literal meaning.
The words of Allah must be taken literally to reap the promised salvific rewards.

5:33 and other violent verses has been adopted literally [accordingly] for 1400 years till the present and will last till eternity as commanded by their God. Even their most serious learned scholars and intelligentsia understand the true meaning and intent; they do not dare to change the literal words of their God.

I understand the majority of believers [being good humans] will not carry out this command, but note even if it is 0.5% there is 1 million fanatics in India or 7.5 million around who will obey this command literally. They have already killed so many they accused of having committed blasphemy against their religion and prophet since 1400 years ago up to the present; there is no way they will stop doing so.
WHO ARE YOU to stop them [merely by reinterpreting in your own perspective] in doing their duty to deal with the blasphemy of yours and others.
dattaswami
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: DattaSwami a Bullseyes for Islamists?

Post by dattaswami »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:44 am
WHO ARE YOU to stop them [merely by reinterpreting in your own perspective] in doing their duty to deal with the blasphemy of yours and others.
Q’ran says that a Muslim should protect even the enemy belonging to other religion. It says that a Muslim can speak about the preaching of Allah to the enemy and then leave the enemy in protected place. It never says that the religion should be spread by violence. It speaks about the war for justice, which is not the war for propagation of religion. For that matter, Gita arose only from the state of war, which was fought for establishing justice.

Even Bible says that the rigid fools who do not realize should be thrown to the liquid fire, which is violence. Therefore, violence is not wrong. But the cause of violence should be perfectly justified. When Mohammad came, there were three hundred religions, which were quarelling among themselves with lot of violence. He tried His best by preaching the concept of one God. There was no alternative way to subside the violence between them.

Actually after Jesus, the concept of human incarnation was fully realized but this concept was exploited by cheaters. Every fellow became a prophet and declared himself as the human incarnation. The followers started preaching that particular form is only the one God. You can imagine easily the situation at the time. When violence is justified, it is called as punishment given by God. If the violence is not justified, it becomes Chaos due to egoism of a demon, which can be subsided only by divine punishment. Actually at the end, Hinduism speaks about the incarnation of Kalki and Christianity speaks about the final punishment given by God. Both these situations are of terrible violence only.

The last sort of God is only punishment, which can alone bring peace at least temporally for some time when the world is filled with brutal conservative fools, who are the wild beasts in the human form. The Lord says in Bible “Revenge is mine” which means the Lord punishes the unjust people.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 15722
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

11 heinous murders over alleged blasphemy against Islam and Prophet Mohammed
Image
https://www.opindia.com/2022/06/11-hein ... -of-islam/

While the world talks about tolerance, freedom of expression and liberal views, fundamental Muslims have taken to the opposite direction, with an increase in violence against alleged blasphemy that allegedly includes insults to Islam and Prophet Mohammed. Islamic literature and interpretations of the Quran have prompted to avenge the criticism or visual depiction of the Prophet, in the wake of Jihad. According to scholars, particularly the Hadiths from Nasai and Sunan Abu Daud, have supported punishment for Blasphemy while narrating that a Jewish woman slave was killed by her master for her repeated blasphemous behaviour against the Prophet. According to the story, when this was brought before Prophet, he declared no retaliation against the master.

Islamic juridical texts have also prescribed death punishment for blasphemy and are ‘agreed by all Islamic scholars of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah’ as claimed by Mufti Obaidullah Qasmi from Deoband. In modern-day parlance, however, avenging the acts of blasphemy by killing the blasphemer is the only rule of law. In the countries of the Indian Subcontinent and Africa where the state has often surrendered before Islamist fundamentalism, ‘gustakh-e-Rasool ki ek hi saza, sar tan se juda sar tan se juda’ is a war cry often justified. In Islamic nations like Pakistan, Iran etc, people are executed or jailed for years for alleged blasphemy, if not already killed by Islamist mobs before arrested by police.

On the occasion of the death anniversary of Prophet Mohammed on June 8, here are ten most well known murders by Islamist mobs due to alleged ‘Blasphemy’ which have rocked the world.

....
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 15722
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: DattaSwami a Bullseyes for Islamists?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

dattaswami wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:01 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:44 am
WHO ARE YOU to stop them [merely by reinterpreting in your own perspective] in doing their duty to deal with the blasphemy of yours and others.
Q’ran says that a Muslim should protect even the enemy belonging to other religion. It says that a Muslim can speak about the preaching of Allah to the enemy and then leave the enemy in protected place. It never says that the religion should be spread by violence. It speaks about the war for justice, which is not the war for propagation of religion.
As I had stated you are ignorant of what is in the whole of the Quran.

Have you read the whole Quran 6236 verses, analyzed its >77,000 words in its full context and understand its main theme? I have.

There are supposedly 'good' verses in the Quran, e.g. promote good and avoid evil, etc. but these are dominated and overridden by the main theme of violence against all non-believers.
Enjoining (what is) right and forbidding (what is) evil[1][2] (Arabic: ٱلْأَمْرْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفْ وَٱلنَّهْيْ عَنِ ٱلْمُنْكَرْ, romanized: al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-n-nahy ʿani-l-munkar) are two important duties imposed by God in Islam, as revealed in the Quran and hadith.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjoining ... ding_wrong


When these verses are etymologically and literally translated, they do not actually mean "commanding good and forbidding evil". Maruf means known, familiar and the purpose of use in 30 verses is to express custom.
Note 5:33 again,
even non-believing is cover within fasadin [mischiefs and corruptions] since non-believing is a threat per se against the religion. There are reputable scholars who support this interpretation which is difficult to refute.
Do you dispute this interpretation?

Point is don't try to be smart or wise out of ignorance, in this case ignorant of the Quran in its full context.

For that matter, Gita arose only from the state of war, which was fought for establishing justice.
As far as I understand the Gita metaphorically represent the battles within the human psyche.
Even Bible says that the rigid fools who do not realize should be thrown to the liquid fire, which is violence. Therefore, violence is not wrong. But the cause of violence should be perfectly justified. When Mohammad came, there were three hundred religions, which were quarelling among themselves with lot of violence. He tried His best by preaching the concept of one God. There was no alternative way to subside the violence between them.

Actually after Jesus, the concept of human incarnation was fully realized but this concept was exploited by cheaters. Every fellow became a prophet and declared himself as the human incarnation. The followers started preaching that particular form is only the one God. You can imagine easily the situation at the time. When violence is justified, it is called as punishment given by God. If the violence is not justified, it becomes Chaos due to egoism of a demon, which can be subsided only by divine punishment. Actually at the end, Hinduism speaks about the incarnation of Kalki and Christianity speaks about the final punishment given by God. Both these situations are of terrible violence only.

The last sort of God is only punishment, which can alone bring peace at least temporally for some time when the world is filled with brutal conservative fools, who are the wild beasts in the human form. The Lord says in Bible “Revenge is mine” which means the Lord punishes the unjust people.
I argued the Constitution of Christianity is solely based on the Gospels ONLY, the OT, Acts and Epistles are merely notes, appendixes to the Constitution.
The overriding message of the Gospels of Christianity is pacifist.

To rely on anything else other than the Gospels is a mistake.
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
dattaswami
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 11:42 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by dattaswami »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:06 am
On the occasion of the death anniversary of Prophet Mohammed on June 8, here are ten most well known murders by Islamist mobs due to alleged ‘Blasphemy’ which have rocked the world.

....
As a good friend of humanity, you shall give them the right interpretation of verses of Quran and bring them to a level of peace so that they will co-exists peacefully with all other religion. All the religions leads to the same God like all the roads leads to the same city center.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 15722
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: You're this DattaSwami?

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

dattaswami wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:23 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:06 am
On the occasion of the death anniversary of Prophet Mohammed on June 8, here are ten most well known murders by Islamist mobs due to alleged ‘Blasphemy’ which have rocked the world.

....
As a good friend of humanity, you shall give them the right interpretation of verses of Quran and bring them to a level of peace so that they will co-exists peacefully with all other religion. All the religions leads to the same God like all the roads leads to the same city center.
As I had stated, WHO ARE YOU to insist YOURS is the 'right interpretation' which is against the literal interpretations by the learned Scholars of Islam?
Last edited by Veritas Aequitas on Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply