The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Linh Dinh ArchiveBlogview
Florensac, Olargues, Pont-Sainte-Esprit and the CIA
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Olargues, 2017
Olargues, 2017
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

For the price of a Motel 6, Jonathan Revusky and I have three floors in Florensac, a village of 5,000 in southern France. This house is older than the USA, for sure, with raw wooden beams in the ceilings, stone floors, twisting stairs, odd angled walls, and an entrance to the bathroom so low, the owner had to pad the top casing, lest her guests be knocked out cold.

A small couch has a café crème floral design on a faded indigo background. Plopped on top are three cushions of red, red and Prussian blue. A tall casement window stares down at it. Matisse’s ghost must be here. Hi, Henri.

We arrived just in time to catch the Pat Cryspol band performing outdoors for free. Trumpet, trombone, saxophone, bass and drums. In the night, dozens of people, mostly old, were dancing. Dozens more sat at long tables to watch and, when the mood struck, sing along. Près de la grève, souvenez-vous / Des voix de rêve chantaient pour nous / Minute brève du cher passé / Pas encore efface, etc.

After two plastic cups of sangria, bought for two Euros each, we tried a pitcher of rosé for five. Though terrible, it couldn’t ruin our mood, for it was wonderful to see a community enjoying itself. An old lady encouraged Jon to sing, too. For one number, all the dancers formed a large circle, held raised hands and turned clockwise, then vice versa. A boy and a girl, no older than ten, asked if they could clear our table.

Next to the concert area, there was an inflatable slide, shooting gallery, bumper car rinks, merry-go-round and other rides. Cotton candies, churros, hot dogs, pizzas and fries were being sold.

Two police cars, four cops and a bomb sniffing dog guarded one entrance to the amusement area, but real terrorists would have had no problem causing havoc there, not to mention so many other targets, just in Florensac itself. It’s merely theater and social conditioning, my dear chumps, from the same people who brought us 9/11 and the endless War on Terror.

We met a Poland-born retired professor who’s living in Germany, “I had a house here for twenty years. I come back often. Florensac is wonderful. It is peaceful, and there is never any problem.”

We were sitting at a round wooden table under a maple tree. His wife and daughter were also present. College professors are conditioned to pontificate because, well, they’re always surrounded by blank slates. I addressed him, “In the US, many people think that Europe is being overrun by immigrants. Do you think that’s the case? Are people grumbling here?”

“Here, we think the US is being overrun by immigrants! We keep hearing all this talk about Mexicans this, Mexicans that.” The man laughed and grabbed the stem of his Bordeaux glass.

“Are there many Muslims in this town?”

“Maybe 7%, but they’ve been here a long time and very well integrated. If you go to the main square in the evening, you will see about 20 Muslim men, sitting on benches and talking. They don’t drink alcohol. It’s their way.”

“So there is no tension here?”

“No, not at all, although about 50% voted for the National Front during the last election. They don’t like the news coming out of Germany. Merkel has caused a lot of problems by inviting the immigrants.”

In Florensac, there are two kebab joints. At the weekly farmer’s market, there’s a very popular truck that sells Vietnamese spring rolls, rice noodles, Chinese dim sums, Thai curried chicken and other Asian dishes. Its proprietor is a 25-year-old born in France. His parents immigrated here from Nha Trang.

At Bistro d’Alex, the waiter is from Coventry, England. He’s been in France for nine years. When told that I was from Philly, the man shouted, “I must go there some day, to try the famous sandwich!”

“Oh man,” I laughed, “it’s seriously overrated.”

Later, I remarked to Jon, “Most Americans don’t even have access to a decent loaf of bread, man. This is basic stuff. They hardly know what cheese is. How did that happen? In the ‘greatest country on earth,’ people are fed fake bread, cheese and news!”

Each day at dawn, the church bell peals in Florensac, then tolls again an hour later. The boulangeries open at six, for bread should be bought daily, and eaten the same day. Seeing your baker each morning, he becomes practically a part of your family.

Since this is Occitan country, the street signs are in French and Occitan. The Occitan cross shows up in shops and even cars. Regionalism rules, as it should. Famous Occitans include Petronius, Balzac, Ingres, Lautreamont, Valery, Artaud, Ponge and Duras.

In nearby Olargues, I saw a graffiti, “C’EST LA TERRE, NOTRE RELIGION” [“IT’S THE LAND, OUR RELIGION”]. A small museum displayed mostly daily objects donated from the locals. The man at the desk, though, was a Brit. A baker for 20 years in Tavistock, near Plymouth, Bill moved to Olargues 15 years ago, “We decided we wanted something in the 34th département, so we drove around. We saw this real estate agent. He showed us a few things. We saw the house and liked it so much, we put a deposit on it the same day. It’s as simple as that. The house we bought was in fairly good condition, it didn’t need any work on it, and it was about half the price of places in England. When we sold our place in England, the extra half gave us the money to live on.”

“Buying a place here allowed you to retire early!” I said.

“Exactly! Moving to France allowed me to retire at 52. I have my pension now. I have no regrets.”

“How much French did you have when you first came?”

ORDER IT NOW

“Oh, just schoolboy French, not very good, but my wife’s French was very, very good. All the legal papers, all the dealings with the real estate agent, I just pushed it in front of her and said, ‘You sort it out!’ Since I’ve been here, my French has improved by leaps and bounds, because you use it all the time, you know, and I’m on the council now, so my French has definitely improved.”

“The council?”

“The town council. There are 15 of us. We meet every week. Old guys, mostly. The town is getting older, but there are still young people here. Some of them work in the city. It’s an hour away.”

By city, Bill meant Béziers, population 76,000. Despite its modest size, it has a huge and lively downtown. In 1209, Catholics troops besieged a Carthar-occupied Béziers, which prompted the papal legate to famously advise, “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.” Bastardized, it’s best known in English as, “Kill them all. Let God sort them out.”

Bill, “Some of the people here may work in Montpelier, they may have a flat there, but they come back here on the weekend.”

“So they’re still very attached to this place.”

“Oh, yes. A lot of these old places that don’t look inhabited, the people may work in the north of France or wherever, but all the family come back during the Summer. They still keep their family homes. These may look pretty tatty on the outside, but on the inside, they’re fine.”

“Do you go back to England often?”

“Since my mum died 2 ½ years ago, we haven’t bothered to go back to England. If my children want to see me, they can come here, but they haven’t. I don’t think I’ll go back to England again. I don’t miss it.”

“Why did you leave England in the first place?”

“The England I liked doesn’t exist anymore. It’s changing too quickly.”

“What do you mean?”

“Well, just people’s attitude, the young people, the binge drinking, the swearing, the drugs. Here, the young people have the freedom to run around, but they’re still polite. If you see a whole pile of kids coming down the street, you don’t feel threatened, and they always say hello, ‘Bonjour.’”

“But isn’t the countryside in England the same?”

“I lived in the countryside in England, and it’s changing. The French still have a family way of life, whereas in England, they put all the kids in front of the TV to watch the TV, they don’t bother with them, but here, the grandparents still bother with the children, and during the Summer holiday, all the grandparents we know have their grandchildren stay with them for six weeks, and so they teach them old values.”

“Do you think it’s because England is too influenced by the United States?”

“Very much. Nothing against you, but it’s definitely the influence of the United States.”

At the top of Olargues is a 13th century bell tower. At the bottom, there’s a 12th century bridge. You don’t build such structures, then move away. They’re meant for your great, great, great, great, great grandchildren. All over the US, I’ve seen so many dilapidated churches, abandoned by whites as they escaped to the suburbs, away from blacks.

Southern France isn’t all medieval villages and vineyards. There are also strip malls and hideous, characterless buildings. The outskirts of Castres, for example, are filled with so many car dealerships and chain stores, with each fronted by a large parking lot, that you can easily think you’re in the USA.

Jonathan Revusky, “This kind of layout is built for the automobile, and it’s very convenient, but you still have the historical core. Across most of the US, the strip malls are all you have! If you think of Orange County, for example, which is all freeways and strip malls, how can you feel attached to that?”

American politicians always cite “main street,” but that concept is mostly abandoned or boarded up, thanks to the big box boys.

Here in Florensac, there are still plenty of mom and pops, and no chain fast foods. I’m typing this outside the Brasserie Le Calypso. At adjacent tables are men, women and children, everyone relaxed and friendly. Peugeots and Citroens zoom by. One woman and four men, one a north African, stand around a barrel to sip drinks and talk. Walking her Yorkshire Terrier, an old woman in a red dress greets a child, “Bonjour, mon bébé!” Then she sits down next to a tattooed man, orders a wine.

Two hours by car from Florensac is Point-Sainte-Esprit. With a population of 4,200 in 1951, it suffered a hellish week then when more than 250 villagers went mad, with people running down the street delirious, tearing their clothes off or even jumping from windows. Seven died and fifty were interned in an insane asylum.

Known as the Cursed Bread Incident [Affaire du Pain Maudit], it caused a local baker to be jailed for two months, before laboratory tests of his flour, baguettes and biscuits cleared the innocent man.

Fifty-one years later, it was finally revealed that this tranquil, postcard-perfect village had been subjected to a CIA experiment with LSD. Big friggin’ deal! It’s just another day in the life of the Evil Empire. Friends, foes, it’s all fair game. Ruling over us, these criminals never care how many lives they destroy.

Meanwhile, though, life is still beautiful in rural France, and it’s precisely because it’s not thoroughly poisoned by American bread, cheese and news.

I finish this article in Adge, on Rue de l’Amour, the Street of Love. It’s just an alley, really, intimate and soothing. When a svelte and quite gorgeous 50-something walked by in a body-hugging dress, a dark, tattooed lady got up from her table to sashay, touch her own hips and compliment her friend and neighbor, “Très chic, madame!”

Everyone laughs. We’re all we need, really. If only the mass poisoners and murderers would disappear. Kill them all. Let God sort them out. Very nice, huh?

Linh Dinh’s Postcards from the End of America has just been released by Seven Stories Press. He maintains an active photo blog.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: France, Immigration, Muslims 
    []
  1. Polymath says:

    Just because the CIA did some very evil things doesn’t mean they did every evil thing they have been accused of. The story smells like fake news, the technical details don’t add up:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/03/did-the-cia-really-dose-a-french-village-with-lsd/346370/

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    We now know that the radio active clouds that went over Bikini, hope I have the right island, were not the result of USA stupidity, but were deliberately planned.
    I have no idea why the USA would want to have a whole French village on lsd, but if it suited the USA they might have done it.
    Oppenheimer in the sixties testified that the two atomic bombs thrown on Japan just were thrown to study their effects in a real war situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /ldinh/florensac-olargues-pont-sainte-esprit-and-the-cia/#comment-1987266
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. While the eloquent Linh Dinh quaffs his sangria in the shadow of the Cathars, does he think we, the modern heretics, will be spared?

    Read More
  3. Talha says:

    As always Mr. Dinh, thanks for the wonderful reporting. Your European reports seem to be quite a bit more optimistic than the American ones – is there a reason for that? Well, I guess you aren’t really hitting the same areas in Europe during a vacation like you do in the US.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sowhat
    Thank you, Mr. Dinh. Your short story brought back memories of my childhood in Southeastern Chester County, 30 miles southwest of Philly. My small town didn't have the Euro-quaintness of Florensac but, it was wholesome and quaint farm country.

    And meanwhile here in the U.S. today, I decided the night before last to make it "movie night"and watch, again, one of my "old favorites"- a movie entitled Last of the Dogmen 1995 , a modern-day Western about a hidden American Indian Tribe in the remote North West that was able to continue their existence, hidden from the modern-day world for the last 60 years.

    It had never stuck with me, before, but one line in the movie reached out and grabbed me by the throat:

    "If you needed to protect your family and your way of life, would you kill (in order to accomplish these things)?"

    Funny how reading so many alarmist articles during the day changes one's bearings, even while watching a movie for the third time. Damned... These kids or Muslims or Antifa or Academia or The Main Stream News or the CIA or Leftists, in general, or "Other Ethnicities"! Or damned them all! If only the mass poisoners and murderers would disappear. Kill them all. Let God sort them out. Very nice, huh? :)
  4. Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    The Muslim view of rape.
     
    Hardly - why don't you go shariah on them - that'll show them the Muslim view on rape.

    I like the site your source with its tagline of:
    "Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there."

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I'm going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Peace.
    , @hyperbola
    Meanwhile in New York, London, Jerusalem, Toronto, Melbourne, ......

    The Child-Rape Assembly Line
    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbe8bp/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11
    , @druid
    Shame on him if he said that. He obviously knows nothing about Islam and should be ostracized!!!!
  5. hyperbola says:

    The towns that are most pleasant to live in are those that had at least 500 years of development prior to the arrival of the automobile and whose centers have not been subsequently destroyed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Nice Kunstler invocation. The CIA's Ralph Nader was busy making sure the automobile would thrive. His role as a mockingbird was for quality-control - the cars must be made "safer" in the minds of the American consumer. Getting impaled by a steering wheel hardly compares to destroying an existing social order if not the world, for something that's "better".
  6. Talha says:
    @Priss Factor
    Meanwhile in Italy.

    The Muslim view of rape.

    https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2017/08/29/italy-muslim-cultural-mediator-in-rimini-rape-says-rape-is-only-worse-at-the-start-later-the-woman-becomes-calm/

    The Muslim view of rape.

    Hardly – why don’t you go shariah on them – that’ll show them the Muslim view on rape.

    I like the site your source with its tagline of:
    “Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there.”

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I’m going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    Fair enough. I don't think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery. So, the ONLY aspect of Islam that becomes operative or relevant is a kind of 'misogynist' view of women as whores who want it.

    But then, it's there plenty in rap music, and non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.
    , @druid
    That's a total lie and shows your hatred for Moslems. You should try to read, meet more people and become a bit more human!
    , @Nico

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I’m going to share this with one of the brothers!
     
    Well, this is certainly a less revealing reaction to blasphemy against the Prophet than the cognitively dissonant spout from the guy who chided a post-Bataclan criticism of Islam from a fellow with a Pakistani name: "But that's not what Islam is! Don't give others leave to speak ill of our religion!" and in response to the fellow's retort - "OUR religion? I'm an atheist!" - followed up with, "You're an atheist?! You deserve the death penalty!"

    However, I'm not fooled.

  7. hyperbola says:
    @Priss Factor
    Meanwhile in Italy.

    The Muslim view of rape.

    https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2017/08/29/italy-muslim-cultural-mediator-in-rimini-rape-says-rape-is-only-worse-at-the-start-later-the-woman-becomes-calm/

    Meanwhile in New York, London, Jerusalem, Toronto, Melbourne, ……

    The Child-Rape Assembly Line

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbe8bp/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Reposting: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbe8bp/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11
    This report should be sent to Schumer and other AIPAC luminaries, every day
  8. I like this article more than Linh Dinh’s usual productions. But I don’t think it will have many readers. If there is one thing white Protestant readers don’t like, it’s having the USA compared unfavorably to a European country – especially France. This makes their blood boil! Ridiculing the French is a major pastime in the United States. They like France-bashing, for many reasons, much more than they like real bread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    If there is one thing white Protestant readers don’t like, it’s having the USA compared unfavorably to a European country – especially France.

    Good that you pointed out to Protestants. Turning France into Protestant "paradise" was one of the goals of British politics for several centuries and later picked up by Americans and the sentiments remained. This still goes on. You can always find articles in WSJ and The Economists bitching about French farming subsidies, short work week and social safety net.
    , @grapesoda
    Linh Dinh talking bad about the country that took him in and gave him so much opportunity like an ungrateful piece of shit? Well I never... Oh yeah that's right that's what he does in every article.

    Usually when I travel in a foreign country or plan on living there I try to show some respect for the people there and their culture. But since Linh Dinh has no humility, he can't do that. He just wants to take what he can get for his pig self and never show any respect or gratitude. What a truly odious human being.

    Liberals* try to act like they're morally superior and look down their nose at the working man, but when you look more closely it's hypocrisy all the way down. Linh Dinh is a smug prick looking down at us regular hard-working Americans.

  9. Sowhat says:
    @Talha
    As always Mr. Dinh, thanks for the wonderful reporting. Your European reports seem to be quite a bit more optimistic than the American ones - is there a reason for that? Well, I guess you aren't really hitting the same areas in Europe during a vacation like you do in the US.

    Peace.

    Thank you, Mr. Dinh. Your short story brought back memories of my childhood in Southeastern Chester County, 30 miles southwest of Philly. My small town didn’t have the Euro-quaintness of Florensac but, it was wholesome and quaint farm country.

    And meanwhile here in the U.S. today, I decided the night before last to make it “movie night”and watch, again, one of my “old favorites”- a movie entitled Last of the Dogmen 1995 , a modern-day Western about a hidden American Indian Tribe in the remote North West that was able to continue their existence, hidden from the modern-day world for the last 60 years.

    It had never stuck with me, before, but one line in the movie reached out and grabbed me by the throat:

    “If you needed to protect your family and your way of life, would you kill (in order to accomplish these things)?”

    Funny how reading so many alarmist articles during the day changes one’s bearings, even while watching a movie for the third time. Damned… These kids or Muslims or Antifa or Academia or The Main Stream News or the CIA or Leftists, in general, or “Other Ethnicities”! Or damned them all! If only the mass poisoners and murderers would disappear. Kill them all. Let God sort them out. Very nice, huh? :)

    Read More
  10. republic says:

    Being a Polish born professor living in Germany must be politically difficult. His opinion probably reflects that of his German colleagues. I would have asked him what the Polish people living in Poland think about the migrants. Having strong anti migrant sentiments in a German university might be fatal career wise. I would have asked him about his ethic ancestry, maybe he has some old German roots.

    Read More
  11. @Talha

    The Muslim view of rape.
     
    Hardly - why don't you go shariah on them - that'll show them the Muslim view on rape.

    I like the site your source with its tagline of:
    "Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there."

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I'm going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Peace.

    Fair enough. I don’t think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery. So, the ONLY aspect of Islam that becomes operative or relevant is a kind of ‘misogynist’ view of women as whores who want it.

    But then, it’s there plenty in rap music, and non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery.
     
    You hit the nail on the head here actually. And I agree. As I said on another thread:
    I do absolutely say though, that if Europeans are going to bring in any immigrants (especially from Muslim countries), they should do proper vetting. I personally do not want Muslims who cannot handle themselves in the West with proper decorum (whether it be committing terrorism, drinking, raping, fornicating, etc.) allowed in. It is better for the preservation of their faith (which is far more important than material increase) if they are kept in Muslim societies that have safeguards to restrict them. And it does non-Muslim citizens of the West no good to be victims of their profligacy.

    The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.


    I have met very good, upright Muslims that would make excellent citizens in the West, but they simply have zero desire to move here even though they would be living large compared to their country of origin. It is a real test of one's spiritual resolve and the faith of one's future generations hangs in the balance - not a decision to be taken lightly. Those who take it lightly probably should not be here.

    Peace.
    , @hyperbola
    Perhaps it is planned (as a divide and conquer tactic) that you should have that impression?

    Gerald Warner: Impact of politically correct Britain - The Scotsman
    http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/gerald-warner-impact-of-politically-correct-britain-1-3128346
    , @Truth

    Fair enough. I don’t think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape... non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

     

    Damn, Homie, you came up with a point, then you straight Punked-Out quick, fast and in a hurry. Most dudes here a least go back and forth a few times before they punk-out. Gay Kats is usually tougher than that, you need to roid up a little like your boys in San Francisco!
  12. utu says:

    Kill them all. Let God sort them out.

    BTW, the destruction of Albigensian heresy was a very good thing. The Cathars were in the process of turning society in to the hive of worker bees and drones. The process was unfortunately resurrected by Reformation, Enlightenment and Bolsheviks. American contributions in this process are significant somewhere along the line with Bolsheviks tough less brutal but more effective and thus more lasting.

    If it was not for the success of the Albigensian Crusade I doubt there would be much reason to visit Occitan nowadays. You just as well could visit Manchester UK or to Lowell, MA and admire their charms.

    The WWII ended in destruction of Europe and conquering it by two non-European powers with acronymic names U.S.A and U.S.S.R. that stood for similar ideologies of turning societies in to the hives of brainless worker bees.

    Read More
  13. “It’s definitely the influence of the United States”

    Yes, that must be where the Brits get their binge-drinking problem. From the United States. A place Brits constantly deride as a country of Mormon teetotalers. Clearly our drinking non-problem is convincing the Brits to drink more to compensate for our unwillingness to be like them.

    And all those acid attacks in London and Birmingham? Clearly influenced by Boise and Portland, where you literally cannot walk down the street without being doused with acid. Makes sense to me!

    Well, Limeys gonna Limey, which means getting all Fatal Attraction about America, pointing fingers, saying you can’t treat me this way, I will not be discarded, etc. etc. Funny thing is most Americans in their entire lives never give Britain a single thought.

    Read More
  14. utu says:
    @eggsaladjohnny
    I like this article more than Linh Dinh's usual productions. But I don't think it will have many readers. If there is one thing white Protestant readers don't like, it's having the USA compared unfavorably to a European country - especially France. This makes their blood boil! Ridiculing the French is a major pastime in the United States. They like France-bashing, for many reasons, much more than they like real bread.

    If there is one thing white Protestant readers don’t like, it’s having the USA compared unfavorably to a European country – especially France.

    Good that you pointed out to Protestants. Turning France into Protestant “paradise” was one of the goals of British politics for several centuries and later picked up by Americans and the sentiments remained. This still goes on. You can always find articles in WSJ and The Economists bitching about French farming subsidies, short work week and social safety net.

    Read More
  15. Talha says:
    @Priss Factor
    Fair enough. I don't think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery. So, the ONLY aspect of Islam that becomes operative or relevant is a kind of 'misogynist' view of women as whores who want it.

    But then, it's there plenty in rap music, and non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery.

    You hit the nail on the head here actually. And I agree. As I said on another thread:
    I do absolutely say though, that if Europeans are going to bring in any immigrants (especially from Muslim countries), they should do proper vetting. I personally do not want Muslims who cannot handle themselves in the West with proper decorum (whether it be committing terrorism, drinking, raping, fornicating, etc.) allowed in. It is better for the preservation of their faith (which is far more important than material increase) if they are kept in Muslim societies that have safeguards to restrict them. And it does non-Muslim citizens of the West no good to be victims of their profligacy.

    The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.

    I have met very good, upright Muslims that would make excellent citizens in the West, but they simply have zero desire to move here even though they would be living large compared to their country of origin. It is a real test of one’s spiritual resolve and the faith of one’s future generations hangs in the balance – not a decision to be taken lightly. Those who take it lightly probably should not be here.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Off The Street
    Good to see you two agreeing, to see there is more civil discourse peering through the haze of columns and calumny. Various cultures suffer from feral-punks in their midst. US and EU are experiencing the impact of feminism in various incarnations V1.0 through whatever is the current distro. Look at any group that is suddenly freed of mental or physical shackles and there are likely to be repercussions. For example, in the case of Muslims in the EU, or Somalis in Minnesota, too much freedom after a history of constraint can be fundamentally unsettling.

    People unused to thinking outside a narrow range may find that the newfound latitude can produce some psychotic-like or agoraphobic episodes that do not end well for anyone. Do not assume that any group or any of its individual members has either the necessary tools or the cognitive capacity to adapt without assistance. Assimilation tends to be a throw-away word when it should be only the start of a process. If you are going to invade and then invite, you also need to think through the consequences and not just assume that all invitees are identical or are good fits for whatever you consider your society to be, unless of course you have some hidden agendas. Sin in haste, repent at leisure.

    , @Anonymous
    So what then would be a genuinely good reason for a Muslim to migrate to non Muslim lands?
    , @Pachyderm Pachyderma
    "The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there."

    It is interesting that the original immigrants to the colonies were not the most desirables; however, in time their offspring have come to be good citizens. Just look at Australia...
  16. grapesoda says:
    @eggsaladjohnny
    I like this article more than Linh Dinh's usual productions. But I don't think it will have many readers. If there is one thing white Protestant readers don't like, it's having the USA compared unfavorably to a European country - especially France. This makes their blood boil! Ridiculing the French is a major pastime in the United States. They like France-bashing, for many reasons, much more than they like real bread.

    Linh Dinh talking bad about the country that took him in and gave him so much opportunity like an ungrateful piece of shit? Well I never… Oh yeah that’s right that’s what he does in every article.

    Usually when I travel in a foreign country or plan on living there I try to show some respect for the people there and their culture. But since Linh Dinh has no humility, he can’t do that. He just wants to take what he can get for his pig self and never show any respect or gratitude. What a truly odious human being.

    Liberals* try to act like they’re morally superior and look down their nose at the working man, but when you look more closely it’s hypocrisy all the way down. Linh Dinh is a smug prick looking down at us regular hard-working Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I think he is talking about (((Jewassay))), other country. But in terms of evilness, France have a very bad reputation with colonialism, the second largest, without mentioning its domestic terrorism for example monarchical absolutism.
    , @Biff
    Was it the same USA taking him in, as the country that bombed the shit out of his home country of Vietnam, making it an unlivable hell hole?
  17. It is weird that a french speaking professor does not seem to know anything about France’s problems with immigrants.
    Already in 2005 Sarkozy, with much force, beat down the risings in the ghetto’s of France, the suburbs, banlieues, of the big cities.
    French are discriminating, not even a Dutchman ever succeeded in getting a job in France.
    Those Dutch who settle there are either retired, or run a camping and/or bed and breakfast.
    When you leave Rouen by car, direction Caen, make a mistake, and drive direction Paris , already after a few kilometres you enter another France, industrial France where coloured French work in factories.
    Ask a French hairdresser about soccer, and get the answer ‘they’re all étrangers’, foreigners, yet most of the players are born in France.
    As a Muslim girl in St Denis, a banlieue of Paris, said ‘ the French do not see us as French’.
    Already in 2005 the French Muslim population was called a time bomb, this bomb now is exploding, the neighbours of Macron in Le Touquet, where he lives with his wife, complain that the guards all are carrying machine guns.
    The French writer Eric Zemmour, who wrote the book Le Suicide Francais, expects real civil war ending in deportations.

    Read More
  18. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Linh could be less subtle in his work and mention the farmers all over the EU who decide to kill themselves. Meat, cheese, vegetables all under control. White vans, machine guns, aircraft or mass druggings aren’t needed anymore for actual cull purposes, these are part of the exercises in mass propaganda.

    We should consider how powerful of a drug social media can be – maybe to start wars and get a whole country to go insane and destroy themselves.

    To really get things done then, the CIA flies the flag of neoliberal finance and lets the grim reaper do things that were done with the old fashioned way with bombs. Farmers will be replaced, just like they took it in the head in the USA, and then they won’t know what real cheese is anymore.

    Read More
  19. Joe Hide says:

    As usual, Lihn, a very good read. It would be revealing to get your perspective, if you stayed in a few of the “no-go” Muslim areas of France for a few weeks. You seem to have the gift of describing at an individual, person on person level. Although, where ever you report from, please be careful!
    Also, thank you for continuing to reveal some of the historical secrets of the CIA, Cathars, Deep State, etc

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    There's at least one documentary on CIA in Point-Sainte-Esprit. Not so secret anymore.
  20. hyperbola says:
    @Priss Factor
    Fair enough. I don't think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery. So, the ONLY aspect of Islam that becomes operative or relevant is a kind of 'misogynist' view of women as whores who want it.

    But then, it's there plenty in rap music, and non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

    Perhaps it is planned (as a divide and conquer tactic) that you should have that impression?

    Gerald Warner: Impact of politically correct Britain – The Scotsman

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/gerald-warner-impact-of-politically-correct-britain-1-3128346

    Read More
  21. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @hyperbola
    The towns that are most pleasant to live in are those that had at least 500 years of development prior to the arrival of the automobile and whose centers have not been subsequently destroyed.

    Nice Kunstler invocation. The CIA’s Ralph Nader was busy making sure the automobile would thrive. His role as a mockingbird was for quality-control – the cars must be made “safer” in the minds of the American consumer. Getting impaled by a steering wheel hardly compares to destroying an existing social order if not the world, for something that’s “better”.

    Read More
  22. druid says:
    @Priss Factor
    Meanwhile in Italy.

    The Muslim view of rape.

    https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2017/08/29/italy-muslim-cultural-mediator-in-rimini-rape-says-rape-is-only-worse-at-the-start-later-the-woman-becomes-calm/

    Shame on him if he said that. He obviously knows nothing about Islam and should be ostracized!!!!

    Read More
  23. druid says:
    @Talha

    The Muslim view of rape.
     
    Hardly - why don't you go shariah on them - that'll show them the Muslim view on rape.

    I like the site your source with its tagline of:
    "Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there."

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I'm going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Peace.

    That’s a total lie and shows your hatred for Moslems. You should try to read, meet more people and become a bit more human!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Uhhh...not sure how to respond here - someone help me out. I am somewhat confused. Was this comment meant for me?
  24. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    The CIA has no need of dumping psychedelics into our water or food to change our behavior or increase Wall Street control of our backs.

    They just have their buddies at Google and FAKEBOOK decide what you can or can’t read, then have their buds in the MSM print lies, distortions, propaganda and more LIES around-the-clock to infest the minds of us gullible Americans.

    If more crowd control is needed, then they just send in some of their al CIA duh buddies to attack skyscrapers.

    Read More
  25. @Polymath
    Just because the CIA did some very evil things doesn't mean they did every evil thing they have been accused of. The story smells like fake news, the technical details don't add up:
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/03/did-the-cia-really-dose-a-french-village-with-lsd/346370/

    We now know that the radio active clouds that went over Bikini, hope I have the right island, were not the result of USA stupidity, but were deliberately planned.
    I have no idea why the USA would want to have a whole French village on lsd, but if it suited the USA they might have done it.
    Oppenheimer in the sixties testified that the two atomic bombs thrown on Japan just were thrown to study their effects in a real war situation.

    Read More
  26. Talha says:
    @druid
    That's a total lie and shows your hatred for Moslems. You should try to read, meet more people and become a bit more human!

    Uhhh…not sure how to respond here – someone help me out. I am somewhat confused. Was this comment meant for me?

    Read More
  27. RobinG says:
    @Joe Hide
    As usual, Lihn, a very good read. It would be revealing to get your perspective, if you stayed in a few of the "no-go" Muslim areas of France for a few weeks. You seem to have the gift of describing at an individual, person on person level. Although, where ever you report from, please be careful!
    Also, thank you for continuing to reveal some of the historical secrets of the CIA, Cathars, Deep State, etc

    There’s at least one documentary on CIA in Point-Sainte-Esprit. Not so secret anymore.

    Read More
  28. @grapesoda
    Linh Dinh talking bad about the country that took him in and gave him so much opportunity like an ungrateful piece of shit? Well I never... Oh yeah that's right that's what he does in every article.

    Usually when I travel in a foreign country or plan on living there I try to show some respect for the people there and their culture. But since Linh Dinh has no humility, he can't do that. He just wants to take what he can get for his pig self and never show any respect or gratitude. What a truly odious human being.

    Liberals* try to act like they're morally superior and look down their nose at the working man, but when you look more closely it's hypocrisy all the way down. Linh Dinh is a smug prick looking down at us regular hard-working Americans.

    I think he is talking about (((Jewassay))), other country. But in terms of evilness, France have a very bad reputation with colonialism, the second largest, without mentioning its domestic terrorism for example monarchical absolutism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @republic
    The worst colonialists in modern history were probably either the Belgians or the Japanese.

    I have never been to the Congo whose atrocities were documented by the Great Irish patriot, Roger Casement, but I have been to Korea where a personal experience attests to how Koreans really think of the Japanese, I was eating alone in a large dining hall in South Korea when a large tour group of Japanese came into the dining room, I was a little tired of waiting for my order to be taken, so I spoke to a nearly waiter and asked him: Do you really like Japanese? I got immediate attention from a large group of Korean waiters! Excellent service!
  29. @Talha

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery.
     
    You hit the nail on the head here actually. And I agree. As I said on another thread:
    I do absolutely say though, that if Europeans are going to bring in any immigrants (especially from Muslim countries), they should do proper vetting. I personally do not want Muslims who cannot handle themselves in the West with proper decorum (whether it be committing terrorism, drinking, raping, fornicating, etc.) allowed in. It is better for the preservation of their faith (which is far more important than material increase) if they are kept in Muslim societies that have safeguards to restrict them. And it does non-Muslim citizens of the West no good to be victims of their profligacy.

    The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.


    I have met very good, upright Muslims that would make excellent citizens in the West, but they simply have zero desire to move here even though they would be living large compared to their country of origin. It is a real test of one's spiritual resolve and the faith of one's future generations hangs in the balance - not a decision to be taken lightly. Those who take it lightly probably should not be here.

    Peace.

    Good to see you two agreeing, to see there is more civil discourse peering through the haze of columns and calumny. Various cultures suffer from feral-punks in their midst. US and EU are experiencing the impact of feminism in various incarnations V1.0 through whatever is the current distro. Look at any group that is suddenly freed of mental or physical shackles and there are likely to be repercussions. For example, in the case of Muslims in the EU, or Somalis in Minnesota, too much freedom after a history of constraint can be fundamentally unsettling.

    People unused to thinking outside a narrow range may find that the newfound latitude can produce some psychotic-like or agoraphobic episodes that do not end well for anyone. Do not assume that any group or any of its individual members has either the necessary tools or the cognitive capacity to adapt without assistance. Assimilation tends to be a throw-away word when it should be only the start of a process. If you are going to invade and then invite, you also need to think through the consequences and not just assume that all invitees are identical or are good fits for whatever you consider your society to be, unless of course you have some hidden agendas. Sin in haste, repent at leisure.

    Read More
  30. Ouff – Pont-Sainte-Esprit is worth a visit any time. It is situated on the heigh levee of the southern Rhone – with a very scenic riverside, a mile-long old bridge, which forms a nice bend and is narrow. Pont-Sainte-Esprit has two medieval churches, one – the older and more interesting one, is most of the time closed – last time I visited, a sign said: Closed because of terrorism threats. The second church near by is – ehem – run? – by very chaming old ladies with lots of smiles and informations and hints for the visitor.

    Great local history museum. Lots of muslims in the old parts of the town.

    French historian Marc Bloch mentioned Pont Sainte Esprit in a book about medieval court cases, concerning unsecure land – by that, he means land which lies in or near the Rhone, and therefor changes it’s gestalt and surface area.

    Except for those notes, – and your story of the “CIA-frenzy”, Pont-Sainte-Esprit is hardly mentioned and at least in spring and autumn – hardly visited. Could well be, that you find yurself alone in the quite spacey musem.

    I love Pont-Sainte-Esprit – and thank you for mentioning it – for what reasons ever. It’ s a place of real beauty.

    Read More
  31. Biff says:
    @grapesoda
    Linh Dinh talking bad about the country that took him in and gave him so much opportunity like an ungrateful piece of shit? Well I never... Oh yeah that's right that's what he does in every article.

    Usually when I travel in a foreign country or plan on living there I try to show some respect for the people there and their culture. But since Linh Dinh has no humility, he can't do that. He just wants to take what he can get for his pig self and never show any respect or gratitude. What a truly odious human being.

    Liberals* try to act like they're morally superior and look down their nose at the working man, but when you look more closely it's hypocrisy all the way down. Linh Dinh is a smug prick looking down at us regular hard-working Americans.

    Was it the same USA taking him in, as the country that bombed the shit out of his home country of Vietnam, making it an unlivable hell hole?

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Always good to hear from those who see the bigger picture. Kudos.

    It's not a bad thing in itself to be defensive against criticism of one's nation except when it actually reinforces the actions of those who are undermining that nation. Perhaps if more people accepted valid criticism of the US there would be more of a push for positive change. Not that I took it as Linh Dinh is being critical of the US anyway, more like just pointing out how things are different here and there. I think he has a wonderful style of writing.
  32. @Biff
    Was it the same USA taking him in, as the country that bombed the shit out of his home country of Vietnam, making it an unlivable hell hole?

    Always good to hear from those who see the bigger picture. Kudos.

    It’s not a bad thing in itself to be defensive against criticism of one’s nation except when it actually reinforces the actions of those who are undermining that nation. Perhaps if more people accepted valid criticism of the US there would be more of a push for positive change. Not that I took it as Linh Dinh is being critical of the US anyway, more like just pointing out how things are different here and there. I think he has a wonderful style of writing.

    Read More
  33. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery.
     
    You hit the nail on the head here actually. And I agree. As I said on another thread:
    I do absolutely say though, that if Europeans are going to bring in any immigrants (especially from Muslim countries), they should do proper vetting. I personally do not want Muslims who cannot handle themselves in the West with proper decorum (whether it be committing terrorism, drinking, raping, fornicating, etc.) allowed in. It is better for the preservation of their faith (which is far more important than material increase) if they are kept in Muslim societies that have safeguards to restrict them. And it does non-Muslim citizens of the West no good to be victims of their profligacy.

    The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.


    I have met very good, upright Muslims that would make excellent citizens in the West, but they simply have zero desire to move here even though they would be living large compared to their country of origin. It is a real test of one's spiritual resolve and the faith of one's future generations hangs in the balance - not a decision to be taken lightly. Those who take it lightly probably should not be here.

    Peace.

    So what then would be a genuinely good reason for a Muslim to migrate to non Muslim lands?

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Talha
    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands. Otherwise one can readily travel there for commerce, learning, etc. and go back. Going there to do nothing but collect welfare from non-Muslims and do nothing but leech off them and cause them trouble is not a good reason and is a good reason to be kicked out. Going there simply to make money is also a very spiritually daft move to make.

    Peace.
  34. Talha says:
    @Anonymous
    So what then would be a genuinely good reason for a Muslim to migrate to non Muslim lands?

    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands. Otherwise one can readily travel there for commerce, learning, etc. and go back. Going there to do nothing but collect welfare from non-Muslims and do nothing but leech off them and cause them trouble is not a good reason and is a good reason to be kicked out. Going there simply to make money is also a very spiritually daft move to make.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Converting others to Islam is a terrible thing to do. Europe is still recovering from our captive spell under Christianity so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?

    I don't say this as a reaction to recent events. I say this because my experience with Muslims is that faith in Islam requires the observation of a vast array of arbitrary diktats. It encourages the development of rote memory but strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning and the synthesis of new ideas, which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe.

    For example, it's hard to take seriously the diktat not to eat pork when the reasoning is so flawed. Why? Because it's unclean. Why? Because it contains worms. 'But the worms are reliably eliminated by cooking..'. (no response).

    Another example: Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty? Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not. And if one contacts a dog's saliva, they must wash seven times with sand. How is this not absolute nonsense?

    So in both examples, the diktats would have originally had value as preventative measures against potentially fatal diseases (trichinosis and rabies) and would have been commendable given the knowledge level of the time but are both now obviously rendered obsolete by scientific knowledge. This leaves the Muslim in a real dilemma - should they choose to go with their own God-given intelligence or should they remain observant to the words written down by great but ignorant leaders of the past?

    The only sensible solution I've seen to this dilemma is to take the same approach as post-Christians, ie. drop the tribalism, dethrone Islam as 'the only true faith in God's eyes' and accept it as just another human creation, far subservient to one's own inner compass.

    My feeling is that until Muslims can get to this point, they have no place in the developed world and, after they reach this point, they will naturally see that spreading Islam is unnecessary and destructive. Hence, I feel that 'To invite others to Islam' is an inherently flawed reason for moving to the West.

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education. As long as the visa recipients behave respectfully (our idea of respectful not theirs) and don't stay on illegally then I welcome them with open arms.
    , @Nico

    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands.
     
    For those of us who do not particularly cherish the trajectory of most civilizations which adopted Islam as their guiding light and who do not wish to see our own lands follow down that same path, that I suppose is as good a reason as any to keep or boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands.
  35. polistra says:

    An interesting look at a piece of Europe we don’t normally hear about.

    Only one quibble: Churches are abandoned in USA because whites stopped being Christian, not because blacks took over the neighborhood. There are NO abandoned churches in a black neighborhood because blacks are still Christian.

    Read More
  36. Regardless of your opinion of Linh’s commentary on the US, you have to acknowledge (if you know your stuff) that he is dead on right about bread and cheese in the US. I’d even go so far as to agree on the Philly Cheesesteak sandwiches being highly overrated.

    My first impression on taking my first job in London in the nineties was how much more the locals drank at lunchtime and how much more gratuitous snogging occurred among co-workers at drinks after work than I ever saw in NYC. No way you can lay all the ills of England at the feet of corrupting American influences; but they heartily embrace things like the US cult of accident & injury lawyers to support long-standing tendencies to shirk. OTOH, kids coming out of typical English schools can still spell (at least in that funny half-French English way) and do math(s) well in competence above their American peers.

    As for the French, I have shocked more than a few of them by telling them they are more like Americans than they would like to admit. When they protest, I simply ask when they made their last trip to the local Cora hypermarche and its surrounding ecosystem. There are plenty of fat French eating pre-fixed meals like those you might find in Kroger or Publix, but while the quality of food in American markets has improved over the years, the stuff you get in Cora (not just bread and cheese) is markedly superior to the American fare. What Linh didn’t mention, interestingly, was that you will typically line up more than a few people deep in Sunday mornings at the local Boulanger or you will not get your bread for the day.

    To the earlier comment about CIA using Google instead of LSD, maybe it was because they realised Google, etc. are more subtle and reliable means to the desired end than driving large numbers of the population stark-raving mad.

    Read More
  37. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha
    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands. Otherwise one can readily travel there for commerce, learning, etc. and go back. Going there to do nothing but collect welfare from non-Muslims and do nothing but leech off them and cause them trouble is not a good reason and is a good reason to be kicked out. Going there simply to make money is also a very spiritually daft move to make.

    Peace.

    Converting others to Islam is a terrible thing to do. Europe is still recovering from our captive spell under Christianity so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?

    I don’t say this as a reaction to recent events. I say this because my experience with Muslims is that faith in Islam requires the observation of a vast array of arbitrary diktats. It encourages the development of rote memory but strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning and the synthesis of new ideas, which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe.

    For example, it’s hard to take seriously the diktat not to eat pork when the reasoning is so flawed. Why? Because it’s unclean. Why? Because it contains worms. ‘But the worms are reliably eliminated by cooking..’. (no response).

    Another example: Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty? Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not. And if one contacts a dog’s saliva, they must wash seven times with sand. How is this not absolute nonsense?

    So in both examples, the diktats would have originally had value as preventative measures against potentially fatal diseases (trichinosis and rabies) and would have been commendable given the knowledge level of the time but are both now obviously rendered obsolete by scientific knowledge. This leaves the Muslim in a real dilemma – should they choose to go with their own God-given intelligence or should they remain observant to the words written down by great but ignorant leaders of the past?

    The only sensible solution I’ve seen to this dilemma is to take the same approach as post-Christians, ie. drop the tribalism, dethrone Islam as ‘the only true faith in God’s eyes’ and accept it as just another human creation, far subservient to one’s own inner compass.

    My feeling is that until Muslims can get to this point, they have no place in the developed world and, after they reach this point, they will naturally see that spreading Islam is unnecessary and destructive. Hence, I feel that ‘To invite others to Islam’ is an inherently flawed reason for moving to the West.

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education. As long as the visa recipients behave respectfully (our idea of respectful not theirs) and don’t stay on illegally then I welcome them with open arms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?
     
    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We're doing our darned best to discourage them.

    strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning
     
    You mean that it doesn't come to the same conclusions you do.

    and the synthesis of new ideas
     
    Like gay pride parades.

    which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe
     
    Possibly - because we aren't down with gay pride parades.

    Why? Because it’s unclean.
     
    No - it's because the One Who created it told us to keep our teeth off of it. Just like He told us to keep our teeth off of other species in the animal kingdom - as is His prerogative as the Creator of the world. You come from a culture that eats pigs and keeps dogs as pets, so you question why you can't eat pork. If you came from a culture where you ate dogs and kept pigs as pets, you would be asking why you can't eat dogs. Eating pigs wouldn't even cross your mind. Islam prohibits you from eating dogs and cats too - why don't you question that premise?

    Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty?
     
    Both are clean.

    Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not.
     
    Both are fine - cite your source - a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

    And if one contacts a dog’s saliva, they must wash seven times with sand.
     
    Not just dog saliva, any carnivore's. The cat is given a dispensation for the ease of people. No, seven times and with one being with sand - that is the ruling only in the Shafi'i and Hanbali schools. The Hanafi school simply washes and the Maliki school doesn't even care because the saliva of all creatures is ritually clean for them.

    I've met plenty of converts in my life - not one ever said they converted because they thought all the rituals were really, really cool. They converted because the over-arching message made sense to them and submitted to the rules. If the message doesn't appeal to you, that's fine.


    by great but ignorant leaders of the past?
     
    Pffffshshshsh - what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!

    and accept it as just another human creation
     
    Apostate, and all will be fine.

    far subservient to one’s own inner compass
     
    You really haven't read up on your Nietzsche, have you?

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education.
     
    Ah - a point of agreement - splendid!

    Peace.

    , @Eagle Eye

    Why [in Islam] is the cat clean but the dog is dirty?
     
    Mo and his men caught toxoplasmosis (i.e. cat lady infection, a real biological phenomenon).
  38. Nico says:
    @Talha
    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands. Otherwise one can readily travel there for commerce, learning, etc. and go back. Going there to do nothing but collect welfare from non-Muslims and do nothing but leech off them and cause them trouble is not a good reason and is a good reason to be kicked out. Going there simply to make money is also a very spiritually daft move to make.

    Peace.

    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands.

    For those of us who do not particularly cherish the trajectory of most civilizations which adopted Islam as their guiding light and who do not wish to see our own lands follow down that same path, that I suppose is as good a reason as any to keep or boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Sure. There are the immigration laws for that. But you must consider certain very powerful non-Muslims who are dead set on destroying the natural habitat of the Muslims. Think Bush, Cheney, Blair, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Condi Rice, Clintons, Sarkozy ... Hold your horses (I mean, your native born non-Muslim criminals) from sending the WMD and armies to slaughter the civilian populations in the Muslim lands (some 2 million killed already) and from supporting the local fanatics (Al Qaeda, ISIS and such) - this should help from keeping "us" separated from "them."
    The trajectory of western civilization has been bent by the mega war-profilers and by the Muslims' cousins known as Israel-firsters. Hope you do not propose that the recent influx of Muslims to the western countries has been caused by the Muslims' inclinations towards educational trips.
  39. Nico says:
    @Talha

    The Muslim view of rape.
     
    Hardly - why don't you go shariah on them - that'll show them the Muslim view on rape.

    I like the site your source with its tagline of:
    "Muhammad was once a refugee taken in by the Jewish City of Medina. Within 5-years, he had driven out, executed, or enslaved every jew there."

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I'm going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Peace.

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I’m going to share this with one of the brothers!

    Well, this is certainly a less revealing reaction to blasphemy against the Prophet than the cognitively dissonant spout from the guy who chided a post-Bataclan criticism of Islam from a fellow with a Pakistani name: “But that’s not what Islam is! Don’t give others leave to speak ill of our religion!” and in response to the fellow’s retort – “OUR religion? I’m an atheist!” – followed up with, “You’re an atheist?! You deserve the death penalty!”

    However, I’m not fooled.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands
     
    That's nice. Wouldn't be the first time, now would it? Let's keep it legal and do it by the books - if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency - call your representatives, they write the laws.

    However, I’m not fooled.
     
    Good for you - you deserve a cookie.

    Peace.
  40. Talha says:
    @Nico

    LOL! That is wrong on so many levels that it is actually hilarious and not offensive! Thanks for the laugh! I’m going to share this with one of the brothers!
     
    Well, this is certainly a less revealing reaction to blasphemy against the Prophet than the cognitively dissonant spout from the guy who chided a post-Bataclan criticism of Islam from a fellow with a Pakistani name: "But that's not what Islam is! Don't give others leave to speak ill of our religion!" and in response to the fellow's retort - "OUR religion? I'm an atheist!" - followed up with, "You're an atheist?! You deserve the death penalty!"

    However, I'm not fooled.

    boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands

    That’s nice. Wouldn’t be the first time, now would it? Let’s keep it legal and do it by the books – if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency – call your representatives, they write the laws.

    However, I’m not fooled.

    Good for you – you deserve a cookie.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    Wouldn’t be the first time, now would it?
     
    Ah, the expulsion of the Moriscos. Alt-right pagans/atheists who knock Christianity forget one of the finest moments of Western civilization: one of the few times in history a barbarian invasion was successfully *reversed*.

    Let’s keep it legal and do it by the books – if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency – call your representatives, they write the laws.
     
    Once we're done preparing the terrain with the requisite Overton window shifts and instilling of confidence in (I refuse to use the buzzword "empowering") the base, this Person of the Book is totally all for doing things by the book. Throw it at me, now, wouldja?

    Oh, wait... "throwing the book" comes from MY religion, not yours. Too bad.


    Good for you – you deserve a cookie.
     
    Yummy!!!!!!!!!!
  41. republic says:
    @Santoculto
    I think he is talking about (((Jewassay))), other country. But in terms of evilness, France have a very bad reputation with colonialism, the second largest, without mentioning its domestic terrorism for example monarchical absolutism.

    The worst colonialists in modern history were probably either the Belgians or the Japanese.

    I have never been to the Congo whose atrocities were documented by the Great Irish patriot, Roger Casement, but I have been to Korea where a personal experience attests to how Koreans really think of the Japanese, I was eating alone in a large dining hall in South Korea when a large tour group of Japanese came into the dining room, I was a little tired of waiting for my order to be taken, so I spoke to a nearly waiter and asked him: Do you really like Japanese? I got immediate attention from a large group of Korean waiters! Excellent service!

    Read More
  42. Truth says:
    @Priss Factor
    Fair enough. I don't think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape.

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery. So, the ONLY aspect of Islam that becomes operative or relevant is a kind of 'misogynist' view of women as whores who want it.

    But then, it's there plenty in rap music, and non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

    Fair enough. I don’t think Islam or your average Muslim endorses rape… non-Muslim blacks are the main sex offenders in America and much of EU now.

    Damn, Homie, you came up with a point, then you straight Punked-Out quick, fast and in a hurry. Most dudes here a least go back and forth a few times before they punk-out. Gay Kats is usually tougher than that, you need to roid up a little like your boys in San Francisco!

    Read More
  43. Talha says:
    @Anonymous
    Converting others to Islam is a terrible thing to do. Europe is still recovering from our captive spell under Christianity so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?

    I don't say this as a reaction to recent events. I say this because my experience with Muslims is that faith in Islam requires the observation of a vast array of arbitrary diktats. It encourages the development of rote memory but strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning and the synthesis of new ideas, which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe.

    For example, it's hard to take seriously the diktat not to eat pork when the reasoning is so flawed. Why? Because it's unclean. Why? Because it contains worms. 'But the worms are reliably eliminated by cooking..'. (no response).

    Another example: Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty? Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not. And if one contacts a dog's saliva, they must wash seven times with sand. How is this not absolute nonsense?

    So in both examples, the diktats would have originally had value as preventative measures against potentially fatal diseases (trichinosis and rabies) and would have been commendable given the knowledge level of the time but are both now obviously rendered obsolete by scientific knowledge. This leaves the Muslim in a real dilemma - should they choose to go with their own God-given intelligence or should they remain observant to the words written down by great but ignorant leaders of the past?

    The only sensible solution I've seen to this dilemma is to take the same approach as post-Christians, ie. drop the tribalism, dethrone Islam as 'the only true faith in God's eyes' and accept it as just another human creation, far subservient to one's own inner compass.

    My feeling is that until Muslims can get to this point, they have no place in the developed world and, after they reach this point, they will naturally see that spreading Islam is unnecessary and destructive. Hence, I feel that 'To invite others to Islam' is an inherently flawed reason for moving to the West.

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education. As long as the visa recipients behave respectfully (our idea of respectful not theirs) and don't stay on illegally then I welcome them with open arms.

    so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?

    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We’re doing our darned best to discourage them.

    strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning

    You mean that it doesn’t come to the same conclusions you do.

    and the synthesis of new ideas

    Like gay pride parades.

    which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe

    Possibly – because we aren’t down with gay pride parades.

    Why? Because it’s unclean.

    No – it’s because the One Who created it told us to keep our teeth off of it. Just like He told us to keep our teeth off of other species in the animal kingdom – as is His prerogative as the Creator of the world. You come from a culture that eats pigs and keeps dogs as pets, so you question why you can’t eat pork. If you came from a culture where you ate dogs and kept pigs as pets, you would be asking why you can’t eat dogs. Eating pigs wouldn’t even cross your mind. Islam prohibits you from eating dogs and cats too – why don’t you question that premise?

    Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty?

    Both are clean.

    Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not.

    Both are fine – cite your source – a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

    And if one contacts a dog’s saliva, they must wash seven times with sand.

    Not just dog saliva, any carnivore’s. The cat is given a dispensation for the ease of people. No, seven times and with one being with sand – that is the ruling only in the Shafi’i and Hanbali schools. The Hanafi school simply washes and the Maliki school doesn’t even care because the saliva of all creatures is ritually clean for them.

    I’ve met plenty of converts in my life – not one ever said they converted because they thought all the rituals were really, really cool. They converted because the over-arching message made sense to them and submitted to the rules. If the message doesn’t appeal to you, that’s fine.

    by great but ignorant leaders of the past?

    Pffffshshshsh – what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!

    and accept it as just another human creation

    Apostate, and all will be fine.

    far subservient to one’s own inner compass

    You really haven’t read up on your Nietzsche, have you?

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education.

    Ah – a point of agreement – splendid!

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We’re doing our darned best to discourage them.

     

    Because in a free society, a small minority will always convert to some totally whacked out ideas, of which Islam is only one. I'm pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we're converting to yours.


    You mean that it doesn’t come to the same conclusions you do.
     
    It's not about conclusions, it's about process. A Westerner may perform free inquiries into the nature of the world around them and go with whatever conclusions arise. A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions. It's a handicap your people suffer from that stops you progressing scientifically and technically. In the past, Christianity was just as bad, and we also see sets of more localised contraints in the forms of Judenwissenschaft, Weltislehre, Anthrophmorphic climate change, and Race/IQ political correctness. In all cases, local constraints inhibit scientific progress within a certain area of knowledge, while global intelligence inhibitors like Islam and medieval Christianity happily retard an entire race or civilisation.

    Both are fine – cite your source – a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

     

    My old Muslim Indian neighbour. He's a very devout Muslim, always talking about Islam, observes fasting and prayer fastidiously and is also a very nice person within his Islamic comfort zone. If this kind and educated old gentleman is not a reliable source of Islamic knowledge then Muslims in general are pretty fucked.

    In which case, what are we really talking about? Your ideal theoretical Islam, or the actual real Islam that is practiced? For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters, while the classic counterpoint of 'Ahhh but that is not the real Islam' means nothing.

    Pffffshshshsh – what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!
     
    He certainly didn't know much about the germ theory of disease. Which is natural, because he didn't have any shoulders of giants to stand upon!

    Apostate, and all will be fine.
     
    Right. Exactly. Fuck it all off, go through the scientific age like we have, try not to fall down the hole of 'scientific' atheism, and then re-assemble a working spiritual practice without creed or dogma. There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching all the way back from the Tao Te Ching and the Bhagavad Gita right up to more modern lights like Sogyal Rinpoche, Paramhansa Yogananda, Osho, Carl Jung, and Herman Hesse.

    Can you do it? We're waiting for you.
  44. @Talha

    But I think there is a kind of feral punk-Muslim mentality in parts of EU. These Muslims are no longer part of a Muslim culture and value system. Instead, they are surrounded by libertinism and debauchery.
     
    You hit the nail on the head here actually. And I agree. As I said on another thread:
    I do absolutely say though, that if Europeans are going to bring in any immigrants (especially from Muslim countries), they should do proper vetting. I personally do not want Muslims who cannot handle themselves in the West with proper decorum (whether it be committing terrorism, drinking, raping, fornicating, etc.) allowed in. It is better for the preservation of their faith (which is far more important than material increase) if they are kept in Muslim societies that have safeguards to restrict them. And it does non-Muslim citizens of the West no good to be victims of their profligacy.

    The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.


    I have met very good, upright Muslims that would make excellent citizens in the West, but they simply have zero desire to move here even though they would be living large compared to their country of origin. It is a real test of one's spiritual resolve and the faith of one's future generations hangs in the balance - not a decision to be taken lightly. Those who take it lightly probably should not be here.

    Peace.

    “The funny thing is, the Muslims you likely want in Europe are those least likely to be eager to move there.”

    It is interesting that the original immigrants to the colonies were not the most desirables; however, in time their offspring have come to be good citizens. Just look at Australia…

    Read More
  45. Nico says:
    @Talha

    boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands
     
    That's nice. Wouldn't be the first time, now would it? Let's keep it legal and do it by the books - if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency - call your representatives, they write the laws.

    However, I’m not fooled.
     
    Good for you - you deserve a cookie.

    Peace.

    Wouldn’t be the first time, now would it?

    Ah, the expulsion of the Moriscos. Alt-right pagans/atheists who knock Christianity forget one of the finest moments of Western civilization: one of the few times in history a barbarian invasion was successfully *reversed*.

    Let’s keep it legal and do it by the books – if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency – call your representatives, they write the laws.

    Once we’re done preparing the terrain with the requisite Overton window shifts and instilling of confidence in (I refuse to use the buzzword “empowering”) the base, this Person of the Book is totally all for doing things by the book. Throw it at me, now, wouldja?

    Oh, wait… “throwing the book” comes from MY religion, not yours. Too bad.

    Good for you – you deserve a cookie.

    Yummy!!!!!!!!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Nico,

    Ah, the expulsion of the Moriscos
     
    Wow - that is an episode that you want to promote as one of the crowning achievements of Christian history in the West? An ethnic cleansing of all descendants of Arabs, regardless of their loyalty to Christianity?
    “The expulsion of the Moriscos from Spain (1609-1614) represents an important episode of ethnic, political and religious cleansing which affected about 300,000 persons. The controversial measure was legitimized by an ideology of religious and political unity that served to defend the expulsion of them all, crypto-Muslims and sincere converts to Christianity alike.”
    http://www.brill.com/products/book/expulsion-moriscos-spain

    Fine by me.

    this Person of the Book is totally all for doing things by the book
     
    Good - then we are in agreement.

    Peace.
  46. Eagle Eye says:
    @Anonymous
    Converting others to Islam is a terrible thing to do. Europe is still recovering from our captive spell under Christianity so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?

    I don't say this as a reaction to recent events. I say this because my experience with Muslims is that faith in Islam requires the observation of a vast array of arbitrary diktats. It encourages the development of rote memory but strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning and the synthesis of new ideas, which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe.

    For example, it's hard to take seriously the diktat not to eat pork when the reasoning is so flawed. Why? Because it's unclean. Why? Because it contains worms. 'But the worms are reliably eliminated by cooking..'. (no response).

    Another example: Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty? Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not. And if one contacts a dog's saliva, they must wash seven times with sand. How is this not absolute nonsense?

    So in both examples, the diktats would have originally had value as preventative measures against potentially fatal diseases (trichinosis and rabies) and would have been commendable given the knowledge level of the time but are both now obviously rendered obsolete by scientific knowledge. This leaves the Muslim in a real dilemma - should they choose to go with their own God-given intelligence or should they remain observant to the words written down by great but ignorant leaders of the past?

    The only sensible solution I've seen to this dilemma is to take the same approach as post-Christians, ie. drop the tribalism, dethrone Islam as 'the only true faith in God's eyes' and accept it as just another human creation, far subservient to one's own inner compass.

    My feeling is that until Muslims can get to this point, they have no place in the developed world and, after they reach this point, they will naturally see that spreading Islam is unnecessary and destructive. Hence, I feel that 'To invite others to Islam' is an inherently flawed reason for moving to the West.

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education. As long as the visa recipients behave respectfully (our idea of respectful not theirs) and don't stay on illegally then I welcome them with open arms.

    Why [in Islam] is the cat clean but the dog is dirty?

    Mo and his men caught toxoplasmosis (i.e. cat lady infection, a real biological phenomenon).

    Read More
  47. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    so why on Earth would we want yet another backwards religion from the Middle East?
     
    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We're doing our darned best to discourage them.

    strongly inhibits independent logical reasoning
     
    You mean that it doesn't come to the same conclusions you do.

    and the synthesis of new ideas
     
    Like gay pride parades.

    which renders Muslims incompatible with post-Enlightenment Europe
     
    Possibly - because we aren't down with gay pride parades.

    Why? Because it’s unclean.
     
    No - it's because the One Who created it told us to keep our teeth off of it. Just like He told us to keep our teeth off of other species in the animal kingdom - as is His prerogative as the Creator of the world. You come from a culture that eats pigs and keeps dogs as pets, so you question why you can't eat pork. If you came from a culture where you ate dogs and kept pigs as pets, you would be asking why you can't eat dogs. Eating pigs wouldn't even cross your mind. Islam prohibits you from eating dogs and cats too - why don't you question that premise?

    Why is the cat clean but the dog is dirty?
     
    Both are clean.

    Muslims say that contact with a dry dog is permissible but contact with a wet dog is not.
     
    Both are fine - cite your source - a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

    And if one contacts a dog’s saliva, they must wash seven times with sand.
     
    Not just dog saliva, any carnivore's. The cat is given a dispensation for the ease of people. No, seven times and with one being with sand - that is the ruling only in the Shafi'i and Hanbali schools. The Hanafi school simply washes and the Maliki school doesn't even care because the saliva of all creatures is ritually clean for them.

    I've met plenty of converts in my life - not one ever said they converted because they thought all the rituals were really, really cool. They converted because the over-arching message made sense to them and submitted to the rules. If the message doesn't appeal to you, that's fine.


    by great but ignorant leaders of the past?
     
    Pffffshshshsh - what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!

    and accept it as just another human creation
     
    Apostate, and all will be fine.

    far subservient to one’s own inner compass
     
    You really haven't read up on your Nietzsche, have you?

    Having said all this, I fully support your ideas of travel/business/education.
     
    Ah - a point of agreement - splendid!

    Peace.

    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We’re doing our darned best to discourage them.

    Because in a free society, a small minority will always convert to some totally whacked out ideas, of which Islam is only one. I’m pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we’re converting to yours.

    You mean that it doesn’t come to the same conclusions you do.

    It’s not about conclusions, it’s about process. A Westerner may perform free inquiries into the nature of the world around them and go with whatever conclusions arise. A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions. It’s a handicap your people suffer from that stops you progressing scientifically and technically. In the past, Christianity was just as bad, and we also see sets of more localised contraints in the forms of Judenwissenschaft, Weltislehre, Anthrophmorphic climate change, and Race/IQ political correctness. In all cases, local constraints inhibit scientific progress within a certain area of knowledge, while global intelligence inhibitors like Islam and medieval Christianity happily retard an entire race or civilisation.

    Both are fine – cite your source – a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

    My old Muslim Indian neighbour. He’s a very devout Muslim, always talking about Islam, observes fasting and prayer fastidiously and is also a very nice person within his Islamic comfort zone. If this kind and educated old gentleman is not a reliable source of Islamic knowledge then Muslims in general are pretty fucked.

    In which case, what are we really talking about? Your ideal theoretical Islam, or the actual real Islam that is practiced? For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters, while the classic counterpoint of ‘Ahhh but that is not the real Islam’ means nothing.

    Pffffshshshsh – what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!

    He certainly didn’t know much about the germ theory of disease. Which is natural, because he didn’t have any shoulders of giants to stand upon!

    Apostate, and all will be fine.

    Right. Exactly. Fuck it all off, go through the scientific age like we have, try not to fall down the hole of ‘scientific’ atheism, and then re-assemble a working spiritual practice without creed or dogma. There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching all the way back from the Tao Te Ching and the Bhagavad Gita right up to more modern lights like Sogyal Rinpoche, Paramhansa Yogananda, Osho, Carl Jung, and Herman Hesse.

    Can you do it? We’re waiting for you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    I’m pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we’re converting to yours.
     
    Not sure about this, the projected numbers for swapping out of/into Islam are in our favor:
    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/04/PF_15.04.02_ProjectionsOverview_religiousSwitching_640px.png

    Atheism will get most of its folks from Christianity which is bleeding like crazy. Most of the people who swap out of Islam tend to go atheist and are pretty far-leaning liberals who have one kid - if any. You are welcome to them.


    A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions.
     
    This is just silly. Nothing in Islam says you can't work on a hydrogen collider or do research in particle physics or medicine or a whole host of other things. Just because Europeans are now at the forefront of it and have been for the last few centuries means exactly that Europeans have a great aptitude for it - good for them. There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc. Ibn al-Haytham is known for his contributions to the progression of the scientific method - building upon the earlier works of men like Ptolemy and Euclid:
    "The work had a major influence not only on 13th-century thinkers such as Roger Bacon but also on later scientists such as the astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571–1630)."
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Haytham

    For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters,
     
    So you get your information from a devout Muslim "uncle" - got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone? This morning I pulled off my shelf "Behishti Zewar" by the great Shaykh Ashraf Thanwi (ra). It is probably the most common reference guide for Muslims in the Indian subcontinent - everything I'm saying is right there. Now, I practice Islam too and I have been blessed to study under three different certified muftis of the Hanafi school along with many intensive weekend retreats on various Islamic subjects. One of my teachers studied under some of the most knowledgeable scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania. He reported that he saw the scholars there feeding their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with and from their own plates. Why doesn't the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn't mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do? You want to count the practice only of those that fit your narrative. Honestly, you can hold any opinion that you want (but so can my plumber), but if this is the first time you've even heard the term "Hanafi" or "Maliki" used, you are trying to punch way above your weight class.

    There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching
     
    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

    Can you do it? We’re waiting for you.
     
    Thanks - not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal:
    "Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion." (57:20)

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive...while spiritually on life support. As Neil Postman posited in his brilliant book, "Technopoly", the West has now become a technocracy and it is evident in everything you are typing:
    “It is still both possible and useful to distinguish a tool-using culture from a technocracy. In a technocracy, tools play a central role in the thought-world of the culture. Everything must give way, in some degree, to their development. The social and symbolic worlds become increasingly subject to the requirements of that development. Tools are not integrated into the culture; they attack the culture. They bid to become the culture. As a consequence, tradition, social mores, myth, politics, ritual, and religion have to fight for their lives.”
    https://www.amazon.com/Technopoly-Surrender-Technology-Neil-Postman/dp/0679745408

    Why would any sane Muslim want to go that route? Why would we not wish to remain a tool-using culture?

    The great American thinker, Thoreau, remarked on this very early on:
    “Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end…We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate…As if the main object were to talk fast and not to talk sensibly.”
    http://www.bartleby.com/73/1540.html

    Again, wisdom from Nietzsche is recommended...the "activist sect" has arisen, we will see what the future holds:
    "The death of the spirit is the price of progress. Nietzsche revealed this mystery of the Western apocalypse when he announced that God was dead and that He had been murdered. This Gnostic murder is constantly committed by the men who sacrificed God to civilization. The more fervently all human energies are thrown into the great enterprise of salvation through world–immanent action, the farther the human beings who engage in this enterprise move away from the life of the spirit. And since the life the spirit is the source of order in man and society, the very success of a Gnostic civilization is the cause of its decline. A civilization can, indeed, advance and decline at the same time—but not forever. There is a limit toward which this ambiguous process moves; the limit is reached when an activist sect which represents the Gnostic truth organizes the civilization into an empire under its rule. Totalitarianism, defined as the existential rule of Gnostic activists, is the end form of progressive civilization." —Eric Voegelin, New Science of Politics, 1952

    It's Aesop's tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.

    Peace.

  48. annamaria says:
    @hyperbola
    Meanwhile in New York, London, Jerusalem, Toronto, Melbourne, ......

    The Child-Rape Assembly Line
    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbe8bp/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11

    Reposting: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbe8bp/the-child-rape-assembly-line-0000141-v20n11
    This report should be sent to Schumer and other AIPAC luminaries, every day

    Read More
  49. annamaria says:
    @Nico

    To invite others to Islam or to help teach others to keep firm on their faith; that is as far as migrating to non-Muslim lands.
     
    For those of us who do not particularly cherish the trajectory of most civilizations which adopted Islam as their guiding light and who do not wish to see our own lands follow down that same path, that I suppose is as good a reason as any to keep or boot Islam and Muslims, prima facie, out of our lands.

    Sure. There are the immigration laws for that. But you must consider certain very powerful non-Muslims who are dead set on destroying the natural habitat of the Muslims. Think Bush, Cheney, Blair, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Condi Rice, Clintons, Sarkozy … Hold your horses (I mean, your native born non-Muslim criminals) from sending the WMD and armies to slaughter the civilian populations in the Muslim lands (some 2 million killed already) and from supporting the local fanatics (Al Qaeda, ISIS and such) – this should help from keeping “us” separated from “them.”
    The trajectory of western civilization has been bent by the mega war-profilers and by the Muslims’ cousins known as Israel-firsters. Hope you do not propose that the recent influx of Muslims to the western countries has been caused by the Muslims’ inclinations towards educational trips.

    Read More
    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Nico
    This is pretty typical "Christian Democrat" centrist finger-wagging. Obviously the Bush administration and the rest of the Saudi/Israeli-aligned foreign policy machine has no sense whatsoever of what is actually good for America (much less the world they invade/invite). However, I see no reason why we must *now* open the doors to the boat people whose reliability, as we have seen time and again, is highly tenuous at best. These are two issues and while the impetus to migrate may be related to Western foreign policy idiocy (although many such "asylum seekers" are not who they claim to be), the actual reception or not of said migrants should NOT be treated in tandem.
  50. Talha says:
    @Nico

    Wouldn’t be the first time, now would it?
     
    Ah, the expulsion of the Moriscos. Alt-right pagans/atheists who knock Christianity forget one of the finest moments of Western civilization: one of the few times in history a barbarian invasion was successfully *reversed*.

    Let’s keep it legal and do it by the books – if you want to strip all Muslims (regardless of criminal actions) of citizenship and revoke their right of residency – call your representatives, they write the laws.
     
    Once we're done preparing the terrain with the requisite Overton window shifts and instilling of confidence in (I refuse to use the buzzword "empowering") the base, this Person of the Book is totally all for doing things by the book. Throw it at me, now, wouldja?

    Oh, wait... "throwing the book" comes from MY religion, not yours. Too bad.


    Good for you – you deserve a cookie.
     
    Yummy!!!!!!!!!!

    Hey Nico,

    Ah, the expulsion of the Moriscos

    Wow – that is an episode that you want to promote as one of the crowning achievements of Christian history in the West? An ethnic cleansing of all descendants of Arabs, regardless of their loyalty to Christianity?
    “The expulsion of the Moriscos from Spain (1609-1614) represents an important episode of ethnic, political and religious cleansing which affected about 300,000 persons. The controversial measure was legitimized by an ideology of religious and political unity that served to defend the expulsion of them all, crypto-Muslims and sincere converts to Christianity alike.”

    http://www.brill.com/products/book/expulsion-moriscos-spain

    Fine by me.

    this Person of the Book is totally all for doing things by the book

    Good – then we are in agreement.

    Peace.

    Read More
  51. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    Not sure, why do Westerners keep converting? We’re doing our darned best to discourage them.

     

    Because in a free society, a small minority will always convert to some totally whacked out ideas, of which Islam is only one. I'm pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we're converting to yours.


    You mean that it doesn’t come to the same conclusions you do.
     
    It's not about conclusions, it's about process. A Westerner may perform free inquiries into the nature of the world around them and go with whatever conclusions arise. A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions. It's a handicap your people suffer from that stops you progressing scientifically and technically. In the past, Christianity was just as bad, and we also see sets of more localised contraints in the forms of Judenwissenschaft, Weltislehre, Anthrophmorphic climate change, and Race/IQ political correctness. In all cases, local constraints inhibit scientific progress within a certain area of knowledge, while global intelligence inhibitors like Islam and medieval Christianity happily retard an entire race or civilisation.

    Both are fine – cite your source – a Muslim source please, not some buffoon that thinks he knows Islam.

     

    My old Muslim Indian neighbour. He's a very devout Muslim, always talking about Islam, observes fasting and prayer fastidiously and is also a very nice person within his Islamic comfort zone. If this kind and educated old gentleman is not a reliable source of Islamic knowledge then Muslims in general are pretty fucked.

    In which case, what are we really talking about? Your ideal theoretical Islam, or the actual real Islam that is practiced? For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters, while the classic counterpoint of 'Ahhh but that is not the real Islam' means nothing.

    Pffffshshshsh – what did Ghazali know anyway? We know how to use iPads!
     
    He certainly didn't know much about the germ theory of disease. Which is natural, because he didn't have any shoulders of giants to stand upon!

    Apostate, and all will be fine.
     
    Right. Exactly. Fuck it all off, go through the scientific age like we have, try not to fall down the hole of 'scientific' atheism, and then re-assemble a working spiritual practice without creed or dogma. There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching all the way back from the Tao Te Ching and the Bhagavad Gita right up to more modern lights like Sogyal Rinpoche, Paramhansa Yogananda, Osho, Carl Jung, and Herman Hesse.

    Can you do it? We're waiting for you.

    I’m pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we’re converting to yours.

    Not sure about this, the projected numbers for swapping out of/into Islam are in our favor:
    Atheism will get most of its folks from Christianity which is bleeding like crazy. Most of the people who swap out of Islam tend to go atheist and are pretty far-leaning liberals who have one kid – if any. You are welcome to them.

    A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions.

    This is just silly. Nothing in Islam says you can’t work on a hydrogen collider or do research in particle physics or medicine or a whole host of other things. Just because Europeans are now at the forefront of it and have been for the last few centuries means exactly that Europeans have a great aptitude for it – good for them. There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc. Ibn al-Haytham is known for his contributions to the progression of the scientific method – building upon the earlier works of men like Ptolemy and Euclid:
    “The work had a major influence not only on 13th-century thinkers such as Roger Bacon but also on later scientists such as the astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571–1630).”

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Haytham

    For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters,

    So you get your information from a devout Muslim “uncle” – got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone? This morning I pulled off my shelf “Behishti Zewar” by the great Shaykh Ashraf Thanwi (ra). It is probably the most common reference guide for Muslims in the Indian subcontinent – everything I’m saying is right there. Now, I practice Islam too and I have been blessed to study under three different certified muftis of the Hanafi school along with many intensive weekend retreats on various Islamic subjects. One of my teachers studied under some of the most knowledgeable scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania. He reported that he saw the scholars there feeding their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with and from their own plates. Why doesn’t the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn’t mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do? You want to count the practice only of those that fit your narrative. Honestly, you can hold any opinion that you want (but so can my plumber), but if this is the first time you’ve even heard the term “Hanafi” or “Maliki” used, you are trying to punch way above your weight class.

    There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching

    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

    Can you do it? We’re waiting for you.

    Thanks – not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal:
    “Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion.” (57:20)

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive…while spiritually on life support. As Neil Postman posited in his brilliant book, “Technopoly”, the West has now become a technocracy and it is evident in everything you are typing:
    “It is still both possible and useful to distinguish a tool-using culture from a technocracy. In a technocracy, tools play a central role in the thought-world of the culture. Everything must give way, in some degree, to their development. The social and symbolic worlds become increasingly subject to the requirements of that development. Tools are not integrated into the culture; they attack the culture. They bid to become the culture. As a consequence, tradition, social mores, myth, politics, ritual, and religion have to fight for their lives.”

    https://www.amazon.com/Technopoly-Surrender-Technology-Neil-Postman/dp/0679745408

    Why would any sane Muslim want to go that route? Why would we not wish to remain a tool-using culture?

    The great American thinker, Thoreau, remarked on this very early on:
    “Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end…We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate…As if the main object were to talk fast and not to talk sensibly.”

    http://www.bartleby.com/73/1540.html

    Again, wisdom from Nietzsche is recommended…the “activist sect” has arisen, we will see what the future holds:
    “The death of the spirit is the price of progress. Nietzsche revealed this mystery of the Western apocalypse when he announced that God was dead and that He had been murdered. This Gnostic murder is constantly committed by the men who sacrificed God to civilization. The more fervently all human energies are thrown into the great enterprise of salvation through world–immanent action, the farther the human beings who engage in this enterprise move away from the life of the spirit. And since the life the spirit is the source of order in man and society, the very success of a Gnostic civilization is the cause of its decline. A civilization can, indeed, advance and decline at the same time—but not forever. There is a limit toward which this ambiguous process moves; the limit is reached when an activist sect which represents the Gnostic truth organizes the civilization into an empire under its rule. Totalitarianism, defined as the existential rule of Gnostic activists, is the end form of progressive civilization.” —Eric Voegelin, New Science of Politics, 1952

    It’s Aesop’s tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I'm not sure I read much into any numbers projected to 2050! Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam. As for current convert numbers, it's similar to the numbers converting to 'folk religions' which I can't say I've personally witnessed in any substantial number (aside from angsty teenage girls converting to Wicca).

    There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc.

     

    Spot on. It was largely Islam that passed the torch of science to Europe. In it's time, the Islamic golden age was a blessing for the whole world! Tell me, Talha, what went wrong?

    So you get your information from a devout Muslim “uncle” – got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone?

     

    He is one of the better examples from around here, hence why I refer to him as 'kind' and 'educated'. Had I come out with some of the complete crap the more ignorant Muslims spout, you would probably have assumed I was trolling.

    You and I are in completely different situations here because you may approach them with a friendly 'salaamaleikum brother' and then initiate a friendly discussion about how the respected scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania feed their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with. You could then back this up with further examples from your own learning and wrap it all in the proper Islamic nomenclature. They would thus be disarmed and obliged to bow to your superior Islamic knowledge. I doubt you'd convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.

    Should I try the same approach, my non-Muslim status would trigger an automatic immune response and my logical arguments would be summarily rejected. Should I attempt to continue the discussion, the Muslim will get defensive and possibly even dangerous. Non-Muslims learn very fast to hold their tongues and let Muslims spout whatever crap they want, because it's futile and dangerous to engage them.

    What should we do in this situation, Talha? Give them your phone number?

    Why doesn’t the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn’t mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do?

     

    Because you seem to live in an ivory tower. You seem to live in a world where the 'true Islam' is actually practiced. It sounds lovely, but I've never witnessed it first hand.

    I also have a Muslim friend of the same ilk as yourself. His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 'muslims' is a real Muslim. I congratulate you on being the 1 in 1000, Talha, but I am still deeply concerned about the other 999 who are likely to wreck havoc on Europe.

    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

     

    Very true, but why restrict yourself? Could it not be that the Buddha had discovered something that the Sufis had not? Could it not be that the extreme simplicity of the Dao De Jing clicks better with some people's minds? Could it not be that European writers communicate better with European minds?

    Thanks – not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal
     
    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality? Ironically, one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows.

    “Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion.” (57:20)
     
    At first this sounded identical to the teachings of the Buddha (and every other Hindu rishi) but then you fell back to the dumbed down idea of 'the next world'. Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it's clearly a 'for dummies' edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive…while spiritually on life support.

     

    I think we're witnessing two different things here, Talha. We're witnessing material greatness as a result of the past's spiritual greatness, and we're witnessing spiritual poverty as a result of a recent spiritual collapse. Personally I feel that the light has recently gone out in the West in the same way that the light long ago went out in the Islamic world. Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present's declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.

    There's two futures for Europe: Either self awareness continues to be buried deeper and deeper under an ever growing technological load and it's attendant environmental problems (see Idiocracy for a good view of this end game), or Europe re-ignites it's own spiritual quest and regains sufficient spiritual buoyancy to once again it become a tool-using culture.

    As for the Islamic world, what you do is really up to you. If you want to earnestly try to move forward spiritually and materially then we welcome and encourage your efforts. On the other hand, if you decide it's all too difficult and you'd rather snipe from the sides then your cultural stagnation will necessarily result in your ultimate destruction. I don't say that out of malice, I say it out of a simple view that when the technological and cultural differentials between two parts of the world reach a critical level, the more advanced part will naturally subsume the less advanced part. At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.

    It’s Aesop’s tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.
     
    This is the problem. Most of you don't.
  52. Nico says:
    @annamaria
    Sure. There are the immigration laws for that. But you must consider certain very powerful non-Muslims who are dead set on destroying the natural habitat of the Muslims. Think Bush, Cheney, Blair, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Condi Rice, Clintons, Sarkozy ... Hold your horses (I mean, your native born non-Muslim criminals) from sending the WMD and armies to slaughter the civilian populations in the Muslim lands (some 2 million killed already) and from supporting the local fanatics (Al Qaeda, ISIS and such) - this should help from keeping "us" separated from "them."
    The trajectory of western civilization has been bent by the mega war-profilers and by the Muslims' cousins known as Israel-firsters. Hope you do not propose that the recent influx of Muslims to the western countries has been caused by the Muslims' inclinations towards educational trips.

    This is pretty typical “Christian Democrat” centrist finger-wagging. Obviously the Bush administration and the rest of the Saudi/Israeli-aligned foreign policy machine has no sense whatsoever of what is actually good for America (much less the world they invade/invite). However, I see no reason why we must *now* open the doors to the boat people whose reliability, as we have seen time and again, is highly tenuous at best. These are two issues and while the impetus to migrate may be related to Western foreign policy idiocy (although many such “asylum seekers” are not who they claim to be), the actual reception or not of said migrants should NOT be treated in tandem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Are you aware that there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa?
    There are Bush children (the horrifically deformed babies of Fallujah) and Clinton children (the maimed kids and the shredded flesh of what used to be children of Libya and Syria). Please spare us your moanings about western civilization: to upheld western values, the population at large should start demanding that the mega-war-profiteers (including Israel-firsters) pay for a new Marshall plans to restore the Middle East, with their ill-gotten fortunes. The perspective of normalcy in the native lands would stop the desperate families from risking their lives while crossing the Lake.
    As for the low IQ migrants flooding PC Europe, all is needed is the enforcement of the already existing laws. No ID - no handouts.

    Just a reminder - the US is not a sovereign state but a colony ruled by Israel-firsters: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47719.htm

  53. annamaria says:
    @Nico
    This is pretty typical "Christian Democrat" centrist finger-wagging. Obviously the Bush administration and the rest of the Saudi/Israeli-aligned foreign policy machine has no sense whatsoever of what is actually good for America (much less the world they invade/invite). However, I see no reason why we must *now* open the doors to the boat people whose reliability, as we have seen time and again, is highly tenuous at best. These are two issues and while the impetus to migrate may be related to Western foreign policy idiocy (although many such "asylum seekers" are not who they claim to be), the actual reception or not of said migrants should NOT be treated in tandem.

    Are you aware that there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa?
    There are Bush children (the horrifically deformed babies of Fallujah) and Clinton children (the maimed kids and the shredded flesh of what used to be children of Libya and Syria). Please spare us your moanings about western civilization: to upheld western values, the population at large should start demanding that the mega-war-profiteers (including Israel-firsters) pay for a new Marshall plans to restore the Middle East, with their ill-gotten fortunes. The perspective of normalcy in the native lands would stop the desperate families from risking their lives while crossing the Lake.
    As for the low IQ migrants flooding PC Europe, all is needed is the enforcement of the already existing laws. No ID – no handouts.

    Just a reminder – the US is not a sovereign state but a colony ruled by Israel-firsters: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47719.htm

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    You're batting them out of the park!

    Peace.
    , @RobinG
    "...there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa??

    Not to mention that Libya was the destination for many of the latter - when it was still the thriving, most prosperous nation of Africa.
  54. Talha says:
    @annamaria
    Are you aware that there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa?
    There are Bush children (the horrifically deformed babies of Fallujah) and Clinton children (the maimed kids and the shredded flesh of what used to be children of Libya and Syria). Please spare us your moanings about western civilization: to upheld western values, the population at large should start demanding that the mega-war-profiteers (including Israel-firsters) pay for a new Marshall plans to restore the Middle East, with their ill-gotten fortunes. The perspective of normalcy in the native lands would stop the desperate families from risking their lives while crossing the Lake.
    As for the low IQ migrants flooding PC Europe, all is needed is the enforcement of the already existing laws. No ID - no handouts.

    Just a reminder - the US is not a sovereign state but a colony ruled by Israel-firsters: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47719.htm

    You’re batting them out of the park!

    Peace.

    Read More
  55. RobinG says:
    @annamaria
    Are you aware that there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa?
    There are Bush children (the horrifically deformed babies of Fallujah) and Clinton children (the maimed kids and the shredded flesh of what used to be children of Libya and Syria). Please spare us your moanings about western civilization: to upheld western values, the population at large should start demanding that the mega-war-profiteers (including Israel-firsters) pay for a new Marshall plans to restore the Middle East, with their ill-gotten fortunes. The perspective of normalcy in the native lands would stop the desperate families from risking their lives while crossing the Lake.
    As for the low IQ migrants flooding PC Europe, all is needed is the enforcement of the already existing laws. No ID - no handouts.

    Just a reminder - the US is not a sovereign state but a colony ruled by Israel-firsters: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47719.htm

    “…there is a difference between people fleeing Lybia and Syria and the migrants from sub-Saharan Africa??

    Not to mention that Libya was the destination for many of the latter – when it was still the thriving, most prosperous nation of Africa.

    Read More
  56. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    I’m pretty sure Muslims are converting to our ideas at a faster rate than we’re converting to yours.
     
    Not sure about this, the projected numbers for swapping out of/into Islam are in our favor:
    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/04/PF_15.04.02_ProjectionsOverview_religiousSwitching_640px.png

    Atheism will get most of its folks from Christianity which is bleeding like crazy. Most of the people who swap out of Islam tend to go atheist and are pretty far-leaning liberals who have one kid - if any. You are welcome to them.


    A Muslim may not, because they are already faith-bound to reach a set of preordained conclusions.
     
    This is just silly. Nothing in Islam says you can't work on a hydrogen collider or do research in particle physics or medicine or a whole host of other things. Just because Europeans are now at the forefront of it and have been for the last few centuries means exactly that Europeans have a great aptitude for it - good for them. There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc. Ibn al-Haytham is known for his contributions to the progression of the scientific method - building upon the earlier works of men like Ptolemy and Euclid:
    "The work had a major influence not only on 13th-century thinkers such as Roger Bacon but also on later scientists such as the astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571–1630)."
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-al-Haytham

    For me, only the practiced Islam actually matters,
     
    So you get your information from a devout Muslim "uncle" - got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone? This morning I pulled off my shelf "Behishti Zewar" by the great Shaykh Ashraf Thanwi (ra). It is probably the most common reference guide for Muslims in the Indian subcontinent - everything I'm saying is right there. Now, I practice Islam too and I have been blessed to study under three different certified muftis of the Hanafi school along with many intensive weekend retreats on various Islamic subjects. One of my teachers studied under some of the most knowledgeable scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania. He reported that he saw the scholars there feeding their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with and from their own plates. Why doesn't the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn't mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do? You want to count the practice only of those that fit your narrative. Honestly, you can hold any opinion that you want (but so can my plumber), but if this is the first time you've even heard the term "Hanafi" or "Maliki" used, you are trying to punch way above your weight class.

    There are lots and lots of very high quality sources of spiritual teaching
     
    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

    Can you do it? We’re waiting for you.
     
    Thanks - not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal:
    "Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion." (57:20)

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive...while spiritually on life support. As Neil Postman posited in his brilliant book, "Technopoly", the West has now become a technocracy and it is evident in everything you are typing:
    “It is still both possible and useful to distinguish a tool-using culture from a technocracy. In a technocracy, tools play a central role in the thought-world of the culture. Everything must give way, in some degree, to their development. The social and symbolic worlds become increasingly subject to the requirements of that development. Tools are not integrated into the culture; they attack the culture. They bid to become the culture. As a consequence, tradition, social mores, myth, politics, ritual, and religion have to fight for their lives.”
    https://www.amazon.com/Technopoly-Surrender-Technology-Neil-Postman/dp/0679745408

    Why would any sane Muslim want to go that route? Why would we not wish to remain a tool-using culture?

    The great American thinker, Thoreau, remarked on this very early on:
    “Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end…We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas; but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate…As if the main object were to talk fast and not to talk sensibly.”
    http://www.bartleby.com/73/1540.html

    Again, wisdom from Nietzsche is recommended...the "activist sect" has arisen, we will see what the future holds:
    "The death of the spirit is the price of progress. Nietzsche revealed this mystery of the Western apocalypse when he announced that God was dead and that He had been murdered. This Gnostic murder is constantly committed by the men who sacrificed God to civilization. The more fervently all human energies are thrown into the great enterprise of salvation through world–immanent action, the farther the human beings who engage in this enterprise move away from the life of the spirit. And since the life the spirit is the source of order in man and society, the very success of a Gnostic civilization is the cause of its decline. A civilization can, indeed, advance and decline at the same time—but not forever. There is a limit toward which this ambiguous process moves; the limit is reached when an activist sect which represents the Gnostic truth organizes the civilization into an empire under its rule. Totalitarianism, defined as the existential rule of Gnostic activists, is the end form of progressive civilization." —Eric Voegelin, New Science of Politics, 1952

    It's Aesop's tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.

    Peace.

    I’m not sure I read much into any numbers projected to 2050! Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam. As for current convert numbers, it’s similar to the numbers converting to ‘folk religions’ which I can’t say I’ve personally witnessed in any substantial number (aside from angsty teenage girls converting to Wicca).

    There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc.

    Spot on. It was largely Islam that passed the torch of science to Europe. In it’s time, the Islamic golden age was a blessing for the whole world! Tell me, Talha, what went wrong?

    So you get your information from a devout Muslim “uncle” – got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone?

    He is one of the better examples from around here, hence why I refer to him as ‘kind’ and ‘educated’. Had I come out with some of the complete crap the more ignorant Muslims spout, you would probably have assumed I was trolling.

    You and I are in completely different situations here because you may approach them with a friendly ‘salaamaleikum brother’ and then initiate a friendly discussion about how the respected scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania feed their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with. You could then back this up with further examples from your own learning and wrap it all in the proper Islamic nomenclature. They would thus be disarmed and obliged to bow to your superior Islamic knowledge. I doubt you’d convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.

    Should I try the same approach, my non-Muslim status would trigger an automatic immune response and my logical arguments would be summarily rejected. Should I attempt to continue the discussion, the Muslim will get defensive and possibly even dangerous. Non-Muslims learn very fast to hold their tongues and let Muslims spout whatever crap they want, because it’s futile and dangerous to engage them.

    What should we do in this situation, Talha? Give them your phone number?

    Why doesn’t the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn’t mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do?

    Because you seem to live in an ivory tower. You seem to live in a world where the ‘true Islam’ is actually practiced. It sounds lovely, but I’ve never witnessed it first hand.

    I also have a Muslim friend of the same ilk as yourself. His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 ‘muslims’ is a real Muslim. I congratulate you on being the 1 in 1000, Talha, but I am still deeply concerned about the other 999 who are likely to wreck havoc on Europe.

    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

    Very true, but why restrict yourself? Could it not be that the Buddha had discovered something that the Sufis had not? Could it not be that the extreme simplicity of the Dao De Jing clicks better with some people’s minds? Could it not be that European writers communicate better with European minds?

    Thanks – not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal

    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality? Ironically, one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows.

    “Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion.” (57:20)

    At first this sounded identical to the teachings of the Buddha (and every other Hindu rishi) but then you fell back to the dumbed down idea of ‘the next world’. Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it’s clearly a ‘for dummies’ edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive…while spiritually on life support.

    I think we’re witnessing two different things here, Talha. We’re witnessing material greatness as a result of the past’s spiritual greatness, and we’re witnessing spiritual poverty as a result of a recent spiritual collapse. Personally I feel that the light has recently gone out in the West in the same way that the light long ago went out in the Islamic world. Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present’s declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.

    There’s two futures for Europe: Either self awareness continues to be buried deeper and deeper under an ever growing technological load and it’s attendant environmental problems (see Idiocracy for a good view of this end game), or Europe re-ignites it’s own spiritual quest and regains sufficient spiritual buoyancy to once again it become a tool-using culture.

    As for the Islamic world, what you do is really up to you. If you want to earnestly try to move forward spiritually and materially then we welcome and encourage your efforts. On the other hand, if you decide it’s all too difficult and you’d rather snipe from the sides then your cultural stagnation will necessarily result in your ultimate destruction. I don’t say that out of malice, I say it out of a simple view that when the technological and cultural differentials between two parts of the world reach a critical level, the more advanced part will naturally subsume the less advanced part. At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.

    It’s Aesop’s tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.

    This is the problem. Most of you don’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yyrvjh

    Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam.
     
    Aren't you neglecting Islam's secret weapon that keeps the sheep within the fold? The penalty for apostasy from Islam is ... death. Ah, but I'm sure that Talha, a modern, cultured Mohammedan living in the West, has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates. Using his real name and photo, he has gone on record saying that it has no place in today's world. Hasn't he?
    , @Talha

    what went wrong?
     
    Mongols and Reconquista. If you look at the Muslim world, its major areas of scientific endeavor were four; Spain, Egypt, the Levant and Persia (or the Persianate areas). The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

    Scientific endeavor did continue in some areas under the Ottomans but the sun seemed to have set on much of the Muslim world with those initial losses. Then the West picked it up and rolled with it - though it took them some time to get there.

    I doubt you’d convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.
     
    Probably not - and that is likely a cultural thing. He is an old man from India - do you know what the dogs are like in India especially from the time he was growing up? Most don't keep them as pets and many of them are feral and dangerous. Say as opposed to a Muslim culture that is comfortable with dogs - like the Turks.

    Now one thing I was just thinking is that I may have been making a wrong assumption. I assumed the man follows the Hanafi school like me and the vast majority of people in the Indian subcontinent, however, he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi'i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam - it isn't - it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

    What should we do in this situation, Talha?
     
    I would definitely not approach them with antagonism by saying this and that are rdidiculous - you won't get anywhere with anybody (Muslim or not) that way. Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject - likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified. It is a realm of human knowledge just like any other. I know a bunch of stuff about web development, but when it comes to medicine, I ask people in their field.

    His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 ‘muslims’ is a real Muslim.
     
    I wouldn't put the number like that at all. I meet good, honest, decent Muslims everyday. The trouble makers are able to make noise and get attention far above their numbers. However, I will readily state that there is a big crisis about education in the Muslim world, both on the religious side and secular side - of this I am well aware and accept the criticism as valid.

    Very true, but why restrict yourself?
     
    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.

    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality?
     
    You can't measure it - you can see its fruits though. From what I've seen, the Sufis (especially the Sufi-scholars) are some of the best examples of spiritual sages from within our tradition:
    https://www.amazon.com/Signs-Horizons-Meetings-Knowledge-Illumination/dp/0989364011

    one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows
     
    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people. They were very contented to God and even the natural world - seeing true dreams was a common phenomenon. My teacher mentioned that when he was setting out to go learn there, he had a dream and saw his teacher and the environment in it even though he had never been there before. When he arrived and he saw the place and his teacher just like in the dream, he was astonished. The man who would become his teacher leaned over gently to him and said, "It's just like in the dream, isn't it?" This kind of a thing is very common there - they are very connected to metaphysical reality and part of it is due to lack of distractions.

    Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it’s clearly a ‘for dummies’ edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?
     
    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn't this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems. There is nothing illogical about a final Day of Judgement in which people are compensated for how they conducted their life. Christianity has similar doctrines because it is revealed by the same Divine source.

    Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present’s declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.
     
    Agree here. And I agree with you about Europe's two choices - it must revive some form of a spiritual world view that helps it navigate life or borrow it from another culture. I want Europeans (and the West) to succeed - in this life and the next - whether I am allowed to stay among them or not. They are an important branch of Bani Adam and their spiritual and worldly success is a benefit to us all.

    At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.
     
    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don't see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real. I have seen good signs though. There has been a spiritual revival across the Muslim world since the late eighties. The secular ideologies (like communism, Arab nationalism, etc.) have been relegated to minority status. The current phase is to make sure the revival is spiritual and expansive and principled and is not take over by narrow-minded, provincial-thinking extremists.

    This is the problem. Most of you don’t.
     
    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:
    "By Allah, I do not fear poverty for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them." - reported in Muslim and Bukhari

    Peace.
  57. yyrvjh says:
    @Anonymous
    I'm not sure I read much into any numbers projected to 2050! Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam. As for current convert numbers, it's similar to the numbers converting to 'folk religions' which I can't say I've personally witnessed in any substantial number (aside from angsty teenage girls converting to Wicca).

    There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc.

     

    Spot on. It was largely Islam that passed the torch of science to Europe. In it's time, the Islamic golden age was a blessing for the whole world! Tell me, Talha, what went wrong?

    So you get your information from a devout Muslim “uncle” – got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone?

     

    He is one of the better examples from around here, hence why I refer to him as 'kind' and 'educated'. Had I come out with some of the complete crap the more ignorant Muslims spout, you would probably have assumed I was trolling.

    You and I are in completely different situations here because you may approach them with a friendly 'salaamaleikum brother' and then initiate a friendly discussion about how the respected scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania feed their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with. You could then back this up with further examples from your own learning and wrap it all in the proper Islamic nomenclature. They would thus be disarmed and obliged to bow to your superior Islamic knowledge. I doubt you'd convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.

    Should I try the same approach, my non-Muslim status would trigger an automatic immune response and my logical arguments would be summarily rejected. Should I attempt to continue the discussion, the Muslim will get defensive and possibly even dangerous. Non-Muslims learn very fast to hold their tongues and let Muslims spout whatever crap they want, because it's futile and dangerous to engage them.

    What should we do in this situation, Talha? Give them your phone number?

    Why doesn’t the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn’t mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do?

     

    Because you seem to live in an ivory tower. You seem to live in a world where the 'true Islam' is actually practiced. It sounds lovely, but I've never witnessed it first hand.

    I also have a Muslim friend of the same ilk as yourself. His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 'muslims' is a real Muslim. I congratulate you on being the 1 in 1000, Talha, but I am still deeply concerned about the other 999 who are likely to wreck havoc on Europe.

    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

     

    Very true, but why restrict yourself? Could it not be that the Buddha had discovered something that the Sufis had not? Could it not be that the extreme simplicity of the Dao De Jing clicks better with some people's minds? Could it not be that European writers communicate better with European minds?

    Thanks – not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal
     
    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality? Ironically, one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows.

    “Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion.” (57:20)
     
    At first this sounded identical to the teachings of the Buddha (and every other Hindu rishi) but then you fell back to the dumbed down idea of 'the next world'. Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it's clearly a 'for dummies' edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive…while spiritually on life support.

     

    I think we're witnessing two different things here, Talha. We're witnessing material greatness as a result of the past's spiritual greatness, and we're witnessing spiritual poverty as a result of a recent spiritual collapse. Personally I feel that the light has recently gone out in the West in the same way that the light long ago went out in the Islamic world. Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present's declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.

    There's two futures for Europe: Either self awareness continues to be buried deeper and deeper under an ever growing technological load and it's attendant environmental problems (see Idiocracy for a good view of this end game), or Europe re-ignites it's own spiritual quest and regains sufficient spiritual buoyancy to once again it become a tool-using culture.

    As for the Islamic world, what you do is really up to you. If you want to earnestly try to move forward spiritually and materially then we welcome and encourage your efforts. On the other hand, if you decide it's all too difficult and you'd rather snipe from the sides then your cultural stagnation will necessarily result in your ultimate destruction. I don't say that out of malice, I say it out of a simple view that when the technological and cultural differentials between two parts of the world reach a critical level, the more advanced part will naturally subsume the less advanced part. At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.

    It’s Aesop’s tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.
     
    This is the problem. Most of you don't.

    Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam.

    Aren’t you neglecting Islam’s secret weapon that keeps the sheep within the fold? The penalty for apostasy from Islam is … death. Ah, but I’m sure that Talha, a modern, cultured Mohammedan living in the West, has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates. Using his real name and photo, he has gone on record saying that it has no place in today’s world. Hasn’t he?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hardly our secret weapon - most Muslims aren't interested in converting to other faiths. When they apostate, they usually go the atheist route - again, you are most welcome to them.

    has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates
     
    Why would I? This is a question for qualified scholars to work out as it regards the rights of human beings in the light of sacred law - a grave and serious matter. I'm not interested about collecting virtue-signaling points and fame via secular-liberalism.

    As far as the penalty for apostasy - it certainly has been historically death across the board for all the schools - although some extinct schools did not consider it a capital offense. However, this is being discussed right now at the highest levels of scholarship within the Muslim world - with some major scholars calling for a moratorium on the penalty until it is worked out.

    Prof. Raymond Harvey has one of the best write-ups on this from the Hanafi school's perspective:
    "Here and elsewhere, al-Sarakhsi uses ‘al-kufr al-tari’ as a term to refer to apostasy as opposed to ‘al-kufr al-asli’ – the initial state of disbelief. His usage would suggest that al-kufr al-tari’ could be fairly well equated to ‘apostasy simpliciter’ (apostasy without qualification, usually understood in this discourse as apostasy in faith without necessarily comprising other further actions against the community), while ‘irtadd’ (apostasy) and ‘al-israr ‘ala al-kufr’ ([violent] perseverance in rejecting faith) refer to apostasy with a distinct political connotation. In al-Sarakhsi’s view, it seems it is this political element on which the death penalty is ultimately to be predicated, on the basis of maslahah (general welfare). "
    https://ramonharvey.com/2011/07/29/al-sarakhsis-interpretation-of-apostasy-in-islam/

    The question at hand is not - has the ruling changed - it most certainly has not. The question is - are the conditions for its application no longer in existence with the rise of the modern nation state and its core foundations of citizenship. If it is deemed so, then it will logically follow that the death penalty is held in abeyance until such a time as the conditions arise again for its application.

    My personal feeling on how it will play out? The Muslim world is large and varied and differences of opinion on a matter such as this will naturally arise. I think the scholars of some countries will implement (or borrow) the principles outlined by Imam Sarakhsi (ra) from the Hanafi school and no longer implement the death penalty. Other will see no need for any change to be implemented because they will have determined that the concept of modern citizenship does not necessarily diverge enough from its concept in the medieval world and they will allow it to remain in place.

    Peace.

    , @utu
    has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates

    Why should he if he supports it? He believes and will preach all Muslim mambo-jambo including the myth that there is no "usury" in Muslim world or that what he practices does snot amount to usury. He is orthodox Muslim who will slit you through when the call comes but temporarily he was assigned on the ideological front to warm up the image Muslims by presenting himself as soft spoken and very understanding Muslim. His handlers spend fortune on Xanax to keep him going in this pretense.
  58. Talha says:
    @yyrvjh

    Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam.
     
    Aren't you neglecting Islam's secret weapon that keeps the sheep within the fold? The penalty for apostasy from Islam is ... death. Ah, but I'm sure that Talha, a modern, cultured Mohammedan living in the West, has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates. Using his real name and photo, he has gone on record saying that it has no place in today's world. Hasn't he?

    Hardly our secret weapon – most Muslims aren’t interested in converting to other faiths. When they apostate, they usually go the atheist route – again, you are most welcome to them.

    has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates

    Why would I? This is a question for qualified scholars to work out as it regards the rights of human beings in the light of sacred law – a grave and serious matter. I’m not interested about collecting virtue-signaling points and fame via secular-liberalism.

    As far as the penalty for apostasy – it certainly has been historically death across the board for all the schools – although some extinct schools did not consider it a capital offense. However, this is being discussed right now at the highest levels of scholarship within the Muslim world – with some major scholars calling for a moratorium on the penalty until it is worked out.

    Prof. Raymond Harvey has one of the best write-ups on this from the Hanafi school’s perspective:
    “Here and elsewhere, al-Sarakhsi uses ‘al-kufr al-tari’ as a term to refer to apostasy as opposed to ‘al-kufr al-asli’ – the initial state of disbelief. His usage would suggest that al-kufr al-tari’ could be fairly well equated to ‘apostasy simpliciter’ (apostasy without qualification, usually understood in this discourse as apostasy in faith without necessarily comprising other further actions against the community), while ‘irtadd’ (apostasy) and ‘al-israr ‘ala al-kufr’ ([violent] perseverance in rejecting faith) refer to apostasy with a distinct political connotation. In al-Sarakhsi’s view, it seems it is this political element on which the death penalty is ultimately to be predicated, on the basis of maslahah (general welfare). ”

    https://ramonharvey.com/2011/07/29/al-sarakhsis-interpretation-of-apostasy-in-islam/

    The question at hand is not – has the ruling changed – it most certainly has not. The question is – are the conditions for its application no longer in existence with the rise of the modern nation state and its core foundations of citizenship. If it is deemed so, then it will logically follow that the death penalty is held in abeyance until such a time as the conditions arise again for its application.

    My personal feeling on how it will play out? The Muslim world is large and varied and differences of opinion on a matter such as this will naturally arise. I think the scholars of some countries will implement (or borrow) the principles outlined by Imam Sarakhsi (ra) from the Hanafi school and no longer implement the death penalty. Other will see no need for any change to be implemented because they will have determined that the concept of modern citizenship does not necessarily diverge enough from its concept in the medieval world and they will allow it to remain in place.

    Peace.

    Read More
  59. Talha says:
    @Anonymous
    I'm not sure I read much into any numbers projected to 2050! Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam. As for current convert numbers, it's similar to the numbers converting to 'folk religions' which I can't say I've personally witnessed in any substantial number (aside from angsty teenage girls converting to Wicca).

    There was a time when polymaths like Imams Biruni (ra), Fakhr ud-din Razi (ra), Ibn Rushd (ra) and a whole host of others were certified scholars in sacred knowledge as well as secular sciences like astronomy, medicine, physics, etc.

     

    Spot on. It was largely Islam that passed the torch of science to Europe. In it's time, the Islamic golden age was a blessing for the whole world! Tell me, Talha, what went wrong?

    So you get your information from a devout Muslim “uncle” – got it. Do you know how shallow that is? He sounds like a very nice man, but what is his source? Did he study with someone?

     

    He is one of the better examples from around here, hence why I refer to him as 'kind' and 'educated'. Had I come out with some of the complete crap the more ignorant Muslims spout, you would probably have assumed I was trolling.

    You and I are in completely different situations here because you may approach them with a friendly 'salaamaleikum brother' and then initiate a friendly discussion about how the respected scholars of the Maliki school from the Sahel region in Mauritania feed their pet dogs with the same hands they were eating with. You could then back this up with further examples from your own learning and wrap it all in the proper Islamic nomenclature. They would thus be disarmed and obliged to bow to your superior Islamic knowledge. I doubt you'd convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.

    Should I try the same approach, my non-Muslim status would trigger an automatic immune response and my logical arguments would be summarily rejected. Should I attempt to continue the discussion, the Muslim will get defensive and possibly even dangerous. Non-Muslims learn very fast to hold their tongues and let Muslims spout whatever crap they want, because it's futile and dangerous to engage them.

    What should we do in this situation, Talha? Give them your phone number?

    Why doesn’t the practice of the experts in the field count? Why doesn’t mine or the far more Muslims I know than you do?

     

    Because you seem to live in an ivory tower. You seem to live in a world where the 'true Islam' is actually practiced. It sounds lovely, but I've never witnessed it first hand.

    I also have a Muslim friend of the same ilk as yourself. His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 'muslims' is a real Muslim. I congratulate you on being the 1 in 1000, Talha, but I am still deeply concerned about the other 999 who are likely to wreck havoc on Europe.

    Sure, but we have plenty of Sufi Orders to choose from, so why would we need to go elsewhere?

     

    Very true, but why restrict yourself? Could it not be that the Buddha had discovered something that the Sufis had not? Could it not be that the extreme simplicity of the Dao De Jing clicks better with some people's minds? Could it not be that European writers communicate better with European minds?

    Thanks – not interested. The Western world is indeed a material marvel, but why would that be a benchmark for a Muslim? One of the most important principles that the entire Islamic worldview is predicated on is; do not let the material world distract you from your primary spiritual goal
     
    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality? Ironically, one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows.

    “Know that the life of this world is merely a game and a diversion and ostentation and a cause of boasting among yourselves and trying to outdo one another in wealth and children: like the plant-growth after rain which delights the cultivators, but then it withers and you see it turning yellow, and then it becomes broken stubble. In the Next World there is terrible punishment but also forgiveness from God and His good pleasure. The life of this world is nothing but the enjoyment of delusion.” (57:20)
     
    At first this sounded identical to the teachings of the Buddha (and every other Hindu rishi) but then you fell back to the dumbed down idea of 'the next world'. Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it's clearly a 'for dummies' edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?

    One chooses what is more important and rolls with it. The West certainly has chosen her path and it is materially great and impressive…while spiritually on life support.

     

    I think we're witnessing two different things here, Talha. We're witnessing material greatness as a result of the past's spiritual greatness, and we're witnessing spiritual poverty as a result of a recent spiritual collapse. Personally I feel that the light has recently gone out in the West in the same way that the light long ago went out in the Islamic world. Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present's declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.

    There's two futures for Europe: Either self awareness continues to be buried deeper and deeper under an ever growing technological load and it's attendant environmental problems (see Idiocracy for a good view of this end game), or Europe re-ignites it's own spiritual quest and regains sufficient spiritual buoyancy to once again it become a tool-using culture.

    As for the Islamic world, what you do is really up to you. If you want to earnestly try to move forward spiritually and materially then we welcome and encourage your efforts. On the other hand, if you decide it's all too difficult and you'd rather snipe from the sides then your cultural stagnation will necessarily result in your ultimate destruction. I don't say that out of malice, I say it out of a simple view that when the technological and cultural differentials between two parts of the world reach a critical level, the more advanced part will naturally subsume the less advanced part. At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.

    It’s Aesop’s tale; as long as we have God, we are quite content to be the tortoise.
     
    This is the problem. Most of you don't.

    what went wrong?

    Mongols and Reconquista. If you look at the Muslim world, its major areas of scientific endeavor were four; Spain, Egypt, the Levant and Persia (or the Persianate areas). The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

    Scientific endeavor did continue in some areas under the Ottomans but the sun seemed to have set on much of the Muslim world with those initial losses. Then the West picked it up and rolled with it – though it took them some time to get there.

    I doubt you’d convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.

    Probably not – and that is likely a cultural thing. He is an old man from India – do you know what the dogs are like in India especially from the time he was growing up? Most don’t keep them as pets and many of them are feral and dangerous. Say as opposed to a Muslim culture that is comfortable with dogs – like the Turks.

    Now one thing I was just thinking is that I may have been making a wrong assumption. I assumed the man follows the Hanafi school like me and the vast majority of people in the Indian subcontinent, however, he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi’i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam – it isn’t – it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

    What should we do in this situation, Talha?

    I would definitely not approach them with antagonism by saying this and that are rdidiculous – you won’t get anywhere with anybody (Muslim or not) that way. Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject – likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified. It is a realm of human knowledge just like any other. I know a bunch of stuff about web development, but when it comes to medicine, I ask people in their field.

    His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 ‘muslims’ is a real Muslim.

    I wouldn’t put the number like that at all. I meet good, honest, decent Muslims everyday. The trouble makers are able to make noise and get attention far above their numbers. However, I will readily state that there is a big crisis about education in the Muslim world, both on the religious side and secular side – of this I am well aware and accept the criticism as valid.

    Very true, but why restrict yourself?

    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.

    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality?

    You can’t measure it – you can see its fruits though. From what I’ve seen, the Sufis (especially the Sufi-scholars) are some of the best examples of spiritual sages from within our tradition:

    https://www.amazon.com/Signs-Horizons-Meetings-Knowledge-Illumination/dp/0989364011

    one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows

    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people. They were very contented to God and even the natural world – seeing true dreams was a common phenomenon. My teacher mentioned that when he was setting out to go learn there, he had a dream and saw his teacher and the environment in it even though he had never been there before. When he arrived and he saw the place and his teacher just like in the dream, he was astonished. The man who would become his teacher leaned over gently to him and said, “It’s just like in the dream, isn’t it?” This kind of a thing is very common there – they are very connected to metaphysical reality and part of it is due to lack of distractions.

    Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it’s clearly a ‘for dummies’ edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?

    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn’t this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems. There is nothing illogical about a final Day of Judgement in which people are compensated for how they conducted their life. Christianity has similar doctrines because it is revealed by the same Divine source.

    Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present’s declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.

    Agree here. And I agree with you about Europe’s two choices – it must revive some form of a spiritual world view that helps it navigate life or borrow it from another culture. I want Europeans (and the West) to succeed – in this life and the next – whether I am allowed to stay among them or not. They are an important branch of Bani Adam and their spiritual and worldly success is a benefit to us all.

    At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.

    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don’t see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real. I have seen good signs though. There has been a spiritual revival across the Muslim world since the late eighties. The secular ideologies (like communism, Arab nationalism, etc.) have been relegated to minority status. The current phase is to make sure the revival is spiritual and expansive and principled and is not take over by narrow-minded, provincial-thinking extremists.

    This is the problem. Most of you don’t.

    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:
    “By Allah, I do not fear poverty for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them.” – reported in Muslim and Bukhari

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

     

    Aging organisms are always vulnerable to pathogens. It seems likely the Islamic world was already in decline.

    he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi’i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam – it isn’t – it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

     

    He is from Tamil Nadu, although I'm pretty sure his origins shouldn't be important to something as basic as whether or not man's best friend is unclean. Put simply, if two respected schools of Islamic thought have been disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have 'sound evidence' from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss. Perhaps the core text is so badly written and ambiguous that interpretation is more a case of creation and projection than understanding? Either way it would be a lot more honest in my eyes if they'd just drop the pretense and say "we don't know".

    Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject – likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified.
     
    Sorry Talha, I can't do this. I don't mean to dismiss your earnest suggestion out of hand, but you must understand it can be very dangerous for a non-Muslim to start asking these kind of questions. In my experience, Muslims treat the inner workings of Islam as a very private space. If I were to enter, they would either get very defensive and try to push me out, or perhaps take the other route and try to convert me. The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed. My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!

    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.
     
    That's great and I'm glad you read around. I've never suggested you 'switch' doctrines though, since to do so would be to jump out of one hole and fall straight back in another.

    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people.
     
    That's interesting. Although even if their material science is weak, I would expect to see some evidence of intelligent invention. Perhaps they have an advanced indigenous medical system?

    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn’t this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems.

     

    Lots of religions claim to have been revealed. If any self-certifying religion is sufficient grounds for a conversion, then your Islamic faith is accidental. You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon, riding around on a mountain bike with a little white-on-black name badge trying to convert people to the One True Religion, as revealed by Joseph Smith (pbuh).

    All of these just-trust-me religions are logical holes, Talha. A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.

    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don’t see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real.

     

    Right. I wasn't thinking in specific terms. I was actually thinking of extreme examples like the Australian Aborigines, and also of colonisation of Indonesia and Malaya by their respective European powers. Thailand would be the shining light here since, aside from a brief occupation by the Japanese, they maintained their sovereignty (and royal lineage) all throughout the colonial period.

    In a way, this process is already in full swing in the Muslim word. Turkey has done a great job of holding their sovereignty, while so many Muslim countries in the Middle East are now ruled by plutocratic sociopaths or recently installed 'democratic' regimes, all of who take orders from overseas. There's also the issue of that poisonous little country that Muslims detest and yet are simply too weak to do anything about.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.

    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:

     

    You misunderstood. I wasn't saying Muslims weren't content. I was saying that most Muslims don't have God. God infinite and formless and can only experienced by men who are truly free, not men who revere outdated doctrine and can't even decide whether a dog is clean or not.
  60. utu says:
    @yyrvjh

    Christianity is indeed bleeding like crazy but the religions are so similar that the same fate probably awaits Islam.
     
    Aren't you neglecting Islam's secret weapon that keeps the sheep within the fold? The penalty for apostasy from Islam is ... death. Ah, but I'm sure that Talha, a modern, cultured Mohammedan living in the West, has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates. Using his real name and photo, he has gone on record saying that it has no place in today's world. Hasn't he?

    has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates

    Why should he if he supports it? He believes and will preach all Muslim mambo-jambo including the myth that there is no “usury” in Muslim world or that what he practices does snot amount to usury. He is orthodox Muslim who will slit you through when the call comes but temporarily he was assigned on the ideological front to warm up the image Muslims by presenting himself as soft spoken and very understanding Muslim. His handlers spend fortune on Xanax to keep him going in this pretense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yyrvjh
    Talha and Xanax? I don't think so. Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned. These people think in decades or even centuries. I rather think Talha is pleased as punch.
  61. yyrvjh says:
    @utu
    has forcefully spoken out about death penalty for apostates

    Why should he if he supports it? He believes and will preach all Muslim mambo-jambo including the myth that there is no "usury" in Muslim world or that what he practices does snot amount to usury. He is orthodox Muslim who will slit you through when the call comes but temporarily he was assigned on the ideological front to warm up the image Muslims by presenting himself as soft spoken and very understanding Muslim. His handlers spend fortune on Xanax to keep him going in this pretense.

    Talha and Xanax? I don’t think so. Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned. These people think in decades or even centuries. I rather think Talha is pleased as punch.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned.
     
    Apparently - but who's doing the planning?

    These people think in decades or even centuries.
     
    No, we're actually pretty dorky and disorganized - look at our countries. The only reason people are wetting their beds about us is because they've had a colossal collapse of social norms in the West (in a very short time span) and can't seem to get the baby train back on the tracks. I had dinner with a convert this evening (German-Polish) background. The guy has two kids and one on the way. His sister (who is non-Muslim)? None. His cousin is on track to have maybe one with his lawyer wife - they just love to take vacations to exotic places all the time.

    We just tend to have stronger families.

    Nah man - you gotta do like that Elon Musk guy - now that's an impressive genetic legacy! He's doing his part!

    Peace.
  62. Talha says:
    @yyrvjh
    Talha and Xanax? I don't think so. Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned. These people think in decades or even centuries. I rather think Talha is pleased as punch.

    Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned.

    Apparently – but who’s doing the planning?

    These people think in decades or even centuries.

    No, we’re actually pretty dorky and disorganized – look at our countries. The only reason people are wetting their beds about us is because they’ve had a colossal collapse of social norms in the West (in a very short time span) and can’t seem to get the baby train back on the tracks. I had dinner with a convert this evening (German-Polish) background. The guy has two kids and one on the way. His sister (who is non-Muslim)? None. His cousin is on track to have maybe one with his lawyer wife – they just love to take vacations to exotic places all the time.

    We just tend to have stronger families.

    Nah man – you gotta do like that Elon Musk guy – now that’s an impressive genetic legacy! He’s doing his part!

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yyrvjh
    Yeah, who is doing the planning? Obviously, Arabs -- armed with their murderous creed and trillions of petrodollars -- have been doing a lot of the planning, as amply documented by Bat Yeor ("Eurabia") and more recently evidenced by Saudi Arabia's generous offer to give 200 mosques, free and gratis, to Germany for its new Muslim inhabitants while offering to take exactly zero (0) Muslim so-called refugees (as refugees, not guest workers tied to availability of work) themselves. It's not the Saudis alone, also rubbing their hands with glee are Muslim Brotherhood, various Pak sects and ISI, and on and on. Takeover of "Rome" (= both the Vatican and what used to be the Western Roman Empire) is in Muslim DNA.

    Then again, even with fierce determination and money out the wazoo, the Moslems could not have achieved what they already have and the much worse that is yet to come. A great many powerful people in the West have betrayed their own folks and collaborated with the enemy.

    I'll name just three by way of example. Peter Sutherland, an Irish catholic who is (or used to be, haven't checked) the UN's migration commissioner, calls for Euro nations's ethnic homogeneity to be destroyed.

    George Soros, born a Hungarian Jew, is hated in every nation where he has meddled including Israel, yet carries on giving BILLIONS to open-borders NGOs.

    Angela Merkel, German chancellor since 2005, is the daughter of a Protestant minister and since 2015, threw all legal and constitutional safeguards overboard to welcome in millions of Muslims, most of them turning out to be either useless as workers in a modern economy ... or worse, criminals, terrorists and welfare cheats.

    What motivates these three? Answers on a postcard, please. (It can't be demographics -- a hundred years ago, Germany had fewer people on nearly twice as much land as today and was not underpopulated. The non-reproducing Westerners will soon have "boiled off", leaving the reproducing kind. Japan is Exhibit No. 1 that a shrinking, aging population need not panic and import enemies en masse.)

    I'd like to see more investigation of Soros, however. Think he's paying not only for faux-humanitarian NGOs, but also priming the pump by selectively supporting media, journalists, and related institutions/initiatives. And I'd also like to see someone dig into how he became an 11-digit net worth man. Maybe Bill Gates is a self-made billionaire, as a pioneer in a new field. But in as old and established a field as finance? Who gave Soros his first 100 million to play with and upped that stake at regular intervals (but with strings attached)?

    Wouldn't be surprised if the hateful and evil Saudis (not that other Muslims are much better) have been behind Soros all this time. Plausible deniability and all that.

    It's easy to underestimate Muslims, they are by and large stupid, brutish and dull. Even the Hindus of India are continuing to make that mistake, eventually it will cost them Kashmir. However, as Tariq Ramadan and our friend Talha prove, they have enough smart, eloquent and determined people to lead the dull masses. Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake, they perceive clearly western weaknesses and skillfully exploit them to their advantage.

    Lenin said the West would sell the communists the rope to hang it with. We are laying our necks on the chopping block for scimitar-wielding Mohamedans all the while profusely apologizing to them for being so much trouble.

  63. yyrvjh says:
    @Talha

    Islamic infiltration of western countries is proceeding as planned.
     
    Apparently - but who's doing the planning?

    These people think in decades or even centuries.
     
    No, we're actually pretty dorky and disorganized - look at our countries. The only reason people are wetting their beds about us is because they've had a colossal collapse of social norms in the West (in a very short time span) and can't seem to get the baby train back on the tracks. I had dinner with a convert this evening (German-Polish) background. The guy has two kids and one on the way. His sister (who is non-Muslim)? None. His cousin is on track to have maybe one with his lawyer wife - they just love to take vacations to exotic places all the time.

    We just tend to have stronger families.

    Nah man - you gotta do like that Elon Musk guy - now that's an impressive genetic legacy! He's doing his part!

    Peace.

    Yeah, who is doing the planning? Obviously, Arabs — armed with their murderous creed and trillions of petrodollars — have been doing a lot of the planning, as amply documented by Bat Yeor (“Eurabia”) and more recently evidenced by Saudi Arabia’s generous offer to give 200 mosques, free and gratis, to Germany for its new Muslim inhabitants while offering to take exactly zero (0) Muslim so-called refugees (as refugees, not guest workers tied to availability of work) themselves. It’s not the Saudis alone, also rubbing their hands with glee are Muslim Brotherhood, various Pak sects and ISI, and on and on. Takeover of “Rome” (= both the Vatican and what used to be the Western Roman Empire) is in Muslim DNA.

    Then again, even with fierce determination and money out the wazoo, the Moslems could not have achieved what they already have and the much worse that is yet to come. A great many powerful people in the West have betrayed their own folks and collaborated with the enemy.

    I’ll name just three by way of example. Peter Sutherland, an Irish catholic who is (or used to be, haven’t checked) the UN’s migration commissioner, calls for Euro nations’s ethnic homogeneity to be destroyed.

    George Soros, born a Hungarian Jew, is hated in every nation where he has meddled including Israel, yet carries on giving BILLIONS to open-borders NGOs.

    Angela Merkel, German chancellor since 2005, is the daughter of a Protestant minister and since 2015, threw all legal and constitutional safeguards overboard to welcome in millions of Muslims, most of them turning out to be either useless as workers in a modern economy … or worse, criminals, terrorists and welfare cheats.

    What motivates these three? Answers on a postcard, please. (It can’t be demographics — a hundred years ago, Germany had fewer people on nearly twice as much land as today and was not underpopulated. The non-reproducing Westerners will soon have “boiled off”, leaving the reproducing kind. Japan is Exhibit No. 1 that a shrinking, aging population need not panic and import enemies en masse.)

    I’d like to see more investigation of Soros, however. Think he’s paying not only for faux-humanitarian NGOs, but also priming the pump by selectively supporting media, journalists, and related institutions/initiatives. And I’d also like to see someone dig into how he became an 11-digit net worth man. Maybe Bill Gates is a self-made billionaire, as a pioneer in a new field. But in as old and established a field as finance? Who gave Soros his first 100 million to play with and upped that stake at regular intervals (but with strings attached)?

    Wouldn’t be surprised if the hateful and evil Saudis (not that other Muslims are much better) have been behind Soros all this time. Plausible deniability and all that.

    It’s easy to underestimate Muslims, they are by and large stupid, brutish and dull. Even the Hindus of India are continuing to make that mistake, eventually it will cost them Kashmir. However, as Tariq Ramadan and our friend Talha prove, they have enough smart, eloquent and determined people to lead the dull masses. Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake, they perceive clearly western weaknesses and skillfully exploit them to their advantage.

    Lenin said the West would sell the communists the rope to hang it with. We are laying our necks on the chopping block for scimitar-wielding Mohamedans all the while profusely apologizing to them for being so much trouble.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake

    I like it. One has to press Talha a bit and one can start hearing the rattle. I saw it myself during the futile discussion on allegedly usury free Muslim banking. All he does is to make good impression, improve Muslim PR and if possible to proselytize.
    , @Talha

    Obviously, Arabs
     
    LOL! Dude this is awesome! I was totally expecting "Da Jews" - but then again, you are citing Bat Yeor as a source so that's obviously not your angle.

    So I guess the Saudis (with less than half the GDP of Germany alone), a people who were literally herding goats and camels two generations ago have completely outflanked Europe in geo-politics. That is an incredible admission!

    I guess them bad boys have the West wrapped around their fingers:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=runYPf4Q2g8

    I mean even Pakistan was smart enough to say "no thanks" when the Saudis tried to pressure them into a coalition to invade Yemen. If the Pakistanis can figure out what their self interests are vis-a-vis Saudi and Europeans can't - well...you guys are seriously screwed.

    Peace.
  64. utu says:
    @yyrvjh
    Yeah, who is doing the planning? Obviously, Arabs -- armed with their murderous creed and trillions of petrodollars -- have been doing a lot of the planning, as amply documented by Bat Yeor ("Eurabia") and more recently evidenced by Saudi Arabia's generous offer to give 200 mosques, free and gratis, to Germany for its new Muslim inhabitants while offering to take exactly zero (0) Muslim so-called refugees (as refugees, not guest workers tied to availability of work) themselves. It's not the Saudis alone, also rubbing their hands with glee are Muslim Brotherhood, various Pak sects and ISI, and on and on. Takeover of "Rome" (= both the Vatican and what used to be the Western Roman Empire) is in Muslim DNA.

    Then again, even with fierce determination and money out the wazoo, the Moslems could not have achieved what they already have and the much worse that is yet to come. A great many powerful people in the West have betrayed their own folks and collaborated with the enemy.

    I'll name just three by way of example. Peter Sutherland, an Irish catholic who is (or used to be, haven't checked) the UN's migration commissioner, calls for Euro nations's ethnic homogeneity to be destroyed.

    George Soros, born a Hungarian Jew, is hated in every nation where he has meddled including Israel, yet carries on giving BILLIONS to open-borders NGOs.

    Angela Merkel, German chancellor since 2005, is the daughter of a Protestant minister and since 2015, threw all legal and constitutional safeguards overboard to welcome in millions of Muslims, most of them turning out to be either useless as workers in a modern economy ... or worse, criminals, terrorists and welfare cheats.

    What motivates these three? Answers on a postcard, please. (It can't be demographics -- a hundred years ago, Germany had fewer people on nearly twice as much land as today and was not underpopulated. The non-reproducing Westerners will soon have "boiled off", leaving the reproducing kind. Japan is Exhibit No. 1 that a shrinking, aging population need not panic and import enemies en masse.)

    I'd like to see more investigation of Soros, however. Think he's paying not only for faux-humanitarian NGOs, but also priming the pump by selectively supporting media, journalists, and related institutions/initiatives. And I'd also like to see someone dig into how he became an 11-digit net worth man. Maybe Bill Gates is a self-made billionaire, as a pioneer in a new field. But in as old and established a field as finance? Who gave Soros his first 100 million to play with and upped that stake at regular intervals (but with strings attached)?

    Wouldn't be surprised if the hateful and evil Saudis (not that other Muslims are much better) have been behind Soros all this time. Plausible deniability and all that.

    It's easy to underestimate Muslims, they are by and large stupid, brutish and dull. Even the Hindus of India are continuing to make that mistake, eventually it will cost them Kashmir. However, as Tariq Ramadan and our friend Talha prove, they have enough smart, eloquent and determined people to lead the dull masses. Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake, they perceive clearly western weaknesses and skillfully exploit them to their advantage.

    Lenin said the West would sell the communists the rope to hang it with. We are laying our necks on the chopping block for scimitar-wielding Mohamedans all the while profusely apologizing to them for being so much trouble.

    Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake

    I like it. One has to press Talha a bit and one can start hearing the rattle. I saw it myself during the futile discussion on allegedly usury free Muslim banking. All he does is to make good impression, improve Muslim PR and if possible to proselytize.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey utu,

    All he does is to make good impression
     
    Thanks...

    improve Muslim PR
     
    yeah...

    if possible to proselytize
     
    and...?

    Of course that's what I do. Or was my reaction supposed to be; "Darn, if it wasn't for you meddling kids and that blasted dog!"

    Bro, I am in my early 40s, I have four kids - I have way better things to do than banter on the internet with anonymous strangers. Don't you?

    But, having consulted with one of my teachers, he thought there was benefit to what I was doing. And I can see other people on UNZ have benefited from having a Muslim that is willing to have a frank and honest discussion on various topics related to Islam - whether they agree with me or not. I have a limited amount of time in my life and I only live once - which is why I avoid getting into tit-for-tat school-yard insult exchanges. I'm here to earn deeds that will balance my scale in my favor on the Day of Judgement - what are you here for?

    Peace.
  65. Talha says:
    @yyrvjh
    Yeah, who is doing the planning? Obviously, Arabs -- armed with their murderous creed and trillions of petrodollars -- have been doing a lot of the planning, as amply documented by Bat Yeor ("Eurabia") and more recently evidenced by Saudi Arabia's generous offer to give 200 mosques, free and gratis, to Germany for its new Muslim inhabitants while offering to take exactly zero (0) Muslim so-called refugees (as refugees, not guest workers tied to availability of work) themselves. It's not the Saudis alone, also rubbing their hands with glee are Muslim Brotherhood, various Pak sects and ISI, and on and on. Takeover of "Rome" (= both the Vatican and what used to be the Western Roman Empire) is in Muslim DNA.

    Then again, even with fierce determination and money out the wazoo, the Moslems could not have achieved what they already have and the much worse that is yet to come. A great many powerful people in the West have betrayed their own folks and collaborated with the enemy.

    I'll name just three by way of example. Peter Sutherland, an Irish catholic who is (or used to be, haven't checked) the UN's migration commissioner, calls for Euro nations's ethnic homogeneity to be destroyed.

    George Soros, born a Hungarian Jew, is hated in every nation where he has meddled including Israel, yet carries on giving BILLIONS to open-borders NGOs.

    Angela Merkel, German chancellor since 2005, is the daughter of a Protestant minister and since 2015, threw all legal and constitutional safeguards overboard to welcome in millions of Muslims, most of them turning out to be either useless as workers in a modern economy ... or worse, criminals, terrorists and welfare cheats.

    What motivates these three? Answers on a postcard, please. (It can't be demographics -- a hundred years ago, Germany had fewer people on nearly twice as much land as today and was not underpopulated. The non-reproducing Westerners will soon have "boiled off", leaving the reproducing kind. Japan is Exhibit No. 1 that a shrinking, aging population need not panic and import enemies en masse.)

    I'd like to see more investigation of Soros, however. Think he's paying not only for faux-humanitarian NGOs, but also priming the pump by selectively supporting media, journalists, and related institutions/initiatives. And I'd also like to see someone dig into how he became an 11-digit net worth man. Maybe Bill Gates is a self-made billionaire, as a pioneer in a new field. But in as old and established a field as finance? Who gave Soros his first 100 million to play with and upped that stake at regular intervals (but with strings attached)?

    Wouldn't be surprised if the hateful and evil Saudis (not that other Muslims are much better) have been behind Soros all this time. Plausible deniability and all that.

    It's easy to underestimate Muslims, they are by and large stupid, brutish and dull. Even the Hindus of India are continuing to make that mistake, eventually it will cost them Kashmir. However, as Tariq Ramadan and our friend Talha prove, they have enough smart, eloquent and determined people to lead the dull masses. Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake, they perceive clearly western weaknesses and skillfully exploit them to their advantage.

    Lenin said the West would sell the communists the rope to hang it with. We are laying our necks on the chopping block for scimitar-wielding Mohamedans all the while profusely apologizing to them for being so much trouble.

    Obviously, Arabs

    LOL! Dude this is awesome! I was totally expecting “Da Jews” – but then again, you are citing Bat Yeor as a source so that’s obviously not your angle.

    So I guess the Saudis (with less than half the GDP of Germany alone), a people who were literally herding goats and camels two generations ago have completely outflanked Europe in geo-politics. That is an incredible admission!

    I guess them bad boys have the West wrapped around their fingers:

    I mean even Pakistan was smart enough to say “no thanks” when the Saudis tried to pressure them into a coalition to invade Yemen. If the Pakistanis can figure out what their self interests are vis-a-vis Saudi and Europeans can’t – well…you guys are seriously screwed.

    Peace.

    Read More
  66. Talha says:
    @utu
    Smooth as silk and poisonous as a rattlesnake

    I like it. One has to press Talha a bit and one can start hearing the rattle. I saw it myself during the futile discussion on allegedly usury free Muslim banking. All he does is to make good impression, improve Muslim PR and if possible to proselytize.

    Hey utu,

    All he does is to make good impression

    Thanks…

    improve Muslim PR

    yeah…

    if possible to proselytize

    and…?

    Of course that’s what I do. Or was my reaction supposed to be; “Darn, if it wasn’t for you meddling kids and that blasted dog!”

    Bro, I am in my early 40s, I have four kids – I have way better things to do than banter on the internet with anonymous strangers. Don’t you?

    But, having consulted with one of my teachers, he thought there was benefit to what I was doing. And I can see other people on UNZ have benefited from having a Muslim that is willing to have a frank and honest discussion on various topics related to Islam – whether they agree with me or not. I have a limited amount of time in my life and I only live once – which is why I avoid getting into tit-for-tat school-yard insult exchanges. I’m here to earn deeds that will balance my scale in my favor on the Day of Judgement – what are you here for?

    Peace.

    Read More
  67. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    what went wrong?
     
    Mongols and Reconquista. If you look at the Muslim world, its major areas of scientific endeavor were four; Spain, Egypt, the Levant and Persia (or the Persianate areas). The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

    Scientific endeavor did continue in some areas under the Ottomans but the sun seemed to have set on much of the Muslim world with those initial losses. Then the West picked it up and rolled with it - though it took them some time to get there.

    I doubt you’d convince my neighbour to be comfortable touching a dog, but he would certainly be bound to tolerate you doing the same.
     
    Probably not - and that is likely a cultural thing. He is an old man from India - do you know what the dogs are like in India especially from the time he was growing up? Most don't keep them as pets and many of them are feral and dangerous. Say as opposed to a Muslim culture that is comfortable with dogs - like the Turks.

    Now one thing I was just thinking is that I may have been making a wrong assumption. I assumed the man follows the Hanafi school like me and the vast majority of people in the Indian subcontinent, however, he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi'i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam - it isn't - it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

    What should we do in this situation, Talha?
     
    I would definitely not approach them with antagonism by saying this and that are rdidiculous - you won't get anywhere with anybody (Muslim or not) that way. Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject - likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified. It is a realm of human knowledge just like any other. I know a bunch of stuff about web development, but when it comes to medicine, I ask people in their field.

    His thesis is that only 1 in 1000 ‘muslims’ is a real Muslim.
     
    I wouldn't put the number like that at all. I meet good, honest, decent Muslims everyday. The trouble makers are able to make noise and get attention far above their numbers. However, I will readily state that there is a big crisis about education in the Muslim world, both on the religious side and secular side - of this I am well aware and accept the criticism as valid.

    Very true, but why restrict yourself?
     
    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.

    Good principal, but how do you measure spirituality?
     
    You can't measure it - you can see its fruits though. From what I've seen, the Sufis (especially the Sufi-scholars) are some of the best examples of spiritual sages from within our tradition:
    https://www.amazon.com/Signs-Horizons-Meetings-Knowledge-Illumination/dp/0989364011

    one of the indicators of a spiritually advanced civilization is the material advancement that naturally follows
     
    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people. They were very contented to God and even the natural world - seeing true dreams was a common phenomenon. My teacher mentioned that when he was setting out to go learn there, he had a dream and saw his teacher and the environment in it even though he had never been there before. When he arrived and he saw the place and his teacher just like in the dream, he was astonished. The man who would become his teacher leaned over gently to him and said, "It's just like in the dream, isn't it?" This kind of a thing is very common there - they are very connected to metaphysical reality and part of it is due to lack of distractions.

    Why is it that Christianity and Islam both hold dear this concept of one single eternal afterlife, when it’s clearly a ‘for dummies’ edition of the far more intricate and divine ideas of karma and rebirth, as elucidated by the Indic religions?
     
    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn't this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems. There is nothing illogical about a final Day of Judgement in which people are compensated for how they conducted their life. Christianity has similar doctrines because it is revealed by the same Divine source.

    Everything about technocracies vs tool using cultures is just about the present’s declining self awareness drowning in the tidal wave of historical scientific advancements.
     
    Agree here. And I agree with you about Europe's two choices - it must revive some form of a spiritual world view that helps it navigate life or borrow it from another culture. I want Europeans (and the West) to succeed - in this life and the next - whether I am allowed to stay among them or not. They are an important branch of Bani Adam and their spiritual and worldly success is a benefit to us all.

    At this point the fate of the Muslim people and culture will be entirely in the hands of the victor, whomever that may be.
     
    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don't see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real. I have seen good signs though. There has been a spiritual revival across the Muslim world since the late eighties. The secular ideologies (like communism, Arab nationalism, etc.) have been relegated to minority status. The current phase is to make sure the revival is spiritual and expansive and principled and is not take over by narrow-minded, provincial-thinking extremists.

    This is the problem. Most of you don’t.
     
    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:
    "By Allah, I do not fear poverty for you, but rather I fear you will be given the wealth of the world just as it was given to those before you. You will compete for it just as they competed for it and it will destroy you just as it destroyed them." - reported in Muslim and Bukhari

    Peace.

    The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

    Aging organisms are always vulnerable to pathogens. It seems likely the Islamic world was already in decline.

    he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi’i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam – it isn’t – it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

    He is from Tamil Nadu, although I’m pretty sure his origins shouldn’t be important to something as basic as whether or not man’s best friend is unclean. Put simply, if two respected schools of Islamic thought have been disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have ‘sound evidence’ from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss. Perhaps the core text is so badly written and ambiguous that interpretation is more a case of creation and projection than understanding? Either way it would be a lot more honest in my eyes if they’d just drop the pretense and say “we don’t know”.

    Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject – likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified.

    Sorry Talha, I can’t do this. I don’t mean to dismiss your earnest suggestion out of hand, but you must understand it can be very dangerous for a non-Muslim to start asking these kind of questions. In my experience, Muslims treat the inner workings of Islam as a very private space. If I were to enter, they would either get very defensive and try to push me out, or perhaps take the other route and try to convert me. The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed. My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!

    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.

    That’s great and I’m glad you read around. I’ve never suggested you ‘switch’ doctrines though, since to do so would be to jump out of one hole and fall straight back in another.

    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people.

    That’s interesting. Although even if their material science is weak, I would expect to see some evidence of intelligent invention. Perhaps they have an advanced indigenous medical system?

    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn’t this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems.

    Lots of religions claim to have been revealed. If any self-certifying religion is sufficient grounds for a conversion, then your Islamic faith is accidental. You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon, riding around on a mountain bike with a little white-on-black name badge trying to convert people to the One True Religion, as revealed by Joseph Smith (pbuh).

    All of these just-trust-me religions are logical holes, Talha. A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.

    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don’t see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real.

    Right. I wasn’t thinking in specific terms. I was actually thinking of extreme examples like the Australian Aborigines, and also of colonisation of Indonesia and Malaya by their respective European powers. Thailand would be the shining light here since, aside from a brief occupation by the Japanese, they maintained their sovereignty (and royal lineage) all throughout the colonial period.

    In a way, this process is already in full swing in the Muslim word. Turkey has done a great job of holding their sovereignty, while so many Muslim countries in the Middle East are now ruled by plutocratic sociopaths or recently installed ‘democratic’ regimes, all of who take orders from overseas. There’s also the issue of that poisonous little country that Muslims detest and yet are simply too weak to do anything about.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.

    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:

    You misunderstood. I wasn’t saying Muslims weren’t content. I was saying that most Muslims don’t have God. God infinite and formless and can only experienced by men who are truly free, not men who revere outdated doctrine and can’t even decide whether a dog is clean or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    his origins shouldn’t be important to something as basic as whether or not man’s best friend is unclean
     
    I don't see why this is the case. Depending on where one is from in the world, dogs are; 1) man's best friend or 2) dangerous feral animals or 3) what Mom's cooking for dinner. Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?

    Tamil Nadu is on the southern part of India - and that area was only partly ruled by the Mughal Empire which implemented the Hanafi school, it is very easy to understand why he might be form the part where the religion was spread by travelers and traders from Yemen (who follow the Shafi'i school).


    disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have ‘sound evidence’ from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss
     
    It's not a basic issue - it's minutiae. The schools have disagreed over many things; some minor, some major. Some fold their hands across their belly in prayer, some let them hang at the sides. We feel the acceptability and respect of differences of opinion are a blessing and mercy from God. We have been blessed with unity in religion despite our differences. You can take a man from Senegal and drop him into a mosque on the island of Java and he'll be able to join a congregation and know exactly what to do.

    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists - most of us don't like that kind on inflexibility.


    they’d just drop the pretense and say “we don’t know”.
     
    Scholars almost always end their pronouncement on a ruling with the words, "and God knows best" - meaning; I have made my attempt to understand what the ruling is, but only God knows what is actually correct.

    The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed.
     
    If you say so - but it doesn't sound like you've ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven't seen any act in the manner you're talking about.

    My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!
     
    I don't understand what this means.

    You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon
     
    True - and I'm very thankful this was not the case.

    A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.
     
    Islam has rules and a creed. It's just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own - this is not the religion for you. It translates to "submission" - the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.
     
    All of that is just fine as long as we don't lose our religion like so many North-East Asians. We have our priorities and others have theirs. Being dirt poor and retaining our faith is preferable to being rich and losing it:
    "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" - Mark 8:36

    not men who revere outdated doctrine
     
    We're fine thanks - we like what we have.

    can’t even decide whether a dog is clean or not
     
    We have; it is for some and isn't for others. Why is it so important that there is only one answer on this? I mean, we do indeed have a unified position on whether they can be eaten or not - they can't. I would assume that is more important to dog lovers.

    Peace.

  68. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    The Mongols ransacked much of Persia and the Levant (completely destroying certain major population centers). Spain was also lost a couple of centuries after.

     

    Aging organisms are always vulnerable to pathogens. It seems likely the Islamic world was already in decline.

    he may actually be from the Malabar Coast, in which case he is actually correct about the purity restrictions with respect to dogs. The Shafi’i school is prevalent there and it does consider dogs to be impure (and have their evidence from sacred texts for their position) and he is acting accordingly. The one thing I would take issue with is if he claims this is the position of Islam – it isn’t – it is simply one interpretation as opposed to other completely valid interpretations (that also bring sound evidence).

     

    He is from Tamil Nadu, although I'm pretty sure his origins shouldn't be important to something as basic as whether or not man's best friend is unclean. Put simply, if two respected schools of Islamic thought have been disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have 'sound evidence' from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss. Perhaps the core text is so badly written and ambiguous that interpretation is more a case of creation and projection than understanding? Either way it would be a lot more honest in my eyes if they'd just drop the pretense and say "we don't know".

    Instead, ask them where theyy got their information from? Was it a book? Was it a scholar? And ask them is this the only position in Islam on the subject – likely it is not. If you want to know what Islamic doctrine says (especially with regard to rules and regulations) it is best to ask someone qualified.
     
    Sorry Talha, I can't do this. I don't mean to dismiss your earnest suggestion out of hand, but you must understand it can be very dangerous for a non-Muslim to start asking these kind of questions. In my experience, Muslims treat the inner workings of Islam as a very private space. If I were to enter, they would either get very defensive and try to push me out, or perhaps take the other route and try to convert me. The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed. My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!

    Well, one can always glean insights from others. I have a book by Soren Kierkegaard who is one of my favorite Christian thinkers. Very spiritual man. Gleaning insights has nothing to do with switching doctrines though.
     
    That's great and I'm glad you read around. I've never suggested you 'switch' doctrines though, since to do so would be to jump out of one hole and fall straight back in another.

    Not sure I agree with this. My teacher who traveled to the Sahel region described the people there as both dirt poor and very, very spiritual people.
     
    That's interesting. Although even if their material science is weak, I would expect to see some evidence of intelligent invention. Perhaps they have an advanced indigenous medical system?

    You are proceeding from an assumption; these are all doctrines that were formulated by men, so why isn’t this one as complex as this one, etc. The issue is, we claim the religion was revealed. You may take issue with that, but that is our claim. God certainly could have put into place a cosmic framework of reincarnation and climbing the ladder, but our contention is that He did not and He informed us of that fact. He brought forth creation and can set the rules as He pleases; as simple or complex as He deems.

     

    Lots of religions claim to have been revealed. If any self-certifying religion is sufficient grounds for a conversion, then your Islamic faith is accidental. You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon, riding around on a mountain bike with a little white-on-black name badge trying to convert people to the One True Religion, as revealed by Joseph Smith (pbuh).

    All of these just-trust-me religions are logical holes, Talha. A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.

    I also agree with the thrust of this paragraph. Though I don’t see Europe trying to colonize the Muslim world as in the past, the threat of creeping technocracy (as an ideology and world view) and the monoculture it demands is quite real.

     

    Right. I wasn't thinking in specific terms. I was actually thinking of extreme examples like the Australian Aborigines, and also of colonisation of Indonesia and Malaya by their respective European powers. Thailand would be the shining light here since, aside from a brief occupation by the Japanese, they maintained their sovereignty (and royal lineage) all throughout the colonial period.

    In a way, this process is already in full swing in the Muslim word. Turkey has done a great job of holding their sovereignty, while so many Muslim countries in the Middle East are now ruled by plutocratic sociopaths or recently installed 'democratic' regimes, all of who take orders from overseas. There's also the issue of that poisonous little country that Muslims detest and yet are simply too weak to do anything about.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.

    Again, I will agree that too many Muslim are not content with a humble place in the world (especially many coming to the West) as long as we remain tied to God:

     

    You misunderstood. I wasn't saying Muslims weren't content. I was saying that most Muslims don't have God. God infinite and formless and can only experienced by men who are truly free, not men who revere outdated doctrine and can't even decide whether a dog is clean or not.

    his origins shouldn’t be important to something as basic as whether or not man’s best friend is unclean

    I don’t see why this is the case. Depending on where one is from in the world, dogs are; 1) man’s best friend or 2) dangerous feral animals or 3) what Mom’s cooking for dinner. Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?

    Tamil Nadu is on the southern part of India – and that area was only partly ruled by the Mughal Empire which implemented the Hanafi school, it is very easy to understand why he might be form the part where the religion was spread by travelers and traders from Yemen (who follow the Shafi’i school).

    disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have ‘sound evidence’ from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss

    It’s not a basic issue – it’s minutiae. The schools have disagreed over many things; some minor, some major. Some fold their hands across their belly in prayer, some let them hang at the sides. We feel the acceptability and respect of differences of opinion are a blessing and mercy from God. We have been blessed with unity in religion despite our differences. You can take a man from Senegal and drop him into a mosque on the island of Java and he’ll be able to join a congregation and know exactly what to do.

    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists – most of us don’t like that kind on inflexibility.

    they’d just drop the pretense and say “we don’t know”.

    Scholars almost always end their pronouncement on a ruling with the words, “and God knows best” – meaning; I have made my attempt to understand what the ruling is, but only God knows what is actually correct.

    The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed.

    If you say so – but it doesn’t sound like you’ve ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven’t seen any act in the manner you’re talking about.

    My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!

    I don’t understand what this means.

    You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon

    True – and I’m very thankful this was not the case.

    A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.

    Islam has rules and a creed. It’s just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own – this is not the religion for you. It translates to “submission” – the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.

    All of that is just fine as long as we don’t lose our religion like so many North-East Asians. We have our priorities and others have theirs. Being dirt poor and retaining our faith is preferable to being rich and losing it:
    “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” – Mark 8:36

    not men who revere outdated doctrine

    We’re fine thanks – we like what we have.

    can’t even decide whether a dog is clean or not

    We have; it is for some and isn’t for others. Why is it so important that there is only one answer on this? I mean, we do indeed have a unified position on whether they can be eaten or not – they can’t. I would assume that is more important to dog lovers.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?
     
    Because so many Muslims pass this off an an inalienable tenant of Islam. I'm beginning to understand that so many things that Muslims pass off as divine revealed truth may be just their cultural or personal preference. In which case, they're not being holy, they're just being pig-headed!


    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists – most of us don’t like that kind on inflexibility.
     
    I'd agree that these are the worst offenders, but I see the same inflexibility emerging to a lesser extent in most of the Muslims that I meet.

    If you say so – but it doesn’t sound like you’ve ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven’t seen any act in the manner you’re talking about.
     
    Possibly not! My experiences are based on many encounters with many Muslims across many countries in the course of daily business and/or travel. These are the majority and for me they are the ones who count. Whether or not this is True Islam is irrelevant; it is real world Islam.

    I don’t understand what this means.
     
    It means that logical reasoning in Islam is so weak that only someone with a vested interest would be able to swallow it. The vested interest in this case is tribal membership, and the hidden threat of rejecting Islam's weak logic is social alienation.

    What I'm saying is that, in my opinion, so much of what passes for logic in Islam is so laughably weak that only a Muslim could take it seriously. To give just one example, I was discussing Islam with a young man outside a Masjid in Malaysia, and he told me the reason that alcohol is forbidden is because "if you are drunk, you might forget your prayers". For me, it's laughably ignorant. For them, it's acceptable as long as the young man in question displays full loyalty to the religion by wearing the correct robes and turning up for Friday prayers.

    True – and I’m very thankful this was not the case.
     
    If you had ended up a Mormon, I'd be telling you that your faith was just an accident of birth and that, had you been born into a Muslim family, you would have been a devout Muslim. In reply, you would tell me that you were very thankful to have been born in Utah so that you were able to learn the true message of God as given by his prophet Joseph Smith.

    Don't you see, Talha? Self-certifying claims of divine revelation are a trap. Once you swallow the bait, it all makes sense. And yet, you must surely accept that everything that makes sense to you now only makes sense because you swallowed that one particular bait? Had you swallowed a different bait, you would have a completely different yet equally certain worldview. In both cases (real and hypothetical), your religion entirely rests on, and is undermined by, one original sin.

    Islam has rules and a creed. It’s just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own – this is not the religion for you. It translates to “submission” – the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.
     
    This is the problem: God should not be defined; God should be discovered. But to see God, you need an empty mind.

    So when your mind is already bound up in Islam then what exactly is it that you submit to? God? Or Islam?
  69. What a damn cheek….he would not even have come to live in the US…were it not for the fact that the American govt bombed the shit out of his country (by “American govt”…obviously this means the Jews who control America….including Mad Dog Mattis and Trump…both of whom are crypto Jews or what were once known as Marranos or Conversos in 15 th Century Spain.

    Read More
  70. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    his origins shouldn’t be important to something as basic as whether or not man’s best friend is unclean
     
    I don't see why this is the case. Depending on where one is from in the world, dogs are; 1) man's best friend or 2) dangerous feral animals or 3) what Mom's cooking for dinner. Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?

    Tamil Nadu is on the southern part of India - and that area was only partly ruled by the Mughal Empire which implemented the Hanafi school, it is very easy to understand why he might be form the part where the religion was spread by travelers and traders from Yemen (who follow the Shafi'i school).


    disagreeing for 1600 years over such a basic issue and both of them have ‘sound evidence’ from exactly the same core text, then something is seriously amiss
     
    It's not a basic issue - it's minutiae. The schools have disagreed over many things; some minor, some major. Some fold their hands across their belly in prayer, some let them hang at the sides. We feel the acceptability and respect of differences of opinion are a blessing and mercy from God. We have been blessed with unity in religion despite our differences. You can take a man from Senegal and drop him into a mosque on the island of Java and he'll be able to join a congregation and know exactly what to do.

    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists - most of us don't like that kind on inflexibility.


    they’d just drop the pretense and say “we don’t know”.
     
    Scholars almost always end their pronouncement on a ruling with the words, "and God knows best" - meaning; I have made my attempt to understand what the ruling is, but only God knows what is actually correct.

    The concept of someone who wishes to retain tribal neutrality while still investigating their doctrine is not understood and not welcomed.
     
    If you say so - but it doesn't sound like you've ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven't seen any act in the manner you're talking about.

    My feeling is that the doctrine itself is so logically weak that a tribal affiliation is a prerequisite for sincere belief!
     
    I don't understand what this means.

    You could have just as easily ended up a Mormon
     
    True - and I'm very thankful this was not the case.

    A real man of God should be able to walk the divine path without swallowing a poisonous ball of self certifying a priori concepts.
     
    Islam has rules and a creed. It's just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own - this is not the religion for you. It translates to "submission" - the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.

    Perhaps if Muslims could move forward intellectually, your people would be able to start producing products of value and attain sovereignty through being an indispensable part of the world economy, just like the North-East Asians.
     
    All of that is just fine as long as we don't lose our religion like so many North-East Asians. We have our priorities and others have theirs. Being dirt poor and retaining our faith is preferable to being rich and losing it:
    "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" - Mark 8:36

    not men who revere outdated doctrine
     
    We're fine thanks - we like what we have.

    can’t even decide whether a dog is clean or not
     
    We have; it is for some and isn't for others. Why is it so important that there is only one answer on this? I mean, we do indeed have a unified position on whether they can be eaten or not - they can't. I would assume that is more important to dog lovers.

    Peace.

    Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?

    Because so many Muslims pass this off an an inalienable tenant of Islam. I’m beginning to understand that so many things that Muslims pass off as divine revealed truth may be just their cultural or personal preference. In which case, they’re not being holy, they’re just being pig-headed!

    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists – most of us don’t like that kind on inflexibility.

    I’d agree that these are the worst offenders, but I see the same inflexibility emerging to a lesser extent in most of the Muslims that I meet.

    If you say so – but it doesn’t sound like you’ve ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven’t seen any act in the manner you’re talking about.

    Possibly not! My experiences are based on many encounters with many Muslims across many countries in the course of daily business and/or travel. These are the majority and for me they are the ones who count. Whether or not this is True Islam is irrelevant; it is real world Islam.

    I don’t understand what this means.

    It means that logical reasoning in Islam is so weak that only someone with a vested interest would be able to swallow it. The vested interest in this case is tribal membership, and the hidden threat of rejecting Islam’s weak logic is social alienation.

    What I’m saying is that, in my opinion, so much of what passes for logic in Islam is so laughably weak that only a Muslim could take it seriously. To give just one example, I was discussing Islam with a young man outside a Masjid in Malaysia, and he told me the reason that alcohol is forbidden is because “if you are drunk, you might forget your prayers”. For me, it’s laughably ignorant. For them, it’s acceptable as long as the young man in question displays full loyalty to the religion by wearing the correct robes and turning up for Friday prayers.

    True – and I’m very thankful this was not the case.

    If you had ended up a Mormon, I’d be telling you that your faith was just an accident of birth and that, had you been born into a Muslim family, you would have been a devout Muslim. In reply, you would tell me that you were very thankful to have been born in Utah so that you were able to learn the true message of God as given by his prophet Joseph Smith.

    Don’t you see, Talha? Self-certifying claims of divine revelation are a trap. Once you swallow the bait, it all makes sense. And yet, you must surely accept that everything that makes sense to you now only makes sense because you swallowed that one particular bait? Had you swallowed a different bait, you would have a completely different yet equally certain worldview. In both cases (real and hypothetical), your religion entirely rests on, and is undermined by, one original sin.

    Islam has rules and a creed. It’s just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own – this is not the religion for you. It translates to “submission” – the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.

    This is the problem: God should not be defined; God should be discovered. But to see God, you need an empty mind.

    So when your mind is already bound up in Islam then what exactly is it that you submit to? God? Or Islam?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    many things that Muslims pass off as divine revealed truth may be just their cultural or personal preference
     
    Bingo!

    I see the same inflexibility emerging to a lesser extent in most of the Muslims that I meet...Whether or not this is True Islam is irrelevant; it is real world Islam.
     
    Valid criticisms, both - unfortunately that rigidity from Salafis and Wahhabis has worked its way through much of the Muslim world. Took us a while to get here, it'll take us a while to get back on track.

    so much of what passes for logic in Islam is so laughably weak
     
    Another valid criticism. Many Muslims have not properly understood the juristic principles behind why rules exist and try to justify them in a rational manner that doesn't work its way out. Like the Malaysian example; the reason alcohol is prohibited is clear - the Qur'an and hadith are unambiguous on its prohibition. Now there might be wisdom behind it , but that is not the reason.

    Self-certifying claims of divine revelation are a trap.
     
    This is all well and good - but not all claims are equivalent. It's not like I haven't been challenged about my belief in Islam before. I simply haven't found the arguments to be convincing (most are woefully ignorant of basic doctrines). Just like you don't find our arguments to be convincing. It doesn't appeal to or convince you - well and good; but why should it matter to me? Just because Islam doesn't appeal to everyone, that doesn't bother me or shake the foundations of my faith.

    God should be discovered.
     
    This is what the Sufis do.

    I can count on my fingers the number of human beings that formulated a coherent understanding of God that appealed to any significant amount of people. People are quite fickle and religions are very difficult to get off the ground - most are likely suffocated in the cradle. If you have a better understanding of God or have discovered something others haven't yet, write a book about it and see how many people it appeals to; aphorisms, moral precepts, etc.

    God? Or Islam?
     
    God...through Islam.

    Peace.
  71. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    Why should location have no bearing on whether one is considered pure or not?
     
    Because so many Muslims pass this off an an inalienable tenant of Islam. I'm beginning to understand that so many things that Muslims pass off as divine revealed truth may be just their cultural or personal preference. In which case, they're not being holy, they're just being pig-headed!


    The only ones who are hostile to differences of opinion and demand a my-way-or-the-highway approach are Salafi-Wahhabi extremists – most of us don’t like that kind on inflexibility.
     
    I'd agree that these are the worst offenders, but I see the same inflexibility emerging to a lesser extent in most of the Muslims that I meet.

    If you say so – but it doesn’t sound like you’ve ever actually come across a scholar of Islam. I haven’t seen any act in the manner you’re talking about.
     
    Possibly not! My experiences are based on many encounters with many Muslims across many countries in the course of daily business and/or travel. These are the majority and for me they are the ones who count. Whether or not this is True Islam is irrelevant; it is real world Islam.

    I don’t understand what this means.
     
    It means that logical reasoning in Islam is so weak that only someone with a vested interest would be able to swallow it. The vested interest in this case is tribal membership, and the hidden threat of rejecting Islam's weak logic is social alienation.

    What I'm saying is that, in my opinion, so much of what passes for logic in Islam is so laughably weak that only a Muslim could take it seriously. To give just one example, I was discussing Islam with a young man outside a Masjid in Malaysia, and he told me the reason that alcohol is forbidden is because "if you are drunk, you might forget your prayers". For me, it's laughably ignorant. For them, it's acceptable as long as the young man in question displays full loyalty to the religion by wearing the correct robes and turning up for Friday prayers.

    True – and I’m very thankful this was not the case.
     
    If you had ended up a Mormon, I'd be telling you that your faith was just an accident of birth and that, had you been born into a Muslim family, you would have been a devout Muslim. In reply, you would tell me that you were very thankful to have been born in Utah so that you were able to learn the true message of God as given by his prophet Joseph Smith.

    Don't you see, Talha? Self-certifying claims of divine revelation are a trap. Once you swallow the bait, it all makes sense. And yet, you must surely accept that everything that makes sense to you now only makes sense because you swallowed that one particular bait? Had you swallowed a different bait, you would have a completely different yet equally certain worldview. In both cases (real and hypothetical), your religion entirely rests on, and is undermined by, one original sin.

    Islam has rules and a creed. It’s just part of the package. If you want spirituality without rules and want to define God on your own – this is not the religion for you. It translates to “submission” – the name should be enough of an indication of what expectations it sets forth.
     
    This is the problem: God should not be defined; God should be discovered. But to see God, you need an empty mind.

    So when your mind is already bound up in Islam then what exactly is it that you submit to? God? Or Islam?

    many things that Muslims pass off as divine revealed truth may be just their cultural or personal preference

    Bingo!

    I see the same inflexibility emerging to a lesser extent in most of the Muslims that I meet…Whether or not this is True Islam is irrelevant; it is real world Islam.

    Valid criticisms, both – unfortunately that rigidity from Salafis and Wahhabis has worked its way through much of the Muslim world. Took us a while to get here, it’ll take us a while to get back on track.

    so much of what passes for logic in Islam is so laughably weak

    Another valid criticism. Many Muslims have not properly understood the juristic principles behind why rules exist and try to justify them in a rational manner that doesn’t work its way out. Like the Malaysian example; the reason alcohol is prohibited is clear – the Qur’an and hadith are unambiguous on its prohibition. Now there might be wisdom behind it , but that is not the reason.

    Self-certifying claims of divine revelation are a trap.

    This is all well and good – but not all claims are equivalent. It’s not like I haven’t been challenged about my belief in Islam before. I simply haven’t found the arguments to be convincing (most are woefully ignorant of basic doctrines). Just like you don’t find our arguments to be convincing. It doesn’t appeal to or convince you – well and good; but why should it matter to me? Just because Islam doesn’t appeal to everyone, that doesn’t bother me or shake the foundations of my faith.

    God should be discovered.

    This is what the Sufis do.

    I can count on my fingers the number of human beings that formulated a coherent understanding of God that appealed to any significant amount of people. People are quite fickle and religions are very difficult to get off the ground – most are likely suffocated in the cradle. If you have a better understanding of God or have discovered something others haven’t yet, write a book about it and see how many people it appeals to; aphorisms, moral precepts, etc.

    God? Or Islam?

    God…through Islam.

    Peace.

    Read More
  72. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Like the Malaysian example; the reason alcohol is prohibited is clear – the Qur’an and hadith are unambiguous on its prohibition. Now there might be wisdom behind it , but that is not the reason.

    If I understand correctly, the correct reason is ‘because the books say say so’, and any attempts at logical justification are irrelevant and unislamic. Is this correct?

    This is all well and good – but not all claims are equivalent

    Why not? In all the just-trust-me religions, an initial suspension of disbelief and an emotionally driven leap of faith is required. I remember the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, explaining this exact same principal. So if Islam, Mormonism and Church of England all require exactly the same suspension of logical reasoning and the exact same leap of faith then there is really nothing to differentiate their claims to be the One True Faith.

    So at the very least, you have to accept that the other leap-of-faith religions are equally (in)valid, while you might also appreciate that a religion with absolutely no logical foundation may be considered ungrounded, circumspect, and unwelcome in a free thinking scientific culture.

    This is what the Sufis do.

    My understanding of Sufi is pretty dim. I’ve honestly never run across it in real life. I think I’d have a lot more affinity for Sufi than Islam since it seems to be a lot more free style and open to discovering God in anyway that the practitioner can reasonably get away with. I also recall hearing that Sufis have suffered repression at the hands of mainstream rote learning Islam. Is this correct?

    I can count on my fingers the number of human beings that formulated a coherent understanding of God that appealed to any significant amount of people. People are quite fickle and religions are very difficult to get off the ground – most are likely suffocated in the cradle. If you have a better understanding of God or have discovered something others haven’t yet, write a book about it and see how many people it appeals to; aphorisms, moral precepts, etc.

    Trying to understand God is like trying to put the sky in a box. You’ll use a lot of cardboard, you’ll create a real mess, and the best you’ll do is blot out your own view and convince yourself that you’ve succeeded.

    I still think you’re vastly underestimating the numbers of religious founders though. The big ones would be Buddha, Kungfutzu, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad, Guru Nanak, Joseph Smith, and Sathya Sai Baba, but there’s a lot more on the second tier: eg. Ramana Maharishi, Meher Baba, Srila Prabuhad, Sri Caitanya, Gurjieff, Shirdi Sai Baba, Osho. Most of these second tier leaders are from the past couple of centuries, so there must be so many more of whom I am not aware.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    the correct reason is ‘because the books say say so’, and any attempts at logical justification are irrelevant and unislamic. Is this correct?
     
    No - something could come in the source texts and be clear and be abrogated by a later practice. Different schools and scholars disagree on the veracity of a text and they can even come to different conclusions based on the same text but due to different lexical interpretations. Furthermore, some can understand the same text in a general sense or in a restricted manner. For instance; the Maliki school looks at the same hadith as the other schools (about washing a vessel seven times and once with dirt - if a dog drinks from it) and simply states that is not a matter of purity - rather, it is a matter of preventing disease because the city of Madinah had feral dogs running around at the time. Another example, the prohibition for heroin or cocaine; there is no explicit prohibition in the texts, rather it is derived by analogical deduction (qiyas) from the example of alcohol, because they are even stronger intoxicants.

    all require exactly the same suspension of logical reasoning and the exact same leap of faith
     
    All religions require faith, that is for sure. But I see no reason that they require suspension of logical reasoning per se. Furthermore, the leap of faith is not the exact same since their doctrines differ. The belief, say, in a transcendent monotheistic God versus a anthropomorphic pantheon is simply not the same, likewise in some religions one believes that the universe is a part of God, or that He was incarnated as an avatar (whether once or multiple times), etc.

    I also recall hearing that Sufis have suffered repression at the hands of mainstream rote learning Islam. Is this correct?
     
    No - Sufism is a part and parcel of mainstream Islam and has been for centuries. Some of the greatest theologians have been Sufis and if they did not belong to a Sufi Order, they had a lot of respect for them. Some Sufis do have heterodox beliefs, that is for sure, but the idea that Sufism is at odds with Islam is something, again, that comes from the narrow-minded my-way-or-the-way groups that make a lot of noise and garner the most attention.

    Trying to understand God is like trying to put the sky in a box.
     
    I like that - and I agree, God can never be circumscribed within the limited human intellect. Some aspects can be understood and others are simply never will be.

    there’s a lot more on the second tier
     
    Sure, and many of those you cite seem to be one or another version of Hindu avatar claimants, or gurus, etc. Many of their doctrines seem to be an amalgam of Hindu, Islam/Sufi teachings. Would these even qualify to be called a new religion? But I was talking those that had a large significant following - these seem like marginal spiritual movements.

    Peace.
  73. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    Like the Malaysian example; the reason alcohol is prohibited is clear – the Qur’an and hadith are unambiguous on its prohibition. Now there might be wisdom behind it , but that is not the reason.

     

    If I understand correctly, the correct reason is 'because the books say say so', and any attempts at logical justification are irrelevant and unislamic. Is this correct?

    This is all well and good – but not all claims are equivalent
     
    Why not? In all the just-trust-me religions, an initial suspension of disbelief and an emotionally driven leap of faith is required. I remember the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, explaining this exact same principal. So if Islam, Mormonism and Church of England all require exactly the same suspension of logical reasoning and the exact same leap of faith then there is really nothing to differentiate their claims to be the One True Faith.

    So at the very least, you have to accept that the other leap-of-faith religions are equally (in)valid, while you might also appreciate that a religion with absolutely no logical foundation may be considered ungrounded, circumspect, and unwelcome in a free thinking scientific culture.

    This is what the Sufis do.
     
    My understanding of Sufi is pretty dim. I've honestly never run across it in real life. I think I'd have a lot more affinity for Sufi than Islam since it seems to be a lot more free style and open to discovering God in anyway that the practitioner can reasonably get away with. I also recall hearing that Sufis have suffered repression at the hands of mainstream rote learning Islam. Is this correct?

    I can count on my fingers the number of human beings that formulated a coherent understanding of God that appealed to any significant amount of people. People are quite fickle and religions are very difficult to get off the ground – most are likely suffocated in the cradle. If you have a better understanding of God or have discovered something others haven’t yet, write a book about it and see how many people it appeals to; aphorisms, moral precepts, etc.
     
    Trying to understand God is like trying to put the sky in a box. You'll use a lot of cardboard, you'll create a real mess, and the best you'll do is blot out your own view and convince yourself that you've succeeded.

    I still think you're vastly underestimating the numbers of religious founders though. The big ones would be Buddha, Kungfutzu, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad, Guru Nanak, Joseph Smith, and Sathya Sai Baba, but there's a lot more on the second tier: eg. Ramana Maharishi, Meher Baba, Srila Prabuhad, Sri Caitanya, Gurjieff, Shirdi Sai Baba, Osho. Most of these second tier leaders are from the past couple of centuries, so there must be so many more of whom I am not aware.

    the correct reason is ‘because the books say say so’, and any attempts at logical justification are irrelevant and unislamic. Is this correct?

    No – something could come in the source texts and be clear and be abrogated by a later practice. Different schools and scholars disagree on the veracity of a text and they can even come to different conclusions based on the same text but due to different lexical interpretations. Furthermore, some can understand the same text in a general sense or in a restricted manner. For instance; the Maliki school looks at the same hadith as the other schools (about washing a vessel seven times and once with dirt – if a dog drinks from it) and simply states that is not a matter of purity – rather, it is a matter of preventing disease because the city of Madinah had feral dogs running around at the time. Another example, the prohibition for heroin or cocaine; there is no explicit prohibition in the texts, rather it is derived by analogical deduction (qiyas) from the example of alcohol, because they are even stronger intoxicants.

    all require exactly the same suspension of logical reasoning and the exact same leap of faith

    All religions require faith, that is for sure. But I see no reason that they require suspension of logical reasoning per se. Furthermore, the leap of faith is not the exact same since their doctrines differ. The belief, say, in a transcendent monotheistic God versus a anthropomorphic pantheon is simply not the same, likewise in some religions one believes that the universe is a part of God, or that He was incarnated as an avatar (whether once or multiple times), etc.

    I also recall hearing that Sufis have suffered repression at the hands of mainstream rote learning Islam. Is this correct?

    No – Sufism is a part and parcel of mainstream Islam and has been for centuries. Some of the greatest theologians have been Sufis and if they did not belong to a Sufi Order, they had a lot of respect for them. Some Sufis do have heterodox beliefs, that is for sure, but the idea that Sufism is at odds with Islam is something, again, that comes from the narrow-minded my-way-or-the-way groups that make a lot of noise and garner the most attention.

    Trying to understand God is like trying to put the sky in a box.

    I like that – and I agree, God can never be circumscribed within the limited human intellect. Some aspects can be understood and others are simply never will be.

    there’s a lot more on the second tier

    Sure, and many of those you cite seem to be one or another version of Hindu avatar claimants, or gurus, etc. Many of their doctrines seem to be an amalgam of Hindu, Islam/Sufi teachings. Would these even qualify to be called a new religion? But I was talking those that had a large significant following – these seem like marginal spiritual movements.

    Peace.

    Read More
  74. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    No – something could come in the source texts and be clear and be abrogated by a later practice. Different schools and scholars disagree on the veracity of a text and they can even come to different conclusions based on the same text but due to different lexical interpretations.

    So Islam is a living breathing culture that changes according to its own will? That’s not a religion based on divine revelation; that’s a tribe!

    With this in mind, I definitely consider ‘spreading Islam’ to be an illegitimate reason for moving to the West. The reason is that Islam is groundless, self-certifying, and comes with a whole raft of mandatory (and essentially arbitrary) cultural baggage that will naturally be at odds with any another culture. Deliberately introducing something alien and inimical is culturally destructive, and thus ‘spreading Islam’ is an act of war!

    Your other reason for Westwards migration (‘to help teach others to keep firm on their faith’) is essentially the same, as this implies turning an integrated ‘sleeping’ Muslim into a active Muslim who will, in turn, wage cultural war.

    So now I can see no good reasons at all for a Muslim to migrate permanently to the West.

    All religions require faith, that is for sure.

    Absolutely not. Real religious belief should arise directly from mystical experience and one should not believe what they have read until they’ve seen it for themselves. The scriptures should act solely as a confirmation of direct experience.

    The first goal of religious practice should preparing for and attaining mystical experience, while further reading should be saved for afterwards. We are not just dumb followers of a handful of prophets who were lucky enough to have their own spontaneous experiences; each and every one of us has exactly the same inner divine potential as all of the first-tier religious founders and it is up to us to discover it.

    Furthermore, the leap of faith is not the exact same since their doctrines differ. The belief, say, in a transcendent monotheistic God versus a anthropomorphic pantheon is simply not the same,

    It’s qualitatively the same. You seem to have taken a look at all the different religions, eg. Mormonism, Catholicism, Islam, etc., and said ‘well I think this one looks best’ and then swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

    If you’re looking for a used car, a house, or anything in this imperfect material world, then I can accept this approach… but how on Earth can you approach the discovery of your own inner nature in such a callous fashion?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    So Islam is a living breathing culture
     
    Sure.

    that changes according to its own will?
     
    No - there are immutable principles that are so obvious that they are agreed upon and are not debated. For instance, the idea that we need to pray 5 times a day or that marriage is between a man and woman. Now there are certain slight variations on the prayer - and the religion needs to be flexible enough to accommodate new situations, like how does one pray on an airplane - but those are details. All of these principles or details are always sought out by best-effort attempts at interpreting the revelation.

    Deliberately introducing something alien and inimical is culturally destructive, and thus ‘spreading Islam’ is an act of war!
     
    I'm sure some Muslims push Islam like that (my-way-or-the-highway), but from what I've been taught, Islam is not culturally predatory:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=862fsKcFs1M

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden - the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century - Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco - these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity - you cannot mistake one for the other.


    The scriptures should act solely as a confirmation of direct experience.
     
    The Sufis have written tomes on mystical experiences while staying well within the Islamic framework. So I don't see a contradiction - at least in our tradition. Maybe if you were talking to a Wahhabi-Salafi sort of guy, this conversation would be going another direction.

    The first goal of religious practice should preparing for and attaining mystical experience, while further reading should be saved for afterwards
     
    And we say that the mystical experience is bound up within the religious practice itself - we don't see a contradiction. If a person's goal is "health", then they might try it on their own or find a trainer to give them guidelines to follow and implement. The person follows the trainer because the trainer has a track record of getting other people to their goal of "health". Following the trainer's guidelines is not the goal, "health" obviously is.

    each and every one of us has exactly the same inner divine potential as all of the first-tier religious founders and it is up to us to discover it
     
    We don't believe this (though it is a logical proposition) - it is also quite logical a proposition that certain select people were chosen by God because they were distinct.

    said ‘well I think this one looks best’ and then swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.
     
    Basically. Once one has come to the determination and belief that there were emissaries that God spoke to and revealed guidelines to humanity - it is actually illogical to nitpick the details. I mean, if you actually believe the commands he is giving you are conveyed from God, then you take them seriously and the only room left is to figure out a best-effort attempt at preserving and interpreting them accurately. Otherwise, you have two other options; he is a charlatan or he is crazy or mistaken - either way, the entire epistemological foundation crumbles. Then - who cares - you can throw the whole thing away, details and all.

    how on Earth can you approach the discovery of your own inner nature in such a callous fashion?
     
    If one is in the market for a car, one can buy one from the various brands around that have a reliable track record and being the end result of the collective efforts of countless engineers, designers, etc.; Mercedes, BMW, etc. or one can attempt to build a generic "car" in their back yard.

    Peace.

  75. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    No – something could come in the source texts and be clear and be abrogated by a later practice. Different schools and scholars disagree on the veracity of a text and they can even come to different conclusions based on the same text but due to different lexical interpretations.
     
    So Islam is a living breathing culture that changes according to its own will? That's not a religion based on divine revelation; that's a tribe!

    With this in mind, I definitely consider 'spreading Islam' to be an illegitimate reason for moving to the West. The reason is that Islam is groundless, self-certifying, and comes with a whole raft of mandatory (and essentially arbitrary) cultural baggage that will naturally be at odds with any another culture. Deliberately introducing something alien and inimical is culturally destructive, and thus 'spreading Islam' is an act of war!

    Your other reason for Westwards migration ('to help teach others to keep firm on their faith') is essentially the same, as this implies turning an integrated 'sleeping' Muslim into a active Muslim who will, in turn, wage cultural war.

    So now I can see no good reasons at all for a Muslim to migrate permanently to the West.

    All religions require faith, that is for sure.
     
    Absolutely not. Real religious belief should arise directly from mystical experience and one should not believe what they have read until they've seen it for themselves. The scriptures should act solely as a confirmation of direct experience.

    The first goal of religious practice should preparing for and attaining mystical experience, while further reading should be saved for afterwards. We are not just dumb followers of a handful of prophets who were lucky enough to have their own spontaneous experiences; each and every one of us has exactly the same inner divine potential as all of the first-tier religious founders and it is up to us to discover it.

    Furthermore, the leap of faith is not the exact same since their doctrines differ. The belief, say, in a transcendent monotheistic God versus a anthropomorphic pantheon is simply not the same,
     
    It's qualitatively the same. You seem to have taken a look at all the different religions, eg. Mormonism, Catholicism, Islam, etc., and said 'well I think this one looks best' and then swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

    If you're looking for a used car, a house, or anything in this imperfect material world, then I can accept this approach... but how on Earth can you approach the discovery of your own inner nature in such a callous fashion?

    So Islam is a living breathing culture

    Sure.

    that changes according to its own will?

    No – there are immutable principles that are so obvious that they are agreed upon and are not debated. For instance, the idea that we need to pray 5 times a day or that marriage is between a man and woman. Now there are certain slight variations on the prayer – and the religion needs to be flexible enough to accommodate new situations, like how does one pray on an airplane – but those are details. All of these principles or details are always sought out by best-effort attempts at interpreting the revelation.

    Deliberately introducing something alien and inimical is culturally destructive, and thus ‘spreading Islam’ is an act of war!

    I’m sure some Muslims push Islam like that (my-way-or-the-highway), but from what I’ve been taught, Islam is not culturally predatory:

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century – Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco – these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity – you cannot mistake one for the other.

    The scriptures should act solely as a confirmation of direct experience.

    The Sufis have written tomes on mystical experiences while staying well within the Islamic framework. So I don’t see a contradiction – at least in our tradition. Maybe if you were talking to a Wahhabi-Salafi sort of guy, this conversation would be going another direction.

    The first goal of religious practice should preparing for and attaining mystical experience, while further reading should be saved for afterwards

    And we say that the mystical experience is bound up within the religious practice itself – we don’t see a contradiction. If a person’s goal is “health”, then they might try it on their own or find a trainer to give them guidelines to follow and implement. The person follows the trainer because the trainer has a track record of getting other people to their goal of “health”. Following the trainer’s guidelines is not the goal, “health” obviously is.

    each and every one of us has exactly the same inner divine potential as all of the first-tier religious founders and it is up to us to discover it

    We don’t believe this (though it is a logical proposition) – it is also quite logical a proposition that certain select people were chosen by God because they were distinct.

    said ‘well I think this one looks best’ and then swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.

    Basically. Once one has come to the determination and belief that there were emissaries that God spoke to and revealed guidelines to humanity – it is actually illogical to nitpick the details. I mean, if you actually believe the commands he is giving you are conveyed from God, then you take them seriously and the only room left is to figure out a best-effort attempt at preserving and interpreting them accurately. Otherwise, you have two other options; he is a charlatan or he is crazy or mistaken – either way, the entire epistemological foundation crumbles. Then – who cares – you can throw the whole thing away, details and all.

    how on Earth can you approach the discovery of your own inner nature in such a callous fashion?

    If one is in the market for a car, one can buy one from the various brands around that have a reliable track record and being the end result of the collective efforts of countless engineers, designers, etc.; Mercedes, BMW, etc. or one can attempt to build a generic “car” in their back yard.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yyrvjh

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century – Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco – these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity – you cannot mistake one for the other.
     
    https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1484852/hijab.jpg

    Present-day Islam is hell-bent on turning women into black moving objects. Hijab, niqab, burka, the trend is going one way only.

  76. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I’m sure some Muslims push Islam like that (my-way-or-the-highway), but from what I’ve been taught, Islam is not culturally predatory:

    Thanks for the video. Basically the first guy says “stop this nonsense, this is not Islam!” and then the prophet himself overruled him. Unfortunately, the prophet has long since departed the Earth and now we’re at the sole mercy of his so-called followers! As Gandhi said, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”.

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable.

    It’s actually very very difficult to weigh this up. Islam may appear to host more diversity, but the diversity is all regional. Within one region, the culture is absolutely uniform (and dead boring if you happen to live there). Conversely, Western culture appears uniform on the surface but delegates sufficient individual freedom that many radically different subcultures can exist within it. Goths, Bikers and Furries can all have their own unique subcultures and weddings (see youtube for plenty of examples).

    We don’t believe this (though it is a logical proposition) – it is also quite logical a proposition that certain select people were chosen by God because they were distinct.

    On this matter, the position of Islam contracts my direct experience and therefore I must conclude that Islam is wrong. Thankfully I’m not Muslim, so I won’t suffer any cognitive dissonance or social repercussions!

    Otherwise, you have two other options; he is a charlatan or he is crazy or mistaken – either way, the entire epistemological foundation crumbles. Then – who cares – you can throw the whole thing away, details and all.

    Perfectly put, Talha. For myself, the epistemological foundations of Islam are downright shoddy and I believe throwing the whole thing away is the correct course of action.

    The Sufis have written tomes on mystical experiences while staying well within the Islamic framework. So I don’t see a contradiction – at least in our tradition. Maybe if you were talking to a Wahhabi-Salafi sort of guy, this conversation would be going another direction.

    Definitely safer for them to stay within the framework!

    You know, Talha, we’ve had a very interesting and enjoyable discussion (thank you!) and it seems obvious to me that our views are fundamentally different and we will never see eye-to-eye. I completely respect your right to live out your Muslim culture within Muslim lands but I still consider the influx of Islam into Europe to be very destructive and a real threat to the cultural and religious freedoms that Europeans take for granted.

    On another note, I’ve also met a few Muslims for whom Islam really doesn’t work out. One close friend in particular was born into a Muslim family but holds the religion in even more disdain than I do. Perhaps the solution for people like myself and my friend would be to allow blasphemy and apostasy on an individual level? So that if Islam is really not working out for us, one should be able to leave Islam and no longer be bound to it’s rules. Would this be permissible?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    You know, Talha, we’ve had a very interesting and enjoyable discussion (thank you!) and it seems obvious to me that our views are fundamentally different and we will never see eye-to-eye.
     
    To each his own, and yes, I like discussions like this. There is a way to disagree fundamentally and remain civil. One learns better that way rather than shouting over each other.

    Would this be permissible?
     
    I had a discussion about this on post #58.

    Peace and take care.
  77. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    I’m sure some Muslims push Islam like that (my-way-or-the-highway), but from what I’ve been taught, Islam is not culturally predatory:

     

    Thanks for the video. Basically the first guy says "stop this nonsense, this is not Islam!" and then the prophet himself overruled him. Unfortunately, the prophet has long since departed the Earth and now we're at the sole mercy of his so-called followers! As Gandhi said, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”.

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable.
     
    It's actually very very difficult to weigh this up. Islam may appear to host more diversity, but the diversity is all regional. Within one region, the culture is absolutely uniform (and dead boring if you happen to live there). Conversely, Western culture appears uniform on the surface but delegates sufficient individual freedom that many radically different subcultures can exist within it. Goths, Bikers and Furries can all have their own unique subcultures and weddings (see youtube for plenty of examples).

    We don’t believe this (though it is a logical proposition) – it is also quite logical a proposition that certain select people were chosen by God because they were distinct.
     
    On this matter, the position of Islam contracts my direct experience and therefore I must conclude that Islam is wrong. Thankfully I'm not Muslim, so I won't suffer any cognitive dissonance or social repercussions!

    Otherwise, you have two other options; he is a charlatan or he is crazy or mistaken – either way, the entire epistemological foundation crumbles. Then – who cares – you can throw the whole thing away, details and all.

     

    Perfectly put, Talha. For myself, the epistemological foundations of Islam are downright shoddy and I believe throwing the whole thing away is the correct course of action.

    The Sufis have written tomes on mystical experiences while staying well within the Islamic framework. So I don’t see a contradiction – at least in our tradition. Maybe if you were talking to a Wahhabi-Salafi sort of guy, this conversation would be going another direction.
     
    Definitely safer for them to stay within the framework!

    You know, Talha, we've had a very interesting and enjoyable discussion (thank you!) and it seems obvious to me that our views are fundamentally different and we will never see eye-to-eye. I completely respect your right to live out your Muslim culture within Muslim lands but I still consider the influx of Islam into Europe to be very destructive and a real threat to the cultural and religious freedoms that Europeans take for granted.

    On another note, I've also met a few Muslims for whom Islam really doesn't work out. One close friend in particular was born into a Muslim family but holds the religion in even more disdain than I do. Perhaps the solution for people like myself and my friend would be to allow blasphemy and apostasy on an individual level? So that if Islam is really not working out for us, one should be able to leave Islam and no longer be bound to it's rules. Would this be permissible?

    You know, Talha, we’ve had a very interesting and enjoyable discussion (thank you!) and it seems obvious to me that our views are fundamentally different and we will never see eye-to-eye.

    To each his own, and yes, I like discussions like this. There is a way to disagree fundamentally and remain civil. One learns better that way rather than shouting over each other.

    Would this be permissible?

    I had a discussion about this on post #58.

    Peace and take care.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Hi Talha, sorry I missed your post on apostasy. So it's not decided yet, but we're most likely looking at a parallel of the war on drug's personal use vs. dealing. Personal apostasy would be punishable by prison while apostasy with an intent to influence others could be punishable by death.

    I think most unz.com readers would agree the WoD has been an absolute disaster (assuming it was formulated with benign intentions) and so to apply a similar legal framework to apostasy should also invite similar social troubles. Honestly, it sounds like an absolute disaster and I think Europe should be absolutely vehement in rejecting any semblance of Islamic law, even amongst Muslims.

    I also feel sorry for my Muslim friends who are trapped on the wrong side of the line, even though they are mentally in the same place as myself. Perhaps their situation is comparable to the East Germans? How long until the wall comes down?

    To each his own
     
    Now you're being hypocritical.
    a) Non-Muslim remains non-Muslim - tolerated by Talha
    b) Non-Muslim becomes Muslim - commended by Talha
    c) Muslim remains Muslim - commended by Talha
    d) Muslim converts to non-Muslim - punishable, possibly by death

    So what is this? You want my people to join your tribe, and if they ever change their mind and want to come back, you might kill them?

    If you are truly concerned about their life and not about increasing your tribe's virility, then would it not be more responsible to leave them where they are?
  78. yyrvjh says:
    @Talha

    So Islam is a living breathing culture
     
    Sure.

    that changes according to its own will?
     
    No - there are immutable principles that are so obvious that they are agreed upon and are not debated. For instance, the idea that we need to pray 5 times a day or that marriage is between a man and woman. Now there are certain slight variations on the prayer - and the religion needs to be flexible enough to accommodate new situations, like how does one pray on an airplane - but those are details. All of these principles or details are always sought out by best-effort attempts at interpreting the revelation.

    Deliberately introducing something alien and inimical is culturally destructive, and thus ‘spreading Islam’ is an act of war!
     
    I'm sure some Muslims push Islam like that (my-way-or-the-highway), but from what I've been taught, Islam is not culturally predatory:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=862fsKcFs1M

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden - the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century - Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco - these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity - you cannot mistake one for the other.


    The scriptures should act solely as a confirmation of direct experience.
     
    The Sufis have written tomes on mystical experiences while staying well within the Islamic framework. So I don't see a contradiction - at least in our tradition. Maybe if you were talking to a Wahhabi-Salafi sort of guy, this conversation would be going another direction.

    The first goal of religious practice should preparing for and attaining mystical experience, while further reading should be saved for afterwards
     
    And we say that the mystical experience is bound up within the religious practice itself - we don't see a contradiction. If a person's goal is "health", then they might try it on their own or find a trainer to give them guidelines to follow and implement. The person follows the trainer because the trainer has a track record of getting other people to their goal of "health". Following the trainer's guidelines is not the goal, "health" obviously is.

    each and every one of us has exactly the same inner divine potential as all of the first-tier religious founders and it is up to us to discover it
     
    We don't believe this (though it is a logical proposition) - it is also quite logical a proposition that certain select people were chosen by God because they were distinct.

    said ‘well I think this one looks best’ and then swallowed it, hook, line and sinker.
     
    Basically. Once one has come to the determination and belief that there were emissaries that God spoke to and revealed guidelines to humanity - it is actually illogical to nitpick the details. I mean, if you actually believe the commands he is giving you are conveyed from God, then you take them seriously and the only room left is to figure out a best-effort attempt at preserving and interpreting them accurately. Otherwise, you have two other options; he is a charlatan or he is crazy or mistaken - either way, the entire epistemological foundation crumbles. Then - who cares - you can throw the whole thing away, details and all.

    how on Earth can you approach the discovery of your own inner nature in such a callous fashion?
     
    If one is in the market for a car, one can buy one from the various brands around that have a reliable track record and being the end result of the collective efforts of countless engineers, designers, etc.; Mercedes, BMW, etc. or one can attempt to build a generic "car" in their back yard.

    Peace.

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century – Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco – these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity – you cannot mistake one for the other.


    Present-day Islam is hell-bent on turning women into black moving objects. Hijab, niqab, burka, the trend is going one way only.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    Present-day Islam is hell-bent on turning women into black moving objects.
     
    Sure, a particular strain - no arguments here. If you are saying that's universal, then that's just silly. There are plenty of places that cater to the modesty revival among Muslims; my wife and daughter shop at places like these:
    http://www.louellashop.com/dresses/
    http://www.islamicoutfitters.com/womens.html
    https://shukronline.com/women.html

    My wife is studying to be scholar certified in the Hanafi school - she's quite aware of what the modesty requirements are in the religion, thanks.

    Now if you want to seriously talk "traditional" dress in the Muslim world, don't post pictures of decked out models from after the wave of modernism hit the Muslim world - that's a nonsense benchmark for "traditional". Find pictures from the 1920's or 1930's and you can see what they had been wearing for centuries prior - then we can talk intelligently about what "traditional" means.

    For instance this is historical traditional dress from Sweden in the early 1900's (this is more modest than many women in the Muslim world today):
    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/01/78/b6/0178b6fe772497eb6173f37373461a6f--embroidered-caps-historical-dress.jpg

    Iraqi women in 1920's:
    http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-arab-women-crushing-ice-in-baghdad-iraq-photo-taken-in-1920s-after-83349118.html

    This is how even the Jews of Iraq dressed in the 1920's:
    http://c8.alamy.com/comp/ERGTJ7/bagdad-iraq-jewish-family-of-baghdad-with-child-photo-taken-in-1920s-ERGTJ7.jpg

    Peace.
  79. Talha says:
    @yyrvjh

    Actually, it is secular globo-mono-culture that is far, far more destructive. Do an image search for weddings from, say, Belgium, Britain, Italy, Sweden – the people and dress and set up are completely interchangeable. That was not the case in the 19th century – Europeans were quite conspicuously distinguished in local flavors. Now look for image search for weddings from Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco – these cultures are all Muslim, but quite strong in their local identity – you cannot mistake one for the other.
     
    https://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1484852/hijab.jpg

    Present-day Islam is hell-bent on turning women into black moving objects. Hijab, niqab, burka, the trend is going one way only.

    Present-day Islam is hell-bent on turning women into black moving objects.

    Sure, a particular strain – no arguments here. If you are saying that’s universal, then that’s just silly. There are plenty of places that cater to the modesty revival among Muslims; my wife and daughter shop at places like these:

    http://www.louellashop.com/dresses/

    http://www.islamicoutfitters.com/womens.html

    https://shukronline.com/women.html

    My wife is studying to be scholar certified in the Hanafi school – she’s quite aware of what the modesty requirements are in the religion, thanks.

    Now if you want to seriously talk “traditional” dress in the Muslim world, don’t post pictures of decked out models from after the wave of modernism hit the Muslim world – that’s a nonsense benchmark for “traditional”. Find pictures from the 1920′s or 1930′s and you can see what they had been wearing for centuries prior – then we can talk intelligently about what “traditional” means.

    For instance this is historical traditional dress from Sweden in the early 1900′s (this is more modest than many women in the Muslim world today):

    Iraqi women in 1920′s:

    http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-arab-women-crushing-ice-in-baghdad-iraq-photo-taken-in-1920s-after-83349118.html

    This is how even the Jews of Iraq dressed in the 1920′s:

    Peace.

    Read More
  80. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Talha

    You know, Talha, we’ve had a very interesting and enjoyable discussion (thank you!) and it seems obvious to me that our views are fundamentally different and we will never see eye-to-eye.
     
    To each his own, and yes, I like discussions like this. There is a way to disagree fundamentally and remain civil. One learns better that way rather than shouting over each other.

    Would this be permissible?
     
    I had a discussion about this on post #58.

    Peace and take care.

    Hi Talha, sorry I missed your post on apostasy. So it’s not decided yet, but we’re most likely looking at a parallel of the war on drug’s personal use vs. dealing. Personal apostasy would be punishable by prison while apostasy with an intent to influence others could be punishable by death.

    I think most unz.com readers would agree the WoD has been an absolute disaster (assuming it was formulated with benign intentions) and so to apply a similar legal framework to apostasy should also invite similar social troubles. Honestly, it sounds like an absolute disaster and I think Europe should be absolutely vehement in rejecting any semblance of Islamic law, even amongst Muslims.

    I also feel sorry for my Muslim friends who are trapped on the wrong side of the line, even though they are mentally in the same place as myself. Perhaps their situation is comparable to the East Germans? How long until the wall comes down?

    To each his own

    Now you’re being hypocritical.
    a) Non-Muslim remains non-Muslim – tolerated by Talha
    b) Non-Muslim becomes Muslim – commended by Talha
    c) Muslim remains Muslim – commended by Talha
    d) Muslim converts to non-Muslim – punishable, possibly by death

    So what is this? You want my people to join your tribe, and if they ever change their mind and want to come back, you might kill them?

    If you are truly concerned about their life and not about increasing your tribe’s virility, then would it not be more responsible to leave them where they are?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    Personal apostasy would be punishable by prison while apostasy with an intent to influence others could be punishable by death.
     
    No - what the article I referenced is getting at is that personal apostasy would simply have no penalty. Other than the personal things it affects like; annulment of marriage, blockage of inheritance rights, etc.

    even though they are mentally in the same place as myself
     
    Why? Look, if they hate Islam that much, they're not really Muslim - It's like being Christian and hating Christ (pbuh) or something - does not compute. Who is stopping them from leaving Islam in the West? I know of people that left Islam - not personally, but those known by acquaintances - nothing happened to them - not a single person. Maybe they were shunned by family, but so what - converts into Islam get shunned by family all the time.

    Now you’re being hypocritical.
     
    No we're not. It's up to the Western countries if they want to implement apostasy laws again in their jurisdictions like they used to have centuries ago. They could implement laws that would punish people for joining Islam (or, as their original form, for leaving [the right version of] Christianity). Now if we complained at that point, that would be hypocritical. But they'd probably be hunting down unorthodox people like you also. It's not our problem that Western countries repealed laws on blasphemy/heresy/apostasy; they made that decision without any regard for Islam whatsoever. Here is a good read:
    “Locke, Spinoza and Voltaire were all brilliant, but religious freedom in Europe was driven by statecraft not philosophy…”
    “The process of centralisation and bureaucratisation brought other important consequences. It meant that identity rules had to be abandoned. In their place, states instituted more general rules. Guilds lost their monopoly privileges. Legal systems became increasingly standardised; taxes more regularised. For states with bureaucracies and professional tax collectors, it was simply less costly to treat everyone equally. Discriminatory rules against Catholics, Protestants or Jews either became redundant over time or were eventually done away with. Though gradual and fitful, this levelling process proved inexorable and, in the long-run, irreversible….”
    “Most important perhaps is the need to recognise that liberal ideas were not necessarily responsible for the emergence of liberal societies. Instead, the rise of a new type of political organisation, the modern state, led, for its own reasons, to rulers enforcing general rules of behaviour – rules incompatible with religious discrimination.”

    https://aeon.co/amp/essays/the-modern-state-not-ideas-brought-about-religious-freedom


    If you are truly concerned about their life and not about increasing your tribe’s virility, then would it not be more responsible to leave them where they are?
     
    We are concerned about their afterlife - has zero to do with our "tribe". I'd like them to become Muslim even if they decide to wipe us all out - they'll join us as brothers in the next life.

    Peace.

  81. Talha says:
    @Anonymous
    Hi Talha, sorry I missed your post on apostasy. So it's not decided yet, but we're most likely looking at a parallel of the war on drug's personal use vs. dealing. Personal apostasy would be punishable by prison while apostasy with an intent to influence others could be punishable by death.

    I think most unz.com readers would agree the WoD has been an absolute disaster (assuming it was formulated with benign intentions) and so to apply a similar legal framework to apostasy should also invite similar social troubles. Honestly, it sounds like an absolute disaster and I think Europe should be absolutely vehement in rejecting any semblance of Islamic law, even amongst Muslims.

    I also feel sorry for my Muslim friends who are trapped on the wrong side of the line, even though they are mentally in the same place as myself. Perhaps their situation is comparable to the East Germans? How long until the wall comes down?

    To each his own
     
    Now you're being hypocritical.
    a) Non-Muslim remains non-Muslim - tolerated by Talha
    b) Non-Muslim becomes Muslim - commended by Talha
    c) Muslim remains Muslim - commended by Talha
    d) Muslim converts to non-Muslim - punishable, possibly by death

    So what is this? You want my people to join your tribe, and if they ever change their mind and want to come back, you might kill them?

    If you are truly concerned about their life and not about increasing your tribe's virility, then would it not be more responsible to leave them where they are?

    Personal apostasy would be punishable by prison while apostasy with an intent to influence others could be punishable by death.

    No – what the article I referenced is getting at is that personal apostasy would simply have no penalty. Other than the personal things it affects like; annulment of marriage, blockage of inheritance rights, etc.

    even though they are mentally in the same place as myself

    Why? Look, if they hate Islam that much, they’re not really Muslim – It’s like being Christian and hating Christ (pbuh) or something – does not compute. Who is stopping them from leaving Islam in the West? I know of people that left Islam – not personally, but those known by acquaintances – nothing happened to them – not a single person. Maybe they were shunned by family, but so what – converts into Islam get shunned by family all the time.

    Now you’re being hypocritical.

    No we’re not. It’s up to the Western countries if they want to implement apostasy laws again in their jurisdictions like they used to have centuries ago. They could implement laws that would punish people for joining Islam (or, as their original form, for leaving [the right version of] Christianity). Now if we complained at that point, that would be hypocritical. But they’d probably be hunting down unorthodox people like you also. It’s not our problem that Western countries repealed laws on blasphemy/heresy/apostasy; they made that decision without any regard for Islam whatsoever. Here is a good read:
    “Locke, Spinoza and Voltaire were all brilliant, but religious freedom in Europe was driven by statecraft not philosophy…”
    “The process of centralisation and bureaucratisation brought other important consequences. It meant that identity rules had to be abandoned. In their place, states instituted more general rules. Guilds lost their monopoly privileges. Legal systems became increasingly standardised; taxes more regularised. For states with bureaucracies and professional tax collectors, it was simply less costly to treat everyone equally. Discriminatory rules against Catholics, Protestants or Jews either became redundant over time or were eventually done away with. Though gradual and fitful, this levelling process proved inexorable and, in the long-run, irreversible….”
    “Most important perhaps is the need to recognise that liberal ideas were not necessarily responsible for the emergence of liberal societies. Instead, the rise of a new type of political organisation, the modern state, led, for its own reasons, to rulers enforcing general rules of behaviour – rules incompatible with religious discrimination.”

    https://aeon.co/amp/essays/the-modern-state-not-ideas-brought-about-religious-freedom

    If you are truly concerned about their life and not about increasing your tribe’s virility, then would it not be more responsible to leave them where they are?

    We are concerned about their afterlife – has zero to do with our “tribe”. I’d like them to become Muslim even if they decide to wipe us all out – they’ll join us as brothers in the next life.

    Peace.

    Read More
  82. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    annulment of marriage, blockage of inheritance rights, etc.

    So you lose your wife and the family estate? I’d say that’s a hell of a punishment.

    Why? Look, if they hate Islam that much, they’re not really Muslim

    That’s my point. The problem is that Muslims feel that anyone born into a Muslim family is automatically Muslim and therefore they feel righteous in applying Sharia. This particularly applies to girls, many of whom live in real fear of what their family would do if they got caught doing as a normal Western girl would. In my experience, it’s a big divider, as they’re constantly caught in this net of paranoia whenever they’re out with their Western friends and are constantly watching out for friends/family/community who may report back to their parents or spread dangerous gossip. So they don’t derive any benefit from their supposed religion, it’s just a massive burden to them.

    To be fair, this doesn’t just apply to Muslims – in my experience, a lot of Hindu girls have the same trouble to a lesser extent.

    Who is stopping them from leaving Islam in the West? I know of people that left Islam – not personally, but those known by acquaintances – nothing happened to them – not a single person.

    That’s because Muslim-controlled areas are still few and far between and are physically easily to avoid. I also wouldn’t expect it to be talked about openly, since Muslims prefer sweet dishonesty to sour honesty and, in the case of an apostate child, may simply say “I have no daughter” or “my son is dead”.

    We are concerned about their afterlife – has zero to do with our “tribe”. I’d like them to become Muslim even if they decide to wipe us all out – they’ll join us as brothers in the next life.

    How can you be concerned with something you know nothing about? Your knowledge is an arbitrary bundle of self referential nonsense. If you earnestly want to understand life/death/afterlife, please give some time to the Indic ideas of karma/rebirth. ‘The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying’ by Sogyal Rinpoche is a good way to ease in.

    We should probably wind this discussion up fairly soon as Linh Dinh’s article won’t be on the front page forever and I don’t really have much more to say. I’m still of the opinion that Islam is a very bad idea, even when embodied by a gentleman and a scholar such as yourself. I also feel that you too easily overlook the real destructive power of less civilised and less educated Muslims, who I feel make up the vast majority of the Ummah.

    Thanks for the discussion, Talha.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    So you lose your wife and the family estate?
     
    Or husband. Sure, the marriage is predicated on Islam and was built on that framework, same with inheritance rules - if you are the son you still get money even if your father hated you, he cannot write you out of the will because a pre-determined part of it is your right. Now if you want to throw the legitimacy of that entire framework behind your back - then go your own way; why should it cater to you, why should you derive any benefit from it?

    So they don’t derive any benefit from their supposed religion, it’s just a massive burden to them.
     
    This makes no sense. Who is feeding these girls, who is housing them? In Islam, that is the father's burden through their entire life until they get married. They don't have to work a day in their life. So if they want to be independent of the guarantees of that framework - then they should go and live the feminist dream; get a job, don't mooch off your parents after 18 and to hell with what they say.

    I also wouldn’t expect it to be talked about openly
     
    Bro, i live in the Muslim community. It is talked about. Nobody goes around advertising it - because it is a loss - but people aren't hiding it.

    ‘The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying’ by Sogyal Rinpoche is a good way to ease in.
     
    I'll take a listen, sure:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GTh5L44HF4

    Imam Biruni (ra) did a very deep dive (the first actually) into Vedic beliefs and practices. He tried to report them as accurately as he could:
    https://www.ibiblio.org/britishraj/Jackson9/chapter04.html


    Thanks for the discussion, Talha.
     
    Most welcome.

    Peace.

  83. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    annulment of marriage, blockage of inheritance rights, etc.
     
    So you lose your wife and the family estate? I'd say that's a hell of a punishment.

    Why? Look, if they hate Islam that much, they’re not really Muslim
     
    That's my point. The problem is that Muslims feel that anyone born into a Muslim family is automatically Muslim and therefore they feel righteous in applying Sharia. This particularly applies to girls, many of whom live in real fear of what their family would do if they got caught doing as a normal Western girl would. In my experience, it's a big divider, as they're constantly caught in this net of paranoia whenever they're out with their Western friends and are constantly watching out for friends/family/community who may report back to their parents or spread dangerous gossip. So they don't derive any benefit from their supposed religion, it's just a massive burden to them.

    To be fair, this doesn't just apply to Muslims - in my experience, a lot of Hindu girls have the same trouble to a lesser extent.

    Who is stopping them from leaving Islam in the West? I know of people that left Islam – not personally, but those known by acquaintances – nothing happened to them – not a single person.
     
    That's because Muslim-controlled areas are still few and far between and are physically easily to avoid. I also wouldn't expect it to be talked about openly, since Muslims prefer sweet dishonesty to sour honesty and, in the case of an apostate child, may simply say "I have no daughter" or "my son is dead".

    We are concerned about their afterlife – has zero to do with our “tribe”. I’d like them to become Muslim even if they decide to wipe us all out – they’ll join us as brothers in the next life.
     
    How can you be concerned with something you know nothing about? Your knowledge is an arbitrary bundle of self referential nonsense. If you earnestly want to understand life/death/afterlife, please give some time to the Indic ideas of karma/rebirth. 'The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying' by Sogyal Rinpoche is a good way to ease in.

    We should probably wind this discussion up fairly soon as Linh Dinh's article won't be on the front page forever and I don't really have much more to say. I'm still of the opinion that Islam is a very bad idea, even when embodied by a gentleman and a scholar such as yourself. I also feel that you too easily overlook the real destructive power of less civilised and less educated Muslims, who I feel make up the vast majority of the Ummah.

    Thanks for the discussion, Talha.

    So you lose your wife and the family estate?

    Or husband. Sure, the marriage is predicated on Islam and was built on that framework, same with inheritance rules – if you are the son you still get money even if your father hated you, he cannot write you out of the will because a pre-determined part of it is your right. Now if you want to throw the legitimacy of that entire framework behind your back – then go your own way; why should it cater to you, why should you derive any benefit from it?

    So they don’t derive any benefit from their supposed religion, it’s just a massive burden to them.

    This makes no sense. Who is feeding these girls, who is housing them? In Islam, that is the father’s burden through their entire life until they get married. They don’t have to work a day in their life. So if they want to be independent of the guarantees of that framework – then they should go and live the feminist dream; get a job, don’t mooch off your parents after 18 and to hell with what they say.

    I also wouldn’t expect it to be talked about openly

    Bro, i live in the Muslim community. It is talked about. Nobody goes around advertising it – because it is a loss – but people aren’t hiding it.

    ‘The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying’ by Sogyal Rinpoche is a good way to ease in.

    I’ll take a listen, sure:

    Imam Biruni (ra) did a very deep dive (the first actually) into Vedic beliefs and practices. He tried to report them as accurately as he could:

    https://www.ibiblio.org/britishraj/Jackson9/chapter04.html

    Thanks for the discussion, Talha.

    Most welcome.

    Peace.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Linh Dinh Comments via RSS