415 Comments on “Fitna by Geert Wilders”

1. djoko says:

   August 19, 2008 at 4:42 pm

   Stick with the facts and don’t give in to attempts to confuse the obvious. Islam is what Islam does.

   I, like most other Muslims, just go about my daily routine. Doing prayers, working hard, living life. Islam is what Islam does. Shame it won’t rate an article on Indonesia Matters.

2. David says:

   August 19, 2008 at 5:04 pm

   I, like most other Muslims, just go about my daily routine. Doing prayers, working hard, living life. Islam is what Islam does. Shame it won’t rate an article on Indonesia Matters.

   Damn right it won’t, sounds really boring…although I can see a humour angle to it so if you can work that in you can go for it.

   Young Djoko got up at 4.30 am, had a wash, shaved, brushed his teeth, and then performed his morning prayers. No infidels were harmed in the process. After this…..

3. barry prima says:

   August 19, 2008 at 5:57 pm

   Are you prepared to undergo the fate of Al-Hallaj whom you mentioned somewhere, the Sufi teacher from Baghdad who by saying Ana Al-Haqq (I am the Truth) also expressed this holistic and mystic paradigm. They (the righteous Muslims) cut of his hands and feet, crucified and brutally tortured him to death.

   Yes absolutely,and like al-hallaj i will never feel my brothers are wrong in bringing this fate to me.

   I concur as long as this vision remains private and recognizes that others might have visions of a different nature and contents and refrains from shouting “truth has won and falsehood disappeared…”

   There is no such thing as private,another fantasy world you so called liberals live in.WHat is the point of such a vision but to give it form in the real world.Truth and falshood(whatever they might mean) are in battle of wills,in the unending play of opposites,wether you choose to believe it or not.

   Judging from the typical Anglo-British aggressive and personally denigrating style I had suspicions already

   Only to those who understand only that level of discourse. It is a case of fight fire with fire.You starting point for any understanding of islam is hatred and a stubborn ressitance to acknowledge it possibly has any value.What do you expect?

   to understand the meaning of an ideology which causes nothing but havoc and trouble wherever it succeeded to impose itself.

   In your vision and intepretation of history,with all its apparent prejudice and hatred.

   Don’t get trapped into discussing Koranic verses with fanatics

   So i go from heretic in one paragrpah to koranic fanatic?A big leap dont you think

   are nature’s way of rebalancing things as a cosmic phenomenon and a condition for renewal and evolution, not as a means to be used by one group of people to impose its specific ideology onto others and to turn the world into a uniformity

   The fact that one group of people or actually lots of groups of people ,inclding you the liberals,secularist or whoever you may be try to impose their will,even though you disguise it as freedom),amounts to the same cosmic phenoma.

   Don’t get trapped into discussing Koranic verses with fanatics.

   Exactly the conclusion i came to a few post ago.I have a very open moinded appraoch to the quran,unlike Shokla who is the real fanatic who is trying to force his view of the quran on me.No thanxs,i wont take it for mthe Islamic fanatics,never mind non muslim one.

   Something like a phenomenon

   According to Hindu/Balinese philosophy it is man’s task to promote harmony in and between the lower (bhur), the middle (bwah) and the upper (swah) levels of existence’

   Subsittute that with animal ,vegetable ,mineral and the ruhani nature of man and its the same thing.The whole path of islam if understood is about putting these things into balance,where the spirit(ruhani)/halus) has a refining influence of the the kasar elements.(Hawa nafsu).The whole of Sufism is dedicated to creating the conditions for that.

   If youre Taosit :mind body,spirit ..
   Christian :father ,son ,holy ghost
   Hinduism:Brahma,vishnu,shiva
   Creator,preserver,destroyer…

   The trinity represents the Divine in its threefold nature and function. Each aspect of the trinity contains and includes the others.

   Sounds a bit like Islam to me.

   not to wage jihad, establish a caliphate and turn those with other convictions into dhimmis who pay jizya.

   Forget your ideas about how god should go about this business,accept the reality of how he has.Whatever god you believe in,or even if u dont ,Islam is a civilization that is here,and will continue to be here.Shouting evil,bad,immoral,wicked wont change the fact that the absolute allowed it to not only come forth ,but to maintain for 1400 years and properbly for the rest of time.You cant wish it away,you cant destroy it,in the process of trying to do so ,you will only destroy yourself.

   As long as it Recognizes that others might have visions of a different nature and contents .

   Good man,you should listen to your own advise,if only sometimes.If only you could apply that impartiality to Islam as a phenomena you might make some headway.

   You conveniently ignore the qurans statements such as `to you youre religion and to me mine.’
   The statements that reflect the opposite are of course the shivatic quality of the absolute.If you apply you own expalnation of HIndu/Balines cosmology you reach the same conclusion.

   You make long dibrates agaisnt the Islamist,but cant see the irony in your own application of the same logic as them in understanding their religion ie:in black and white terms..
   You expect a religion to be absolute in its purity and absolutely moral in black and white moral terms,when phenomena as you call it itself is not created in such an absolute fashion.

   Maybe if you understood hinduism you might understand Islam,even if only as phenomenom.

4. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

   August 19, 2008 at 9:46 pm

   @ Barry Prima

   Oh yeah .. Brown men always need to be taught. You better stick your colonialism mindset up your arse. State your agenda.

   You go from assuming im a brown man,who doesnt speak english as his first language to assuming im a white boy colonialist,better you keep you guessing in that case, its more entertaining.It would really upset the rule book,if i turned outot be chinese.

   Read again. Was that sentence assuming you’re Brown? Didn’t I said “The English didn’t banish all of their retards to Oz land”?.

   Anyway, you shy away from answering the most pertinent and nagging question put forth, “Was it halal for an old man to have sex with a pre-teen child?” Most of British White moslem say it is halal as long as one is moslem. What is your stand?

   Also you said that you invested in 3rd world country, I assumed you meant Indonesia. Let’s say I give you a benefit doubt; name me one charity organisation had you donated to. My spouse and I are actively involved in various charity organisations and chaired one which I had previously mentioned in a postings. I can do a check if you are genuine.

   Your definitely not a Chinese. Chinese worship Money. You are a Punk Rocker White man with sinister motive. You worship children private parts. Only Real Islam halalled such immoral act. A humanitarian moslem Punk Rocker (you said it yourself). That is a mouthful of oxymorons. 🙂

5. barry prima says:

   August 19, 2008 at 10:16 pm

   Your definitely not a Chinese. Chinese worship Money.

   I am a pork eating,fried noodle loving ,slanted eyed money worshipping,taoist/buddhist.confucian punk rocker convert to islam.

   Why not?

   Didnt muhammed say there are as many ways to god as there are human beings.

   Probably a lame attempt to void his responses. We are not English speakers; and usually we don’t go over what were typed.

   I assume the `we’ was reference to your fellow white/brown/yellow man..me?

   Also you said that you invested in 3rd world country.

   Do i detect a note of seriousness here?My only investment in the 3rd world was on rent boys in block m (If youre assumptons about white boys are correct,if indeed i am a white boy).

   Anyway, you shy away from answering the most pertinent and nagging question put forth, “Was it halal for an old man to have sex with a pre-teen child?”

   I believe you are being serious here.i might give that one a shot.See how i feel a bit later.

6. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

   August 19, 2008 at 10:39 pm

   @ Barry Prima,

   Your attempt to answer my question is deafening. 🙂

7. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

   August 19, 2008 at 10:40 pm

   oopsey .. your attempt to shy away from my question is deafening. 🙂

8. barry prima says:

   August 20, 2008 at 12:07 am

   Your lack of Patience is most unbecoming of a javanese man,especially one wearing the Paci.Sabar.
   Al Quran
   `Wait and i too will wait with you’.

9. dewaratugedeanom says:

   August 21, 2008 at 12:14 am

   @ barry prima

   Good man,you should listen to your own advise,if only sometimes.If only you could apply that impartiality to Islam as a phenomena you might make some headway.

   To bring this pembicaraan buntu (I don’t know the English equivalent for this expression) to an end, I managed to keep that impartiality for most of my life thanks to ignorance. Until I started reading the Koran, hadith and reviews. You are certainly well aware of the reason for it. Like many others who also weren’t born and educated within the Islamic mindset I was and still am appalled. Sorry, nothing I can do about it and the way things are evolving it certainly won’t get any better.

10. barry prima says:

    August 21, 2008 at 7:02 am

    Due to public demand, here is Sifu Primas take on the issue of AIsha/ Mohammed (pbuh)..I dont see why the Islam Haters are so keen to here an opinion on this issue here on Indonesia mattters,when it is one of the the most hotly contested elswhere on the web.It looks like the muslim baters on this forum have already done their reserach on this matter in any case and made up their minds.

    Anyway i always like a challenge,and admittedly this is a hard one.,but ill have a go myself,why not?

    Ill be honest and admit beforehand that i havent swotted and gone back to the sources themselves,i cant imagine anything more boring than a few hours of Hadith reading.
    i have instead relied upon a number of Chrisitan websites,who have gone to great pains to do do the swotting on my behalf (no doubt to save my Heathen soul.) I am just using their material to serve my own purpose,and reach a different conlusion,therby making a point about how we can make the facts say whatever we want.

    Who needs wisdom,when you got facts.?

    IN establishing what the facts of the matter we shall first consider the sources for our information

    To begin any enquiry into the islam,we must refer to what (In the eyes of muslims) is its only undisputed source :Al Quran.

    What does the quran have to say about the age of Aisha at the time of her marriage to The nabi?Unfortunately nothing.

    So any source refering to this matter is always going to be diusputable even if your a muslim..

    What are the secondary sources of information of Historical data in Islam:
    The hadith and the works of historians,if not of that period,then around the same time as the hadith.

    What does the hadith/Historians say about this matter?Plenty,unfortunately,they are inconsistent,unreliable and give different ages as we shall see later.

    What is the value of the Hadith as historical/spiritual cues in the eyes of muslim society?
    No inherent value.They do not have a sacred charecter.A muslim does not have to pay them any mind if he so wishes.There are many contradictory hadiths,even factually and statistically.A high amount of hadith are acknowledged as forgeries by muslim scholars themselves. The common practise was for one person to collect as many hadithsas he possibly could,and scrap the ones he didnt like or didnt match up to his degre of historical accuracy.Hundreds of thousands of Hadith were thus collected(about a man who died in some cased almost 3 hundred years before)
    That is why some sections of Muslim society who do not give credibility to the Hadith at all. Biggest irony is that one Hadith even quotes Muhammed as saying :

    “Do not write down anything of me except the Qur’an. Whoever writes other than that should delete it.” Ahmad, Vol. 1, page 171 .

    He said that presumably as a warning about how his legacy would be perverted not only by his own followers,but his enemies.

    So how do we get to the bottom of this?

    Well we cant prove anything absolutely,We can only make an educated guess
    To reach a decison on this matter that is at least empirically acceptable and even worth discussing,we have to take into account:
    The level of Authenticity ascribed to the hadith.(which is determind by chain of narration,and the narrator)
    The character of Muhammed in the quran.
    Consider them in the light of other facts/ideas that we have based on :
    Other Hadith
    Other sources of History
    Consideraton the relative nature of morality.

    In the light of all above,we can thus find a pattern that is if not the truth at least credible.

    Ok so lets look at the sources referingto Aishas situation.Before we do we have to acknowledge that all of them are singular narrations,so they are considered to fail the qualification criteria set by Hadith compilers themselves as to being strong hadith.
    The refernces:
    Sahih Bukhari: Compiled in 256 A.H.(ie 256 years after Muhammeds death-hmm??)
    Most authentic source of Hadith:In here we have two refernces to the age of Aisha as being 6 when bethroed and Nine when the Marriage was consumated.
    Sahih Muslm:Considered to be the second most uathentic Source.
    Two references to Aishas age.One puts it at 6 and one at 7at marriage,9 at consumation.
    There are Other sources of Hadith that also put the figure around the same age,which Pak Lauang posted elswhere (i think.)

    Narrators of these Hadtih:
    Most often quoted:Hisham
    Who was Hisham?
    Tehzibu’l-tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: “narrative reported by Hisham are reliable except those that are reported through the people of Iraq”.
    Mizanu’l-ai`tidal, a book on the [life sketches of the] narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports that when he was old, Hisham’s memory suffered quite badly. (v.4, p.301-302)
    Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq. (vol.11, p. 48 – 51)
    Also most of these narratives are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father.
    An event as well known as the one being reported, should logically have been reported by more people than just one, two or three.
    It is quite strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas.
    All the narratives of this event have been reported by narrators from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have had shifted after living in Medinah for seventy one years.

    If Hisham was mistaken, then all the people who accurately quoted him would have wrong information too,so a truckload of Hadith,if only as empirical evidence should be consigned to the scrapper.

    Other Narrators:
    An unnamed man from Quraysh is a transmitter in al-Tabari vol.7 p.7, which is a weak reference.

    Second most quoted:Muhammad ibn Amr
    He is is called weak by Ibn Abu Hatim in Al-Jarah wa al-Ta’deel: Yahya said, “he is not among those whom you would desire [to report from].” Abu Hatim asked Malik who said similar, and Yahya bin Mu’een said “People refrain from accepting his narratives”
    Al-Dhahabiy in “Siyar Aa`laam al-Nubalaa”, says that Juzjanniy said that Muhammad ibn Amr is not strong [in reliability]. Al-Dhabahiy also says Yahya ibn Qataan said Muhammad ibn Amr was not very careful in reporting narratives.
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
    So objectively without regard to any cultural factors,or other contrary information how valuable are these sources?(especially written as they were hundreds of years after muhammed passed away):

    Very questionable,but not necessarily untrue .We have to look deeper to get more clarity.

    OK moving onto historical evidence which suggest a different age :

    Firstof all Bukhari and muslim themselves ::
    Aisha is said to have joined Muhammad on the raid that culminated in the Battle of Badr, in 624 CE. (Volume 5 of Bukhari) (Book 19 Sahih Muslim)
    However, because no one below the age of fifteen was allowed to accompany raiding parties, Aisha should have been at least fifteen in 624 CE and thus at least thirteen when she was married following the Hijra in 622 CE.

    Not a definative statement ,but neverthless lets put it on the other side of the scale for the time being.

    Bukhari’s Kitab-ul-Kafalat
    “Since I reached the age when I could remember things, I have seen my parents worshipping according to the right faith of Islam. Not a single day passed but Allah’s Apostle visited us both in the morning and in the evening. When the Muslims were persecuted, Abu Bakr set out for Ethiopia as an emigrant.”
    The mention of the persecution of Muslims along with the emigration to Ethiopia clearly shows that this refers to the fifth or the sixth year of the Call. … At that time Aisha was of an age to discern things, and so her birth could not have been later than the first year of the Call.”
    Again, this would make her more than fourteen at the time of the consummation of her marriage.
    Again not as clear as direct statement,but lets put it on the other side of the scale even if its only a few spliffs worth.

    Non Hadith Sources
    IBn Hisham-Wrote the oldest surviving copy of the Prophets biography,using the same historical criteria for narration as the Hadith and wrote his piece around the same times as the Hadith (Mind you long before political correctness or before anyone had shouted :paedophile!):
    Ibn Hisham records Aisha as having converted to Islam before Umar ibn al-Khattab, during the first few years of Islam around 610 CE. In order to accept Islam she must have been walking and talking, hence at least three years of age, which would make her at least fifteen in 622 CE.

    There are other sources to suggest that Aishas age was older(Especially by a wanker call Tabniri or something).,but theyre not very reliable (even acknowledging the fact,that none of the hadith are reliable).These are often used by islamic aplogist who try too hard to prove something even when they have to refer to lunatic like Tabrini, so i wont bother quoting such sources.
    Conclusion: direct Statements override indirect implications as to age.However are the direct sources credible a historical proof?

    No,although the evidence to suggest a different age makes them less effective especialy as they were written at arouund similiar or same period by people who had no particular interest in proving that Aishas age was higher or lower.it doesnt change things too much.

11. barry prima says:

    August 21, 2008 at 7:09 am

    At this point we need to ask:
    Would this evidence be enough to condemn a person in a court of law (assuming he was still alive or even posthumously).

    Obviously no,it would be thrown out of court.So we need to look at more evidence.
    Lets do charecter profiles,social context,past history of offending, and if there is any evidence of harm as a result of the alleged Crime?(Just like a court of law would)
    Alleged crime:Paedophilia:

    Legal Definition:As a medical diagnosis, it is defined as a psychological disorder in which an adult experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent and has engaged or may engage in child sexual abuse.
    Prepubescent :
    Before the age at which a person is first capable of sexual reproduction. Who is not yet capable of sexual reproduction. Immature.
    Sexual abuse:
    The forcing of unwanted sexual activity by one person on another, as by the use of threats or coercion. Sexual activity that is deemed improper or harmful,(socially defined) as between an adult and a minor (as socially defined)or with a person of diminished mental capacity.
    According to the definition was Muhammed (pbuh) a Paedophile?

    A girl reaches puberty when she has her period. 8 to 13 years of age is the average but varies according to climate and other factors. Even if we go according to the youngest age at which her marriage was consumated ,she was not prepubescent.
    Counter argument:Because she wasnt prepubescent doesnt mean she was emotionally ready.
    According to the customs of the time,she was.A bedouin women from the sub shahra of that age even now is very much considered as woman.She is not assuming a role which nature (the ultimate judge) has not prepared her for.Emotional readiness is determined by Cultural standards and expectations.Muhammed was not transgressing the values of his time(assuming she was indeed that young)
    
    Verdict: Technically not a Paeodophile,but still makes me feel uncomfortable,she was rather young.Poor girl didnt know what she was doing,she must have been forced,raped and will grow up mentally unstable (if we are to believe it was sexual abuse according to the above definition)
    Typiocal charecter profile of Paedophile
    (Understanding the Pedophile Psyche, courtesy of the Police Federation of England & Wales: )
    “Loneliness, depression and relationship needs – this particular trait is associated with low self-esteem and lack of empathy with the victim. Many pedophiles are lonely individuals who live on their own and have found it difficult to establish relationships with adults, especially for sexual purposes. Some suffer from psychological problems and even psychotic illnesses. Here intensive treatment and monitoring is in order.”
    Low self esteem:not this man who thought he was gods gift ,not only to women but all mankind.
    Lives on their own: 9 wives,dont think he had much time to be lonely and depressed!
    Found it difficult to establish relationships with adults, especially for sexual purposes.
    Cant argues with 9 Wives and more hangers on than groupies at a Skid row concert.
    Psychotic Illness:
    Madman to some yes,Genius to others.

    Evidence of coercion/rape: Zero,

    She had two years to get ready.According to the all the evidence she herself gave in Bukhari and Muslim,she was over the moon about the whole afair.(Go and read them yourself for references, as i sure as hell cant be bothered)
    Evidence of Mental problems and sexual frigidity/promiscuity/trauma in Later life?

    Despite the fact she was the most public female figure of her time ,their is not any shred of evidence that she was unstable.In fact she grew up to be a very level headed women,and the most important preserver of her husbands legacy.She was the first female scholar in islam,maybe even in history?She taught hundreds of students.
    “Abu Musa said: Whenever there was any hadith that was difficult [to understand] for us, the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, and we asked Aisha we always found that she had knowledge about that hadith.”
    “Musa ibn Talha said: I never saw anyone more eloquent than Aisha.”

    When she wasnt acting the historian,she was making one of her famous laments about her dearly departed dream lover.No doubt she belived she would be queen of the houris in the afterlife(despite the fact they dont really exist and are symbolic manifestations of pure thoughts and acts commited in this life).

    Counter argument:These barbaric sand niggers dont know whats good for them,they dont know that theyre oppressed.Any happinness they feel is only illusionary,you dont know happiness unless youve got the latest ipod,Mobile phone and your Warholian 10 minutes of fame on a reality TV show.

    Anyway im still not convinced ,so lets look at other aspects of his charecter in the light of the Quran and other hadiths.
    Marriage History:
    First wife :15 years older than him.Later wifes : Mixed ages,two were in their 60’s at the time.One was 26 when she got married.The rest age unknown,or unknown at least to me ,as i cant be bothered .I know at least one of the others had at least two children before marrying Muhammed.
    Evidence of Paeodophilia according to Marraige history: 0.
    If anything prefered older women.Neverthless he night have swung all ways,for arguments sake and liked a bit of young stuff once in a while.

    Evidence to Suggest this was the case:0
    Evidence to the contrary based on general pattern of sexual behaviour :

    Muhammed(pbuh) didnt limit his sexual experimentation to one person,so why should he do so in respect to young girls?. He could have had any number of child brides he wished but only took the one that was the daughter of his best mate who himself must have been a paedophile to agree to it .Right?

    Any Evidence to suggest he was not a Paedo?
    He waited 2/3 years before Consumating his marriage?So we can assume if he became a paeodophile it was 2 years after he had the chance to become one?
    Why did he wait two years?
    He was witing for the fruit to ripen i suppose.He was quite specific about the age of his child victims.
    Alternatively: He recognised that although spiritually and politically it was a good idea,he was concerned she was too young,physically and emotionally and wanted her to get used to the idea.PLus that and the small matter of having to fight the pesky infidels.

    Also, when Khawlah bint Hakim suggested to him to marry Aisha, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, thought thoroughly whether to accept or to refuse. He took into consideration his relation with Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him).
    (you can tell that last paragraph, was a copy and paste job cant you?)

    Verdict: Evidence strongly suggest that the accused does not have paedophilic charecter.

    I dont give a sh*t what your manipulation of the evidence says ,if youre being honest with your self, marrying young girl (even though technically not prepubescent)when youre old enough to be her grandad is plain wrong just admit it?After all you wouldnt marry a nine year old would you?

    No i wouldnt marry a nine year old,nor would i marry a 65 year old,even if i was sixty five myself,especially when i could have someone younger.Nor would i choose to be a prophet.However if i was born 1400 years ago,or actually even if i was born now in a different society i would have different ideas.In making a decision about a relationship to someone else i would use the same criteria as the prophet did,wherever i was in the world at whatever time.

    Will it benefit me socially,spiritually?Does the other person want to make a relationship with me?If i am the older party,will my relationship with her bring her harm?How does her family feel about this?What does she get out of it?Will we be Socially ostracised,if so is it worth trouble?

    Even in my currrent environment in the land of the infidels, if i was honest with myself when im 50 or so,if i have the same good looks and charisma of the prophet(as well as his legendary sexaul prowesss) i would consider marrying a 16 year old (comparable equivalent to a nine year old Bedouin in Arabia)who wanted to marry me.(assuming my already existing wife,didnt object too much).After all some of my chinese friends who are in their fifties have mistressses around 16/18 age even now in England,Indonesia and Hong Kong.(Mas Aluang you should know how accurate that is)

    In some cases,both parties are just exploiting each other for sex on one side and money on the other.However in alot of cases,its even kind of noble.It threw me at first,especailly being raised in the west , but i got used to it after actually knowing the people themselves and their personal circumstances.
    Typical Scenario:
    Guy has money,wife is dead or plays mahjong all day.Guy grew up poor and made it as a big man.He needs a challenge and someone to remind him that he is still alive.Hell he may even have a caring side and wants to bring up(the social ladder) somebody who reminds him of his improvished life as young man in China town.
    Girl :quite often from a poor family,or alternatively rich family who want to get richer.Girl from poor family is only child or eldest daughter and is thus responsible for her parents.Guy takes her under her wing,gives her a job as his secetary and looks after her whole family.Girl is usually loyal to her sugar daddy,because how much he has done for her.Everybody wins.Nothing dirty or seedy about it.Everybody knows whats going on,but ignore discussing it,as the needs of real life,are more immediate than high principles which are invented by sexually impotent puritans.
    Although I wouldnt quite act like this myself,i am not going to condemn someone who does.In some situations,i can see something real and beautiful between not just two people(in this case between families)Chinese people in Asia,still think social rather than individualistic terms,So did the prophet,whose every marriage (except his first love marriage)was based on wider social benefits it woud bring to the community.

    In case my yellow brothers find this reference to their community objectionable,expecially when it is used to legitimise the no fun faith of the brown skinned slaves,who are only fit to be pembantus and underpaid Chauffers,even in their own country.,ill also give you examples from my experince of Arab communities.

    When i lived in Arab countries ,i quite often saw marriages where there was a hugh gulf between partners.One particular case i rember ,as it was quite close to my heart,was that of an 88 year old man whose wife was in her 30’s.
    Old 90 year old man,had a walking stick,but had a hugh glow about him all the time.He was a real geezer,randy as hell,despite his age.Was even thinking about another wife.
    Would expect the wife to be tearing her hair out?
    On the contrary his wife was one of the funniset people i ever met.About as ridiculoulsy happy as her husband.They were the most lively couple in the village.Homegirl was not feeling oppressed from what i saw every day.
    My particular example is not proof of anything,im just trying to show,how the actual realities of life are often so different than superficial ideas of morality that we inherit from our culture.Personal experince of the actual parties involved give a lot more clarity than judging from moral high horse from millions of miles away.

    That just shows your a dirty old man?
    A dirty old man,according to a moral definition that is even in the west only just more than hundred or so years old. (The common-law marriage age for women was 12)

    Old man(not yet) but in the above hypothetical scenario( yes),but dirty?(no lah ,not me!)

    You could call me dirty if i wanted to do things against her will,that she had no comprehension of ,that she would get no benefit from,that was determined from the outset by lust.In the prophets relationship to Aisha,there is no suggestion that his thinking about the matter was that of a dirty old man.Nor were the results of his relationship indicative of that.

    My Conclusion:

    Still not sure about the age thing,im not going to try and prove Aisha was 18 or something as that would be based on proof just as shaky as trying to proove she was 9.
    But in the end im gonna give Muhammed the benefit of the doubt,especially in the overall context of his life and mission.Maybe even if she was 9 its not such a bad thing.Depends what kind of 9 year old she was and what kind old man he was.I cant see any evidence of harm done to either party,but lots of good,so it must have been a marriage between two suitable people of suitable age.

12. djoko says:

    August 21, 2008 at 11:38 am

    To bring this pembicaraan buntu (I don’t know the English equivalent for this expression) to an end, I managed to keep that impartiality for most of my life thanks to ignorance. Until I started reading the Koran, hadith and reviews. You are certainly well aware of the reason for it. Like many others who also weren’t born and educated within the Islamic mindset I was and still am appalled. Sorry, nothing I can do about it and the way things are evolving it certainly won’t get any better.

    It is funny how it works because I was much the same in the sense I come from a non-Islamic background, only difference being that I only ever was told the bad stuff about Islam (or rather about what Muslims do). Once I started reading the Qur’an, hadiths and so forth I actually came to see a lot of good in the religion itself, despite the failings of a lot of Muslims. The good I saw was reinforced further when I came to Indonesia and saw how Muslims lived on the everyday level.

    Different experiences I suppose.

13. Cukurungan says:

    August 21, 2008 at 1:00 pm

    Still not sure about the age thing,im not going to try and prove Aisha was 18 or something as that would be based on proof just as shaky as trying to proove she was 9.
    But in the end im gonna give Muhammed the benefit of the doubt,especially in the overall context of his life and mission.Maybe even if she was 9 its not such a bad thing.Depends what kind of 9 year old she was and what kind old man he was.I cant see any evidence of harm done to either party,but lots of good,so it must have been a marriage between two suitable people of suitable age.

    What does it mean..if the respectable gentlemen and gentlewomen only want to believe that one Hadist is the truth while other thousand hadist is wrong.

    It is funny how it works because I was much the same in the sense I come from a non-Islamic background, only difference being that I only ever was told the bad stuff about Islam (or rather about what Muslims do). Once I started reading the Qur’an, hadiths and so forth I actually came to see a lot of good in the religion itself, despite the failings of a lot of Muslims. The good I saw was reinforced further when I came to Indonesia and saw how Muslims lived on the everyday level.

    Friend, It is not funy , you must be an Paki Ustadz undercover, ask to Pak Aluang Islam does not bring any good to Indonesia…Islam is only about wife beating, bombing and f***king how dare you a white boy to teach Javanese about Islam

14. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

    August 21, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    @ Barry Prima,

    I will read your argument when I get back home tommorrow.

    @ djoko,

    I was born a moslem, so was my father and grandfather; same goes with most pris. My wife’s family trees went even further. Her families were descended from the 1st wali. Javanese moslems are tolerant because they are pseudo moslem. Try to live among the real moslems in Saudi Arabia, or most other Islamic countries. Ask them if holy Mother Theresa can visit the kaaba to start with.

15. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

    August 21, 2008 at 1:18 pm

    @ Cukurangan

    Yes, Paki Ustadz smells just as bad as Indians. No offence but I just don’t like Palm oil or Coconut oil as body deodorant.

16. barry prima says:

    August 21, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    My wife’s family trees went even further. Her families were descended from the 1st wali.
    Based onwhat evidence? The evidence i would imagine is even less reliable than that purpoting to prove the age of aisha at the time of marriage.
    Their is little evidence to actually proove the wali existed,apart from oral tradtions and historic signpost.

    I for one do believe in the wali songo,(most properbly because iwant to)and you are not the first i have met who claims descedent from the.Hell from one side of the family i myself might have been desendent from them.!

    The fact you is propperbly dont have any evidence whatsoever.

    Javanese moslems are tolerant because they are pseudo moslem.
    So now the javanese patriot (who rejects his own heritage) takes the word of the white Western anthroppologist (geeets,Mulders et al) that his ancestors were stupid and never true muslims.?

    Thats pseudo muslim tag applied to the javanese,is dependent on how you define Islam.
    As i said previously ,there has never been a pure/true Islam,and thank god for that!
    In my experince of both cultures ,Indonesians are much more islamic in certain aspects than arabs,and less in others.

    Your rational for deciding what true Islam is to take the word of some people simply because they say so,or because they shout the loudest or drop a few bombs to make the point?I wouldnt call that very scinetific/rational would you?

17. Shloka says:

    August 21, 2008 at 6:06 pm

    @ djoko and every else,

    Of course everyone’s experience is different, unique and the right to switch religions or leave religion altogether is a basic human right, universally accepted in the Declaration of Human Rights, which you like anyone else is completely entitled to.

    Actually, what bothered me about Islam was the Prophet’s(IMO) unneccessary force used on the Meccan polytheists and his destruction of their way of life.

    I’ve read about Islam, the Prophet’s life and what is stated about Pre Islamic Saudi Arabia in Islamic sources, and for all its supposed faults (and maybe the faults were exaggerated, as history is written by the winners) it seems to be an incredibly multi cultural society. Though the Meccan polytheists were a clear majority, there were people of various other faiths, and it seems that the people generally respected freedom of religion. Converting to another faith was allowed, or how would Khadija’s cousin Waraqa bin Nawfal have converted to Christianity? Waraqa after his conversion to Christianity continued to reside happily in Saudi Arabia, and Prophet Mohammed(PBUH) discussed religion with him. Today it would be a capital offence in Saudi Arabia and many Muslim nations to convert to Christianity, so a Waraqa bin Nawfal would have to seek asylum in U.S.A. or Italy 😉

    Then we have Ka’ab ibn Al Ashraf, famous as someone plotting to harm the Muslims whom Mohammed ordered to be assasinated. Ka’ab ibn Al Ashraf was born of a Jewish mother and an Arab father and followed his mother’s religion, Judaism, not his father’s Meccan polytheism. It must also be remembered that an overwhelming majority of Muslim nations, even the more progressive ones like Malaysia require anyone marrrying a Muslim to convert to Islam. A Jewish woman, Jemima Goldsmith converted to Islam to marry Imran Khan, so a Kaab ibn al Ashraf would be unthinkable in the Middle East too. The Jews lived in perfect comfort in Saudi, yet long before the Israel issue, Jews were put into discomfort in Muslim states, besides paying the Jiziya tax, they had to wear a yellow badge in Baghdad in the Middle Ages, something Hitler later adopted.

    A Saudi Arabia which could produce a Waraqa bin Nawfal who lived a happy and safe life despite his conversion to Christianity, and which could let a Kaab ibn Al Ashraf’s Arab father freely marry a Jewess and even raise his offspring as a Jew, doesn’t seem to me to be a hotbed of fundamentalism or religious persecution. There seems to be no real opposition to a new or foreign faith, although its natural that there’d be opposition to a faith which interfered forcibly with the old majority Meccan polytheistic faith. Maybe the Mecca polytheists and Jews had strong reason to suspect that tolerance to their ways of life would come to an end once Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) won?

    In any case, that suspicion proved to be true. When Prophet Mohammed’s(PBUH) victorious armies marched forth into Mecca, he smashed every single one of the 360 idols surrounding the Kaaba chanting, “Truth has won and falsehood departed, as falsehood is ever bound to depart.” If I compare it to the WTC attack on September 11, the Taliban by killing nearly 3000 Americans in a single day provided the casus belli for America’s invasion of Afghanistan. The Taliban were hostile to U.S.A. as are significant portions of the Muslim population. So any fanatic Muslims, who pose a grave threat to others’ life and limb should indeed be destroyed, like any fanatic Christian, Hindu, Jew or Wiccan posing threat to the life and limb of others but a place of worship isn’t a war zone. Since none have seen God the 360 idols venerated by the Meccans were as much god as Allah. I would support an American or anyone attacking a Saudi Arabia if all the fanatic Saudis posed a threat to the rest of humanity, but I’d never support or respect a President Bush who smashed the Mecca and Medina mosques and the kaaba chanting , “Truth has won…” I’d immediately lose respect for such a guy, as even if I’m not too fond of the Saudis, they have a belief, and I respect their right to their belief and worship.

18. barry prima says:

    August 21, 2008 at 7:27 pm

    Shokla:

    Rant and rave..nobody wants to hear what u say..especially as you have proven yourself to be am imbecile and a fanatic once too often…you seem to think by saying that same thing (basically)over and over again ,means it will make sense at some point?Not even to you i suspect.doth protest too much me thinks!

    You and cukuraungan should stick to racial insults at each other..even on that score you dont seem to be doing too well..

    What does it mean..if the respectable gentlemen and gentlewomen only want to believe that one Hadist is the truth while other thousand hadist is wrong.

    If we apply a culinary metaphor,it means the javanese man is indeed the best qualified to cook up a recipe for the defining charecter of ISlam.

    He understands the benefit of mixing the sweet and sour.

    The white man,makes everything look nice,but his culinary effrots taste bland and unsatisfying.The spaniards and Italians ahave some decent food ,a bit of roman catholic zeal puts some spice into things.

    The indian : Uses too many spices.Leaves a bad after taste, bad breath and diareah.(yeah spelt wrong)>All those gods and godesses ,is a case of too many cooks spoil the broth.If they could strip it down to the essentials,as islam tried to help them to do,could be onto a winner.

    The arab. Virtually no spices ,so the main dish is tasteless,too basic in his approach to cuisine.
    Too much sugar in his snacks.Leads to weight problems(too much baggage) and diabetes.(high blood pressure,and an inabiltiy to control ones emotions)

    The China man:Good basic appraoch to cuisine.However takes the whole thing too far.Too many cats ,dogs and pigs results only in leaving an animal with a human face.

    The African:unfortunately ,cannot afford any of the ingredients,so is a non beginer.

19. Shloka says:

    August 21, 2008 at 8:22 pm

    You seem to describe yourself barry prima.

20. Shloka says:

    August 21, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    @ barry prima,

    Actually, I was addressing my post to djoko, who’d asked what offends me about Muslims and Islam. I’ve lost any interest of discussing anything under the sun with you the after the post where you narrated a story of an adulterous woman submitting herself to stoning.These are the exact same punishments which the Algerian Islamist terrorists hope to impose if and when they get to power. Thank goodness its neighbour Tunisia puts a strong front against Islamists, has nothing to do with democracy and so is infinitely more progressive, albeit its not due to the people but the progressive dictators who keep a tight leash on the mullahs. I quite dislike your irrational hatred of atheists and materialists, and would feel far more comfortable in the company of an awoved materialist than anyone suggesting stoning for adultery.

    Please go ahead and write how I rant and rave…

    I neither expected nor wanted a you to respond to any post of mine, although I consider djoko to be fully capable of debate and discussion.

21. Lairedion says:

    August 23, 2008 at 1:29 am

    Nice debate. Keep on talking guys. I think we have found our new Dawud Farquhar, another infamous bule convert.

22. barry prima says:

    August 23, 2008 at 3:30 am

    I think we have found our new Dawud Farquhar, another infamous bule convert.

    I am not revert/convert to anything, I only pose as a muslim in certain circumstances out of an instinctive need to champion the cause of the underdog.

    ‘I’m not a Jew, I’m not a Muslim, I’m not a Christian, I’m not a this, I’m not a that, I am every man’

    Rumi

23. barry prima says:

    August 23, 2008 at 4:59 am

    Please go ahead and write how I rant and rave…

    I neither expected nor wanted a you to respond to any post of mine, although I consider djoko to be fully capable of debate and discussion.
    Duh..

    A) make your second sentence consistent with the first.
    b) I don’t need to write and essay about how you rant and rave, if I did I would indeed be ranting and raving wouldn’t I? Of course I can’t expect the logic of that to makes sense to you.

    I do not take great pleasure in taking a condescending tone to anyone, but if you bring the ruckus, my jihad will you.

    dewaratugedeanom Says:

    Sorry, nothing I can do about it.

    You don’t need to be sorry about it to anyone but yourself really. If you go around thinking a billion people are completely deluded about the basis on which they live their lives, then you must have a very strong belief that you’re understanding of reality is somehow fool proof. I think that is the biggest delusion you can have.

    At least acknowledge the possibility their is something about this religion that you haven’t figured out yet.

    You are certainly well aware of the reasons for it.

    I am, and I can very easily understand how distasteful Islam can appear to others. But I just don’t happen to think your reasons are very enlightened especially when they lead to such acrimony towards something that is held to be sacred by 1/5 of the world.

    I don’t particularly like islam myself sometimes and if something better was out there for me, I’d take it, but there is nothing out there that does it for me, or anyone all the time.

    If people believe that their is some kind of magic system out there that has all the answers (like the fanatics do, because they are too chicken sh*t to figure it out for themselves) then they really don’t have much of a chance.

    It is this black and white approach to religons, that leads to misunderstandings on both sides.

    At the end of the day, religions provide structures/practises which you can use to gain understanding of your true nature and purpose. They’re only a tool, the results they produce are dependent on how they are used.

24. dewaratugedeanom says:

    August 23, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    djoko said

    Different experiences I suppose.

    Experiences by themselves are not enough to explain the stance somebody takes on certain issues. Logical reasoning and comparative investigation also play an important role in the making of an opinion. I will try to explain in as few words as possible why I reject the Koran and the religion based on it as much as I do.

    1. I cannot prove that god exists. Neither can I prove the contrary. However to explain Being an sich I have to revert to an unfathomable Absolute Reality from which Everything (the phenomenal universe and its content) emanates and forms a part.

    2. I notice that Everything isn’t static but evolving. Everything being a part of the Absolute Reality, I suppose this Reality is also participating in this evolution.

    3. This ‘Everything’ seems to function according to certain ‘Laws’ and ‘Principles’. These universal Laws and Principles give rise to concepts of entities that govern Everything. These concepts are usually called gods or deities.

    4. If Everything is already submitted to these deities, I see no reason why they, or the Absolute Reality they represent, should send messages with moral orders to individuals who call themselves prophets. By doing so the Absolute Reality would prove itself to be a fallacy because it implies that Everything is not completely under the control of its Laws and Principles (deities). Instead of an Absolute Reality it becomes a lesser Reality that can be contested by not following its orders. It is no longer absolute and hence a contradiction in terms.

    5. So common sense tells me there is no such thing as a deity who sends messages to prophets on behalf of humans who emanated from him and are a part of himself. At least if I go out from a monist point of view that there is only one Ultimate Reality which encompasses Everything.

    6. This rationale leads me to the conclusion that a human being who proclaims he received messages delivered by a supreme god for the guidance of mankind is either delusional and suffering from psychopathic disorders like paranoia or schizophrenia, or he is a charlatan who is using the credulity and ignorance of his fellow humans. A third possibility is that this ‘prophet’ started out as someone suffering from delusional visions but later became aware of the possibilities these ‘revelations’ presented for his personal agenda to control the Kaaba, an important source of local economic profit (pilgrimage).

    7. The method he used by combining a moral paradigm with brutal violence has proven successful to attract a wide following. The rest is history.

    The constant leitmotiv of the Koran is reward and punishment in the afterlife. I personally don’t see any reason why humans have to be put to the test to enter a hypothetical paradise resp. hell after death. Why do we have to wait until we die and rely on promises that until now no one has been able to substantiate?

25. Shloka says:

    August 23, 2008 at 4:52 pm

    I found this lovely poem by Rumi

    The Carnal Soul

    ” Your self (nafs) is the mother of all idols:
    the material idol is a snake, but the spiritual idol is a dragon.
    ‘Tis easy to break an idol, very easy;
    to regard the self as easy to subdue is folly, folly.
    O son, if you would know the form of the self,
    read the description of Hell with its seven gates.
    From the self at every moment issues an act of deceit;
    and in each of those deceits a
    hundred Pharaohs and their hosts are drowned.”

    Thus the material idols is a smake, but of course the spiritual idol is much worse, a dragon. Here, Sufism interprets “idols” as bad qualities, and breaking of idols as destroying one’s bad qualities. This is a very nice way of interpreting, I guess.

    I’ll try to apply the principles of Sufism to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. In the Mein Kampf Hitler says, “I’m convinced I’m acting on behalf of the Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I’m doing the Lord’s work.”

    If only Nazi could interpret the term “Jews” as their own inner wicked qualities, a Holocaust might’ve been prevented. Unfortunately most couldn’t and Jews had to pay with their lives. Likewise the Taliban couldn’t interpret idols as “inner qualities” and sought to use the plain meaning of the terms, leading to the destruction of a World Heritage Site.:-(

    I’m not sure which one is misinterpretation.

26. Aluang Anak Bayang says:

    August 23, 2008 at 10:04 pm

    @ Barry Prima,

    I have yet to read your Mohammad novel but I will response to this one:

    I for one do believe in the wali songo,(most properbly because iwant to)and you are not the first i have met who claims descedent from the.Hell from one side of the family i myself might have been desendent from them.!

    Huh? Both sides of the families descended from the same family trees. White Boy needs to learn a bit about Javanese culture, or Asian culture in general because commenting as an expert in this forum. Incest is haram to Brown men in case you don’t know. 🙂

27. Lairedion says:

    August 24, 2008 at 12:56 am

    Good explanation, dewa. It pretty much sums up my view as well. I’m sick and tired of this vain talk about the existence of God.

    Why put stock in religion? By the word religion we have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God. We have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves (the children, the poor, wildlife and nature), and goodness. The decisions you make every day will determine if you are a good person – or not.

    I agree with dewa, we cannot prove God exists or not but the existence of God is completely irrelevant. Self-understanding is the key to find solutions for our problems.

28. barry prima says:

    August 24, 2008 at 5:49 am

    dewaratugedeanom:
    I know you did not direct your statements to me, as it seems you want to avoid debating with a muslim who actually has the ability to project a good argument, but I will respond to them anyway, as I am sure you will read them.
    I do acknowledge that despite your anti -islamic stance, unlike Shokla you still actually have some measure of objectivity left.

    However to explain Being an sich I have to revert to an unfathomable Absolute Reality from which Everything (the phenomenal universe and its content) emanates and forms a part.

    SOUNDS LIKE ALLAH TO ME.

    Say: He is Allah,
    The One and Only.
    “Allah, the Eternal, Absolute.
    “He begets not, nor is He begotten.
    And there is none like unto Him.”
    [Al-Qur’an 112:1-4]

    “No vision can grasp Him
    But His grasp is over
    All vision: He is
    Above all comprehension,
    Yet is acquainted with all things.”
    [Al-Qur’an 6:103]

    The fact you have failed to see something that’s so obviously parallels you own thoughts in the quran shows how blind you have been in your study of it.

    The quran does not however limit god to his impersonal nature it also (in the interest of preserving his unity) articulates him in his personal nature. For if everything does emanate from the one, how can the emanation also not be the one and thus be unfathomable?

    The infinite can be fathomable (although there is no such word) by way of its imprint on the finite world.
    That is what is meant by Allah cannot be known by speculation but by referring to his his ayats (signs) in the phenomenal world, most precisely in your own selves.

    By reducing god to an abstraction and failing to see his interdependency and objectification in the world, including through religion, you are avoiding the issue somewhat, whilst simultaneously hiding behind an illusionary idea of objectivity.

    Sorry if this sounds offensive, but it is rather embarassing for someone who uses the symbol of yin yang as his avatar, to fail to grasp its most elementary meaning.

    2

    I notice that Everything isn’t static but evolving. Everything being a part of the Absolute Reality, I suppose this Reality is also participating in this evolution.

    Evolution as you describe it here is subject to the understanding that time itself has an absolute quality to it, which is mysticism is generally regarded as an illusionary concept, esp in Taoism. Time is a phenomenon that the absolute cannot be limited or defined by, otherwise it would not be absolute, would it?

    Time only exist in a world that is relative. (Although the relativity of the world is valid only for people in it,not the people who have transcended it, or the absolute itself)
    Static/evolving,…good/evil….you can’t help philosophising in such terms to define something that is outside of duality, separation/5 elements/the 10000 things.

    3. This ‘Everything’ seems to function according to certain ‘Laws’ and ‘Principles’.

    LAWS AND PRINCIPLES MEANS REWARD/PUNISHMENT/KARMA..THEReBY YOU INVALIDATE YOUR FINAL POINT OF NO JUDGMENT BY WAY OF POINT 2.
    You have nice ideas buy you do not partake in the so called evolution you talk about, because you do not take them to their conclusion, merely abandoning them when they come up against something you don’t like.

    These universal Laws and Principles give rise to concepts of entities that govern Everything. These concepts are usually called gods or deities.

    So Allah (or islam if you prefer) must thus be the manifestation of one of those deities, right? What else can he be according to you own analogy?
    According to the quran Allah is the most merciful but also the avenger (his mercy overrides his wrath, being the finalizing formula). So he must be more than one deity, considering his 99 attribute (which also symbolises totality/forever in chinese numerology) he can only be logically, according to your own criteria be the absolute itself, regardless of the fact that you wish that god didn’t have these attributes. The fact that you only ignoring the totality of god as articulated by himself in the quran is a reflection of your own limitations, not the qurans.

    If Everything is already submitted to these deities, I see no reason why they, or the Absolute Reality they represent, should send messages with moral orders to individuals who call themselves prophets.

    If everything is already submitted (which indeed it is) that does not necessarily exclude the actual sending of messengers, in fact it is only by sending messengers or prophets that this submission is actualised or evidenced. If their is no need to send prophets then their is no need to create the universe either. Unless as god says in al quran:
    I was a hidden treasure, and I wanted to be known.
    It is only to manifest the quality of submission (which by necessity must exist in order to manifest freedom) that we are given moral sensibilities.

    Your’e trying to make the absolute amoral but then rejecting his manifestation in the quran on moral grounds that by the very definition you use, reject his absoluteness?
    Also if you limit prophets to moral characters only (and thereby ignoring their avartaric nature) then it creates certain problems in your metaphysics. (but that’s going off on a tangent)

    By doing so the Absolute Reality would prove itself to be a fallacy because it implies that Everything is not completely under the control of its Laws and Principles (deities). Instead of an Absolute Reality it becomes a lesser Reality that can be contested by not following its orders. It is no longer absolute and hence a contradiction in terms.

    SOMETHING CANNOT BE ABSOLUTE,UNLESS IT HAS THE POTENTIAL AND EXERCISES THAT POTENTIAL TO BE LESS THAN ABSOLUTE. THE ONLY WAY IT CAN EMPHASISE ITS ABSOLUTENESS IS DEPENDENT ON ITS MANIFESTATION OF NON ABSOLUTENESS .

    There is no divinity (or reality or absolute) (la-ila-ha-ilalah) except the sole divinity (or reality or absolute) and muhammed is the messenger (the spokesman, intermediary,manifestation or symbol) muhammed-dur-rusullullah.

    The sahadah is making two assertions, two certitudes, two levels of reality and their inherent interdependence which solve the problem of dichotomy of existence.

    THE SHAHADAH AND THE QURAN PROVIDE THE MOST COMPLETE ARTICULATION OF YIN YANG METAPHYSICS IN EXISTENCE.

    The first of these certainties is god alone is and the second is “all things are attached to god”. In other words nothing is is absolutely evident save the absolute, then following this truth: All manifestation and so all that IS relative is attached to the absolute.
    OR IN OTHER WORDS;
    Only the absolute is absolute,not the world, which is only a manifestation of the absolute.
    Muhammed is the perfect manifestation of the absolute in the realm of world, as he is the complete and full articulation in the macrocosmic loci that is man, of the totality of god’s attributes.
    The emulation of character of Muhammed (in his exercise of his attributes/qualities in the face of circumstances, not the circumstances themselves) is thus the way to transform your experience of reality from the mundane and relative into the transcendental and absolute.

    Muhammed is the last prophet and the complete personification of the logos, the other prophets do not share his status as they only personified certain aspects of the logos (Buddha,Jesus Moses,Confucius) Peace be upon them all.

    The shadah is a more perfect and complete articulation of the hindu mantra :
    `All things are Atma’

    So common sense tells me there is no such thing as a deity who sends messages to prophets on behalf of humans who emanated from him and are a part of himself.

    There is no such thing that can objectively be called common sense, it is only a product of one’s own experience and application of what you call rational observation in the context of ones experience of reality.

    Again you are applying a relative faculty, to understand something that is not relative.

    To understand something that is absolute, you must access a part of yourself that is itself absolute. If you disbelieve in the existence of such a potential, then you really have no chance.

    Most muslims and christians and people of faith understand their limited ability to comprehend the absolute (on a certain level) and therefore do give an absolute value to their own subjective experience of reality. You might call that blind faith but by such a recognition, which in fact is only a concession to a deeper part of the self which does know the absolute, they are saved, by what can be called a process of grace.

    If one wishes to be saved (even if it from oneself) and we all need saving, one only has to have faith in the possibility that one can indeed be saved. If you reject that possibility, then you undermine its ability to activate itself when it will be required in the face of khusf (unveiling) after death when the reality of yourself will be revealed to you.

    Personally don’t see any reason why humans have to be put to the test to enter a hypothetical paradise resp. hell after death.

    Personally & don’t see being the defining words here.

    You already have existence in one realm that is both Heaven and Hell (this world)

    You are already being tested by life, whichever ideology you adhere to, the every day experience of life testifies to that.

    When you die this experience is transplanted from the sphere of relativity into the sphere of the absolute, which is inevitable as it is only part of the whole and thus cannot fail once again to return to it.

    Why do we have to wait until we die and rely on promises that until now no one has been able to substantiate?

    why do we even have to be born? See above …

    That is why the best way to find out is to do what that sufis say and `die before you die’.

    When you say no one, no one in your experience. I have met plenty of people who have experiences with people from beyond the grave, a lot of whom are not muslim. You will find that particularly prevalent in Indonesia’s totok chinese communities.

    Of course your take on such experiences is that its just another delusion. Everything that doesn’t correspond to your sensibilities is delusion?

    7. The method he used by combining a moral paradigm with brutal violence has proven successful to attract a wide following.

    I presume that the laws and principles that give rise to gods and deities are also governing the brutal violence and manifesting the moral paradigm?

    Presented for his personal agenda to control the Kaaba, an important source of local economic profit (pilgrimage).

    That is why he gave a way all the money he had, died without a penny to his name, slept on a mat on the floor, and showed no desire for the wealth that could have been his. You are not even being factual here.

    You are smart man, but you would be a lot smarter if you recognised your’e not as smart as you think.

29. dewaratugedeanom says:

    August 25, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    barry prima

    Due to public demand, here is Sifu Primas take on the issue of AIsha/ Mohammed (pbuh)..I dont see why the Islam Haters are so keen to here an opinion on this issue here on Indonesia mattters,when it is one of the the most hotly contested elswhere on the web.It looks like the muslim baters on this forum have already done their reserach on this matter in any case and made up their minds.

    I consider this entire pedo-Aisha-hype a non-event, a bait for normal people’s innate instinct to protect children but thankfully seized by Islam apologists as an opportunity to divert the attention from the core of the matter, i.e. brainwashing and submission to a totalitarian ideology.

    I will read your post of August 24 later when I have time.

30. dewaratugedeanom says:

    August 25, 2008 at 10:18 pm

    You are smart man, but you would be a lot smarter if you recognised your’e not as smart as you think.

    Before I start reading your post let me clear out a misunderstanding. The last thing on my mind is to enter a debating contest to show off intelligence. Ego-tripping by playing the devil’s advocate is not on my agenda.

    @ all

    Time-out for a while. Have fun.