Hindu-Muslim dialogue VII

Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Ruzan Shah - Venugopal Hindu-Muslim dialogue continues
Dear Ruzan Shah,
Unless we define the word ‘idol’, we are getting nowhere. In our context, discussing religion and all that, including Hinduism, idol simply means a reflection or representation of the divine or God. Allah, the word as uttered by man, represents Allah who is the creator and who is beyond our grasp. Therefore, Allah the word for man is an idol, in the form of sound and language. The Ka’aba, the Quran and Mohammad (with some special prayers after his name every time you utter his name) are all idols because they represent the divinity of Allah. You might be worshiping only Allah, but since you cannot worship Allah without the aid of Kabaa (for direction), the Quran (for the words of prayers) and Mohammad (for without him would you have known Allah?), they are all idols you worship in Islam, without you conceding it, because it is said in the Quran “Thou shall not worship idols.” Hindus too are only worshiping the creator or the ultimate or whatever they choose to call him through various idols. Therefore, I say, the Hindu and the Muslim, both being human beings, have no escape from being an idol worshipper.
That Islamic culture is intolerant is easily proved by the fact that in most Muslim countries, non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens. And Islam itself is intolerant is proved by the fact that Islam teaches that it alone is the true religion and that all other religions are of lesser value and its followers are Kafirs.

You say Shariat is there to show all the people how to live a peaceful civilized life. Saudi Arabia, which is being run on the basis of shariat, as was the Taliban regime, are hardly the epitomes of peaceful or civilized societies. Saudi Arabia is more a police state than a peaceful state. And the Taliban was hardly a civilized entity, its greatest triumph having been the blowing up of Buddha idols in Bamian.

I agree the Shariat has been intact in its original pure form, but it is an obscurantism in the modern world. Instead of adjusting the Shariat to cope with the modern world (which you can’t, as it is part of Quran and not a world can be altered), Muslims are attempting to change the world according to the laws of Shariat! It is simply unfeasible because the Shariat has not taken into account the progress the world has made since the middle ages. On the other hand, the Shariat portion of the Hindu religions, called Smriti, is not a collection of dead laws being sought to be imposed on the world. The Hindu culture allows new elements to be incorporated in its ever living Smiriti, so much so that we have now come from Manusmirti to Ambedkar smirti, as we could call the Indian constitution. I would go the extent of saying that the greatest failing of Islam is that it is stuck with the Shariat. Islam without being stuck with the Shariat would be more like Sufism.

If you say the Shariat says that “idols can’t even help themselves because they are dead stones and have no life” and thereby proof that idols are useless, I ask you, isn’t the Quran also a dead thing without life. Would you thereby consider the Quran as a useless thing?

You say Allah ordered stones to recite the Quranic verses and sure enough it did so. This is a logical fallacy. Allah you say has no shape or size or anything of that sort. So who saw or heard Allah ask the stones to obey His command. Actually, Allah spoke only to Mohammad. Did anyone else hear even the Quranic verses that Allah spoke to Mohammad. Even Mohammad cannot claim that he saw Allah. (Or can he calim so, having flown up on a flying horse to heaven to meet Allah?) He at best only heard Allah. So please tell me how this story of stones reciting Quran arose.

Henceforth I think you should say “Mohammad said, as was recorded in the Quran”, and not “Allah said”, because nobody else has heard Allah speak except Mohammad, and we have only Mohammad’s word for it. Am I right?
It is quaint that you say of anything that the Quran does not explain, like as to why Mohammad was the last prophet or why Allah sent the last message to the Arabs, with the words “that’s Allah’s wish, nobody can question that”. At least you are modest.
You talk of the contradictions in Hinduism, failing to understand that the so-called contradictions are only the One Truth being expressed variously. Islam, the One Truth being expressed in a single way, is actually full of contradictions. I of course came to know about it from some Internet sites. If you wish to know which Internet sites are saying so, I shall inform you.

There are many ways to God and each way is a particular religion. Hinduism is the culture that endorses the various ways to God. Hinduism is not just one religion. It is a culture of many religions.
Love,
Venu
10:12:49 PM
Posted By VenuGopal Comment (5) Politics