Jump to content

Confused


Recommended Posts

He had 13 wives. He married the 6-year-old Ayesah, the daughter of his best friend Abu Bakr and thus the prophet became the son-in-law of his best friend. The prophet then married the young daughter, Hafsa, of his another great comrade, Umar who also married the four-year-old half sister of Ayesha (the posthumous daughter of Abu Bakr). Mohammad also made his adopted son to divorce his wife, Zainab, so he could marry her.

Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers." (5:49, Quran)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am not trying to do nindaa of any religion,but then I cant lie about what I feel.

If someone of us achieve bit of spirituality(but still are far far away from god),and we tell people who are suffering in this world,that you just come into my faith,and u get a ticket to heaven,where u will have girls,boys,water,fruits,everything that a poor human thinks 24 hours on this earth,many people are going to come to that faith.

Thats why so many muslims give their life in all these suicide attacks.Thats why so many non muslims have been killed by them in the last 1500 years.

The aim of a true religion should be to attack the ego in the mind and ego in the mind can only be attacked by the TRUE WORD.All other ways are of no avail.Look at the world at present,the world has gone mad because they dont have the true word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why dont we let a educated muslim on the site to defend his faith. Why do nindya?

Bikramjit Get some sleep, your babbling while you yawn :@

143715[/snapback]

LostSoul

I was yawning due to the boredom of having to read your pointless and ignorant contribution. From now on I will do what most of the posters say they do which is just ignore your posts. wacko.gif

Btw find out what nindya means before throwing that word around just to cover up your lack of knowledge on this subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ooooooooops what have i done! lol!

Maybe Mohammed did marry a 6 yr old, and everythign else you guys have all written....however....i personally believe that we should not put down another religion's prophet....i have a feeling you all might say that you are not putting him down but merely stating facts..well fair enough but your just picking and choosing facts that make him look bad.

I do think my friend is confused.....because shes been converted by a muslim...she knows alot about the muslim religion already....i just listen and take in the facts and defend our religion.......but what i can't stand is the fact that they think there religion is the only way.........

out of interest have we already had a discussion about why we have so many different religions? My muslin friend said that in the christian bible it states that only one more prophet will come down to earth to guide people..hence mohammed...and the quran does not say anything about anther one coming along, meaning guru nanak dev ji....also she has found that they have arguments against other religions but not really anything against sikhi..it does not even mention sikhi..

btw thank you All-Info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The city which had refused to listen to his mission, which had tortured him and his followers, which had driven him and his people into exile and which had unrelentingly persecuted and boycotted him even when he had taken refuge in a place more than 200 miles away, that city now lay at his feet. By the laws of war he could have justly avenged all the cruelties inflicted on him and his people. But what treatment did he accord to them? Mohammad's heart flowed with affection and he declared, "This day, there is no REPROOF against you and you are all free." "This day" he proclaimed, "I trample under my feet all distinctions between man and man, all hatred between man and man."

Taken from: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/p...eofprophet.html

This extract shows that this man beleived in getting rid of hatred between man and man. He also beleived in ONE God, and was against idol worship (sounds familiar?? grin.gif ) which is why, in my views, he said that You shall go to hell if you don;t follow me.

He basically said what Guru Gobind SIngh Ji said, but harsher lol coz guru ji in Tavprasad Swayye says many times that idol worship gets you nowhere near God. However, Muslims took the wrong idea of this adn start attacking Sikhs as well! (who also, funily enough, believe in ONE God..)

And concerning the biographies of Mohammed...

The sources of Mohammed's biography are numerous, but on the whole untrustworthy, being crowded with fictitious details, legends, and stories. None of his biographies were compiled during his lifetime, and the earliest was written a century and a half after his death. The Koran is perhaps the only reliable source for the leading events in his career. His earliest and chief biographers are Ibn Ishaq (A.H. 151=A.D. 768), Wakidi (207=822), Ibn Hisham (213=828), Ibn Sa'd (230=845), Tirmidhi (279=892), Tabari (310-929), the "Lives of the Companions of Mohammed", the numerous Koranic commentators [especially Tabari, quoted above, Zamakhshari 538=1144), and Baidawi (691=1292)], the "Musnad", or collection of traditions of Ahmad ibn Hanbal (241=855), the collections of Bokhari (256=870), the "Isabah", or "Dictionary of Persons who knew Mohammed", by Ibn Hajar, etc. All these collections and biographies are based on the so-called Hadiths, or "traditions", the historical value of which is more than doubtful.

...Many of these opinions are biased either by an extreme hatred of Islam and its founder or by an exaggerated admiration, coupled with a hatred of Christianity. Luther looked upon him as "a devil and first-born child of Satan". Maracci held that Mohammed and Mohammedanism were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism. Spanheim and D'Herbelot characterize him as a "wicked impostor", and a "dastardly liar", while Prideaux stamps him as a wilful deceiver. Such indiscriminate abuse is unsupported by facts. Modern scholars, such as Sprenger, Noldeke, Weil, Muir, Koelle, Grimme, Margoliouth, give us a more correct and unbiased estimate of Mohammed's life and character, and substantially agree as to his motives, prophetic call, personal qualifications, and sincerity. The various estimates of several recent critics have been ably collected and summarized by Zwemer, in his "Islam, a Challenge to Faith" (New York, 1907). According to Sir William Muir, Marcus Dods, and some others, Mohammed was at first sincere, but later, carried away by success, he practised deception wherever it would gain his end. Koelle "finds the key to the first period of Mohammed's life in Khadija, his first wife", after whose death he became a prey to his evil passions. Sprenger attributes the alleged revelations to epileptic fits, or to "a paroxysm of cataleptic insanity". Zwemer himself goes on to criticize the life of Mohammed by the standards, first, of the Old and New Testaments, both of which Mohammed acknowledged as Divine revelation; second, by the pagan morality of his Arabian compatriots; lastly, by the new law of which he pretended to be the "divinely appointed medium and custodian". According to this author, the prophet was false even to the ethical traditions of the idolatrous brigands among whom he lived, and grossly violated the easy sexual morality of his own system. After this, it is hardly necessary to say that, in Zwemer's opinion, Mohammed fell very far short of the most elementary requirements of Scriptural morality. Quoting Johnstone, Zwemer concludes by remarking that the judgment of these modern scholars, however harsh, rests on evidence which "comes all from the lips and the pens of his own devoted adherents. . .And the followers of the prophet can scarcely complain if, even on such evidence, the verdict of history goes against him".

Taken from Catholic Encyclopaedia

This seems kinda true..

Btw, THanks to this thread, I've begun to research on Mohammed's life..

quite interesting.

But, I'm unsure about his death. Some say he was poisoned by a widow, who's husband was killed by Mohammed, while others day he died forma disease. (He was also epelepsic.. however u spell it)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ke fateh

Pyare jio, I am not sure exactly why lost soul is so upset. The whole of Gurbani compares the idealogies of one religion to another. Bhagat kabir is very unforgiving of Islam. Sahib Siri Guru Nanak dev spoke opening against janeau, fasting and many other things.

Pyare jio, people are not bashing faiths when we dicsuss fact about their lives.

When we read the lives of Sahib Siri Guru Nanak dev ji, I find each story full of inspration, wisdom and pyaar. So I thought I would read about others aswell, hoping for the same stuff, but was sadly disppointed.

I have read extensively about jesus, mohammed, buddha, out of interest. I find jesus and budhha good people who have positive messages, but lacking in certain areas.

Mohammed has a life that leaves alot to be desired. The things mentioned by Veer Bikramjeet singh are just the tip of the iceberg.

I always respect the sentiments of others, but this does not mean, the wrongful acts should be ignored just because that person was a leader.

All humans are equal and respect worthy, but not all idealogues are. Nowhere in Gurbani does it say all idealogues are equal. We do not riducule the beliefs of others, neither act superior to them, but we should discuss them.

I speak to punjabis who have converted to islam, and I talk them out of it. It is because I choose to develop my knowledge on this subject. Most sikhs, when they see a punjbai convert, just stick their noses up and push them away further, or just say we should not question islam. I find both these attitudes wrong in my opinion, and such choose to engage those who convert in discussion, to see why they convert.

However I do not accept sikhs saying to me that I have no right to question mohammed, and equating that to bashing. This is because ignorance is lack of knowledge and basing assumptions on that. Gaining knowledge and making opinions upon that knowledge is not ignorance.

Islam has many good virtues, and many good people follow it and learn from it. But also Mohammed and some concepts in islam are highly questionable.

waheguru ji kekhalsa waheguru ji ke fateh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use