Is Islam a Peaceful Religion?

"I think the answer can be found on one of the very basic observations that Mahatma Gandhi made about human nature - that if you want to find out the true nature of a person, find out how he treats a weaker person."

Well put. The minorities in the Muslim majority areas are simply not treated equally that is an understatement infact they are deliberately mistreated but when they go to the west or in India they demand equal rights, infact even special status too.

Well said Vikas. The recent problem with Islam started with the authoritarian regimes in the Middle East. Screwing human rights they wanted to create the seventh century Arab nomad culture as THE culture of the Muslims in the world. The problem in Pakistan started when Ziaul Haque in 1979 adopted Sharia law and steered Pakistan to a religious state. Today's anarchy is the by-product of those. But in democratic countries like Bangladesh and Indonesia, the other religious minorities are far better than those authoritarian regimes.

Its not actually ordinary Muslim vs the rest of the world situation. The truth is that no matter what logic you put; you cannot put any comparative religion top of another and consider others as enemy or inferior. In this era of technology and democratic freedom, the importance of religion is decreasing day -by- day. This is what makes the clerics or the people in power afraid. They want to blind people with unconditional faith. They want to stop people from questioning. They had to create a common enemy, the enlightment and freedom of democracy. And their war continues, because without that their power base will crack.

The way forward, or to have success in the war of terror, is to shake the base of these authoritarian regimes, put democracy in effect. Then the situation will change automatically. Just one example, Madrassas in West Bengal has revolutionized with reforms. Now they have many Hindu students and teachers and even principals. They even have no problem with Bande Matram, because they are under a democracy. But in Waziristan a Madrassa will continue to preach hatred towards non-Muslims, because it is under a regime that uses Islam to stay in power. So how would you compare Muslims in both the contexts?

Rezwan: You say that the solution is to institute democracy in these places, but that is exactly what Bush proposed (even though his implementation was horribly inept), but Bush has drawn a lot of criticism over his principle as well. People have said that you cannot have democracy by brute force. And now in Iraq, we see violence that is essentially Shia over Sunni and yet we don't see Muslims on the streets like they are doing over Pope's statement. So, if you cannot have democracy by brute force and the local population is not willing to embrace the principles of liberal democracies, how will you get democracy in that place?

As for the example of Madrassas in West Bengal, I think that is a classic example of the effect of a moderate society on a conservative tradition like madrassas. You will also find many such examples in the US, where Muslims have tried to keep many of their more orthodox and conservative impulses under control. But the question is when will it happen in Waziristan? When will it happen in Kandhar? When will it happen in Saudi Arabia?

it's a good set of questions vikas.

i guess like you said no religion is static no state actor is static or politics.

i'd tend to believe that if powerful countries stop meddling and exploiting poor countries with 'rich' resources - too much to ask, probably it wd end. at least a hope.

if powerful countries for their own good hoist, support, dreadful despotic regimes the movements of the people wane and so do their aspirations.

Balaji: While the West can be blamed for exploiting the countries with rich natural resources, not all the problems with radical Islam can be placed on the doorsteps of the West.

US is not stopping Saudi Arabia to lift restrictions from other religions, or to let its people surf everything and anything on the internet, is it? It is always easy to blame your problems on someone else.

For example, in England, Muslims claim that the extremist tendencies amongst their youngsters can be blamed on the British society. But England also has a whole lot of Hindus who share the same brown skin, the same linguistic skills and yet, they have succeeded beyond imagination into the society.

So, the external factors do play a part in shaping societies, but in the end, it is your own true collective selve that comes through in characteristics of societies.

The Pope recently apologized for calling Islam a violent religion. Pot calling the Kettle black?

addledbychoice: Your comment would have hit the nail on its head a few centuries back or even a hundred years ago. But the pot has been changing its colors for quite some time now.

While the comments of the Pope were politically incorrect in today's supercharged atmosphere and he was certainly foolish in using the comments of a 14th century king in analyzing present day political conditions, the underlying assumption of his comment was certainly correct.

The plight of Hindus in Bangladesh is well known. Firstly, millions were massacred during 1972 - ruthlessly. And the percentage of Hindus, dropped from 20% to 2% within the last twenty years.

Muslim-majority countries treat minorities like shit. Look at the treatment of Hindus in Saudi-Arabia for instance. But then they demand equal treatment when they are the minorities.

Someone see something off ??

Vikas, you try to sound intellectual but you are hopelessly biased. I am sad that as an Indian you are so brainwashed and myopic.

More news from the Religion of Peace:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/17/news/somalia.php

That nun had worked hard for the poor for 38 years. And yet she was snuffed out by the Religion of Peace (TM)

She was shot 4 times in the back, and her bodyguard was also killed. But we shouldn't say anything, because it's the Religion of Peace (TM), and as you know, it's wrong to cast aspersion on that which is perfect.

Because that which is perfect is above any criticism, and therefore any criticism can only be motivated by wicked and shallow thoughts, naturally.

So let us all hail the Religion of Peace (TM) for its perfection, and condemn any criticism which doesn't reinforce the singular belief in its perfection. Let's use words like 'myopic' and 'brainwashed' to explain the bizarre mentally deviant phenomenon of criticism against the Religion of Peace (TM).

What kind of person assembles dangerous explosives in the presence of a child, while letting them play with a gun?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAUHTGDKdOw

Only someone from the perfect religion -- the Religion of Peace (TM)

The religion that is so perfect that none dare criticize it. The religion that is completely above the criticism of mere mortals. The perfect wisdom with its perfect followers. The religion whose adherents are completely and utterly devoid of any self-criticism or introspection.

How lucky and fortunate we all are to be in the presence of the pristine perfection of the peaceful people.

K: Some people claim that the situation of non-Muslims in Bangladesh is much better as compared to some of the countries in the middle east or in Pakistan. Of course, if you are better off than Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, it is nothing to brag about and certainly nobody is claiming that Bangladesh has created an equal, fair and egalitarian society.

Saleem: If you could logically refute my reasoning, then I'd be all ears. Name calling and allegations without substantiating it is not a good way to get a discussion going.

@Saleem
Give some intelligent reply to what Vikas says. And if you feel frustrated because you were born with this religion of peace; then you are welcome to convert to any other religion. I assure you, your life would be much better than current one.

@Vikas - It has been two days since you published this great article and still no sensible reply. Does this goes to show that most of the people agree with you?

silence may mean many things.

vikas

it is not just the hindus who feel 'constrained' in saudi arabia, even the 'normal' muslims feel so.

i know of muslim friends who are indifferent to religious practices found it too stifling in saudi arabia - so what does it say?

and do we equate wahabism with all the strains of islam?

and the irish and english by your token are christians? and how come there was violence?

weren't some of the sikhs violent? do we forget the terrible death of indira gandhi?

and how about the massacre of thousands of sikhs in the aftermath?

was dhanu a muslim woman who killed rajiv gandhi in a ghastly way?

is the deadly LTTE who mastered and taught the world a thing or two about suicide bombing muslim?

the guru of om shinrikyo in japan i heard is ready to be hanged, is he a muslim?

madness has no religion and color.

often terrorism feeds on issues which are utterly materialistic. in my humble view.

land? water? power/political expression? percieved humiliation? regional discrimination? domination by others?

if the world does not provide spaces for dialog and snub aspirations the ugly head of terrorism crops up? a reasonable hypothesis? may be. may be not.

in the erstwhile nizam state, the telengana people's armed struggle - how would it have been viewed by the nizam state? as heroic, revolutionary, liberating? or as terrorists who need to be annihilated at any cost?

how about violence in tribal africa? only islam to be blamed?

how about the violence of naxals?

how about the violence perpetrated by states both in india and other places?

i am not blaming the US for all the violence in the world. but i have an issue when a partisan universe of discourse foisted on the world and we get caught like flies in a spider's web.

sometimes it is important to question the categories empoloyed in the discourse, the terms and boundaries of the discourse, in my humble view.

in all the madness i do not condone any violence perpetrated by anyone.

balaji:

in all the madness i do not condone any violence perpetrated by anyone.

well said sir!

techlaid: You say that "religion is not bad, its followers are". But then, what is religion if not its followers? A religion is defined by its followers and they are the ones who make it good or bad.

A religion is not and cannot be defined by scriptures alone - it has to be defined by the lives led by people purportedly following those scriptures.

y

a

w

n


;)


(you have made these claims before

and i maintain

your words of incessant hatred


articulate your saffronista hatred better than any denials you can ever write

here is another....;)

I see Islam as a religion that has several interpreters within the followers of the faith. There is a moderate interpretation of Islam that actually is saving the faith from being persecuted by the civilized world for complete extermination as a huge cabal of terrorists.

However, neither did Manuel II, nor the current Pope say anything wrong about Islam. I have my own thoughts on whether the Pope was wrong at all.

Also, it is NOT a fashion to criticize and bash Islam these days. If it is so, one can argue that wearing skull caps, sporting beards and brandizing assault rifles has become a fashion within Muslims these days.

After reading through all the comments and the articles i feel really out of place. I have my reasons. I do not agree with Vikas, Stan & Sanjay. When an article is written, it has to capture the entire problem rather than attacking onto one's religion, and passing statements which are very biassed.

I being a muslim, have more hindu friens than i can imagine. Understanding a religion is very important. i agree with balaji and i appreciate the way he has put in everything in the support of muslims. For a bunch of terrorists, who are muslims, the whole race cannot be blamed. i have questions for everyone.

Is it what you see is what you believe or do you reasearch and make your belief. I have visited more 70% of the world and I havent seen people talking so conservatively about an issue which is mere to terrorism. The sercastic statements that Mr. sanjay passed in his comments didnt have any answers to Balaji's point of view. Why? Its because he doesnt know what he is talking. Today Muslims are just a shoulder for terrorism and they are being used by people. Who gave power to Osama Bin Laden during the Russia and Afghanistan crisis. When WTC happened, USA was supposed to look for OSAMA than get into Iraq and slaughter everyone there. It is easy to blame one person for a mistake but the other side of the story is that when one claps they need both hands to make the noise. I agree Iraq never had democracy during Saddam's regime but that doesnt mean US has more freedom of democracy. What is their business to get into Iraq when a unified body like UN had denied the presence of biological weapons in Iraq. They were supposed to go for Osama instead of Saddam. You talk about democracy not being accepted in Iraq when US is trying so hard. Tell me how many people are left in Iraq who need democracy at the cost of their lives. Nobody wants democracy like that. Even Mahatma Gandhi never wanted that. No matter how Saddam has been with his people, that is his problem. He is still a Diplomat. That is not a way to handle Diplomatically. You dont come into my Refrigrator and tell me what i should have in there, so does he. Whats up with the racism we go through as brown skin or black skin. Let it be in America for blacks and let it be in UK for Browns. Its all the same. Nobody is a born terrorist. they all have been through consequences that have made them like that. I have been harrased my self because of my name being Ali, Mohammad and im an Indian for god sake. All muslims are being treated like terrorists. Why ? for a bunh of idiots the whole community is going to get a bad name. Where in the Holy Book does it say Violence is the answer. It is a religion of Peace. Has anyone read the holy book. I advice you to read it. No offence to any religion. But the fact is that Quran is the only book in the world, " No matter which part of the world you are in. the book is the same including the grammar. There is no change or different versions of the book." Which mosque in the world preaches terrorism. Your articles and comments are the provokation to all these things happenings in the world. Even American citizens never wanted war. Does anyone know how it feels to loose someone in the family. Why when a Jewish lady who wears a scarf not questioned. Why is a muslim lady wearing a burkha questioned. Does anyone have an answer for this. Do you know how is it to live in Palestine. Why are muslims being killed there. Even small children. Do you think they deserve this. Yes when you come to my house and kill my family for no reason. Yes then i wont see my age either. This is a very broad minded answer to all of you no supporters of Islam. Guess what i also need no advice to switch my religion. If one cant be honest to ones own religion, then he cant be honest to any religion.

Terrorists dont have a religion, they use religion to exploit the world. Please do your home work before you point a finger on someone.

You quote - "Open your eyes and look around the world."

reading ur article makes me feel u need this dose more than anyone else.

Is ISLAM a peaceful or voilent ideology/religion?
To know answer to this question maybe a little research will help.

Just sum-up the deaths/destruction caused in last 100years all over the world and see for yourself which ideology/country/religion is on the top of it.

Dude, and then u can see that even in our times, Islam is not wat brought mass destruction and turmoil.

Though with over 1.8 Billion Muslims, its not easy not to produce a bunch of idiots.

May be you need to travel a little, so you can stop reading about the acts of these idiots only and really open your eyes and look around the billions living or striving to leave peacefully.

Ali: You are simply recycling a lot of old arguments about prejudices. You give example of racism in Europe and UK, but Hindus have the same skin color too and they have not only survived any such percieved racism, but also thrived in the UK. How's it that the brown skin racism only affects Muslims according to you and not the Hindus?

Blacks faced a lot of racism in the US, but apart from a few stray movements, they mostly had a peaceful agitation for civil rights under the leadership of Dr. King.

And by insisting that Quran is a book of peace, you are actually making my point. That is what I am trying to say here, that it is not possible to figure out if a religion is peaceful or not by examining its scriptures.

It is easy to say that terrorist have no religion but saying it does not make it so. While a comment by Pope outrages people enough to come out against it all around the world in a pan Islamic show of strength, why isn't the same show of strength on display when according to you, "handful of terrorists give religion a bad name". One would think that the use of Islam by terrorists be more offensive (or should be) than some inconsiderate comments made by the pope.

excellent written ...u have bright future ...

Subhan: My dear friend, tell me where should I travel to find out that the present day Islam is a peaceful religion?

Should I travel now, or after the current Muslim anger against the pope has subsided? ( Now, how's that for irony! "How dare pope call Islam a violent religion, now let us watch slit the throats of Christians")

Should I travel to Iran, where the premier of the country which is home to 20,000 jews declares that holocaust is imagination of the west?

Should I travel to Saudi Arabia where I might be jailed or beheaded for carrying Gita with me?

Or maybe I should travel to Bangladesh, a country which is beholden to India for its very existence and yet prosecutes Hindu minority and gives shelter to Islamic terrorists?

Tell me where should I travel to find proof of peace and love in present day Islam?

Maybe you should begin travelling India - it would be way easier and cheaper too.

And contrary to what you would expect, I would suggest that you do travel to these countries u noted (Saudia, Iran, Bangladesh), so u may know world is not Black & White as u see. You can also add now Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, and I hope you at last see that even Muslims populace in all those countries are suffering.

On Pope Issue, if you read this you would be a little more educated on this issue.
A man with little sympathy for other faiths

you say: "now let us watch slit the throats of Christians". Is not this, like everything else, an exaggeration???

I don't see that happening, though many are eager to see it happening, and if coincidently a Nun is killed in some remote part it is immediately linked to Pope issue. Missionaries do face attacks quite often and everywhere. I don't recollected Pope saying anything offending when Graham Staines and his 2 sons where burn to death in ::Gulp:: India.
(oh but dats not committed by any Muslim, so the world should excuse and forget it, lets only focus on Muslim acts cause thats whats selling now).

Subhan,

Graham Staines was killed by a fanatic who was sentenced to death (now commuted to life imprisonment). The President remarked that it was one of the worst in the inventory of blackest deeds in India.

Take the example of how Muslim nations treat the tenants of other faiths? There is no way you can practice - say Hinduism openly in nations like Saudi Arabia?

Lastly, what have the public beheadings, floggings and choreographed public executions as I linked in my post achieved in those countries?

Vikas is quite right when he says;

It is easy to say that terrorist have no religion but saying it does not make it so. While a comment by Pope outrages people enough to come out against it all around the world in a pan Islamic show of strength, why isn't the same show of strength on display when according to you, "handful of terrorists give religion a bad name". One would think that the use of Islam by terrorists be more offensive (or should be) than some inconsiderate comments made by the pope.

Subhan: Travelling to India will not prove anything because I've already mentioned - I am looking for a pattern of behavior in countries where Islam is the dominant religion. Whenever, anything about Islam is criticized, a popular line of reasoning is "but look at all those crimes committed by people of other religions". You give the example of the Staines murder case but as Beau Peep correctly points out, the person who committed that crime was punished.

I think the problem is not that there are not enough moderates in Islam, the problem is those moderates rushing out to defend the extremists with numerous "ifs and buts".

Its a very well written article Vikas. I do agree with most of your statements in relation to the present scenarios. However I feel that there are some facts which were not properly looked on. To the world Saudi Arabia follows the Islamic culture just because it has dominant muslims, but from its roots it follows arabic culture which was way way before Islam had actually arrived. Tribal/caste system still prevails in the community there. If a non-saudi works there your passport is taken away(irrespective of your religion/caste/nationality). Its a mordernized form of slavery. All these deeds are not part of Islam, as a matter of fact, this religion has tried to remove these kind of practices and systems from the arabic society. So the problem is that people are using the name of Islam to project out their culture to the world.
All the prophets that were sent by god were sent to the Arabian lands, be it jewism, christanity or islam inorder to change the inhuman and barbaric traditions they had.
I am in total agreement with Mr. Ali Mohammad who says that a bunch of fanatics cannot represent the entire community. Also a person is not a terrorist by birth
If a kids parents are murdered before him, his sister is being raped what will he become after he grows of course not a saint, but a terrorist. This kind of violence is what is happening in middle east for the past 15 years due to western foreign policies. The west is trying to impose its culture(including democracy) on the middle east, the countries which are accepting are in peace where as those which are not accepting are suffering

Hep Thanks for the compliments.

You say that:

All the prophets that were sent by god were sent to the Arabian lands, be it jewism, christanity or islam inorder to change the inhuman and barbaric traditions they had.

Vikas and Subhan . both have talked and made sense. I agree with Subhan more than Vikas.

You and me writing articles here and discussing over a contradictory issue is not going to change the world. If anyone has the guts start writing in News Papers talk about it in the News Channels bring it to media and then everyone will get the answer.

Telling Saudi arabia is this and that is true. But When you are in someone else's country which is not yours, dont expect them to listen to you. It is you who has to listen to them. they are still under King's rule. Yes they are a dominant muslim country and they follow their religion on a daily basis. Everything there is an open book. There is no where it says that if you practice Hinduisim you will be slaughtered or prosecuted. If you would have done the math properly, you would have known how many indian non muslims are there in saudia. i agree only one place that is mecca where non muslims are not allowed. but they dont prosecute them when they see them .. grow up vikas .. which world are you living in. Dont you know what is money, power and corruption. there is bloody more corruption in your country than anywhere in the world. what is ratio of muslims corrupting india. tell me. What is Siva Sena all bout .. what was BJP when they brought down Babri Masjid. If muslims wanted to retaliate, then could, they have the guts to. But they dont.
It is people like you who think and write and talk about muslims and create communal riots. Siva Sena is known for this. Talk to me about Hyderabad " the city of nizam" where as now it is called the city of telanganas.. ha ha ha. When there were problems with bangladesh.. who started and why didnt they support bangla people. if the country has its own policies then you cant blame them .. coz its you who is going to their country and working for more money. All i can say taht is Brown skin let it be muslims or hindus .. they are all slaves of white skin in one way or the other. this will remain forever .. dont talk bout prophets..they did what they did and lost their lives to get peace.. i guess you dont believe in god being there... i believe my religion and no one can stop me from doing that. hinduism.. no one can justify. its all man made. written by so many people. islam is god sent and so is christianity. pope doesnt know what he is talking .. if he had no much guts to talk bout islam... then he should have stood by to his statements rather than apologising to the people and the muslim community. When he himself has apologised, then he knows what is what. So bunch of illiterate people cannot make a statement here. do the home work and then talk vikas.. using good english is not an answer to all this. believe me..

I completely agree with Subhan because this is all you guys are here for.

"lets only focus on Muslim acts cause thats whats selling now"

Dont bring Iran in between because they are not Iraq. Also chk out msn.com today and you will read whats really going on in Iraq now.. Democracy my foot .. thats what is going on...
Also the total population of Muslims are almost 2 billion and hindus are probably 3/4 of a billion. Dont try to make a statement here. Try putting these articles on a muslim website from anywhere in Middle East, Pakistan or any Muslim country. You will hear the truth.

null (pointer?): Man that is one big memory access violation.

Though I don't often agree with Charles Krauthammer of the Post, his article in today's post is something to mull about.

Today's Islamists seem to have not even a sense of irony. They fail to see the richness of the following sequence. The pope makes a reference to a 14th-century Byzantine emperor's remark about Islam imposing itself by the sword, and to protest this linking of Islam and violence:

· In the West Bank and Gaza, Muslims attack seven churches.

· In London, the ever-dependable radical Anjem Choudary tells demonstrators at Westminster Cathedral that the pope is now condemned to death.

· In Mogadishu, Somali religious leader Abubukar Hassan Malin calls on Muslims to "hunt down" the pope. The pope not being quite at hand, they do the next best thing: shoot dead, execution-style, an Italian nun who worked in a children's hospital.

"How dare you say Islam is a violent religion? I'll kill you for it" is not exactly the best way to go about refuting the charge. But of course, refuting is not the point here. The point is intimidation.

by the token that islam is a violent religion, we should be having civil wars in india with 15 percent of muslims in the population.

and it is like saying indians are 'morons' to have taken shit from british for about 200 years.

what does it say about history? or are we too impatient like 'vinita' in mahabharata?

balaji: What was partition if not a civil war?

Sure I will agree with you that Indians were "morons" to take shit from the British. But now that we've made curry the national dish of UK, I think we've had our revenge :).

[no personal attacks tolerated]

This has been very educational. Thank you everyone for all your comments here. I can see that you are all very passionate about the subject, and I agree mostly with Vikas (what a beautiful name) However, I love that we all can speak our minds without being hunted down and shut away in prison.....or even worse murdered for it. This is surely a wonderful way of expressing ideas and it might even evolve into a peaceful resolution if a lot more people learn to talk openly to each other without adding violence. Personally, I think that violence is a "man" thing and being a woman I have learned over the years that men have great difficulty discussing their problems without hitting each other. Woman are classically just bitchy and use their tongues to lash out rather than violence. Therefore, it might just be that hormone levels are the cause of violence, I don't know. What ever it is, I believe that religion is just an excuse to control the masses and hide the true reasons for why a selected few are in control of us. Why, there is nothing they love more than for them to see us all fighting with each other while they sit in their comfortably homes surrounded with wealth and power and laugh at us all. Ask yourselves what i slife about? Is it not to live it well and be happy, and go to the grave with a peaceful heart knowing you did a good job? None of us will live forever. If we can shale off our natures, and stop being animals we might start being human and learn that we are higher beings with compassion, tolerance, and understanding. I apologize for ranting on here, I did not mean to lecture, but came to learn, and understand islam. I do not have a religion, never had one. Was brought up in the UK and moved to the USA when I was 27 so I do have experience at least with two very different cultures. One thing is for sure......I do LOVE CURRY. Kind regards from Atlanta, Georgia. USA.

georgina:

i love curry too ... only sometimes ... too much can be bad for ulcers

kind regards from here also


ps: ulcers are a good barometer of everything be it religion or politics or curry;)

Vikas,

Religion is what is is written in its scriptures and how its founder interpreted it.

In context of Islam, its founder demonstrated altogather two different faces and interpretations of it.

His first 10 years when he was weak, poor and surviwed by the money of his first wife (who was of his mothers age), he behaved like Budha.

He was merciful, he was passionate, he was a humanist and demonstrated all human qualities. Most of teh muslims living in non muslim countries always quote this Budha like character and verses of Quran from this time interval.

This is knowns as Islam of Mecca `the peaceful'.

But in spite of 10 years of praching and humanistic behaviour Mohamemd could get hardly 50 companions.

He moved to Medina and after his first wife Khadija passed away and her wealth finished, it was altogather a new Mohamed. `for you your religion and for me my religion' type of humanistic verses used by muslims living in non muslim lands are smoothly replaced by `kill the kafirs wherever you find them' when Mohamemd becomes strongman with 10,000 fighters on his side. Threatening letters are written to contemporary princes either convert of fall, tribes are attacked, male members are kileld and women and children enslaved booty shared between boss and subordinates. Islam spreads like wild fire during this phase. This phase is known as Islam of Medina.

Now question arises which is true Islam. islam preached by Mohamemd the weak ir Mohammed of mecca or Mohamemd the strong ie Mo of Medina?

Some Muslims are of the opinion that original Islam was revealed in the first 10 years only ie Islam of Peace. later part was compulsion on prophet by pagans and need to be ignored.

Others are of the opinion that later violent islam is true Islam as that contains the teachings of a matured Maohammed as Mohammed of Mecca was immatured and talked like Budha unnecesary. Moreover latest edition of a book is considered to be more authentic and hence islam of mecca full of violence is real Islam and makes Muslims a dynamic lot.

There is thrid category of people who consider both islam of mecca and Islam of medina in totality as `true islam' that preaches:

1. Start with softness, charity and discussion. be humanistic and try to win the hearts of non muslims when you are weak and living in non muslim territories. Act like a lamb.

2. When you are in your stronghold attack like a lion and show no mercy to pagans. Bring them to light of Islam using any means.

3. Ultimate aim is establishing Islamic rule on whole earth either by method 1 or method 2 above. Converting Darul Harb to Darul islam is divinely prescribed duty of every muslim.

Now its upto people to decide what islam stands for as it contains two streams which are exactly opposite to each other.

My personal view is that any ideology that have tendency to establish their domination, this agression, invading type of mentality, it can never create a permanent peace either to its followers or on this earth.

Mutual respect is the only way to esatblish peace on teh earth. let's learn to `live and let live' with due respect to each other. the day on whcih agressive ideologies will stop to carry out agressive compaing for world domonation, peace will be established. If people keep on engaging themselves in attacking others, converting others, peace can never prevail.

Therefore, all right thinking people should opoose this conversion bussiness using money muscle and marriage. Volunteer conversion for spritual developement never need a publicity or compaing with economic political and military might.

Very good Vikas
Your analysis is very good too, Man Singh
Is Islam a peaceful religion?
If looks like a duck, walks like a duck and squacks like a duck , it got be a duck.

Bhai # Moris

I encourage people to read Quran and hadith themselves along with biograpgy of Mo by Muslims and non mulsims both.

We should analyse the situation if Mohammed was working for Allah or Allah was working for Mohammed always ready to reveal a verse suitable to him.