MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Laurens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 12:46 pm

oceanmen wrote:
Laurens wrote:I don't think much of Muhammed. I wonder how people rationalize worshipping a paedophile?

'Narrated Aisha: The Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64


A guy who had sexual relations with a 9 year old girl.

Doesn't sound like a Buddha.... This is but why example of why it would be reasonable to consider Muhammed a twisted and evil individual...



sorry bro, thats hadith again....fabricated and unreliable


Okay, however I strongly stand by my sentiment that Islam is not a peaceful faith:

"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

"Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it." (Surah 2:216)

"If you should die or be slain in the cause of God, His forgiveness and His mercy would surely be better than all the riches..." (Surah 3:156-)

"Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God's religion shall reign supreme." (Surah 8:36-)

"...make war on the leaders of unbelief...Make war on them: God will chastise them at your hands and humble them. He will grant you victory over them..." (Surah 9:12-)

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them." (Surah 9:121-)

....and so on.

People wonder why Islam has such a violent radical following in some cases. I think that is clear from looking at their scriptures.
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Carl Sagan
User avatar
Laurens
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:06 pm

People wonder why Islam has such a violent radical following in some cases. I think that is clear from looking at their scriptures.


not the scripture as i will proof how you have shown only Partial tuth, its the peoples (muslims) perception of their religion that deteriorated the essence of the Koran

Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme."[/i] (Surah 2:190-)



i was waiting for you to put those down ; )

thanks,

now you will see how much mistranslation occurred when reading the Koran in a language other than Arabic
i will get those verses for you to see how our understanding of them reflects our intentions

the fist verse and so as to make people understand the full meaning please do refer to the verse before it

وَقَـٰتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَـٰتِلُونَكُمۡ وَلَا تَعۡتَدُوٓاْ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلۡمُعۡتَدِينَ (١٩٠) وَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ حَيۡثُ ثَقِفۡتُمُوهُمۡ وَأَخۡرِجُوهُم مِّنۡ حَيۡثُ أَخۡرَجُوكُمۡ‌ۚ وَٱلۡفِتۡنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ ٱلۡقَتۡلِ‌ۚ وَلَا تُقَـٰتِلُوهُمۡ عِندَ ٱلۡمَسۡجِدِ ٱلۡحَرَامِ حَتَّىٰ يُقَـٰتِلُوكُمۡ فِيهِ‌ۖ فَإِن قَـٰتَلُوكُمۡ فَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ‌ۗ كَذَٲلِكَ جَزَآءُ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرِينَ (١٩١) فَإِنِ ٱنتَہَوۡاْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ۬ رَّحِيمٌ۬ (١٩٢)

Al-Baqara
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. (190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (191) But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (192)

i think its crystal clear that the advise is to DEFEND yourself from those who attack you but not to BEGIN hostilities
and its clear also that they permission to go to war is when they DRIVE YOU OUT of your homes and also not to figh them at places of worship unless they attack first...and at the end it is clear to all that if they desist(stop) then you also must stop.....

question: were there any resistance fighters during WW2?
how many fought to defend the holocaust victims
and how many would have survived if they were allowed to defend themselves?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them.
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Laurens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:15 pm

I don't care much to debate Islamic scripture - it's not something that I am well versed in and I understand how it can be mistranslated. Just watch this video:



Whatever the book says is irrelevant really. Look what kind of behaviour it generates. I can't apologise for such a faith. I really can't.
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Carl Sagan
User avatar
Laurens
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 1:41 pm

Laurens wrote:I don't care much to debate Islamic scripture - it's not something that I am well versed in and I understand how it can be mistranslated. Just watch this video:



Whatever the book says is irrelevant really. Look what kind of behaviour it generates. I can't apologise for such a faith. I really can't.



i cant agree more - and again, its the mis-perception of the koran that lead so many to where they r today

just one q:
did u put those verses with the intention to show people partial truth that is in line with what you belief?
or you really didnt undderstand it? and now that you understand it, do you think it is wise to insist in judging it as you thought it is?

theres a huge difference between buddhist and buddhist teachings

sad to say today's islam has entered the dark ages - only a few muslim understand what true jihad means - and i m not talking about fanatics who force others to islam or terrorize civilians

this is a buddhist forum so i ll keep it here


i will check the video and comment later

as for now
lets see what this sutta says

"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Laurens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:11 pm

oceanmen wrote:
Laurens wrote:I don't care much to debate Islamic scripture - it's not something that I am well versed in and I understand how it can be mistranslated. Just watch this video:



Whatever the book says is irrelevant really. Look what kind of behaviour it generates. I can't apologise for such a faith. I really can't.



i cant agree more - and again, its the mis-perception of the koran that lead so many to where they r today

just one q:
did u put those verses with the intention to show people partial truth that is in line with what you belief?
or you really didnt undderstand it? and now that you understand it, do you think it is wise to insist in judging it as you thought it is?

theres a huge difference between buddhist and buddhist teachings

sad to say today's islam has entered the dark ages - only a few muslim understand what true jihad means - and i m not talking about fanatics who force others to islam or terrorize civilians

this is a buddhist forum so i ll keep it here


i will check the video and comment later

as for now
lets see what this sutta says

"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.


Whilst it is true that there are many mistranslations, misinterpretations, misreadings of scripture - whatever it really says is almost irrelevant. When people take a book to be the infallible words of God, and they take those words to heart, and those words can be interpreted to be promoting evil - regardless of their original intent, then that book is highly dangerous. Not matter what it actually says. If the book can be used to rationalize stoning women to death for adultery - then it is not a good book regardless. Whatever it really says. If you can derive from it that its okay to execute homosexuals, it's simply not a force for good in the world whether its a misinterpretation of the original meaning or not.

The penalty for leaving Islam in Islamic countries is death. You have to ask where they get these ideas from. If not scripture then where? And how can you derive so much acts of evil from a 'peaceful' book? The Buddha's teachings are truly peaceful and I see no way in which they could be used to rationalize terrorism and oppression. Where did these ideas come from if not derived from their holy book? If it had a clear message of peace then there would be peace.

It's a dangerous book, and I would have to say that the world would be a better place without it (and the Bible) that is not that I advocate the destruction of those religions, but if we were to live in an alternate history unaffected by those two books, we would be free from an awful lot of the problems that we are faced with.

I think the peaceful Muslims could certainly do more to distance themselves from, and draw international attention to the acts committed in the name of Islam. Whenever the radical Muslims parade the streets with banners claiming that cartoonists should be beheaded - the peaceful Muslims should demonstrate in equal numbers to save the name of their faith, I am unsure as to why there is not a real movement to distance themselves from those kinds of actions.
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Carl Sagan
User avatar
Laurens
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Modus.Ponens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:17 pm

oceanmen wrote:i beg to differ, i dont think you met the guy so how can you reflect him? how can anyone reflect him? the only think that can be reflected is how he was described in the so called "Hadith" which is not protected from corruption, manipulation and modification, hence it is not a realistic description of him, besides his role was not to be an example (as most muslims think) his role was to give the koran to the people,


Well there are the sahih (authentic) hadiths which contain the pearl that Laurens already posted: the Aisha thing. The Quran and the hadiths were brought by the same people so how can you say that one is completely reliable and the other is complete fabrication? Don't you think that's streching logic to the limit?

I remember other happenings that are ilustrative of mohamed's character: the capture of 800 jews; the men were slaughtered and mohamed alowed his men to have sex with the jews' wives.


....and that koran is not 60% about war - no idea where you got that from

i recall less than 8 of suras (of the 114 suras) speaking of "permision" to go defend yourself
with the following conditions:

1.your family is killed unjustly by an aggressor
2.you are driven out of your home by an aggressor
3.you are being treated unjustly by the aggressor


I got that from a portuguese writer, José Rodrigues dos Santos, who wrote "Divine Fury", a book about radical islam. He said that 60% of the quran were instructions of war. He made detailed research into islam for his book, and he was careful in it not to ofend muslims. He showed the book to both moderate and radical muslims who both confirmed that all that was in his book was true. He even spoke with an ex-member of Al-Qaeda. So I don't see why a person who investigated so deeply and who worried not to ofend the muslims in his book would say such a "lie". I prefer to take his word on this.

why are we accepting the french and english resistance movements in WW2 but we cant accept others to do so?
or are you ok with the Gaza Siege - not to mention the flotilla incident !!

:namaste:

Metta


I don't call conquering the entire arabic peninsula a resistence movement, like mohamed did in his lifetime. As for the israel-Palestine problem: yes I agree with the current siege with alowance to enter human aid into the territory. Otherwise the Hamas will get weapons and atack israel as usual :toilet:

As for the necessity of reading the quran in arabic for understanding its true meaning, that is a way of stoping any argument.

:anjali:
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Agent » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:28 pm

oceanmen wrote:وَقَـٰتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَـٰتِلُونَكُمۡ وَلَا تَعۡتَدُوٓاْ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلۡمُعۡتَدِينَ (١٩٠) وَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ حَيۡثُ ثَقِفۡتُمُوهُمۡ وَأَخۡرِجُوهُم مِّنۡ حَيۡثُ أَخۡرَجُوكُمۡ‌ۚ وَٱلۡفِتۡنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ ٱلۡقَتۡلِ‌ۚ وَلَا تُقَـٰتِلُوهُمۡ عِندَ ٱلۡمَسۡجِدِ ٱلۡحَرَامِ حَتَّىٰ يُقَـٰتِلُوكُمۡ فِيهِ‌ۖ فَإِن قَـٰتَلُوكُمۡ فَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ‌ۗ كَذَٲلِكَ جَزَآءُ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرِينَ (١٩١) فَإِنِ ٱنتَہَوۡاْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ۬ رَّحِيمٌ۬ (١٩٢)

Al-Baqara
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. (190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (191) But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (192)

i think its crystal clear that the advise is to DEFEND yourself from those who attack you but not to BEGIN hostilities
and its clear also that they permission to go to war is when they DRIVE YOU OUT of your homes and also not to figh them at places of worship unless they attack first...and at the end it is clear to all that if they desist(stop) then you also must stop.....

Hmmm... that's not much better really. Persecution is worse than slaughter? Really? Do you not see a problem with advocating such an attitude? It all just sounds like a justification of anger, greed, and murder when someone offends you. Certainly not the words of a future Buddha.
Any response to Laurens' claim that Muhammad engaged in pedophilia? If that is true I think that alone is enough to dismiss him as having any value, let alone being a Buddha.


oceanmen wrote:question: were there any resistance fighters during WW2?
how many fought to defend the holocaust victims
and how many would have survived if they were allowed to defend themselves?

This is going quite far off topic. We are discussing the possibility of Muhammad being Maitreya. WW2 has nothing whatsoever to do with that.
Vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādethā.
User avatar
Agent
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 5:14 pm
Location: Morenci, Michigan

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Mawkish1983 » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:37 pm

Oceanmen, I'm not sure the Kalama Sutta is particularly appropriate, particularly as the "praised by the wise" seems to promote the opposite idea to which I think you are trying to promote. What I mean is, I think you are saying one should learn Arabic and study the Qu'ran in its original language yourself before passing judgement rather than trusting someone else's opinion, whereas the Kalama Sutta seems to imply those who are "wise" can be trusted. The question, I suppose, is how one would define what "wise" is. I'm sure this is covered extensively in the Canon (I can think of a few places within the Dhammapada, for example, where distinction between "fools" and "the wise" are made).

Anyway, time for work for me (I'm working a day shift for a change!!!). I recommend you read the translators notes about the Kalama Sutta on accesstoinsight :)
Mawkish1983
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:45 pm

Whilst it is true that there are many mistranslations, misinterpretations, misreadings of scripture - whatever it really says is almost irrelevant. When people take a book to be the infallible words of God, and they take those words to heart, and those words can be interpreted to be promoting evil - regardless of their original intent, then that book is highly dangerous. Not matter what it actually says. If the book can be used to rationalize stoning women to death for adultery - then it is not a good book regardless. Whatever it really says. If you can derive from it that its okay to execute homosexuals, it's simply not a force for good in the world whether its a misinterpretation of the original meaning or not.



do you see how tragic the difference between koran and muslims? if they take it as God's words that their problem, and not our responsibility, our role is to investigate the book not the people, - and it is not the book that is to be blamed for promoting evil but those who decide to misinterpret it , and mix it with old traditions and fabricated hadith - stoning woman for instance (thanks for bringing that up) has never ever been mentioned in Koran, it is an old israelite tradition that is mentioned once again in "Fabricated hadith" and why is it fabricated because it is not in line with what the koran said about adultrers, and it is not stoning and physical torture , far from it - same for homosexuals, thats what muslims today claim but the koran clearly speaks of "killing one soul unjustly is like killing all humanity" so homosexuals should not be executed...another sad behavior of the different muslims who are not aware of the teachings of koran

The penalty for leaving Islam in Islamic countries is death. You have to ask where they get these ideas from. If not scripture then where? And how can you derive so much acts of evil from a 'peaceful' book? The Buddha's teachings are truly peaceful and I see no way in which they could be used to rationalize terrorism and oppression. Where did these ideas come from if not derived from their holy book? If it had a clear message of peace then there would be peace.


where does it say so in koran, no where - in the contrary the koran speaks clearly that whoever leaves his religion it wont make one bit of atoms worth of difference to God and no where did they say to kill them as they do in saudi arabia - its a disgrace

so where do they get these ideas from? because i cant find it in koran but i find it everywhere in fabricated hadith + old and ignorant traditions
there is another place where they can that - their unskillful minds...they derive to much evil from a peaceful book because they refuse to see the peace anywhere, not just in that book...

i cant see any reason to rationalize terrorism and oppression either....

if koran had a clear message of peace but their minds are set on ignorance then 100 korans wont help!!

It's a dangerous book, and I would have to say that the world would be a better place without it (and the Bible) that is not that I advocate the destruction of those religions, but if we were to live in an alternate history unaffected by those two books, we would be free from an awful lot of the problems that we are faced with.


did you read it all? or else you cant make that statement....

I think the peaceful Muslims could certainly do more to distance themselves from, and draw international attention to the acts committed in the name of Islam. Whenever the radical Muslims parade the streets with banners claiming that cartoonists should be beheaded - the peaceful Muslims should demonstrate in equal numbers to save the name of their faith, I am unsure as to why there is not a real movement to distance themselves from those kinds of actions.


i love this part....i keep saying the same thing over and over...why are muslims so angry when they disgrace mohamed in cartoons and why are they so silent when they disgrace jesus, moses, abraham? once again its against koranic teahcings that clearly states not to differentiate between the prophhets...sadly this is the case today and each one is obsessed with his own prophet like a football team....when we share all their wisdom and have the same God (thats the koran speaking - not the fanatic angry muslims who choose to differentiate between prophets and see Mohamed as superior....not very koranic)

كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ
Each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, His books, and His apostles.
"We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His apostles."
Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #285

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The criterion for acceptance

10. "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them.
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:48 pm

Mawkish1983 wrote:Oceanmen, I'm not sure the Kalama Sutta is particularly appropriate, particularly as the "praised by the wise" seems to promote the opposite idea to which I think you are trying to promote. What I mean is, I think you are saying one should learn Arabic and study the Qu'ran in its original language yourself before passing judgement rather than trusting someone else's opinion, whereas the Kalama Sutta seems to imply those who are "wise" can be trusted. The question, I suppose, is how one would define what "wise" is. I'm sure this is covered extensively in the Canon (I can think of a few places within the Dhammapada, for example, where distinction between "fools" and "the wise" are made).

Anyway, time for work for me (I'm working a day shift for a change!!!). I recommend you read the translators notes about the Kalama Sutta on accesstoinsight :)



absolutely! this is what i m trying to say
why judge when we didnt even investigate properly
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 2:50 pm

Agent wrote:
oceanmen wrote:وَقَـٰتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَـٰتِلُونَكُمۡ وَلَا تَعۡتَدُوٓاْ‌ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلۡمُعۡتَدِينَ (١٩٠) وَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ حَيۡثُ ثَقِفۡتُمُوهُمۡ وَأَخۡرِجُوهُم مِّنۡ حَيۡثُ أَخۡرَجُوكُمۡ‌ۚ وَٱلۡفِتۡنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ ٱلۡقَتۡلِ‌ۚ وَلَا تُقَـٰتِلُوهُمۡ عِندَ ٱلۡمَسۡجِدِ ٱلۡحَرَامِ حَتَّىٰ يُقَـٰتِلُوكُمۡ فِيهِ‌ۖ فَإِن قَـٰتَلُوكُمۡ فَٱقۡتُلُوهُمۡ‌ۗ كَذَٲلِكَ جَزَآءُ ٱلۡكَـٰفِرِينَ (١٩١) فَإِنِ ٱنتَہَوۡاْ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ۬ رَّحِيمٌ۬ (١٩٢)

Al-Baqara
Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. (190) And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (191) But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (192)

i think its crystal clear that the advise is to DEFEND yourself from those who attack you but not to BEGIN hostilities
and its clear also that they permission to go to war is when they DRIVE YOU OUT of your homes and also not to figh them at places of worship unless they attack first...and at the end it is clear to all that if they desist(stop) then you also must stop.....

Hmmm... that's not much better really. Persecution is worse than slaughter? Really? Do you not see a problem with advocating such an attitude? It all just sounds like a justification of anger, greed, and murder when someone offends you. Certainly not the words of a future Buddha.
Any response to Laurens' claim that Muhammad engaged in pedophilia? If that is true I think that alone is enough to dismiss him as having any value, let alone being a Buddha.


oceanmen wrote:question: were there any resistance fighters during WW2?
how many fought to defend the holocaust victims
and how many would have survived if they were allowed to defend themselves?

This is going quite far off topic. We are discussing the possibility of Muhammad being Maitreya. WW2 has nothing whatsoever to do with that.




the arabic word is FITNA = Creating a War between two groups or two people so they kill one another
the word persecution is NOT correct translation

as for WW2 i agree - this is of topic and i appologize
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby oceanmen » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:02 pm

Well there are the sahih (authentic) hadiths which contain the pearl that Laurens already posted: the Aisha thing. The Quran and the hadiths were brought by the same people so how can you say that one is completely reliable and the other is complete fabrication? Don't you think that's streching logic to the limit?


unfortunatly what you call authentic hadith is not authentic because it uses the modern science of narration which is also not water proof and sometimes still not in line with koran - from the 1-2 million hadith or so i can say there are just 2000 authentic ones in line with koran and the one you mentioned is not one of them

I remember other happenings that are ilustrative of mohamed's character: the capture of 800 jews; the men were slaughtered and mohamed alowed his men to have sex with the jews' wives.


another fabricated hadith - the truth is much simpler than that but who will see it in the midst of the enormous deception of today's world

I got that from a portuguese writer, José Rodrigues dos Santos, who wrote "Divine Fury", a book about radical islam. He said that 60% of the quran were instructions of war. He made detailed research into islam for his book, and he was careful in it not to ofend muslims. He showed the book to both moderate and radical muslims who both confirmed that all that was in his book was true. He even spoke with an ex-member of Al-Qaeda. So I don't see why a person who investigated so deeply and who worried not to ofend the muslims in his book would say such a "lie". I prefer to take his word on this.



i ve read the koran over 150 times wihtin the last 23 years and i can safely tell you if it were 60% about war, i would know!!

I don't call conquering the entire arabic peninsula a resistence movement, like mohamed did in his lifetime. As for the israel-Palestine problem: yes I agree with the current siege with alowance to enter human aid into the territory. Otherwise the Hamas will get weapons and atack israel as usual :toilet:


He never conquered it, he was attacked first and was lucky to win most battles,
this was because he managed to unite the tribes, something that had not been done for centuries before
he never spread islam using the sword yet other AFTER his death did - which was wrong and against koranic teachings

as for Gaza....at least we agree on something

As for the necessity of reading the quran in arabic for understanding its true meaning, that is a way of stoping any argument.


then why dont you read shakespear in chinese? or goethe in hebrew? wouldnt make much sense either i think!!

all i m saying why so much aversions and critisicm? is it not possible that there is some truth out there that we have all overlooked?
why not either do proper investigation about koran instead of blind judgements, or better not to judge at all since we never read it

i do understand where all this misunderstanding comes from and i totally do not blame anyone for these wrong views about koran
as i said, muslims today are in their dark ages


:namaste:
metta
User avatar
oceanmen
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:45 am

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Laurens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:24 pm

Why go to great lengths to defend the book?

...slay the idolaters wherever you find them...take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush...


Earlier you made claims that the language used was talking in terms of the defence of Islam. How is this in any way talking of defence? - taking captive is not a defensive measure, besieging is not a defensive measure, laying in wait and ambushing is not a defensive measure. Slaying them wherever you find them is not a defensive measure - that implies that if you find a group of idolaters idly sitting around it's your God given duty to slay them. Whatever the context, how can that be justified as peaceful or even defensive?

That is not the only verse that talks about Jihad in terms of war. There are many verses that speak of doing battle, waging war, raiding, looting etc. Muhammed's poor opinion of those who did not fight for Islam is often mentioned. The rewards of dying in the name of Islam are proclaimed in the Koran. I'm sorry but I cannot see the peace there.

I feel that it is clear from the actions of its followers and the verses contained within the book that Islam is a religion who's aim is world domination - through force if necessary. I really do not see why you are defending it.

It certainly is not a book conceived of by enlightened beings.
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Carl Sagan
User avatar
Laurens
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:56 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby Modus.Ponens » Sun Jun 20, 2010 3:30 pm

oceanmen wrote:
Well there are the sahih (authentic) hadiths which contain the pearl that Laurens already posted: the Aisha thing. The Quran and the hadiths were brought by the same people so how can you say that one is completely reliable and the other is complete fabrication? Don't you think that's streching logic to the limit?


unfortunatly what you call authentic hadith is not authentic because it uses the modern science of narration which is also not water proof and sometimes still not in line with koran - from the 1-2 million hadith or so i can say there are just 2000 authentic ones in line with koran and the one you mentioned is not one of them

You didn't answer my question. Plus, you're at odds with most muslim scholars, who accept the hadiths.

I remember other happenings that are ilustrative of mohamed's character: the capture of 800 jews; the men were slaughtered and mohamed alowed his men to have sex with the jews' wives.


another fabricated hadith - the truth is much simpler than that but who will see it in the midst of the enormous deception of today's world


You didn't answer my question above: how do you explain that the hadiths are complete fabrications and the quran is a complete perfection?

I got that from a portuguese writer, José Rodrigues dos Santos, who wrote "Divine Fury", a book about radical islam. He said that 60% of the quran were instructions of war. He made detailed research into islam for his book, and he was careful in it not to ofend muslims. He showed the book to both moderate and radical muslims who both confirmed that all that was in his book was true. He even spoke with an ex-member of Al-Qaeda. So I don't see why a person who investigated so deeply and who worried not to ofend the muslims in his book would say such a "lie". I prefer to take his word on this.



i ve read the koran over 150 times wihtin the last 23 years and i can safely tell you if it were 60% about war, i would know!!

I don't call conquering the entire arabic peninsula a resistence movement, like mohamed did in his lifetime. As for the israel-Palestine problem: yes I agree with the current siege with alowance to enter human aid into the territory. Otherwise the Hamas will get weapons and atack israel as usual :toilet:


He never conquered it, he was attacked first and was lucky to win most battles,
this was because he managed to unite the tribes, something that had not been done for centuries before
he never spread islam using the sword yet other AFTER his death did - which was wrong and against koranic teachings


So he, while defending his territory, conquered the arabic peninsula? That is hard to get.

as for Gaza....at least we agree on something

As for the necessity of reading the quran in arabic for understanding its true meaning, that is a way of stoping any argument.


then why dont you read shakespear in chinese? or goethe in hebrew? wouldnt make much sense either i think!!

all i m saying why so much aversions and critisicm? is it not possible that there is some truth out there that we have all overlooked?
why not either do proper investigation about koran instead of blind judgements, or better not to judge at all since we never read it

i do understand where all this misunderstanding comes from and i totally do not blame anyone for these wrong views about koran
as i said, muslims today are in their dark ages


:namaste:
metta


i can read shakespear in portuguese and i will understand the meaning. What i'll miss is the beauty of the original language, for which I won't have the same sensitivity anyway.

:anjali:
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Funchal, Portugal

Re: MUHAMMAD (PBUH) IN BUDDHIST SCRIPTURES?

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:36 pm

Unfortunately Islam is a bit of of a lightning rod, but this is really no place to air out problems or defend Islam from criticisms justified or not.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19180
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Paradise

Previous

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], LXNDR, purple planet and 7 guests