Pak Tea House » Uncategorized » “Innocence of Muslims” and Muslims….
“Innocence of Muslims” and Muslims….
Raza Habib Raja
“One of the “best”ways to protest against a movie which portrays your faith as crazy, fascist and violent is to go and protest in a way that is crazy, fascist and violent !”
The above is a Facebook status of a friend (may be an excerpt from an article) which accurately describes what right now we are witnessing all across the Muslim world. How an obscure and crude movie on YouTube ( which by no stretch of imagination is state sanctioned or censored in the conventional sense) can spark such violent protests is something which really needs to be pondered upon.
Frankly I will not defend the movie as I have seen the thirteen minute trailer. I fully agree that it is crude and frankly aims at humiliating Muslims. But in no way, does it lead to any justification of the violence which has erupted all across the Muslim world.
Whenever I want to refute the increasingly voiced and accepted opinion that “ Moderate Islam is a Mirage”, something like this happens which leaves me completely speechless.
It is not the protests, as it is natural to protest against what a community feels is offensive and inflammatory. It is the ugly nature of protests which is extremely worrisome. Muslims really need to ponder over the fact that their excessive reaction actually ends up leaving them virtually isolated. The world does not feel any sympathy for them and correctly interprets them as perpetuators of hate and bigotry. This behavior also has a spillover effect on virtually all issues which involves Muslims and creates a universal impression that perhaps everywhere, even where they are actually prosecuted, Muslims are the main culprits.
And by the way let us not forget that while Muslims continue to rage over Blasphemous cartoons, movies and images, their own record with respect to treatment of minorities is pathetic. What they need to learn that world will only sympathize with them if they themselves show the same kind of respect they expect of their faith.
And besides the ugly nature of protests, the Muslims also have this misplaced anger towards the Western governments. An obscure movie, made by someone who has even been convicted in a fraud, is in no way connected with US government or West in general. However, in this strange Muslim mindset ( which by the way is roughly similar all across the globe reaffirming that Islamic identity cuts across the world), everything is being deliberately planned to insult them.
Much deeper and frankly important issue is the confrontation between Western ideals of freedom of speech and Muslims’ extraordinary reverence of their religion. I have pointed out before also that one of the major reasons as to why Muslims are like that is the extraordinary reverence which is instilled in their minds right from the childhood. Even those who are moderate ( and they exist in majority) and for that matter those who don’t follow Islamic rituals, have a tendency to get riled up when anyone mocks Prophet Muhammad or Quran. Religion for Muslims is like race or ethnicity and in fact even more than that. This is something which the West needs to understand.
While it is perfectly right to be critical of radical Islam and also question inhuman laws, but mocking or insulting the Holy Prophet will be completely counterproductive. It is just like calling African Americans as “Niggers” and expecting them not to even notice! Yes I am fully admitting there is a huge issue with the way Islamic World is today and we need to address the issue but mocking won’t just do it. I am being extremely realistic and pragmatic here. It is how you deal with the problem that will make any difference.
Yes I agree that religion is not that sensitive matter for many in the modern world but in Muslim world it is. And through mocking and ridiculing, we only further alienate the Muslims and in the process lose any realistic chance of engaging them for reforms.
However, at the same time it becomes difficult to just bow down in front of violent pressure exerted by Muslims when Muslims themselves show little credibility in terms of how they treat minorities and respect their religious freedom. Moreover, since freedom of expression is often construed as a hard won right therefore making exceptions for Muslims and that too in the face of violence, does not appear to be the “right” choice.
We need to nevertheless agree on something with religion’s criticism in the media. For example just like race, religion’s criticism also needs to be pondered over. For example, perhaps we can broadly agree that criticism on religious laws and customs is acceptable while ridiculing its symbols is not. There has to be at least some consensus, of informal type, which should guide media in general.
Filed under: Uncategorized · Tags: Muslims, protests, Raza Habib Raja, right
1,078 Responses to "“Innocence of Muslims” and Muslims…."
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- Maggu
said Tajendar: How do you get access to these “se... - ルイビトン 財布
said これら女の子べきではないするは良い取引の製品ものですか？ルイ ・ ヴィトン作成クリーン革はクラッチブ... - tajender
said lurker everything is from your upanishads and veda... - Marianne
said These are in fact enormous ideas in concerning blo... - G. Ali
said Guys, who are offended by Farsi terms of word R... - kapil said Markandey Katju is the son of S N Katju who was th...
- Lurker said Tajender,
You are a whitefaced lier. All your crap...
- Ndelhi
said G ali,
Just athought after reading your enlightene... - Ex-Paki said Sunny,
I think all of us should be honest in answe...
- AbraHarami Homo/Babri Sarpian said “Early in his reign Shahjahan had appointed...
relevant,
those are transcription issues.
.
You’re doing a better job of exposing Muslims’ lies than I ever could. Please continue.
@ finglofin
Interesting explanation. The examples of hate driven politics infront of me are AQ, political extremists (right and left) and other terrorists as well as street mobs. Hate is a very strong emotion, stronger than fear. If one experiences it one should set it aside, it leads to no lasting good.
to tilsim
There is a difference between “hate combined with arrogance and violence” and “hate without arrogance and violence”.
Islam and muslims are on the evil track (hate combined with arrogance and violence) since the days of Mohammad.
Raj,
Thanks but you have complicated the word phiosophy and expanded sanskrit to become a modern language which it is not.
Philosophy simply means “friend of knowledge”, sophie or sophia being the knowledge in greek language andPhila was the jew who was born in Alexandria. Insanskrit language the word ‘Veda’ appears to t to knowledge. If you agree with the word Veda then please tell us wheather the language came first or the knowledge came first to the mankind?
This is a serious question we need to address first, before one gets drowned in the world of internet. May I suggest that you take lessons in philosophy in the nearest university as an observer student
This should then place you in the position to read and understand scriptures as well. Have a nice day.
Rex Minor
. without a the closes
nD,
You talk about two gods in this country, you shall be referred to the nearest hospita. Your kind actualy spin and state instead, one god with several assistants. this is acceptale since we call them Prophets and angels or heilige geist which the christians termed them. It was nice knowing you. thanks for he avice, the message of one God has not yet reached you.
Rex Minor
FF,
You do not have the talent to debate. Rajtoo atleast analyses and then posts theories, MB puts out the published info and says that he is a massenger. MTG selects the crap and posts it without demanding a response. You put out crap that you read and post it for a debate and expect others to accept or deny the info.
You are a product of propaganda coming out from various quarters. German history did not start from Hitler, nor it ended with the fall of third reich. German monarchs have ruled Europe, and Hitler was overwhelmingly elected as the chancellor and was the most popular and powerful chancellor as well. His use of military power brought disgrave to this Nation and every one is conscious of this. The excessive use of force by the American President is equaly going to disgrace the American people in the world.Go and visit the wall of separation America from Mexico. It was Mr Reagen who appealed to Gorbachav to tear down te Berlin wall. Hitler went across Europe in a blitzkrieg and got stuck in Russia. The American President is using more than 150 oversees bases for its policies. Hitlersetup concentration camps in Germany and Poland for th European jews. George W and BO used oversees concentration camps acroos many countries and operated randition flights transfering prisoners from one camp to another ( Hitler technique)) the Bagram and Abugareb being the notable one for torture as well as the one in Guatanemo. Muslims instead of Jews are the casualties and this makes no difference about the mentality of Hitler, Bush and Obama. We are witnessing the performance of three animals and not the freedom of expression. Let America accept the civilised norms and accept the authority of the criminal court at Hague and we shall see how the zionist jews like Bernard levi alias Lewis are going to defend and rescue those who caused the death of millions plus.
No the Talbans are not invincible , no one is. It is just that marines are suffering from incontinence. No one from the amrine corps shall ever be proud of their valour after their combat with Taliban forces.
Rex Minor
Ps
Facts of history and ground reality are of essence, not your god damn theories and cold blooded philosophies.
Origins of Hate
The passions of hate arise from several features of our thinking process. These include wanting to assign blame for misfortune, protecting our self-esteem, a desire to strengthen our community, the need to avoid toxins, alleviating our fears, and several types of errors in reasoning. The ability to quickly separate friend from foe is essential to self-defense and safety and provides the origins of hate. Each of these contributing factors are explained in more detail below.
Assigning Blame
Who do we hold responsible when bad things happen? If we want to affirm our stature, preserve our self-esteem, avoid shame, and preserve our pride, it does not help to blame ourselves. So we conveniently assign blame to “them”, the “others”, the Enemy. Since we don’t like bad things to happen and since bad things are caused by the enemy, we hate them for it. We frame the opposition as the enemy. It’s the victims versus the villains, good versus evil, us versus them, in-group versus out-group, and friend versus foe. It is often easier to reject the other than to work to understand their point-of-view.
Of course this line of reasoning is based on the fallacy of disproportionate responsibly and the fallacy of being right. Since many causes contribute to each result, we probably share in the blame along with many others, including unavoidable bad luck.
Strengthening the community
Hostility toward the out-group increases the cohesion of the in-group and increases our sense of loyalty and belonging to our local community. The in-group always finds reasons to see itself as superior. Hostility toward the out-group increases the solidarity of the in-group.
Avoiding Toxins
Disgust helps us avoid toxic substances. Contempt distances us from unworthy people. Hate is our defense against noxious behavior. We attempt to raise our self-esteem by contrasting ourselves with the evil, subhuman enemy. Pain, including psychological pain, mobilizes us psychically, mentally, and emotionally, to get away from the source (run) or remove the source (fight) of the pain.
Alleviating our Fears
Because the feared other—the enemy—seems dangerous, we feel compelled to escape the threat or destroy the enemy. Threat strongly arouses the simple and primitive urge to “kill or be killed”. Revenge is pursued with a vengeance to eliminate the threat.
Bias Toward Identifying Danger
When identifying a stranger as friend or foe, survival in primitive times may depend on a quick decision that does not mistake a foe. The result is a bias toward caution and the suspicion of danger. The safest assumption is that members of the out-group are dangerous. In security screening the consequences of a false negative—mistaking foe for friend—is much more dangerous than the cost of a false positive—mistaking a friend for foe. The resulting optimum decision threshold results in an inherent suspicion of strangers called xenophobia, even though this is based on the fallacy of overgeneralization. As a result we often overreact against a suspected foe.
Permission to Destroy the Enemy
Empathy, compassion, and cooperation are ubiquitous strengths of human nature. However, various errors in reasoning can overcome compassion and give us permission to destroy the enemy. This often involves seeing ourselves as the victims of an evil other. This gives us permission to do good by killing off the evil enemy and still regard ourselves as a good person. Because they are wrong, bad, evil, or subhuman they deserve to be killed. An asymmetrical view of the other, seen only from the first-person viewpoint, fuels hate. Viewing the other as very different from our self can allow hate to emerge. What begins as the other quickly becomes the beast. Denigrating the victim gives us permission to harm them.
Disrespect is the precursor to hate. Heed the warning. Reevaluate the evidence, eliminate the distorted thinking, correct the errors in reasoning, and reject the temptation to dismiss the other.
Other Errors in Reasoning
A wide variety of errors in reasoning allow us to sustain hate.
Common stereotypes include a variety of overgeneralizations about members of a group based on race, ethnicity, gender, nationality, or religious belief, along with profession and social class. These can create distorted and exaggerated negative images of the members of particular groups. This dehumanizes and demonizes “the other” and invites hate.
Misattributing benign behavior to evil intent can make us suspicious and fearful of others. Choosing to hate is an ineffective shortcut that avoids the hard work of analyzing the problem in depth. It attributes blame incorrectly.
Egocentrism, the unshakable belief that “I am correct”, self-justification, and the need to be right leads us too quickly to the conclusion that others are wrong, they are the obstacles, the source of our problems, evil, and need to be eliminated. We deny contrary evidence.
Stress and fear can lead us to revert to simplified and often incorrect primal thinking based on the fallacy of polarized thinking.
Hypersensitivity to criticism can cause us to revert to simplified, but incorrect rules governing other’s behavior.
Our desire to go along with the group, including the Ashe Effect and other group-think tendencies, can compromise our good judgment.
Genocide
Hate fuels the tragedies of genocide throughout history and continues today. Millions of humans are murdered in pursuit of “ethnic cleansing” justified on the basis of eliminating the disgusting, subhuman, others. Genocide often relies on misattributing evil motives to an out-group, establishing them as scapegoats, and transforming these beliefs into a widely-accepted conspiracy theory. Stories are told that reinforce, popularize, and justify these distortions. The United Nations adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 1948.
Gregory Stanton, President of Genocide Watch, describes these eight stages of genocide developmentthat are “predictable but not inexorable”.
1. Classification People are divided into “us and them”.
2. Symbolization “When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups…”
3. Dehumanization “Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder.”
4. Organization “Genocide is always organized… Special army units or militias are often trained and armed…”
5. Polarization “Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda…”
6. Identification “Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity…”
7. Extermination “It is ‘extermination’ to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human.”
8. Denial “The perpetrators… deny that they committed any crimes…”
Here are several examples of the horror of genocide:
The indigenous populations of the Americas dropped sharply, perhaps as much as 97%, after the arrival of Europeans in 1492. Although some of these deaths were the unavoidable consequences of disease, hardship, or severing social ties, much of it was due to systematic attacks on Native Americans by the European settlers. The Indian Removal policy of the United States coerced the relocation of major Native American groups in both the Southeast and the Northeast United States, resulting directly and indirectly in the deaths of tens of thousands.
The Armenian Genocide was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923, resulting in the deportation of nearly 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men, women, and children were killed, 500,000 survivors were expelled from their homes, which succeeded in eliminating the over 2,500-year presence of Armenians in their historic homeland.
The Holocaust was the efficient and systematic attempt on an industrial scale to assemble and kill as many Jewish people as possible, using all of the resources and technology available to the Nazi state. It resulted in the murder of approximately 6 Million Jews between 1933 and 1945.
Approximately 1.7-3 million people were killed in Cambodia between 1975 and 1979 through execution, starvation and forced labor. The Khmer Rouge, a communist group headed by Pol Pot, sought to transform the Cambodian society by wiping out any western influences and converting the country to the purest form of socialism. To annihilate modern values, they attacked people in the intellectual, commercial, and professional class in the cities, declaring them enemies of the state.
Between 1975 and 1999 as many as 180,000 people of East Timor—approximately one quarter of the population—were killed by the Indonesian military after invading and occupied East Timor. The Indonesian military used starvation to exterminate the East Timorese, according to a UN reportdocumenting the deaths. Most of these killings took place in the years 1975-1979.
The Bosnian Genocide was an organized killing of Bosnians, predominantly Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks) during the war between 1992 and 1995 by authorities of Republika Srpska and its Army. The Bosnian Genocide has been proven at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) through the court case entitled Prosecutor vs. Krstic.
During a period of about 100 days from April 6th through mid-July 1994, 937,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were killed by Hutus in Rwanda according to official estimates. The rate at which people were killed far exceeded any other genocide in history. Bodies were left wherever they were slain—usually by machetes, mostly in the streets and their homes.
Darfur has been embroiled in a deadly conflict for the past three years. At least 400,000 people have been killed; more than 2 million civilians have been forced to flee their homes to live in displaced-persons camps in Sudan or in refugee camps in neighboring Chad; and more than 3.5 million men, women, and children are completely reliant on international aid for survival.
Lynching
Lynching is a form of mob violence and rush to justice, usually involving the illegal hanging of suspected criminals. Perversely, photographs and postcards were often taken as souvenirs at lynchings throughout America. The mobs have clearly given themselves permission to hate.
Constructive Responses
Reasoning errors sustain hate. The many constructive responses to hate rely on examining the evidence more carefully, interpreting it from a more compassionate point-of-view, correcting errors in our reasoning, and increasing our understanding and empathy for those we have labeled the enemy. Adopt a humanistic perspective, recognize the universal similarities of all humans, and let the empathy, caring, and compassion in. Since hate can only be sustained by errors in reasoning, it can be eliminated by reappraising and correcting those errors. Work to transform your enemies into friends. Your own thinking may be where the change has to take place.
“Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?” ~ Abraham Lincoln
Tilsit,
You left out the genocide in East Pakistan.
Tsilm,
Love and hate are two sides of the same coin. I love my family and hate No One! You probably need another word to replace it with the word hate.
Rex Minor
This was a cut and paste job but yes there are genocides that have been committed by Muslims because their intention was hate,power and plunder. This was not meant to absolve anyone who falls into the trap of hate. We have to acknowledge hate for what it can lead to.
Rex Minor wrote:
Rex,
I have been discussing philosophy with Germans who have PhDs in Hegel for over 10 years, so I’ll pass on your advice, which sounds a tad childish, as if outside of some university in Germany, there is no way of getting to know philosophy.
.
Besides it is somewhat gratuitous as you asked a question, and I answered it, and for some reason, it did not suit your world-view, so you are telling me, I need to go and get more knowledge. It is you who were looking for answers, e.g. as to what is philosophy in Sanskrit, what came first language or knowledge, etc. so it logical that you should be going to some philosophy classes, especially as you think of that as a good source of knowledge!
.
I don’t know about any Jew Phila from Alexandria. Philosophy means “love of wisdom” and that definition suffices me, without needing to bring in any Jews from Alexandria, which is superfluous.
.
Yes, Veda means knowledge, and from the word Veda come European words like “Wissen”, “wisdom”, “vedere”, etc.
.
Rex,
I don’t know what you are trying to get at, because this question and flow of discussion comes for me really out of the blue. Very unexpected.
.
I don’t even know whether you are asking help to try to understand something or whether you are trying to pass on some wisdom to me, that I don’t see and did not ask for!
.
To be frank, I discuss philosophy in a very different environment than what exists on PTH, and with people who I think, have some philosophical depth and experience. I am not making any judgment as to whether you have it or not. It is just that in this forum, even if you had it, it would not be visible. So sorry pal, let’s stay away from philosophy.
.
Neither is philosophy a word from a modern language, nor is Sanskrit incapable of expressing modern thoughts!.
.
Just FYI, Sanskrit, even Vedic Sanskrit, is not just Classical Sanskrit, is a refined language, created by philologists thousands of years ago, which happens to still be a language most capable of compressing maximum semantic into minimum phonetic using consistent rules, and which can organically expand to express knowledge in the most efficient way! In fact its very learning helps relieve the brain of muddled thinking. In fact the whole field of linguistics research one sees in the West is something they have Sanskrit and Panini, an Indian Sanskrit grammarian of old to thank for. You ask any German philosopher, “who is the father of linguistics”, and he will tell you of Panini. In fact it was knowledge of Sanskrit that lighted up European linguistics and philosophy in the late 18th century.
.
Don’t take my word for it! Do your own research!
@ Tilsim ( September 22, 2012 at 3:35 pm)
The “Hatred Factor” is no doubt the origin of all bigotry, persecution and oppression and also a symptom of sick minds. Now I come to your following words:
//..Disrespect is the precursor to hate. Heed the warning. Reevaluate the evidence, eliminate the distorted thinking, correct the errors in reasoning, and reject the temptation to dismiss the other..//
I agree. I am of the the opinion that the idea of building a human society based on “disrespect”, merely for the purpose of exercising freedom of speech, is a negative way of approaching things. Disrespect will only arouse disrespect and hatred will arouse hatred. The human society’s viability depends on mutual respect and restraint.
@RajTOO
You are right about your observations on philosophy, of course; it is not clear why you were attacked on this issue (especially when there are so many others that you could, and should be attacked about).
Regarding Sanskrit, why is it that every enthusiast echoes the same guff about the rule-friendly super-language which is suitable for computers? It is an elegant natural language beyond any doubt, especially as it is not a natural language at all, but a single-handed tour de force by Panini, who ‘cleaned up’ the Vedic version by the strict application of rules, eliminating much of the transitional traces in that earlier, more natural version.
What you and other enthusiasts probably refer to is actually Panini’s own invention, the sutras, a use of recursion as used currently in computer languages which he introduced several centuries before Christ. Absolutely stunning. It is difficult to understand what sort of a mind could produce this out of a hat, as it were. There are loose references to Sanskrit and Backus-Naur Form, which are just that, loose references; correctly, the reference is to Panini, and there have been quite legitimate calls to re-title BNF as Panini Normal Form.
@RajTOO
The objection to Sanskrit being called a modern language is natural, and is also pedantic, stemming from an abysmal lack of knowledge of the concepts involved. The only recursion likely to work on that particular bony carapace is a mechanical type of recursion.
Vajra wrote:
Too much blah blah, and no substance!
.
The issue is not whether the newest terminology has been imported or translated into Sanskrit, for that can be done anytime, but whether Sanskrit is in a position to fulfill the demands of modernity, once suitably extended with the new vocabulary.
.
Computer languages do not really pose too many demands on a natural language. They are minimal. Almost any natural language in the world can fulfill the requirements. Even Bantu would suffice.
.
Those are however not the requirements for the efficient working of a human mind! That is a domain where Sanskrit would be beneficial.
Raj,
I am sorry I had no intention to question your knowledge nor that of your friends with Phd’s, It was naive of me to take you on the route which many philosophers have taken to search for knowledge methodicaly and this lands them to the source of knowledge. Scriptures are one of the key confirmed source of knowledge but scriptures have never been fully understood nor are they meant to be fully understood, until the time comes. I was not trying to be pedentic.
The thing I admire about you is that you want to learn about Indian civilisations, not fully discovered yet and without relying on the stories which foreign experts not familiar with Indian culture have put out in the world. My intention was to suggest to you to study more deeply at the same time what is outlined in Hindu literature and scriptures if you will. What happened to the civilisations whch indicate the most advanced life style of people with swimming pools in front of their dwellings and no sign of any temple or worship place. Why did they vanish without any trace of violence or or a natural cause. Was this similar to Pompie episodeß By the way have you been to Pompei to see the remnants of the affluen people who once lived there: Do visit the place if you have the time and the opportunity.
Rex Minor
Raj,
Well said, but after meeting a swede, who became a good friend of mine, who was raised in hisv farm with Bantu vhildren, I would not recommend the Africaan which the Bantu speaks , but both English and dutch would be inferior to the sanskrit, it it is updated with words from the foreign languages. The concern would ofcourse be its acceptance in the foreign arena, but who cares with a popultion of billion plus and the extrapulated economy in fifty years, even the Brits would become the expert all of a sudden. You are ong fine, develope a white paper, a short one and send it to the Indian Prime Minister office for rview, simultaneously put it out in leading german and British news paper. remember, you have to make Indians intelligentia pregnant with your conep and even prenancy takes Nine months period.
Rex Minor
Blasphemy takes place in the US or Denmark and we Pakistanis start destroying Pakistani property and killing Pakistanis. This is like somebody twists my arm and I respond by amputating my own arm. This in neither ghairat nor revenge. This is madness and nothing but madness. If blasphemy has been committed against the Holy Prophet, it is the responsibility of Muslims to inform the world of the beautiful character and conduct of the Prophet. Violence is no response.
@RajTOO
The issue is not whether the newest terminology has been imported or translated into Sanskrit, for that can be done anytime, but whether Sanskrit is in a position to fulfill the demands of modernity, once suitably extended with the new vocabulary.
.
Computer languages do not really pose too many demands on a natural language. They are minimal. Almost any natural language in the world can fulfill the requirements. Even Bantu would suffice.
Your response was confusing. There was no question of importing new terminology into Sanskrit, or translating it into Sanskrit. What on earth are you talking about? Do you have a clue about the issues involved? I am surprised to find you taking refuge in broad generalities on a very specific topic. There is no vocabulary extension involved. There is a type of algorithmic structure which is used, which Panini’s sutras emulate very well, with tremendous brevity and power.
Incidentally, what gives you the impression that computer languages are linked to natural languages, and that extending a natural language can form a computer language?
Raj,
Sorry I now know that I spelled he name “Philo” incorrectly. You could read about Philo, the jew from Alexandria, a lot in the internet world.
Rex Minor
much of the talk here is off topic, that makes sick!!
Folks, come to the point and comment on the topic rather than discuss Hinduism or Sanskrit—both being dead entities.
@ syed
As a Mirzai you will hold every act of protest or self defence as violence. Playing with the sentiments of masses naturally creates anger, more anger when their leaders are slavish and indifferent to the issue. the violence may not be so violent against the video as much as it may be to wake up the dead scruples of the Muslim leaders.
/
Mirzai’s are against Jihad….not because Jihad is mandatory in Islam but because Mirza Ghulla sold himself to his British lords for misleading Muslims as well as Hindus during the quit India movement through word play to harm the struggle for independence. If violence is bad for Muslims it is also bad for the super power who is bent upon to bully weaker nations…..pending another balancing force (such as the USSR in the past) ,,, Like every rise has a fall, wait and see how very soon the so called super powers and their crony nations are bound to collapse.
AKB,
Have a bit of patience. I am confident that you have the individual by the of RajToo, regardles of his background and use of rude language at times,specially when he is angry, is extremely rich in his intution and intellect. My study on this blog has revealed to me that Hinduism is the most ancient source of knowledge in science and human ethics as well as cosmolgy and metaphysics and were outlined in their scriptures but were never fully understood, interpreted and therefore not adequately explained.Sanskrit was and is the key to loosen Hindus resistance towards Islam and other Ibrahimic religions. The caste system was not meant to be the caste system they practice, this might have the result of their Hindu King suddenly going over to Buddhism etc. There were definitely several Indian civilisations, and people of hindu faih ccomplete interpretation of their scripturs in terms of economy and economy alone, and use of violence to resist neighbours without any obvious compassion for the poor explains their stance on morality and ethics, which is so different from Islam. Indians attitude towards Islam an only change if they fully understand their own faith, culture and traditions as well as the complete History of India. I dare say that Sanskrit holds the key to their faith as arabic language to Islam and its interpretation whih is now being unfolded in Arabia and jewish faith in the Hebraesh laguage.
Rex Minor
Syed,
It is not blesphamy what is being witnessed. It is the human dignty which is now at stake! Tunsisia shall be the first odemocratic muslim country which is going to introduce 21st century Sharia followed by Egypt. Sharia law simply means the laws which theeir parliament shall discuss, agree and legislate. The law which will reflec the values of Islam and not a copy of the ancient 7th century practices. There shall be no discrimination, all citizen will have equal rights, without exception and the religion clergy shall have no power in running the Govt., as is the case now In Germany and beyond. The kuffar if I may be liberal to use this word is coming from the Zionists, speciaal from America who would like theie style of democracy with free for all or other lobbyists who would like to possess the special privilages in muslim countries. Barring some no muslim Govt. currently represent legitamely their citizens. Hence opposing demonstrators who are emotional but have no intention to commit violence. What we are witnessing is Helplessness of people.
Rex Minor
@ Kashif
Thanks.
@ Syed
I agree. It pains me greatly to see that those who threaten that they would destroy themselves and the earth for their love of the Prophet. It’s not love that they have in their hearts. Obsession is not love. Love is focussed on the needs of the beloved. Obsession is self centred and the Prophet is incidental to the obsession. Obsession is ferocious and cruel.
Vajra,
when you say Sanskrit is not a modern language, except for the fact that it is an old language, what else do you mean? If nothing more than that, then that much is known. That is trivial.
.
I acknowledge when you say that Panini wrote down the rules much in the form of BNF, making the language extensible.
.
What in your view is the difference between what you are saying and what I said on the topic?
.
Actually AFAIK, Panini has not claimed he had done something new. It is unknown to me, whether he simply continued the work that was taking place over time and sort of brought it all together in the form of rules or whether he wrote down new rules.
.
What I know is that Vedic Sanskrit is actually far richer linguistically than Classical Sanskrit, and the effort was not simply in writing down all the grammar rules but also simplifying many aspects of the language, stuff like doing away with subjunctive and decreasing the number of declined forms. There were some changes in phonetics as well.
.
Where perhaps we may have a disagreement is that somehow Classical Sanskrit was linguistically more advanced than Vedic Sanskrit. I am also of the opinion that before Panini did the Ashtadhyayi, Vedics were quite well-versed in the linguistics of the language. As part of Vedic education, it was incumbent on the students to learn Shiksha (phonetics) and Vyakarna (grammar), and it was so the case even before Panini entered the picture. So the expressiveness one would attribute to Classical Sanskrit was already present in Vedic Sanskrit and perhaps to a larger extent.
.
One cannot be sure, but I do not think that Vedic Sanskrit developed as a natural language. Vedic Sanskrit too was a constructed refined language.
Rex Minor,
thanks for clarifying that little misunderstanding.
.
I think it is important for all to have a much deeper understanding of their history. The only ones doing extensive research in history, archaeology, paleontology, anthropology, linguistics are the Europeans and from all what I have seen and read, there is a streak of racism and Euro-centricism that runs through all of their body of academic scholarship.
.
It is important that others enter the field and do research without any other agenda than to serve Truth to the best of their abilities.
@RajTOO
I acknowledge when you say that Panini wrote down the rules much in the form of BNF, making the language extensible.
.
What in your view is the difference between what you are saying and what I said on the topic?
Our differences commence when you make statements like these above. Panini writing down the rules as he did had nothing to do with making the language extensible. Have you any idea of what Panini did? Have you seen a sutra and studied its construction, even idly? I suspect you have not, and are casting around trying to make sense of a totally unknown situation. Please take the time and the trouble to look up these rules and their construction. The entire argument lies within that.
.
Actually AFAIK, Panini has not claimed he had done something new. It is unknown to me, whether he simply continued the work that was taking place over time and sort of brought it all together in the form of rules or whether he wrote down new rules.
I hate it when political propagandists take up a subject and maul it without making the slightest attempt to understand what they are talking about.
This is unsound. The first codification of grammatical rules that is known to have taken place was undertaken by Panini. If there had been precursors, there were sufficient grammarians following him, Patanjali, to name the most prominent, to have left records of that, even if he didn’t .
However, there are two distinct issues here, one of the codification of the rules, one of the method used to codify the rules. Are you sure that you are aware where this argument lies? Whether Panini codified the rules first or not is not the issue. The manner in which he did so is entirely the issue. It was his format, his construction that is electrifying in its originality. You seem to have no clue about that, and keep talking about the language and its flexibility and so on, seemingly because you have no idea what recursion means in computerese, and because you have never seen a sutra.
.
What I know is that Vedic Sanskrit is actually far richer linguistically than Classical Sanskrit, and the effort was not simply in writing down all the grammar rules but also simplifying many aspects of the language, stuff like doing away with subjunctive and decreasing the number of declined forms. There were some changes in phonetics as well.
True.
.
Where perhaps we may have a disagreement is that somehow Classical Sanskrit was linguistically more advanced than Vedic Sanskrit.
Who argued that? Not I. Must have been the straw man in the corner. Go and beat him up to your heart’s content, and come back and tell us all about it.
Classical Sanskrit was merely Vedic Sanskrit cleaned up, no more, no less.
What is the term ‘linguistically more advanced’ supposed to convey? Something like Niels Bohr being more advanced physicsically
I am also of the opinion that before Panini did the Ashtadhyayi, Vedics were quite well-versed in the linguistics of the language. As part of Vedic education, it was incumbent on the students to learn Shiksha (phonetics) and Vyakarna (grammar), and it was so the case even before Panini entered the picture. So the expressiveness one would attribute to Classical Sanskrit was already present in Vedic Sanskrit and perhaps to a larger extent.
.
One cannot be sure, but I do not think that Vedic Sanskrit developed as a natural language. Vedic Sanskrit too was a constructed refined language.
@RajTOO
I am also of the opinion that before Panini did the Ashtadhyayi, Vedics were quite well-versed in the linguistics of the language. As part of Vedic education, it was incumbent on the students to learn Shiksha (phonetics) and Vyakarna (grammar), and it was so the case even before Panini entered the picture. So the expressiveness one would attribute to Classical Sanskrit was already present in Vedic Sanskrit and perhaps to a larger extent. </
.
One cannot be sure, but I do not think that Vedic Sanskrit developed as a natural language. Vedic Sanskrit too was a constructed refined language.
You have yourself given the reasons why Vedic Sanskrit should not be considered a constructed, refined language. It was too untidy, too unmindful of the grammatical proprieties, too much in need of Panini’s reforms.
The expressiveness or otherwise is a completely different thing from grammatical conformity, just as that itself is a completely different thing from the path-breaking nature of the sutras. In my personal opinion, Vedic Sanskrit was a far more expressive language than classical, and had a natural flow and content to it never to be repeated; Kalidasa’s work was elegant, not vigorous and zestful in quite the manner of the Rig Vedic verses. Just my opinion, not to be taken too far.
Finally, it is possible to say truthfully and accurately that grammar and phonetics existed before Panini; he mentions the Unadishutra, the Dhatupatha and the Ganapatha.(and uses them), and we know about his predecessors. But he was the first linguist to define the language in such close and precise terms, through his rules.
It is a comparative matter, and essentially what you say is correct; he was the best, but not necessary the first. Except with regard to linguistics.
@ Raj TOO
Was this discussion about Sanskrit????
Was it about Hinduism?????
Why only Hinduism to be compared????
and its about two of you
its neither Gyan nor jnyan its Jñāna. Roman alphabets are not apt. Even why only Devnagri? Sanskrit is written in many other scripts.
Tilsim
I am only describing the situation as it exists on the ground to you. Not suggesting that that is the way i want things to be. I even told you that i conform to the idea that hate at the end of the day, is a double edged sword and should be kept at arms length if possible.
I admire your stand as far as this concept is concerned. I wish more people shared it. I am afraid they do not. Especially people blinded by an idea of religious supremacy. You have shown a remarkable detachment to religious loyalism when it comes to objectively creating a narrative. That is excellent and the way to move forward in my humble opinion.
Vajra,
We differ substantially on Indian chronology, so being aware of that, here is my take on it.
.
Vedic Sanskrit was NOT being used for thousands of years for writing scriptures, before Panini wrote down his rules. Many scriptural works in “Classical” Sanskrit were already there much before his time for example the Epics. And before the Epics like Mahabharata, the Brahmanas and Upanishads were already composed, as the former refer to these earlier works. One can say “Epical Sanskrit” if one wants.
So Panini did not create any new Sanskrit through his rules. He simply compiled the rules of Epical/Classical Sanskrit already in use. He was also not the one to turn Vedic Sanskrit into Classical/Epical Sanskrit. That had taken place much earlier.
Fingolfin
Most, and most intense hate ensues from love. So we ought to be extraordinarily careful about love and about people in love. Love and people in love can be far more dangerous than people who hate for more humdrum reasons like fear. And absolute love and absolute hate can be indistinguishable from each other.
@RajTOO
The issue relating to Sanskrit as a modern, computer-friendly language is what is under discussion, not the phony chronology concocted by auto-didacts. As far as that goes, I reiterate: you are absolutely innocent of the technical requirements of a computer language, and seem to imagine it to be some kind of subset or superset of a natural language; you are not aware of BNF, and what it represents; you seem never to have encountered recursion; and you have never seen a Panini sutra; you do not really have any idea about why Panini was important, and what he did that was important. All this business about Epical Sanskrit is merely a smokescreen to hide your complete lack of information on those issues. Which is fine, so long as you do not put on airs and make pompous statements about unfamiliar subjects, as you did earlier about the connection between Abraham, circumcision and India, or about the chronology of Indian history, after reading and almost understanding books by eccentrics.
Kaal
That is why the Buddha’s path to defeating hate and pain, was to detach himself from everything around him.That is why i mentioned Buddha to Tilsim early on and the improbability that his like will be seen in this day and age.
I know for certain though that i will never want to be able to accomplish it and so i am not going to try. i know am going to hate some things.
Vajra,
You have no idea how long I have been active in computer science. So cut out the crap! BNF is old hat for me. I have been programming with all sorts of programming languages, so I know what I am talking about.
.
Just because you throw a few words around and don’t get the answers as you would expect, you start vomiting all over! Go back to your English literature and your British History classes. Don’t stretch out your intellect where it sounds juvenile.
.
Just because your intellect cannot comprehend Indian antiquity, brainwashed as you are with British toilet water, does not change the antiquity.
.
You were breeding somebody to kill me in Gokul! What happened? Go do your homework boy!
.
Mahabharata and Ramayana were both composed before 3100 BCE. When did Panini arrive on the scene? So don’t talk bullshit, stuffed into you by your British masters!
About innocence of muslims
Muslims will use every chance to prove that islam is a fascist intolerant crazy-violent ideology in its core spirit and method. This crazy violence is the passport to arab allah’s paradise since 1400 years.
No need to show off your knowledge about sanskrit and panini.
Trawlers fishing in the depths of ancient trenches.
Kaal
hence my entire stand to Tilsim was based on the premise that since you cannot stop hating, you might as well learn to be attached to and therefore hate rationally. It’s not an unreasonable position and that is what most do today. At least what they think is rational hate. The trick is to create a rationale that gives the perception of rationality some rationality.
But there is also the idea of not going overboard with it. That is as much as i can hope to do.
@RajTOO
Good try, but no cigar.
No, I have no idea how long you claim to have been active in computer sciences, since it is entirely not visible in your posts. I am impressed to hear that you have been programming in all sorts of programming languages; a pity that experience does not show up in your posts. You still show no signs of recognizing what is under discussion, none whatever, so talk about vomiting and my intellect not comprehending Indian antiquity manufactured by crackpots does seem to be your only recourse.
While you are at it, how do you know what my exposure to computer science is? And what do you know about my experience and track record in managing and turning around software organizations? Try to stick to the topic rather than entering a dick measuring contest; you might get a nasty shock.
If you can manage to figure out what is going on in Panini sutras, do let us know. Otherwise stick to reading Kota Venkatachellam.
In an islamic society yaum e ishq means the day of maximum hate, craziness and violence (by the religious) and cowardice (by the so-called liberals). Especially when some so-called “final” prophet is the object of this ishq.
This arab WAR religion will be destroying not only mankind but the very idea of love. Or may be it has already achieved that.
WAR = Warped Arabic Revelation-based
Raj,
Do not act the way Gogin did. Do try to avoid the use of language which I am sure neither Arabic nor sanskrit prescribes to. Read with patience what others say for they mean well and are not yet enlightened with your thoughts and background knowledge. there is no racism among the europeans per say, prejudice perhaps and ignorance of what we do not know because of the inherited culture. This should not discourage others and create a corresponding prejudice as well. Go out at night in the open and you will see the sky ornamented with shining stars and this is the lmitless universe we all have to explore and discover, without anyone’s assistance and support if we must. But be careful those who ventured to discover India landed in soouth america. This risk we all undertake.
Rex Minor
Kaal,
The well artiulated piece of yours on hate and love should also be addressed to Tsilm narrative as well. Both love and hate are imaginery but emotional expressions. Just part of the hot air which we breathe out. An ice cold drink with Aspirin 100 is the remedy.
Rex Minor
Raj,
I just read your verbatim on horses. I guess you have read my post on todays horse as well. ths anmal we call horse was supposedly born in America millions of years ago not exactly in the shape as we see today, which later travelled to Europe over land when the American continent had not separated from the European continent, and then to arabia to central ASsia and to India. It then travelled back to central Asia and settled down the steppen of Ukrain and later to Arabia and Europe. It was later taken back to America in ships. Todays horse has travelled mst continents of the world and were instumental for the conquer of the world by mongols and so on. Lady G who was formerly a regular blogger on PTH could tell you more on horse names as well as and why the blue grass country of Kentucky is the must for horses to win the Derbys, though Lady G reckons that famous horses now visit Florida.
Rex Minor
You were the one to butt in into the discussion, and then you start telling me, what the discussion is about! And pray tell me, with whom were you having the discussion on Sanskrit, whose nature I allegedly failed to understand! The only person here I see whom you’re trying to convince of your superficial knowledge here is me!
Lots of logical shortcomings in that little brain of yours!
.
If you had even a little level of BNF logic in you, you will know that either the parameters of the discussion were already defined (before you butted in) or they are defined during a discussion by both dialogue-partners (you and me)! And then you keep on telling me, I don’t know what the discussion is all about, as if you are the only one setting the parameters of the discussion here!
.
Your essential problem is that you can’t live outside a biosphere produced by British flatulence, so you would obviously not appreciate the textual testimony of numerous Indian texts regarding Indian antiquity!
.
But coming back to your screwed up thinking on Panini, even going by the chronology prepared by your British masters, Panini still comes after the Epics and not before. So Epical Sanskrit which is different than Vedic Sanskrit was already there before Panini! What Panini did was to clean up Epical Sanskrit of the influence of Prakritisms which had entered Sanskrit. And yes he set down the rules! That however has nothing to do with Vedic Sanskrit! Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit exist side by side, because Vedic Sanskrit would be used as long as the Vedas are used.
.
Logic is however not really your forte! Stick to English Literature and Partition History, and don’t forget to take a deep breadth whenever you see a Brit eating Lahori Channa, cuz that is your life-blood!
@RajTOO
At the end of the day, it is still nothing but an effort to get away from demonstrating, in front of your admiring public, your usual shallow lack of information or knowledge. You can use a dozen words, a hundred words, whole pages, but what you do know and do not is clearly on display. As it was in the case of that pathetic essay at linking India to circumcision.
Vajra,
The only thing you have on offer is really some vocabulary donated to you by the British, and you think that puts enough wind in your sails that lack of logic and textual knowledge would not really be visible! Sorry but your English does not really impress!
.
So when you say,
that is simply a lot of codswallop and nothing more.
.
Vajra/Raj
Sorry to butt in .
” even in the dick measuring contest you may lose! ”
According to our blog friend AKB, you both will lose to all Pakistanis
in this contest. (:
Rex Minor wrote:
That is really a good one, Rex.
.
At least there were some of felt the need to “discover” a way to India. However these cultural orphans the British left behind in India, are still just longing to “discover” a way to their papa in Britain! India does not really concern them.
Raj,
Your constant reference to the colonialists, reminds of th most valuable commodity( equivalent and if not more than the Arab oil) which India and the neighbouring south east asians possesed, and traded with Europe for thousand of years and to this date were the Gewürze und Kraüter as well as silk cloth. In exchange they demanded GOLD and nothing less than GOLD. Gold was not only required by the Pundits of the temples but was part of the culture, and was used in woman jewlery and in peoples savings. This Gold more or less never travelled back to Europe and therefor it was an open secret that Gold was hoarded in one or other form among th south east Asian countries. It was the search of Gold which took the colonialists in other countries and threfore the fate of the subcontinent was sealed. Today we talk about the balance of import and export trade, so as to avoid one hoarding the wealth by export and with negligible imports. But this is another topic.
Rex Minor
@Mohan
Let me be quite clear.
I will definitely lose a dick-measuring contest with RajTOO. Actually, anybody who challenges him will lose.
RajTOO is the biggest dick around.