Once a believer, always a believer?
A fascinating report on the current "apostasy" blow-up in
Afghanistan
from the Asia Times:
from the Asia Times:
" 'It is more of an ontological debate than
anything,' said renowned
Muslim intellectual Shahnawaz Farooqui. 'If somebody tries to
practice his religion or faith, Muslim society will not stop him or
pressurize him to change his faith. Nobody is allowed to even
motivate a non-Muslim to change his religion. However, discourse is
allowed. After such discourse, if somebody feels they want to embrace
Islam, it is allowed,' Shahnawaz said.
"However, for a Muslim to change his religion, 'he will have to be
executed because it is related to an ontological debate'.
" 'If somebody at one point affirms the truth [belief in God] and
then rejects it or denies it, it would jeopardize the whole paradigm
of truth. This is such a big offense that the penalty can only be
death.'
And a little further on:
" 'I saw President Bush's statement in which he asked to honor the
universal principle of freedom. This is not a question of social
liberty or social rights or freedom, this is a question for the
affirmation of truth and nobody will be allowed to distort the truth.
No society can give people the right to distort the truth or play
around with it. As far as execution is concerned, I have the same
questions for the West,' Shahnawaz maintained.
" 'Pope Urban II, while standing in a church in 1095, called Islam a
satanic religion. He called the followers of Islam wicked and then
called that those wicked people should be eliminated. That sermon was
the start of the crusade to eliminate Muslims and continued for 200
years in which Muslim territories were attacked and people were
massacred. Why was that?
" 'Because somebody evolved in his mind a philosophy of truth and
then reckoned Islam as false and then thought it a threat to
spirituality and the universe, so they decided to eliminate it. On
the contrary, there is not a single instance in Muslim history in
which people were forced to change their religion, and even if there
were an isolated incident, it would never be endorsed by Islam or by
unified Muslim opinion.
" 'Having said that, once somebody affirms the truth [Islam] and then
goes into its rejection, it would jeopardize the truth and it would
also show the spiritual corruption of oneself; therefore the
execution,' Shahnawaz said."
I don't know if Muslims generally would agree with this fellow, but I
certainly hope not. (And how about going back to 1095 to complain
about another religion? Some people have long memories!)
Muslim intellectual Shahnawaz Farooqui. 'If somebody tries to
practice his religion or faith, Muslim society will not stop him or
pressurize him to change his faith. Nobody is allowed to even
motivate a non-Muslim to change his religion. However, discourse is
allowed. After such discourse, if somebody feels they want to embrace
Islam, it is allowed,' Shahnawaz said.
"However, for a Muslim to change his religion, 'he will have to be
executed because it is related to an ontological debate'.
" 'If somebody at one point affirms the truth [belief in God] and
then rejects it or denies it, it would jeopardize the whole paradigm
of truth. This is such a big offense that the penalty can only be
death.'
And a little further on:
" 'I saw President Bush's statement in which he asked to honor the
universal principle of freedom. This is not a question of social
liberty or social rights or freedom, this is a question for the
affirmation of truth and nobody will be allowed to distort the truth.
No society can give people the right to distort the truth or play
around with it. As far as execution is concerned, I have the same
questions for the West,' Shahnawaz maintained.
" 'Pope Urban II, while standing in a church in 1095, called Islam a
satanic religion. He called the followers of Islam wicked and then
called that those wicked people should be eliminated. That sermon was
the start of the crusade to eliminate Muslims and continued for 200
years in which Muslim territories were attacked and people were
massacred. Why was that?
" 'Because somebody evolved in his mind a philosophy of truth and
then reckoned Islam as false and then thought it a threat to
spirituality and the universe, so they decided to eliminate it. On
the contrary, there is not a single instance in Muslim history in
which people were forced to change their religion, and even if there
were an isolated incident, it would never be endorsed by Islam or by
unified Muslim opinion.
" 'Having said that, once somebody affirms the truth [Islam] and then
goes into its rejection, it would jeopardize the truth and it would
also show the spiritual corruption of oneself; therefore the
execution,' Shahnawaz said."
I don't know if Muslims generally would agree with this fellow, but I
certainly hope not. (And how about going back to 1095 to complain
about another religion? Some people have long memories!)
Posted: Fri - March 24, 2006 at 07:08 PM | |
Quick Links
SITE UNDER CONSTRUCTION!
(while I bone up on html and css)
(while I bone up on html and css)
Categories
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Comments powered by
Archives
Truth Laid Bear
Technorati
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Mar 24, 2006 07:12 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Mar 24, 2006 07:12 PM
