Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Locked
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:22 am

Aisha's age is not the only thing criticizable about Muhammad, as can be seen in the following quotes of the canonical texts:

The Quran says:
5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

The Quran says:
5:33 Those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land should be punished by death, crucifixion, the amputation of an alternate hand and foot or banishment from the land: a disgrace for them in this world, and then a terrible punishment in the Hereafter, 34 unless they repent before you overpower them: in that case bear in mind that God is forgiving and merciful. (Haleem)

The Quran says:
24:2 The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. [This punishment is for unmarried persons guilty of the above crime (illegal sex), but if married persons commit it (illegal sex), the punishment is to stone them to death, according to Allah’s law]. (Hilali and Khan).



And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on his face he cursed her . . . (Muslim no. 4206)

The news of this event reached Ibn Abbas [Muhammad’s cousin and highly reliable transmitter of traditions] who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Messenger forbad it, saying, ‘Do no punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah Messenger, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.’" (Bukhari, Apostates, no. 6922; online source)

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
A group of eight men from the tribe of 'Ukil came to the Prophet and then they found the climate of Medina unsuitable for them. So, they said, "O Allah's Apostle! Provide us with some milk." Allah's Apostle said, "I recommend that you should join the herd of camels." So they went and drank the urine and the milk of the camels (as a medicine) till they became healthy and fat. Then they killed the shepherd and drove away the camels, and they became unbelievers after they were Muslims. When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and they were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died (Abu Qilaba, a sub-narrator said, "They committed murder and theft and fought against Allah and His Apostle, and spread evil in the land.")
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261)


As quoted, Muhammad's behaviour is not the behaviour of a worthy spiritual leader. He is not to be worshiped, acording to islam, but he is to be emulated.
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

Caodemarte
Posts: 732
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Caodemarte » Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:43 am

I have noted the “canonical” and classical sources, even tracing the origin of the story. I am not paid to defend Islam and it probably needs no defense from people like me. I doubt any more light will be shed by my repeating the 1,000 and more years old and ongoing extensive debunking of this sort of thing.

When bizarre figures like Robert Bruce Spencer, are quoted (UK Home Office barred Spencer, self declared expert on Islam, from travel to the UK in 2013 for 3 to 5 years for "making statements that may foster hatred that might lead to inter-community violence" ) the intentions of these postings is made clear. It is depressing that this forum has provided a platform for such bigotry and intolerance.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18335
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am

Greetings,
Caodemarte wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:43 am
It is depressing that this forum has provided a platform for such bigotry and intolerance.
Why is it bigotry and intolerance to make well-reasoned arguments for or against something?

:shrug:

What makes Islam so special and protected that its set of ideas, traditions, practices and beliefs are beyond reasonable critique, so much so that anyone who would dare to critique them in such a way is instantly deemed bigoted and intolerant? Can Islam, its founders and its practices not stand on their own merits like everything else, without PC protections and accusations of "hate speech" (and associated punishments) against those who dare to disagree with it?

It's a curious situation indeed...

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

alfa
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:43 pm
Location: India

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by alfa » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:12 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am
Greetings,
Caodemarte wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:43 am
It is depressing that this forum has provided a platform for such bigotry and intolerance.
Why is it bigotry and intolerance to make well-reasoned arguments for or against something?

:shrug:

What makes Islam so special and protected that its set of ideas, traditions, practices and beliefs are beyond reasonable critique, so much so that anyone who would dare to critique them in such a way is instantly deemed bigoted and intolerant? Can Islam, its founders and its practices not stand on their own merits like everything else, without PC protections and accusations of "hate speech" (and associated punishments) against those who dare to disagree with it?

It's a curious situation indeed...

Metta,
Paul. :)
Probably because most people who 'critique' Islam are not interested in critiquing Islam at all. That is just excuse to demonize Muslims. The proof is right here in this thread - they talk about Mohammad and Aisha, whether she was too young etc. Now let's say Mohammad was a pervert. Let's say Aisha was a child. Now what you have accomplished? You've managed to create a (false) perception in the minds of 21st century people that most Muslims living today don't belong here, and instead belong to a primitive age.

So by exposing Mohammad, you haven't done anything extraordinary or scholarly. You've simply created a certain stereotype of the average Muslim, and so people will at a subconscious level associate just about all Muslims with child marriage, perversion, etc. But then this is what these critics of Islam want to begin with, right?

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18335
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:30 am

Greetings Alfa,
alfa wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:12 am
Probably because most people who 'critique' Islam are not interested in critiquing Islam at all. That is just excuse to demonize Muslims.
Have you actually asked them their motives, or have you just decided to be totally lacking in charity and cast this aspersion upon them?
alfa wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:12 am
The proof is right here in this thread - they talk about Mohammad and Aisha, whether she was too young etc. Now let's say Mohammad was a pervert. Let's say Aisha was a child. Now what you have accomplished? You've managed to create a (false) perception in the minds of 21st century people that most Muslims living today don't belong here, and instead belong to a primitive age.
That's an interesting conflation on your part. I've seen no one saying Muslims are automatically barbaric just because aspects of Islamic doctrine and history are. In fact, many Muslims (and ex-Muslims) have the courage to stand up to such practices and insist upon reform. Can we therefore not critique female genital mutilation, stonings, child brides, Sharia Law, throwing homosexuals off cliffs and buildings etc. just because indirectly, someone's feelings might get hurt? You do know that most of the victims of Islam are actually Muslim, don't you?

If so, we do indeed live in crazy times, where the coddling of feelings is prioritized over the right to life and the right to not be mutilated, enslaved, stoned, punished for being raped etc.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
L.N.
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 6:01 pm

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by L.N. » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:36 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:32 am
Why is it bigotry and intolerance to make well-reasoned arguments for or against something?
It isn't. However, something less than "well-reasoned arguments" are mixed in among what is being presented here with regard to Islam.
What makes Islam so special and protected that its set of ideas, traditions, practices and beliefs are beyond reasonable critique,
Nothing.
... so much so that anyone who would dare to critique them in such a way is instantly deemed bigoted and intolerant?
Is that what is happening? Not sure the discussion is quite so black and white.
Can Islam, its founders and its practices not stand on their own merits like everything else,
Yes.
... without PC protections and accusations of "hate speech" (and associated punishments) against those who dare to disagree with it?
I believe this is the first mention of "hate speech."

One issue here is the image of Buddhism that we all present to others when Islam and other faiths are essentially slandered, for lack of a better word, through comments that have little or nothing to do with the actual merits of the religion. I may be as guilty as others of inadvertently speaking in this dismissive manner about other religions, but I am becoming more aware of the damage this can do.

Asking whether Muhammad or Jesus or Bahá'u'lláh or any other central figure of a major world religion is "worthy of respect" is probably not the most effective way to discover "what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies."
O Atula! Indeed, this is an ancient practice, not one only of today: they blame those who remain silent, they blame those who speak much, they blame those who speak in moderation. There is none in the world who is not blamed.

There never was, there never will be, nor is there now, a person who is wholly blamed or wholly praised.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .budd.html
Sire patitthitā Buddhā
Dhammo ca tava locane
Sangho patitthitō tuiham
uresabba gunākaro


愿众佛坐在我的头顶, 佛法在我的眼中, 僧伽,功德的根源, 端坐在我的肩上。

"You can indulge your hauteur and prissiness at someone else's expense." -- Ven. Dhammanando

User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am

Caodemarte wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:43 am
I have noted the “canonical” and classical sources, even tracing the origin of the story. I am not paid to defend Islam and it probably needs no defense from people like me. I doubt any more light will be shed by my repeating the 1,000 and more years old and ongoing extensive debunking of this sort of thing.

When bizarre figures like Robert Bruce Spencer, are quoted (UK Home Office barred Spencer, self declared expert on Islam, from travel to the UK in 2013 for 3 to 5 years for "making statements that may foster hatred that might lead to inter-community violence" ) the intentions of these postings is made clear. It is depressing that this forum has provided a platform for such bigotry and intolerance.
The Sahih Al Bukhari and the Sahih Muslim are canonical. You cannot deny this. It is even more so with the Quran, which I also quoted. Quoting original sources cannot be distortion and bile. On the other hand, quoting Robert Spencer is not the most conciliatory thing to do, I'll admit. But I rather have truth with a rough edge to it, than pleasant sounding lies. Ill will is easy to detect, but lies are not, which is why lies are so dangerous. If you weigh the effect of unpleasant truths on the world against the effect of pleasant lies, you will find that lies are far more devastating. For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18335
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:41 am

Greetings L.N.,

L.N. wrote:I believe this is the first mention of "hate speech."
To clarify, any mention I've made in relation to hate speech and associated punishments, pertains to this example provided by Caodemarte...
Caodemarte wrote:When bizarre figures like Robert Bruce Spencer, are quoted (UK Home Office barred Spencer, self declared expert on Islam, from travel to the UK in 2013 for 3 to 5 years for "making statements that may foster hatred that might lead to inter-community violence" ) the intentions of these postings is made clear.
... and not to anything specifically said in relation to this particular discussion. Thus, my point was a general one, moreso than being limited in scope to this topic.
L.N. wrote:Asking whether Muhammad or Jesus or Bahá'u'lláh or any other central figure of a major world religion is "worthy of respect" is probably not the most effective way to discover "what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies."
Maybe, but it does seem a reasonable lens by which to separate that which is meritorious, from that which is demeritorous. If much of Mohammad's legacy falls into the latter of those two categories, then I do not see how that outcome is a failing on the part of members of this forum.
AN 10.94 wrote:"I tell you, venerable sirs, that the Blessed One righteously declares that 'This is skillful.' He declares that 'This is unskillful.' Declaring that 'This is skillful' and 'This is unskillful,' he is one who has declared [a teaching]
Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

Garrib
Posts: 305
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:35 pm

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Garrib » Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:12 am

IMO demonizing Muslims is unskillful.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 18335
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by retrofuturist » Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:49 am

Greetings Garrib,

Of course.
MN98 wrote:"Birth makes no Brahmin, nor non-Brahmin, makes; it is life's doing that mold the Brahmin true. Their lives mold farmers, tradesmen, merchants, and serfs. Their lives mold robbers, soldiers, chaplains, and kings. By birth is not one an out-caste. By birth is not one a Brahmin. By deeds is one an out-caste. By deeds is one a Brahmin."
Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 2984
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Mr Man » Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:42 am

Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am
For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
Hi Modus
Do the UK authorities "claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"?

alfa
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:43 pm
Location: India

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by alfa » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:14 pm

retrofuturist wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:30 am
Greetings Alfa,
alfa wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:12 am
Probably because most people who 'critique' Islam are not interested in critiquing Islam at all. That is just excuse to demonize Muslims.
Have you actually asked them their motives, or have you just decided to be totally lacking in charity and cast this aspersion upon them?
alfa wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:12 am
The proof is right here in this thread - they talk about Mohammad and Aisha, whether she was too young etc. Now let's say Mohammad was a pervert. Let's say Aisha was a child. Now what you have accomplished? You've managed to create a (false) perception in the minds of 21st century people that most Muslims living today don't belong here, and instead belong to a primitive age.
That's an interesting conflation on your part. I've seen no one saying Muslims are automatically barbaric just because aspects of Islamic doctrine and history are. In fact, many Muslims (and ex-Muslims) have the courage to stand up to such practices and insist upon reform. Can we therefore not critique female genital mutilation, stonings, child brides, Sharia Law, throwing homosexuals off cliffs and buildings etc. just because indirectly, someone's feelings might get hurt? You do know that most of the victims of Islam are actually Muslim, don't you?

If so, we do indeed live in crazy times, where the coddling of feelings is prioritized over the right to life and the right to not be mutilated, enslaved, stoned, punished for being raped etc.

Metta,
Paul. :)
It's a subconscious process. If you repeatedly focus on the bad things in Islam (under the pretext of critiquing it, of course), then the general population will start believing that Muslims are just as bad. This conflation takes place at the subconscious level, so people may not even be aware of it happening.

User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:23 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:42 am
Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am
For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
Hi Modus
Do the UK authorities "claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"?
They have barred Robert Spencer from entering, while allowing hundreds of ISIS jihadists to return and remain in the UK. If they did not claim it, they did worse: they acted in acordance to it. Do you welcome ISIS jihadists in the UK, Mr Man?
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
Will
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:26 pm
Location: So Cal

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Will » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:27 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:42 am
Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am
For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
Hi Modus
Do the UK authorities "claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"?
The point may be that banning a person from the UK for possible speech unpleasantries, but not banning many persons who actually plan & then murder - is a cowardly way to run a country.
Distrust everyone in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Nietzsche

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 2984
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Mr Man » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:33 pm

Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:23 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:42 am
Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am
For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
Hi Modus
Do the UK authorities "claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"?
They have barred Robert Spencer from entering, while allowing hundreds of ISIS jihadists to return and remain in the UK. If they did not claim it, they did worse: they acted in acordance to it. Do you welcome ISIS jihadists in the UK, Mr Man?
So ""claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"? was a straw man?

It's kind of ironic when you said in the same paragraph "lies are so dangerous". Why don't you stick to truth Modus?

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 2984
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Mr Man » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:36 pm

Will wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:27 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:42 am
Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:40 am
For exampe, if the UK authorities claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK, then they are doing a clear disservice to the British citizens. Pointing this out is not bigotd or intolerant. It's common sense.
Hi Modus
Do the UK authorities "claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"?
The point may be that banning a person from the UK for possible speech unpleasantries, but not banning many persons who actually plan & then murder - is a cowardly way to run a country.
If they are returning jihadis I guess they are UK citizens.

User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:02 pm

Garrib wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:12 am
IMO demonizing Muslims is unskillful.
Which muslims are being demonized? The communists muslims, the social democrat muslims, the social liberal muslims, the liberal muslims, the libertarian muslims, the conservative muslims, the ultraconservative muslims, the fascist muslims, or the jihadist muslims? Is it the jihadist muslims, the fanatic muslims, the devout muslims, the non-devout muslims, the cultural muslims, or the muslim reformers? Muslims do not all think alike, neither politically, nor religiously.

Christianity was brought to the 20th century by criticism of their ultraconservative doctrines and fascist actions, which were incompatiple with a liberal humanist secular democracy, and incompatible with many of Jesus' own teachings. This included criticising the most violent and irrational aspects of the old testament. It was not a demonization of christians, but a harsh criticism of the harmful components of christian doctrines and those who acted on them, or offered cover to those who acted on them by believing these harmful doctrines. If these criticisms had not been made, we would still be living in christian theocracies in the West. That would be bad for most of us.

This process has to be applied now to islam because it is not yet in the 20th century. Among the people who will benefit the most from the end of islamic fascist theocracies will be muslims. Criticism of this kind is bound to upset some people. It's a natural and unavoidable part of this process. The three options in front of us are to ignore the problem of islamic fascism, to verbally criticize it, or to take military action. It seems clear to me that the most moral course of action is to verbally criticize it, while calling for people to stop ignoring the problem which is making so many people suffer, and also criticizing military actions not taken in self defense.
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1573
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, Southern California, USA
Contact:

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by lyndon taylor » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:04 pm

I'm damn well certain the UK has not allowed any known ISIS fighters to return to the UK, obviously they're talking about unknown ISIS fighters probably being among people returning to the UK. Robert Spencer is a known hatemonger, obviously he deserves to be banned, just like any real ISIS fighters that slipped in under the radar.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:17 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:33 pm
Modus.Ponens wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:23 pm

They have barred Robert Spencer from entering, while allowing hundreds of ISIS jihadists to return and remain in the UK. If they did not claim it, they did worse: they acted in acordance to it. Do you welcome ISIS jihadists in the UK, Mr Man?
So ""claim that Robert Spencer is more dangerous than the hundreds of ISIS jihadists that have returned to the UK"? was a straw man?

It's kind of ironic when you said in the same paragraph "lies are so dangerous". Why don't you stick to truth Modus?
It was not a straw man. It was an unintentional steel man (english is not my first language). If the UK authorities had claimed such a thing, but barred the entrance in the UK of hundreds of ISIS jihadists, while allowing Robert Spencer to enter the UK, then it would not have been nearly as dangerous as acting as if the claim is true _ which they did. And people have been dying in th UK in these last months because of this kind of irresponsability. Are you more concerned with semanthics and perceived mean words, or are you more concerned with deaths, such as in the Manchester attack?

Again, the three options in front of us are to ignore the problem of islamic fascism, to verbally criticize it, or to take military action. It seems clear to me that the most moral course of action is to verbally criticize it, while calling for people to stop ignoring the problem which is making so many people suffer, and also criticizing military actions not taken in self defense. What do you think is the most moral course of action?
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 2659
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Muhammad - Worthy of respect?

Post by Modus.Ponens » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:44 pm

lyndon taylor wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:04 pm
I'm damn well certain the UK has not allowed any known ISIS fighters to return to the UK, obviously they're talking about unknown ISIS fighters probably being among people returning to the UK. Robert Spencer is a known hatemonger, obviously he deserves to be banned, just like any real ISIS fighters that slipped in under the radar.
Unfortunately their gross negligence has allowed it.

"Just one in eight of the 400 British foreign fighters who have travelled to Syria and since returned home has been successfully prosecuted.

Figures disclosed by the Home Office show that only 54 fighters from the UK suspected of having fought in Syria and Iraq have been convicted of an offence.

Security services estimate that since 2012, 400 British Muslims who have joined terrorist groups such as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) and al-Qaeda have returned to the UK.

The official statistics will raise serious concerns over the failure of the authorities to keep track of dangerous jihadists in Britain.

Security experts told The Telegraph how the low prosecution rate showed for the first time that many foreign fighters returning from Syria who posed a real risk were now “off the radar”.

Experts on the conflict say the number who have returned could be as high as 800 to 1,000. Some are known to have faked their own deaths and slipped back into Britain using new identities.

The figures were disclosed by Lord Keen of Elie, a Home Office spokesman in the Lords, who made public the number of prosecutions in response to a parliamentary question.

He said the Crown Prosecution Service was also in the process of prosecuting a further 13 cases involving 30 defendants. The Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland is also dealing with one Syria-related prosecution.

Prof Anthony Glees, head of the University of Buckingham’s Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies, said: “The hundreds of British citizens who have gone to Syria are highly dangerous. The fact so few are being prosecuted when they return is clearly very unsatisfactory and will be very alarming to many people.

“We need to know why so many haven’t been prosecuted. It suggests to me that they have have simply gone off the radar while our security services try to play catch-up.”

Chris Phillips, former head of the National Counter Terrorism Security Office, said the low prosecution rate was the tip of the iceberg.

“I don’t believe the UK knows how many people have left for Syria or indeed come back,” he said. “There are many ways of getting back into the UK avoiding checks, including bus routes and ferry crossings. What we have to avoid is a false sense of security just because we have a stretch of water between us and Europe.”

The Telegraph is running a “Border Security” campaign highlighting the porous nature of Britain’s borders and urging the Government to tighten controls to keep out Jihadists.

Khalid Mahmood, Labour MP for Birmingham, Perry Barr, a constituency with a high proportion of Muslims, said the low prosecution rate demonstrated the failure of border controls.

“It is a shambles,” said Mr Mahmood. “The Government is not on top of this. The real problem is we don’t know who is coming back and where they are coming back from.”
"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... nd-convic/


I understand the people who do not like Robert Spencer, but he has not killed anyone, nor caused anyone to kill. We should get our priorities straight and tackle the real dangers. We are already at the point of dodging terrorist attacks with chemical weapons, so it is unforgivingly irresponsible to have this kind of negligence in border control.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/03/asia/ ... index.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 86121.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... en-wallace

-------------------------------

EDIT: In order to tackle these issues, it would be helpful for us to return to the central aspects of this DW topic.
He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
(Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: binocular, Coëmgenu, DNS, Garrib, Mr Man, SarathW and 27 guests