Convertion of muslims

Organisational work, teaching, Sunday school syllabus, charitable work, outreach, sharing of resources, artwork, etc.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6494
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Dhammanando »

khemindas wrote:So according to article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam most of muslim thinking that man committing Apostasy from Islam should killed. I think muslims if they converted to Islam should not tell anyone, otherwise they can be killed.
Should this be:

"I think muslims if they converted to Buddhism" ?
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Caodemarte
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Caodemarte »

Buddha Vacana wrote:In Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen apostasy is punishable by death sentence.

There are certainly cases of people outside these countries getting murdered for having left the religion as well.

Hence Bhante's advice can be relevant in some places.
Not so true in Nigeria. Among 12 states in Nigeria who have some form of sharia law conversion from Islam is an offense in those states and some have the death penalty in theory. However, I have never heard of it actually being applied. It would seem to be instant political suicide to try to do so. I don't know about the other countries.

It may be interesting to note that for the first century or so after the early Islamic conquests conversion of non-Arabs to Islam was not allowed. At that time, Islam was seen as a religion for the conquering Arabs and Muslims had special tax breaks and privileges. Even after conversion was allowed it was not usually encouraged. Even later non-Arab Muslim rulers and conquerors did not like to lose a source of revenue or erase the distinctions between the ruled and the rulers. Joining "the equal community of believers" would certainly be a loss for the ruler so there was no incentive to use force and good reason to allow the practice of other religions. This is one reason why the Islamic world was considered far more tolerant than Christian Europe for many centuries.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by DooDoot »

Caodemarte wrote:Joining "the equal community of believers" would certainly be a loss for the ruler so there was no incentive to use force and good reason to allow the practice of over religions. This is one reason why the Islamic world was considered far more tolerant than Christian Europe for many centuries.
Indeed. Before the ex-Buddhist Mongols took over the Islamic Empire & started butchering & slaughtering, the Islamic Empire I heard was similar to the Roman Empire, primarily interested in raising taxation revenue rather than changing cultures. This is why numerous non-Muslim religious sects continued under Islam, such as Christian sects previously persecuted by the Roman & Byzantine Churches, & the Jewish community becoming not only enormously wealthy but reached heights in their own culture. Some Buddhists need to practise more vimansa (investigation) rather than place faith (saddha) in the mass-media. As for Christianity in Europe & the Americas, it essentially made extinct every indigenous religion. Funny how the mass-media has the Buddhists cheering for Muslim war also.
The golden age of Jewish culture in Spain coincided with the Middle Ages in Europe, a period of Muslim rule throughout much of the Iberian Peninsula. During intermittent periods of time, Jews were generally accepted in society and Jewish religious, cultural, and economic life blossomed.
:candle:
khemindas wrote:ํํYes, sometime some exception are made, but according to Sharia rules it's prescribed to killing. Same as some Nazi not killed jews this as an exception.
Possibly, Sam Harris & Bhikkhu Bodhi could be invited to support such viewpoints.
khemindas wrote:No of course. Promoting murder is Parajika for monk.
So by comparing Muslims to those evil Nazis, what exactly is being promoted here, Venerable Bhikkhu?
Last edited by DooDoot on Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:43 pm, edited 4 times in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Buddha Vacana »

This is the situation in Malaysia. I think I still wouldn't advertise it if I were to give up the faith

I am all for not agitating for conflicts and antagonisms but that doesn't mean we should not see the reality for what it is when investigating it

Image

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malay ... U1roixQ.97
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by DooDoot »

Buddha Vacana wrote:I am all for not agitating for conflicts and antagonisms but that doesn't mean we should not see the reality for what it is when investigating it.
Sounds like how it was once risky in the USA being a 'Communist'. Islam is not the same as Buddhism because it does have a political component, similar to the old Judaism, where the death penalty also applied to apostasy. If you don't want to be a Muslim in Malaysia then it might be wise & respectful to emigrate given societies do often require some kind of core culture to remain sustainable. It might be useful to ask why extremism is growing in the world, not only in some Muslim nations?
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
pulga
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by pulga »

Bundokji wrote: To sum up: from theological point of view, the vast majority believe that Muslims who change their religion should be killed. Moderate Muslims dispute it and try to present Islam as peaceful. Many believe in it but don't act upon it.
Thank you. Once again you've provided the forum with information that is firsthand, concrete, and factual.
"Dhammā=Ideas. This is the clue to much of the Buddha's teaching." ~ Ven. Ñanavira, Commonplace Book
Caodemarte
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Caodemarte »

Being Muslim is often seen as the definition of being an ethnic Malay. It is a both a cause and an effect of ethnic rivalries.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Coëmgenu »

Caodemarte wrote:It may be interesting to note that for the first century or so after the early Islamic conquests conversion of non-Arabs to Islam was not allowed. At that time, Islam was seen as a religion for the conquering Arabs and Muslims had special tax breaks and privileges. Even after conversion was allowed it was not usually encouraged.
This is something that will be denied to the teeth if one speaks to someone brought up in dominant modern narratives about the conquest, despite being verifiable through numerous historical sources. Knowledge is a funny thing. If enough people just say "no" it becomes a lie, functionally speaking.

I recall an interview with a very upset Mor Nicodemus Daoud Sharaf, Archbishop of Mosul, just after Daesh had moved in. He was lamenting that his Christian forefathers had translated and preserved the wisdom of the Greeks, Egyptians, etc, into Arabic, giving the knowledge to the new hegemony, helping to precipitate the golden age of sorts for Islam.

Of course, if they hadn't, we wouldn't be able to read Boëthius today at all. He simply wouldn't exist (well, his works would have gone the way of the Confucian Classic of Music). And our society would be massively different. The Renaissance wouldn't have been the same, for certain.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Caodemarte
Posts: 1092
Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Caodemarte »

Coëmgenu wrote:
Caodemarte wrote:It may be interesting to note that for the first century or so after the early Islamic conquests conversion of non-Arabs to Islam was not allowed. At that time, Islam was seen as a religion for the conquering Arabs and Muslims had special tax breaks and privileges. Even after conversion was allowed it was not usually encouraged.
This is something that will be denied to the teeth if one speaks to someone brought up in dominant modern narratives about the conquest, despite being verifiable through numerous historical sources. Knowledge is a funny thing. If enough people just say "no" it becomes a lie, functionally speaking.

I recall an interview with a very upset Mor Nicodemus Daoud Sharaf, Archbishop of Mosul, just after Daesh had moved in. He was lamenting that his Christian forefathers had translated and preserved the wisdom of the Greeks, Egyptians, etc, into Arabic, giving the knowledge to the new hegemony, helping to precipitate the golden age of sorts for Islam.

Of course, if they hadn't, we wouldn't be able to read Boëthius today at all. He simply wouldn't exist (well, his works would have gone the way of the Confucian Classic of Music). And our society would be massively different. The Renaissance wouldn't have been the same, for certain.

A lot of the idea that these were wars of religion comes from the medieval narratives. These often assumed that Muslim conquerors used the same claimed motivation that Europeans did ("the Cross or the Sword"). In Spain Jews and Christians would sometimes riot in order to turn over their cities to Muslims. They knew they would get a more tolerant ruler (not that anybody is claiming Arab invaders were proto-hippies, just often better than the alternative)
Garrib
Posts: 605
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:35 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Garrib »

One of my favorite undergrad courses was a religious studies class about Islam - covering its history, beliefs, various practices, reform movements, and modern issues. The class was taught by one of my favorite professor's, a great political scientist/academic and also a practicing Muslim. There were many students at the school who were practicing muslims - many of the girls wearing hijabs. I never once had a negative interaction or experience with any muslim student or faculty member. In fact, I had many positive and friendly encounters. I did, however, (not infrequently) overhear non-muslims making derogatory and disparaging comments about Islam.

There is religious extremism in the world, and unfortunately a lot of violence is perpetrated by people who call themselves muslims- but let us not forget that most of the victims of that extremism are also muslims. And let us not lose sight of the fact that there are economic, ethnic, and political reasons for extremism as well religious ones.

It is one thing to disagree with certain views/beliefs/practices/values, or to offer a critique of religious ideas - but it is quite another thing to be bigoted against or to condemn an entire religion and all of its adherents; especially without considering the internal diversity of the religion and other factors.

I basically agree with the Bhikkhu's opinion, if it can be expressed in this way - there are places in the world where people who convert from Islam to another religion should be very careful about being open about their religious convictions. But this is not true in all cases - and we should not let the fact that it is true in others give rise to bigotry and enmity in our hearts.
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Buddha Vacana »

In his documentary Hypernormalisation, Adam Curtis explains how the use of Muslim faith to radicalize and then use people as landmine fodder or kamikazes which is fueling islamophobia arose some time in the 70s.

It is a trite, but regarding the topic of this thread, religious freedom is an important if not fundamental part of general human well-being, and we can only wish that all human beings could enjoy it.
DooDoot wrote:If you don't want to be a Muslim in Malaysia then it might be wise & respectful to emigrate given societies do often require some kind of core culture to remain sustainable.
Are you suggesting that Malays who wish to stop being Muslims should move to some other country so as to maintain some (impossible) religious homogeneity in Malaysia?
SarathW
Posts: 21257
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by SarathW »

Islam is not the same as Buddhism because it does have a political component
Do you mean Buddhism is a political ideology like capitalism and communism
or
Islam is a political ideology like capitalism and communism?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote:Islam is a political ideology like capitalism and communism?
Capitalism and communism appear to be economic ideologies, which affect politics. Both appear to be forms of economic dictatorship because, when capitalism is unregulated, it leads to monopoly or oligarchy. 'Capitalism' is not necessarily 'free enterprise' or 'fair trade' or 'democracy'. The common correlation between capitalism & democracy I think is erroneous. The very formation of capitalism was from feudal dictatorship. That billionaires are now comprising of the US govt (rather than appointing puppets or proxies, such as Obama) shows how far the US is moving in the direction of economic dictatorship ('plutocracy'); where a president personally decides, on a whim of opinion based on tears from his daughter & the bliss of chocolate cake, to give an order to fire 59 missiles into another country. But capitalism and communism are not 100% political ideologies because they have no rules about crime & punishment in respect to non-economic human behaviour.

Islam is a political ideology because its tenants are about ruling a nation or society, including having laws about crime & punishment, the same as any other nation. All nations have legal systems with punishments for murder, theft, defamation, drug taking & drug trafficking and most used to have punishments for adultery, including fault in divorce. Buddhism only recommends certain behaviours and has no recommendations for punishment and no aspirations for national sovereignty. Therefore, Buddhism is not inherently a political system (even though its value can influence a political system).

I would speculate the original Muslims believed they were bringing a better civilisation to the world; which for many small groups was actually the reality (as has been posted by others on this thread). This is similar to the USA which claims to want to liberate nations (but actually destroys nations).
Buddha Vacana wrote:Are you suggesting that Malays who wish to stop being Muslims should move to some other country so as to maintain some (impossible) religious homogeneity in Malaysia?
Wasn't it your good self that recently wrote elsewhere that you & others appreciate a core & stable culture? I think it is religious or moral values (rather than race or superficial identity group) that historically create a stable culture. For example, when Trump won the election & the left-wing were rioting shows these people do not believe in democracy. They believe in a different culture. When I have travelled in Muslim cultures, I ensure I dress & behave in ways that are suitable to that culture. Generally, interest in Christianity (generally Protestant) by a Muslim is a sign of less moral values; similar to Christians who are interested in Western (liberal) Buddhism. Once core & universal morals break-down, societies break down. For example, when Buddhists lament the decline of Buddhism in Thailand or Sri Lanka, this is usually due to the introduction of new cultures (such Western corporate liberalism). At least this is how a conservative would view things.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Buddha Vacana
Posts: 607
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:16 am

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by Buddha Vacana »

DooDoot wrote: Wasn't it your good self that recently wrote elsewhere that you & others appreciate a core & stable culture?
I don't think so. That doesn't sound like something I would write at all. Can you quote me saying so?
DooDoot wrote: I think it is religious or moral values (rather than race or superficial identity group) that historically create a stable culture.
Only if those values are the 5 precepts and tolerance. Also, people having these characteristic but different religions can coexist peacefully. Why on earth people would be by principle unable to mix and live together?
DooDoot wrote: For example, when Trump won the election & the left-wing were rioting shows these people do not believe in democracy.
Sorry, but that is a non-sequitur. The USA are not an actual democracy, and people who actually believe in democracy call for changing that fundamentally corrupt system.
DooDoot wrote: Generally, interest in Christianity (generally Protestant) by a Muslim is a sign of less moral values; similar to Christians who are interested in Western (liberal) Buddhism.
What??? :shock:
DooDoot wrote: when Buddhists lament the decline of Buddhism in Thailand or Sri Lanka, this is usually due to the introduction of new cultures (such Western corporate liberalism)
.
What??? :shock:
DooDoot wrote: At least this is how a conservative would view things.
I guess that explains a lot
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Convertion of muslims

Post by binocular »

Buddha Vacana wrote:
DooDoot wrote:I think it is religious or moral values (rather than race or superficial identity group) that historically create a stable culture.
Only if those values are the 5 precepts and tolerance. Also, people having these characteristic but different religions can coexist peacefully. Why on earth people would be by principle unable to mix and live together?
It is not possible to peacefully coexist with someone who belives you're wrong about something that they consider important. Even if externally, the two parties may live very similar lifestyles, as long as their motivations for living those lifestyles differ, they won't be able to peacefully coexist.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Post Reply