I don't know how old you are or if it is you couldn't read my post properly even after quoting me, but I asked for alternate translations for verse 5.51, 5.33, 9.29 of Quran and not 2.190. You'll get tired if I post all the verses I know from muslim.org. But then, just to justify your end, you will start using the translations by Griffith, Bloomsfield, Max muller to show that killing has been done by Indra also and that "Yindoos", like one our admins happily pronounces, worshipped Cows, Horses etc, and embarrass the soul of Vedic seers like Aurobindo even further
Remember, the fight starts the moment you cannot accommodate other's point of view and "force your own opinion on others". So don't rush in just because your swabhava triggered some reactions. Read my post, slowly and carefully. It is the whole point of "La ilaha Il Alaha, mohammad ur rasool allah" that the "believers" want to impose the word Allah on every one's throat.
If the "believers say, that "Allah is the eaten, the eater and the process of eating and the output of that eating" then it would make sense as every thing in this universe is matter and energy as per modern science and even matter is energy (Refer Quantum Theory). A person (made up of matter and energy), is born from matter and energy, uses matter and energy as food and becomes matter and energy after his death.
When one puts consciousness into the picture of this dance of matter and energy, it becomes a higher concept which is pronounced as brahman as per the Indian science.
More for you, Chapter 5 for the appetizers ---
Quran_chaper_5 said:
ch5, v41
O Messenger, let not those
grieve thee who hasten to disbelief,
from among those who say with their
mouths, We believe, and their hearts
believe not, and from among those
who are Jews — they are listeners for
the sake of a lie, listeners for another
people who have not come to thee.a
They alter the words after they are
put in their (proper) places, saying: If
you are given this, take it, and if you
are not given this, be cautious. And
he for whom Allåh intends temptation,
thou controllest naught for him
against Allåh. Those are they whose
hearts Allåh intends not to purify.
For them is disgrace in this world,
and for them a grievous chastisement
in the Hereafter.
ch5, v60
Say: Shall I inform you of those
worse than this in retribution from
Allåh? They are those whom Allåh has
cursed and upon whom He brought
His wrath and of whom He made apes
and swine, and who serve the devil.
ch5, v64
And the Jews say: The hand of Allåh is tied up. Their own hands are shackled and they are cursed for what they say. Nay, both His hands are spread out.a He disburses as He pleases. And that which has been revealed to thee from thy Lord will certainly make many of them increase in inordinacy and disbelief. And We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the day of Resurrection. Whenever they kindle a fire for war Allåh puts it out, and they strive to make mischief in the land.b And Allåh loves not the mischief-makers.
ch5, v73
Certainly they disbelieve who
say: Allåh, He is the Messiah, son of
Mary. And the Messiah said: O
Children of Israel, serve Allåh, my
Lord and your Lord.a Surely whoever
associates (others) with Allåh, Allåh
has forbidden to him the Garden and
his abode is the Fire. And for the
wrongdoers there will be no helpers.
First, you can see that Quran is full of contradictions as you made it easy for me. Bring me any version of Quran you like for discussion. Secondly, like I stated, Quran preaches attachment to a name and his prophet which further dictates you what to do and who your enemy is. It is not the demons like lust, greed,anger etc as a philosophical mind would understand but jews,christians and infidels. It further divides the society between regions like Israel etc. Thirdly, "my thought better than yours and if others don't obey it then fight them" (9.29) certianly is a breeding ground, a spark of the war no matter what. If others fight to protect themselves, then they will face even more terrible consequences (5.33).
And every body knows, those who leave Islam, are punishable by death e.g Salman Rushdie, Wafa Sultan, Ali Sina, Taslima Nasreen who have been issued fatwas and death sentences by muslim councils.
If it is a discussion between theist/Religion and atheists, then I'd be pro-atheists. If it is atheists and agnostics, then agnostics. But there is a world which lies beyond all these childish distinctions, where the asuras and devtas are the powers of the same infinite, which is indivisible but seems divided because of our conditioning, uncontrolled mind etc. It is this indivisible, infinite, all pervading ocean which the Indian thought advocates which teaches tolerance, where the same nameless ocean can be called be any name (ekam sat vipra bahuda vadanti), where friendship itself is divine and not weighed by childish taggings like "Jews, Christian and infidels". Even friendship with the members of your perceived enemy is divine e.g Ram and Vibhishan.
bhagvada-gita said:
Sages see with an equal eye the learned and cultured Brahmin, the cow, the elephant, the dog, the outcaste. (BG 5.18 ) (Refer to the story of SatyaKama Jabala and the king Bharat)
That which is in us is he and all that we experience outside ourselves is he. The inward and the outward, the far and the near, the moving and the unmoving, all this he is at once. He is the subtlety of the subtle which is beyond our knowledge. He is indivisible and the One, but seems to divide himself in forms and creatures and appears as all the separate existences. All things are eternally born from him, upborne in his eternity, taken eternally back into his oneness. (Chapter 13.16-17, BG)
The branches of that tree extending downward and upwards, with its sprouts symbolizing sense objects, develope due to the three modes of material nature; with roots spreading downwards also produces actions and reactions in the worlds of humans. Within this world the inverted form of this tree cannot be perceived, nor its beginning, nor its foundation; severing this strongly rooted in attachment banyan tree with the sharp weapon of detachment; thereafter go to the place where there is no return again by approaching the exclusive shelter, surrendering at the feet of the Supreme; verily to the original, Ultimate from whom the perpetual process emanates. ( BG : 15.2-4 )
Please read the bold part from my previous post. Yet it/he/she, i.e the infinite ocean, brahman, purusha, parameshvar etc whatever you'd like to call, is glorified in masculine form in some upanishads, neutar in other and feminine aspect in Devi Purana and as "I/Me" in Gita and Devi Purana as well. The same way can be seen for the hymns dedicated to Indra, Varuna, Vishnu etc in Vedas. There are some upanishads which are flexible in calling the infinite as "it" in some verses and "he" in other verses.
Not woman is He, nor man either, nor yet sexless; but whatsoever body He take, that confineth & preserveth Him. (Svetasvatara Upanishad, 5.10)
It means that the "ideal ocean" is infinite and generates waves like "man, woman, stone, eunuch etc" and hence when viewed from the highest truth it is neither man nor woman neither sexless as it consists of man, woman, eunuch, stone etc. Once you understand the metaphorical and riddle like nature of much of the shrutis, most of the understanding will come automatically to you.
Can Allah see with an equal eye, a believer (muslim), jews, christian, infidel and a goat (Refer Bakr-id)? But even if you disagree with any of the "Yindoo" texts, then you are free to do so as there is no attachment to the knowledge anyhow.
Ending conversation between Arjun and Krishna --
bhagvad-gita said:
Thus the most confidential wisdom of all that is confidential has been described by me to you; deliberating fully on this; accordingly act as you wish. (Bg 18.63)
About corruption in shruti texts, it can only be mistranslation and no corruption which has been discussed before. You'd have understood it better had you been a sanskrit literate and why it is being put in computers and why NASA is hiring sanskrit experts. This matter has been discussed before anyways yet this thread continues with the painful reincarnations of the same ignorance.
NASA on Sanskrit & Artificial Intelligence by Rick Briggs
No textual corruption in Vedas - Agniveer
In the Indian thought everyone is free to do as he likes unless it imposes opinions on others. It is the reason why different sages had different interpretations of the same truth like Kena, Katha etc, different scriptures like Vedas, Tantra etc which seem different from different angles, but lead to the same understanding of the truth.
whitestar said:
it is just that islam is still waiting for such individuals for last few hundred years unlike other religions & that is why it seems the most extremist as of now.
Perhaps, we should put Islam/Quran in a shelf and tell that to the muslims so that they shoud wait for another few hundred years so that extremism doesn't happen?
What is the "cause of Allah" which you quoted? Is it the judgment day when the muslims will be asked if they converted an infidel or is it the hatred for Jews, Christians and infidels? Is it the attachment to the name Allah, and making the non-believers and believers fear Allah? The rest of the questions fall under the purview of atheists like "Who is God", "Prove God exists" etc.
According to some, the older the text, the more outdated it is. The newer it is, the purer it is. Some theorise, newer the text the translations are even more authentic and now you come up with a different theory. Interesting! In that case, the readers of Vivek Anand, Aurobindo etc would be even more extremists than the Muslims, as you state, destroying mosques, killing muslims, destroying the muslim equaivalent of Amar Jyoti etc.
Anyways, "the rules of engagement" that you quoted i.e women, children, and innocent civilians are off limits is sadly debunked in Chapter 33 of Quran
Quran_chapter_33 said:
O Prophet, We have made lawful
to thee thy wivesa whom thou hast
given their dowries, and those whom
hy right hand possesses, out of those
whom Allåh has given thee as prison-
ers of war, and the daughters of thy
paternal uncle and the daughters of thy
paternal aunts, and the daughters of thy
maternal uncle and the daughters of thy
maternal aunts who fled with thee; and
a believing woman, if she gives herself
to the Prophet, if the Prophet desires to
marry her. (It is) especially for thee,
not for the believersb — We know
what We have ordained for them con-
cerning their wives and those whom
their right hands possess in order that
no blame may attach to thee. And
Allåh is ever Forgiving, Merciful. (33.50)
Thou mayest put off whom thou
pleasest of them, and take to thee
whom thou pleasest. And whom thou
desirest of those whom thou hadst
separated provisionally, no blame
attaches to thee. This is most proper
so that their eyes may be cool and
they may not grieve, and that they
should be pleased, all of them, with
what thou givest them.a And Allåh
knows what is in your hearts. And
Allåh is ever Knowing, Forbearing. (33.51)
I can keep posting endlessly. The question is can your really provide me an alternate translation of the same which deny the same? Like I said, "I asked for alternate translations for verse 5.51, 5.33, 9.29 of Quran and you gave 2.190". 2.190 from muslim.org pretty much say the same as you pointed out.
Please read any version of Quran completely and not out-of-context or random verses, or quote "scholars" to show "Islam is about peace". Scholars and authors also state that Mohammed was a schizophrenic (Just google for sources). Please read and show me which version or
translation by any scholar of complete Quran speaks of
1) Detachment from name Allah and his prophet mohammed?
2) Does not mention hatred towards Jews, Christians and infidels?
3) Does not Propogate the "cause of Allah", taxation, judgement day?
4) Chopping of hands, limbs etc? Just a few questions!
-------------
@Rhitwick : Thank You