Theist Existentialism and Islamic Terrorism

-Biplab Pal, 10/27/05

In those days of crusade, both the crusaders and the defenders were highly confident-killing infidels is not a sin but the surest path to God (Allah)!

Thousands of years passed by. I am not sure how many among 1.2B Muslims can think otherwise for this rubbles of deaths in Delhi, which must have crossed sixty now. Only one thing has surely changed. Thousand years later, they have developed another face-public face to be apologetic, no matter whatever they discuss in the inner circle.

Situation is same with Hinduism-I was reading that in every 40 minutes on average, we have have one death from dowry! Speak in public with any Hindu, specially if he is new to you, he will show you how progressive he is against all the Hindu rituals! Dig deeper, he might be one of those who beats his wife for dowry. His actual self, didn't change from days of Manu, but he did develop a modern face to speak and live in the religious world of double standards.
Majority of the Muslims belong to same category, specially if they live in the west. They speak of death to infidels in their Mosques while put up an apologetic face in the public. As if Islam will be the last religion to sanction terrorism!

Well, problem of terrorism is complicated. It is like poison ivy, that needs seeds, some watering and some negligence to clean it. In this case seed is Koran, Arab money is watering it and American defense corporates are making sure that they grow it well, so that at the end, we need their service to clean terrorism! That's why we find double standard of US Govt which will never recognize Koran as source of terrorism.

Koran starts with invectives against those who do not believe in the advertisement of Allah and promises toughest treatment against them by all 'merciful' Allah. Anybody who has a minimum gray matter in his/her head will immediately understand from Koran that Muhammad faced a daunting task to establish his new religion specially when Jews, Christians and Pagans were quite advanced civilization of their time. To cash on the angers of poor pagans, to fuel their hatred against rich pagans, Muhammad would have done only one thing. That is to sanction this anger and hatred in the name of Allaha- that is what the Koran is all about. This is nothing new in the history, specially this is a prescribed one from Kautilya (400 BC). In Artha Satra, Kautilya wrote, the easiest way to induce hatred or love among the common people is to sanction it in the name of God-A king must preach his subjects that he talks to God and a king's will is therefore the God's will. Muhammad, definitely proved himself as the most worthy student of Kautilya!

But wait, who does not know the above! Non-Muslims of course. Yes, even Muslims do understand above. But they can not believe it, because believing that Muhammad is as good fraud as any other king when it comes to religion, is tantamount to disbelieving his own existence. Yes, this is the classic problem of theist existentialism, existence precedes essence. Root of all terrorism.

Most of the Muslims do not know what rotten egg is there inside Koran as the most of Hindues do not know what garbage is called Vedas. But they believe, these are sacred book. Why?

Because they want to find a meaning of life-an objective, as to why they live and they should live. So they believe that these books have defined their objective of life-submit to Allah and reach kingdom of heaven. This mortal life is sin and eternal life in heaven is defined as supreme objective of life. If you look at all the Muslim terrorists, they have defined their objective in heaven!

Sometimes, I laugh at the desperate attempts of the Muslim apologetics who want to prove that the terrorism is a handiwork of American corporate. American corporates definitely didn't define their objective in heaven. Koran did. Americans merely utilized a seed of poison ivy-known as Koran. Tomorrow, when Americans will not be the master imperialist, the seed will remain. Other master race will use it.

Surely we need to destroy the seed. It must be destroyed by the Muslim themselves-understanding that Koran is merely a problem of existentialism for them. Understanding that they can have an independent existence without Koran. A Muslim as human being,a biological being who can love his friends of all religions and Koran are two independent existence- it is mixed up because they are born and brought up that way.

But that can not be done, unless we can provide an alternative to religion.

An apologetic may argue that merely a few thousands are terrorists among the hundreds of millions ( Like Taj Hashami). But is there any difference between an apologetic and a terrorist? Both the apologetics and the terrorists are suffering from the same problem- problem of existentialism. Neither can think of their existence disbelieving in Koran. One is explicit, others are implicit, silent supporters of same supreme objective. That's why everywhere, it is a few of thousands of fundamentalists, run over millions of others- who are ' apparently' good religious people-nonterrorist type. Why? Because these millions do not have moral strength to oppose these few hundreds. Opposing is equivalent to destroying their own existence as Muslim! They are essentially on the same boat. Iran fell in to the hands of Islamic terrorists because of these apologetics.

My bottom-line would be to provide an alternative to religion-philosophy of science. Which I deem to be the only solution.

Zakir Naik's popularity is convincing proof of Islamic fanaticism

This Islamic preacher of Indian origin supports

(1) Death to apostate as he thinks they are traitors of Islam.
(2) Polygamy should be legalized
(3) No religious right to non-Muslims
(4) Every Muslim must be terrorist against America

And he has millions of followers in Muslim world!!!

[3] is very serious. Just read this:

*****

Interviewer: Here is a question from a non-Muslim from India. Are non-Muslims allowed to preach their religion and to build their places of worship in an Islamic state? If so, why is building of temples and churches disallowed in Saudi Arabia, whereas Muslims are building their mosques in London and Paris?

Zakir Naik: I ask the non-Muslims, suppose you are the principal of a school and you intend to select a mathematics teacher. Three candidates come and you ask them, what’s the total of 2 plus 2? The first replies: 2 plus 2 equals 3. The second answers: 2 plus 2 equals 4. And the third one answers that 2 plus 2 equals 6. Now, I ask these non-Muslims, will you allow the candidate to teach in your school who says that 2 plus 2 equals 3 or that 2 plus 2 equals 6? They’ll say, no. I ask, why? They’ll say, because he does not have correct knowledge of mathematics. Similarly, as far as matters of religion are concerned we (Muslims) know for sure that only Islam is a true religion in the eyes of God. In the Holy Quran (3:85), it is mentioned that God will never accept any religion other than Islam. As far as the second question, regarding building of churches or temples is concerned, how can we allow this when their religion is wrong and when their worshipping is wrong? Therefore, we will not allow such wrong things in our Islamic country.

Interviewer: But is it not that they (non-Muslims) also think that their religion is true, whereas we (Muslims) think that our religion is true?

Zakir Naik: In religious matters only we know for sure that we Muslims are right. They (non-Muslims) are not sure. Thus, in our country we can’t allow preaching other religions because we know for sure that only Islam is the right religion. However, if a non-Muslim likes to practise his religion in an Islamic country, he can do so inside his home — but he can’t propagate his religion. It is exactly as if a teacher thinks in his mind that 2 plus 2 equals 3. He has the right to do so, but we can never allow such a person to teach this to our children. Non-Muslims are no doubt experts in science and technology. But they (non-Muslims) are not sure about religious truths. Therefore, we are trying to get them to the right path of Islam.”

Should we in India or in America also ban Islam because we think it is vile????

Can any supporter of Naik will clarify me why they support this Mullah Zakir who even does not admit the
religious right of non-Muslims? Should we apply Zakir's argument on them as we can provide thousands of logics why Islam is notorious as faith and therefore it must be wiped out from India, Europe and America?

This man has millions of supporters. Which mean they also do not support religious plurality. This is height of communal sentiment. This is the reason we all think most of the Muslims are fanatics.

Who’s responsible for the stereotypes of Islam?

Sudheendra Kulkarni

Islam fascinates me. But the conduct of some of its adherents also frustrates me. The positive aspects of Islam are too numerous to escape the attention of any unprejudiced and truth-seeking non-Muslim. For example, Hindus have much to learn from Muslims about the virtue of solidarity and fellow-feeling within their community. During the month of Ramadan, I am captivated by the sight of Muslims who, after offering their evening namaz, end their day’s fast by grouping together and eating from the same plate, without any distinction of class or status

Related Stories

Bharat Teri Ganga MailiThe Toyo-Tata Way to nation-buildingWill BJP campaign in poetry or prose?Our unexamined livesLiving in a dangerous neighbourhood

Ad Links

Islam Symbols Mecca Denmark Muslim

Also, one can only marvel at the power of devotion and the degree of self-surrender of many Muslim mystics, whose lives have undoubtedly influenced pious, ordinary Muslims. Here is a story told by Vinoba Bhave, the great Gandhian who learnt Arabic at age 50 just to study the Holy Quran in the original. An old Muslim saint once had a thorn in his foot. It had gone deep and doctors were worried that the pain involved in removing it would be too much for the old soul to bear. One of his devotees then told them, “Don’t worry. You remove it while he is offering his prayers. He will be so engrossed in Allah that he won’t feel anything.”

Sadly, this ennobling aspect of Islam sits uneasily with the fanaticism that tarnishes its image. Last week I was shocked to watch an interview with Zakir Naik, a well-known Mumbai-born Muslim preacher, whose TV talks on Islam are highly popular in India and around the world. His books and audio/video cassettes are sold in huge numbers worldwide.

Watch the interview at YouTube, the free video site on the Internet, and draw your own conclusions.

Interviewer: Here is a question from a non-Muslim from India. Are non-Muslims allowed to preach their religion and to build their places of worship in an Islamic state? If so, why is building of temples and churches disallowed in Saudi Arabia, whereas Muslims are building their mosques in London and Paris?

Zakir Naik: I ask the non-Muslims, suppose you are the principal of a school and you intend to select a mathematics teacher. Three candidates come and you ask them, what’s the total of 2 plus 2? The first replies: 2 plus 2 equals 3. The second answers: 2 plus 2 equals 4. And the third one answers that 2 plus 2 equals 6. Now, I ask these non-Muslims, will you allow the candidate to teach in your school who says that 2 plus 2 equals 3 or that 2 plus 2 equals 6? They’ll say, no. I ask, why? They’ll say, because he does not have correct knowledge of mathematics. Similarly, as far as matters of religion are concerned we (Muslims) know for sure that only Islam is a true religion in the eyes of God. In the Holy Quran (3:85), it is mentioned that God will never accept any religion other than Islam. As far as the second question, regarding building of churches or temples is concerned, how can we allow this when their religion is wrong and when their worshipping is wrong? Therefore, we will not allow such wrong things in our Islamic country.

Interviewer: But is it not that they (non-Muslims) also think that their religion is true, whereas we (Muslims) think that our religion is true?

Zakir Naik: In religious matters only we know for sure that we Muslims are right. They (non-Muslims) are not sure. Thus, in our country we can’t allow preaching other religions because we know for sure that only Islam is the right religion. However, if a non-Muslim likes to practise his religion in an Islamic country, he can do so inside his home — but he can’t propagate his religion. It is exactly as if a teacher thinks in his mind that 2 plus 2 equals 3. He has the right to do so, but we can never allow such a person to teach this to our children. Non-Muslims are no doubt experts in science and technology. But they (non-Muslims) are not sure about religious truths. Therefore, we are trying to get them to the right path of Islam.”

Naik’s views provoke a troubling question in my mind: “Why do some Muslims demand secularism and more than equal treatment in countries where they are a minority, but aggressively turn anti-secular and deny even equal treatment to non-Muslims in many Muslim-majority countries?” Muslims cannot escape their responsibility to answer this question.

Naik’s defense of the denial of fundamental human rights of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia is not unrelated to an unbelievable incident that happened recently in the land where Islam was born. On February 26, four French nationals — all non-Muslims working in Saudi Arabia — were killed by gunmen. Their crime? They were resting on the side of a desert road about 10 miles from the holy city of Medina, which, like Mecca, is restricted to Muslims only.

Whenever non-Muslims, including those who admire Islam’s positive features, express alarm at incidents like these, or at views such as Zakir Naik’s, they are accused of spreading “stereotypes” about Islam and Muslims. But shouldn’t Muslims themselves be debating what produces these stereotypes?