Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

I haven't done a boolean search at that UM site, and frankly was uninterested in doing so while i suffered through my insomnia this morning. A few years back, at AFUZZ, some lunatic (which is not what i consider you to be--yer just a little goofy, while still loveable) was posting completely spurious suras, which, when i initially found the UM site, proved to be passages which had been altered by only a word or two, and which were offered at a christian web site whose avowed purpose was to further a world-wide crusade against "Islamic facist terrorists." The author was grossly affronted that i would criticize the source on such a basis, and contended that text alterations were necessary to "show the true meaning and extent of the evil Muslim plots." (Not an exact quote, but very damned close.) That was one of the last times i posted at AFUZZ.

And while we're at it, the OT advises you that if "thine eye offend thee, pluck it out," as well as prescribing death for adultery (death of the woman only), for homosexuality, and even for unruly children. In the NT, Hey-Zeus reputedly blasted a fig tree for having no figs when he was hungry, despite his companions pointing out that figs were not in season. This is followed by a torturous and completely unbelievable homily which attempts to suggest that Hey-Zeus was simply teaching a lesson. On another occassion, apparently on a whim, Hey-Zeus, having driven a devil out of someone (, oh please !) then directs it into a herd of swine, with apparent disregard for the livelihood of the swineherd and his family. This incident is made even more preposterous by the contention that the swine then precipitated themselves into Lake Tiberius. These were the Gaderene swine, and Gaderes was about 30 miles from Lake Tiberius--but we are expected to believe that the maddened swine ran thirty miles to drown themselves.

I've never known of a religion, including Zoarastrianism and Buddhism, which did not, within the first generation, begin the process of larding the accounts of the founder with preposterous tales of miracles and special, supernatural powers. In the case of Islam, it is important to remember that Mohammed was very likely illiterate, so we cannot say that he wrote anything, nor rely completely upon the contention that these are the exact recordings of what he said. Additionally, in the case of Islam, there are the haddith, the alleged sayings and actions of the Prophet and the Companions, to muddy the waters.

Interesting post Setanta, thanks. I understood that Mohammed was illiterate, but that he was surrounded at all times by scribes who wrote down everything he said and did, on bits of pottery, papyrus, bone etc etc. Quite a lot of stuff. Yet not one original artefact has survived. You would have thought the original draft of the Koran might have been venerated by the followers and carefully preserved. Aparantly not.

The Companions is largely a mythical concept--Abu Bekr remained his faithful companion throughout the hegira and all the warfare between Medina and Mecca, while others joined or fell away as suited their perception of the political climate at the time. Abu Bekr was responsible for the recording of the sayings of the Prophet, as far as anyone is able to assert with certainty, and there is no way of knowing if the record was colored, intentionally or otherwise, by Abu Bekr or those who flocked to surround him after Mohammed's death in 632. But even in the lifetime of Gautama Siddartha (the "Buddha") legends grew up about him and his sayings and activities. This is sort of thing is part and parcel of religious hagiography.

This is to confrim that legends regarding the Buddha and his teachings began very early, certainly within a generation of his death. However, Buddhist schalars do believe that there are sutras dating from the time of the historical Buddha in the Theravada canon. The Deer Park Sermon is perhaps the most prominent. Mahayan texts are much more difficult to clearly identify the actual author. The authorship of Tantric texts is often obscure, and Milrepa almost certainly did not write most of the Hundered Thousand Songs, and he may not have written any of them.

The birth of the Buddha in the Garden of Lumbini is a nice example of Buddhist legend. This was taught in the Buddhist Sunday School at the Hewit St. Soto Zendo to the children. My sons made nice pictures with white elephants, and masses of flowers each year to commemerate the event. The tales about how Siddhartha was raised, married and came to question the nature of suffering before leaving his beautiful wife, son and life of ease are also generally accepted by Buddhist scholars as largely legendary. These are acknowledged as fitted to the limited uderstanding of children and the ignorant than as important "facts" and fundamental to the religion. Discard all of thiese popular notions and the Buddhism is not harmed at all. The legendary did probably help speed the spread of Buddhism as it move out of the Indian sub-continent and into China.

There are many Confucian texts that almost certainly were written by Master Kung. Though the Tao Te Ching is attributed to Lao Tse, he may not have existed historically at all. On the other hand most of the major Taoist writings probably were written by the Taoists to whom they are attributed. eg. Chaun Tse, Mao Tse, etc.

I assume you refer to Jetsun Milarepa. I read a biography of him once, and it was so egregiously fanciful that it turned me off to any further close contact to the Buddhists who were anxious that i join them in their beliefs. Perhaps my loss, perhaps not . . .

Later Mahayana and many Tantric texts often become extravagant in their use of metaphor and an the miraculous. It is at least partially from these overly fulsome accounts that many of the misconceptions about Buddhism have arisen. The really important stuff, in my estimation, is found in the Theravada texts that date from very early in Buddhist history. Those later texts do have validity, but they can easily lead the amateur astray. The symbolism in these works is often complex, and obscure. Even dedicated scholars can easily become disoriented in the maze. This is certainly no place for the novice. I often recommend that people interested in learning more about Buddhism start with Theravada texts, and if you only study one let it be the Deer Park Sermon.

Well, these people were Kargayupta Buddhists (sp?) and Milarepa was their main man. They caught me at about the last time in my young life when i would have been amenable to religious notions, and blew it completely. I do not consider it any great loss, and have replaced the mostly phoney notions of morality and religiosity in my life with wonder and joy in the universe, and the construction of a personal ethic which coincides with the social contract.

Ugh. Just a note, while browsing through recent comments.

Setanta-- I don't want you to think that I ascribe Muslims hatefulness. I don't. But, it seems to be the assumption of even thoughtful people such as yourself, when someone (that would be me :wink: ) calls Mohammad's writings into question--which is what I'm doing. I can just understand how a devout Muslim can get the strong message that violence and directed hatred is part of their Muslim responsibility--due to what Mohammad wrote.

Reading up...

Same thing can be said of the OT, Boss, and certain passages of the NT. The Book of Revelations sounds like something written by a Goth Deathrocker (no personal implications there) on Angel Dust . . .

We should all pray for the abolition of monotheism

That's meaningless to me . . . i'm an atheist . . . no, really, i am . . . i swear to God . . .

Glad to hear it

Thats what the world needs these days. More good honest down to earth God fearing atheists.

Um, Jesus smote a lazy fig tree and sent some demonic pigs over a cliff.

...and He loves you!

Actually, for those whose cultural prejudices don't blind them, and who look past the contradictions and flaws, as christians commonly do with their own credos, Islam offers something which made a powerful proselytizing belief right from the beginning. In the eyes of Allah, the slave is not less than, nor greater than, the Sultan. In so far as religionous belief matters, a Muslim has no problem seeing in a humble, lowly person, the alim, the righteous man, and at the same time recognize the Sultan for an evil man. Hey-Zeus offered a message which if taken at face value, calls for the complete renunciation of material concerns--Islam does not concern itself at all with the material, and accepts that the Rich Man and the Poor Man both can enter Paradise at one another's side. Judaeism was a widely, successfully proselyted belief before the Syriac and Nestorian christians spread out through the middle east and all the way to China. Just as the "less harsh" seeming christianity replaced Judaeism, so Islam replaced the Nestorians and Syriacs. That all of these belief systems have been corrupted by the larding on of legend, and narrow tribal values ought to be recognized by any intelligent person as par for the historical course. Trying to make one out to be better than the other is ludicrous.

I think God must be a social Darwinist.

He tells three different individuals that THEY ALONE and their people are the SPECIAL CHOSEN ONES, and the rest are going to hell...


Then sits back and lets them fight it all out.

Either that or He has a strange sense of humour.

Being omnipotent and all powerful is an incredibly boring job. I suppose he needed amusement.

Well I hope He's enjoying his little prank.
Doesn't seem so funny this end

Judaism does not condemn non-Jews to hell. It is not concerned with the afterlife for most non-Jews because it is the religion for Jews.

In all honesty, what would that do?

--Ibn