Aye! I know...I'll dive into the books soon.

Just made me smile that the religion with no enemies or violence was the only one carrying swords around 24/7.

Yup, shows one can have a Kirpan, and not use it for violence. Also, you find me one case where a Sikh has used it to attack another, and I'll eat my turban live on cam!

Experience in Canada indicates the kirpan is dangerous. Justice Campbell in Ontario Human Rights Commission and Harbhajan Singh Pandori v. Peel Board of Education:

http://australianatheist.blogspot.co...ation-and.html

There have been, in the Metropolitan Toronto area, three reported incidents of violent kirpan use. One involved a plea of guilty to attempted murder after a stabbing with a kirpan. In one street fight, a man was stabbed in the back with a kirpan. In one case, a kirpan was drawn for defensive purposes.


Im ever so sorry matey. You dont have to eat it all, just a quick nibble will suffice!
send us the You-Tube link when its up

http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web.../ige21112.html

But rather than post the multitude of incidents, Sikhs have used Kirpans in Battles for centuries. If it's never been used for violence then how come theres so many millons of dead with kirpan shaped holes in them.

I'm not denying that its a symbol and its a sign of resisting oppression, but sometimes as we can see from so many examples in this thread, resisting oppression is simply another word for blatant expansionism and violence.

One thing about it that puzzles me a little. Shouldnt it be a .40 caliber automatic these days? Swords are a bit 18th century.

That link is for a fraud case?

Sikhs have not expanded using the sword. Defence yes, just as a soldier would use his/her weapon. Khalsa (that's the name) is a Saint Soldier, his/her job is to protect ALL, regardless of sex, colour, religion or sexuality.

Like I say, you'll need to educate yourself on Sikhism, before nit-picking. A better understanding of it will come naturally.

As for the caliber automatic, well as Sikhs are a martial race in india they carry guns freely AK47. The Kirpan is relevent today as it was back in the 17th century, Gurus also instructed they should be armed and ready for any conflict. Hence the need for it. Skihs had their own Empire, but if you read, you'll find they killed nobody to obtain it, or loot, plunder or rape. Something other religons can not really state they didin't do.

But, don't take my word for it, you're a dab hand at looking up links, look up our history, and then we can discuss any things you don't see fit.

Heya.
Sorry, i should have quoted it,The Murder is a bit further down the page.

Aye, I'll check up on the history and stuff and we can have a proper natter then

Regards.

Greetings and peace be with you all,

If we are striving to be truthful to God and our religion, then we should always strive to do what is greatest.

In Christianity Jesus said the greatest commandments of God; are to love God and to love our neighbours as we love ourselves. He gave us the parable of the Good Samaritan to describe how the greatest commandments work. It tells how people who could be seen as enemies should help and love their enemies in desperate situations.

How was George Bush striving to follow in the footsteps of the greatest commandments when he said, God bless America, God is on our side, and then he bombed Iraq.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

Very true, Uncle Eric! People often overlook how the scriptures teach us to treat even our so-called worst enemies with kindness.

Greetings to all,

Having read some of the replies, I would like to make a few points:

1. People who lack in depth Islamic knowledge should not attempt to interpret verses of the Qur'an.

2. A good understanding of Arabic is essential for fully understanding the Qur'an. The fact that translations differ in so many ways is proof of this. Non-Muslims often argue that this point is just an excuse used by Muslims to escape the argument, but it most certainly is not!

3. All Muslims don't necessarily have to learn Arabic. They should look to what the majority of knowledgeable scholars say about any given issue with the evidence and follow that - Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said that the Ummah will never unite upon falsehood.

4. In modern times, I would argue that events such as 9/11 are done chiefly for political reasons, with religion used as justification. People who do attempt to use religion as justification are probably delusional - their minds clouded by what they perceive to be injustices done against them, and are at odds with the views of the majority of Muslim scholars anyway. Remember that suicide is explicitly declared haraam in the Qur'an, yet many terrorists are suicide bombers. This shows that they are not good Muslims. Also, harming women and children is explicitly made haraam, yet many terrorists do. This also shows that they are not good Muslims.

5. I have yet to see a verse of the Qur'an or an authentic hadith which condones unjust violence. Indeed, there are many examples of showing how Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) treated his enemies with such kindness, that they even became embarassed at how kind he was treating them.

Read this account:

“I was with one of the Ansari families, after being taken as captive. Whenever they had lunch or dinner, they used to give me preference by providing me with bread while they’d eat only dates, in compliance with the Prophet’s order to treat prisoners well.”

His name was Huzayr ibn Humayr. He has previously been a prisoner of war from the battle of Badr when he was battling against the Muslims. He later converted to Islam.

That, ladies and gents, is how Muslims are supposed to treat their worst enemies.

Now, in what way does the Qur'an or Sunnah encourage unjust violence?

Hahaha, the only time violence is ever allowed in Islam is in a war - and even that is after all other options are exhausted (negotiations etc). Most of the time, to practice Islam is simply to be a nice human being.

It's the exact same with any ideology or way of life. At the core lies belief from a human being, who has zoomed in way too much. Again human error. Yeah religion/ideology/way of life may very well be the petrol, but the follower is the car AND the driver in those cases.

1) Without religion people would fight first and compromise later (it would be survival of the fittest since religion tells you to control your emotions and find compromises FIRST)
2) Islam I know for a fact takes the middle ground on a large majority of the occasions....

I would also like to draw your attention to Osman's post, just above this one and also Eric H's.

The collective Muslim psyche is too temperamental as it keenly takes offense in anything that contradicts, negates or criticizes its faith. They need to understand that critical analysis and commentary should not be deterred and perhaps also learn to tolerate (if not appreciate) satire instead of maniacally focusing their pent up rage on sabotaging foreign property and harming foreign individuals. A disagreement can easily easily be resolved by fighting back, but only verbally.

It is possible to criticise a religion, whilst staying respectful. Cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban are hardly that.

But I agree that anger should be controlled and/or channelled in peaceful and more effective ways to tackle the problem. It is ironic that some Muslims actually fail to emulate the example of the person that they try to defend. We should pray that Allah guides these people. Their anger may be justified, but their actions are not.

Greetings and peace be with you barney;
Likewise if the Quran said go fly a plane into a building you would say what a stupid religious book. But I think you will find there is no reference to flying planes into buildings in any religious text.

It leaves me thinking it is man and not religion to blame.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

since i am not overly fond of religion, i always belived also the subject line of this thread. now i have come to see that it is not religion, but something within our psyche that makes us violent toward others. religion can be (as indeed it has been) used as an excuse, and people in power can also use it to manipulate the people.
if religion disappeared overnight, would all the violence all over the world immediately end? of course not - there is no shortage of divisions, and new ones can always be created by politicians.
on the other hand, religion has been a major source of comfort to untold billions throughout the ages, given them hope when all seemed hopeless, a light in times of utter despair, etc etc.
if violence were not in the human heart, no religious doctrine could create it.