Mass Shiite protests sweep Pakistan after deadly bombing claims 81 lives

[Muloghonto]

Actually that holy book you talk about does not mention the word sunni or shia and even warns Muslims to not create division between themselves.

Yes, i have read your holy book. Its a better written book than most, but it is your usual cliches of carrot-and-stick with a few pearls of wisdom, some contradicting ideas that lead to 'divisions in the first place' - which is why you have different fiqhs and madhabs in the first place. Its easy to package a broken idea with standard marketing ploys ( in the field of religion, it tends to be pearls of utopian wisdom that usually has no practicality inherent to it and in many, if not most cases, tend to be completely overrun by counter-thoughts proposed in seemingly unlrelated ideas that are easily exposed by logical extrapolations and logical interconnectivity of ideas. Suffice to say,i am impressed by it only so much- yes, its a more consistent book like you guys try to claim, but then again, a rulebook to operate a machine is just as easily, more 'consistent' than 99% of the works of nobel prize winning literary giants. That is where your book differs from the bible for example- which is meant to be presented in a 'days of our lives' style. Yours, uses the WHIMIS manual to safety approach- dry, but consistent. What your book does not satisfy and can never satisfy, is the question of ' why should i stake my entire existence on the basis of what one man said, recorded by another man, on the sole basis of absolute trust on this semi-legendary historical character ? I can dismiss the whole thing by simply assuming 'Mohammed = Genghis Khan on a religious level. Thus, unscrupulous and everything he said is a version of megalomania', so why am i to lead my life on simply the basis of trust towards that one man ? Don't take this for Islam bashing as i am not a believer in the God concept in the first place. The fundamental problem- why should i live my life bereft of my instincts, desire and my ability to judge and deal with the phenomenal universe, on the basis of trusting what some XYZ said in stone-age times about how phenomenal existence and its creator is, is inherent flaw to the whole concept of divinity without empiricity, ie, virtually any religion. The least God could've done while sending Mo into fits of convulsions receiving 'divine directives' is to put atleast the speed of light or some bloody thing in it that would narrow down the possibility to one of: a) God and b) Alien intervention instead of the whole credibiity of religions, which fundamentally relies on ' no empiric evidence of divinity, no empiric hint of divinity by inclusion of scientific/phenomenal data impossible to obtain in the technological timeframe of said transmission but hey, trust it to be true and lead your entire existence on the basis of it'. You can lead your entire life and base the entirity of your existence conducting yourself on what some stone-age man said you should be like without a single iota of empirical evidence because you trust him. I will trust my brain, my instincts and my evolutionary history as a member of a species that has thrived on this planet for over 5000 generations to do the job.

[Muloghonto]

Not sure what gave you guys the idea that I meant it as some scientific poll, but if seedhi's assertion of smilies is correct India should have lots of radicalized and fundoo Muslims. Now if I had said I have never met one in real life despite living in a city with one of the largest Muslim populations you would dismiss it as hearsay, so I asked seedhi to point out a few Indian Muslims with which we share a common acquaintance and he considers radicalized and fundoo. And the only such common ground for us is ICF, an imperfect scientific lab. As a counter example I presented him with a list of radicalized and fundoo Hindus on ICF to establish the baseline of vitriol against the other community we are talking about.

Strawman. Since you concede that this is an imperfect scientific lab and thus, by default, its sample space has very little correlative or quality value to the subject ( fundoos in India), your counter-example can be easily dismissed as a function of the fundamentally flawed science lab of ICF in the first place. Thus, you cannot draw any such baseline for the purposes of the discussion if you admit that the system you are trying to use to simulate the said scenario is a broken one in first place.

[mhr123]

I find it ironic that many Pakistanis living abroad are more concerned with the safety of Muslims in India. They refuse to believe the ongoing conflict' date=' bloodshed, genocide, target killing and tries to focus on Muslim safety issues in India particularly in Kashmir as in their mind it gives them reassurance and reaffirms legitimacy in the formation of Pakistan.[/quote'] Well its true .. most of the time they talk abt the Gujrat/Assam riots were as more than 10 times they are killing their own people in Karachi/Baluchistan... Well once we were discussing with a Pakistani Guy here abt the treatment of Indian Muslims in India.. well i told them that we are having our best times here in India .. we don't have issue here to dress/keep beard/marry/build mosque .. no objections from govt... but if u go to so called Muslim state like Tunisia .. a person can be put behind bars or deported if he is keeping a beard (Paks with not talk abt them).. We are more than 100000 times thankful to God that we are born in India were we are treated the same was as others... Well Proud to be an Indian Muslim :isalute:

[The Outsider]

Strawman. Since you concede that this is an imperfect scientific lab and thus, by default, its sample space has very little correlative or quality value to the subject ( fundoos in India), your counter-example can be easily dismissed as a function of the fundamentally flawed science lab of ICF in the first place. Thus, you cannot draw any such baseline for the purposes of the discussion if you admit that the system you are trying to use to simulate the said scenario is a broken one in first place.

If fundoo Muslims are as prevalent in India as seedhi would have us believe, it's quite possible a few of them would have ventured on to ICF. It's not as if the sample selection of ICF precludes the presence of fundoo Muslims. It has certainly not prevented fundoo Hindus to become members. Obviously, it's not a scientific result and neither am I making any claims for it to be.

[seedhi]

If fundoo Muslims are as prevalent in India as seedhi would have us believe, it's quite possible a few of them would have ventured on to ICF. It's not as if the sample selection of ICF precludes the presence of fundoo Muslims. It has certainly not prevented fundoo Hindus to become members. Obviously, it's not a scientific result and neither am I making any claims for it to be.

This is a rather strange argument. Firstly, you yourself label someone as "Hindu fundoo" base your argument on it. Secondly, ICF is clearly not a representative of the country's population. On the ICF you will not find any Kashmiri separatists either - so does that mean that there are none ? Ignore Kashmir, ignore the rising extremism in places like Kerala, Maharashtra (azad maidan), Tamil Nadu, ignore the frequent riots in UP, in Assam etc and instead use ICF as an example - can there be a more naive worldview?

[Muloghonto]

If fundoo Muslims are as prevalent in India as seedhi would have us believe, it's quite possible a few of them would have ventured on to ICF. It's not as if the sample selection of ICF precludes the presence of fundoo Muslims. It has certainly not prevented fundoo Hindus to become members. Obviously, it's not a scientific result and neither am I making any claims for it to be.

So you are going to erase my posts and PM me personally about substantiating comments like '1 in a million' with statistical analysis, but you are quite okay to maintain an agenda by interpreting data from a fundamentally flawed system that you conceded is flawed ? Thats terribly unscientific and inconsistent of you, isn't it ? As per the line of thought you are propagating, i have already rested my case. You conceded that ICF is a flawed laboratory for drawing any sort of correlative data, therefore, the correlation you are trying to allude to, is equally flawed. Therefore, you do not have a case on the prevalence or absence of fundamentalist muslims in India on the basis of ICF.

[dial_100]

Yes, i have read your holy book. Its a better written book than most, but it is your usual cliches of carrot-and-stick with a few pearls of wisdom, some contradicting ideas that lead to 'divisions in the first place' - which is why you have different fiqhs and madhabs in the first place. Its easy to package a broken idea with standard marketing ploys ( in the field of religion, it tends to be pearls of utopian wisdom that usually has no practicality inherent to it and in many, if not most cases, tend to be completely overrun by counter-thoughts proposed in seemingly unlrelated ideas that are easily exposed by logical extrapolations and logical interconnectivity of ideas. Suffice to say,i am impressed by it only so much- yes, its a more consistent book like you guys try to claim, but then again, a rulebook to operate a machine is just as easily, more 'consistent' than 99% of the works of nobel prize winning literary giants. That is where your book differs from the bible for example- which is meant to be presented in a 'days of our lives' style. Yours, uses the WHIMIS manual to safety approach- dry, but consistent. What your book does not satisfy and can never satisfy, is the question of ' why should i stake my entire existence on the basis of what one man said, recorded by another man, on the sole basis of absolute trust on this semi-legendary historical character ? I can dismiss the whole thing by simply assuming 'Mohammed = Genghis Khan on a religious level. Thus, unscrupulous and everything he said is a version of megalomania', so why am i to lead my life on simply the basis of trust towards that one man ? Don't take this for Islam bashing as i am not a believer in the God concept in the first place. The fundamental problem- why should i live my life bereft of my instincts, desire and my ability to judge and deal with the phenomenal universe, on the basis of trusting what some XYZ said in stone-age times about how phenomenal existence and its creator is, is inherent flaw to the whole concept of divinity without empiricity, ie, virtually any religion. The least God could've done while sending Mo into fits of convulsions receiving 'divine directives' is to put atleast the speed of light or some bloody thing in it that would narrow down the possibility to one of: a) God and b) Alien intervention instead of the whole credibiity of religions, which fundamentally relies on ' no empiric evidence of divinity, no empiric hint of divinity by inclusion of scientific/phenomenal data impossible to obtain in the technological timeframe of said transmission but hey, trust it to be true and lead your entire existence on the basis of it'. You can lead your entire life and base the entirity of your existence conducting yourself on what some stone-age man said you should be like without a single iota of empirical evidence because you trust him. I will trust my brain, my instincts and my evolutionary history as a member of a species that has thrived on this planet for over 5000 generations to do the job.

Actually these religious books need much more evolved spiritual understanding. Some of it is not for a day to day guy who doesn't understand it thoroughly. They heavily rely on an interpreter who they believe is evolved and thats where the whole issue is. There are some empirical approaches to spirituality which not many know. With that approach these religions, all of them, make much more sense.

[Muloghonto]

Actually these religious books need much more evolved spiritual understanding. Some of it is not for a day to day guy who doesn't understand it thoroughly. They heavily rely on an interpreter who they believe is evolved and thats where the whole issue is. There are some empirical approaches to spirituality which not many know. With that approach these religions' date=' all of them, make much more sense.[/quote'] Spirituality and religion are related but different things and as such, empiricism is far less relevant in spiritualism than in religion, since spiritualism inherently relies on adaptive interpretations of phenomena as well as assumptive conditions that does not lead to implications towards authority or absolutism, like religion does. The fact that religious books are of two types- either the Koranic type of ultra-dry and boring 'manual to operate a printing press' or a super-convoluted symbolism-lead stories in the Biblical type (or a mish-mash of both, ala Gita type) makes it quite a hard thing for masses to follow and come to same conclusions. But no religion ( except perhaps Buddhism, if we stick to scriptures only where technically it is not a religion) answers the questions i've posed. All of them utterly hinge on one concept: trust the protagonist 100%. The same 'proof' that for example Muslims accuse the jews/christians of for tampering with God's message can also be applied to Islam, the same 'evidence' presented to make the Koran seem divine is applicable to all other religious texts and the same 'evidence' presented to challenge their divinity can also be applied to Koran. For it all hinges on trusting the source, not a shred of empiric proof of divinity presented in any of these religious texts. I find it rather curious that this God person utterly failed to anticipate the need for empiricism in modern human society and left us with books of quality and claim that virtually any literate man with a flair for literary writing can conjure. I simply have not seen any evidence whatsoever, which can seperate any religion from other religions and total propagandas. Ultimately, it boils down to trust. Do you trust this Mohammed guy, Valmiki or Guru Gobind or Peter or any such compilers & proponents or not ? That is all there is to it, really. Muslims chose to trust this guy, i choose not to. I see no inherent reason why i should either and except for insane amounts of social and familial pressures to conform, i see no reason why muslims should trust this guy either. Its not like Mohammed, or any such religion founders have actually presented any shred of divine evidence or made a case for divinity strongly enough.

[dial_100]

Spirituality and religion are related but different things and as such' date=' [b']empiricism is far less relevant in spiritualism than in religion, since spiritualism inherently relies on adaptive interpretations of phenomena as well as assumptive conditions that does not lead to implications towards authority or absolutism, like religion does. The fact that religious books are of two types- either the Koranic type of ultra-dry and boring 'manual to operate a printing press' or a super-convoluted symbolism-lead stories in the Biblical type (or a mish-mash of both, ala Gita type) makes it quite a hard thing for masses to follow and come to same conclusions. But no religion ( except perhaps Buddhism, if we stick to scriptures only where technically it is not a religion) answers the questions i've posed. All of them utterly hinge on one concept: trust the protagonist 100%. The same 'proof' that for example Muslims accuse the jews/christians of for tampering with God's message can also be applied to Islam, the same 'evidence' presented to make the Koran seem divine is applicable to all other religious texts and the same 'evidence' presented to challenge their divinity can also be applied to Koran. For it all hinges on trusting the source, not a shred of empiric proof of divinity presented in any of these religious texts. I find it rather curious that this God person utterly failed to anticipate the need for empiricism in modern human society and left us with books of quality and claim that virtually any literate man with a flair for literary writing can conjure. I simply have not seen any evidence whatsoever, which can seperate any religion from other religions and total propagandas. Ultimately, it boils down to trust. Do you trust this Mohammed guy, Valmiki or Guru Gobind or Peter or any such compilers & proponents or not ? That is all there is to it, really. Muslims chose to trust this guy, i choose not to. I see no inherent reason why i should either and except for insane amounts of social and familial pressures to conform, i see no reason why muslims should trust this guy either. Its not like Mohammed, or any such religion founders have actually presented any shred of divine evidence or made a case for divinity strongly enough.

Spirituality is all about a very empirical approach to seeking. Your second highlighted statement is again based on your ignorance. There is an on-going effort all across the world which believe in more innate religion which is within us not outside. It encompasses all the worldly religions but while digesting lot of religious scriptures, it rightfully, ignores things that do not make sense (again empirical approach). That innate religion is same within all of us whether we believe in it or not. So we are obviously not dependent on a book or books to practice it. You drive it yourself. Its verifiable and that the beauty. Its about you believe what you experience and not believe what Ã×e been told (per book). Simple as that. Its not true that only muslims trust in Prophet and christians believe in Jesus or hindus believe in Krishna. Actually the so called believers themselves do not know the real divinity of these personalities. And its okay that you donÃÕ believe in them either because as you said you have not experienced anything to prove their divinity.

[Lurker]

Well its true .. most of the time they talk abt the Gujrat/Assam riots were as more than 10 times they are killing their own people in Karachi/Baluchistan... Well once we were discussing with a Pakistani Guy here abt the treatment of Indian Muslims in India.. well i told them that we are having our best times here in India .. we don't have issue here to dress/keep beard/marry/build mosque .. no objections from govt... but if u go to so called Muslim state like Tunisia .. a person can be put behind bars or deported if he is keeping a beard (Paks with not talk abt them).. We are more than 100000 times thankful to God that we are born in India were we are treated the same was as others... Well Proud to be an Indian Muslim :isalute:

Lovely sentiment there mh :icflove:

[rahulrulezz]

Well its true .. most of the time they talk abt the Gujrat/Assam riots were as more than 10 times they are killing their own people in Karachi/Baluchistan... Well once we were discussing with a Pakistani Guy here abt the treatment of Indian Muslims in India.. well i told them that we are having our best times here in India .. we don't have issue here to dress/keep beard/marry/build mosque .. no objections from govt... but if u go to so called Muslim state like Tunisia .. a person can be put behind bars or deported if he is keeping a beard (Paks with not talk abt them).. We are more than 100000 times thankful to God that we are born in India were we are treated the same was as others... Well Proud to be an Indian Muslim :isalute:

I don't agree with this as we are not even 75% to a perfect society like Canada or Newzealand where everyone is treated equally irrespective of their religion. We do have a relative high hate-mongers among Indian Hindus who really need to differentiate between Indian Muslims and Pakistanis. My bloods boils to no limits when I see Indian Hindus start to insult Islam and their prophets during a Indo-Pak hate discussion. I mean wtf!! Indian Muslims are equally if not more patriotic than Indian Hindus then why do Indians insult fellow Indians relgion n beliefs. I remember back in 2008 when Pakistan, Srilanka n Zimbabwe played a series in Canada n I was in stands among this group of Indian fans where this crazy Indian Muslim guy was abusing Pakistani players like anything. Then suddenly some random stupid Indian Hindu guy starting saying bad about Islam n their relgion among the group in the stands( i guess he didnt know that there was a muslim indian in that stand)Man, I felt like breaking his jaw n told him to eff off. I can't even imagine what that Indian Muslim must have felt hearing that. P.s. that crazy Indian Muslim guy still kept on abusing the Pakistani players n fans throughout the match:--D loll we lolled all the way throughout the match cuz of his creative gallis:haha:

[ravishingravi]

I don't agree with this as we are not even 75% to a perfect society like Canada or Newzealand where everyone is treated equally irrespective of their religion. We do have a relative high hate-mongers among Indian Hindus who really need to differentiate between Indian Muslims and Pakistanis. My bloods boils to no limits when I see Indian Hindus start to insult Islam and their prophets during a Indo-Pak hate discussion. I mean wtf!! Indian Muslims are equally if not more patriotic than Indian Hindus then why do Indians insult fellow Indians relgion n beliefs. I remember back in 2008 when Pakistan, Srilanka n Zimbabwe played a series in Canada n I was in stands among this group of Indian fans where this crazy Indian Muslim guy was abusing Pakistani players like anything. Then suddenly some random stupid Indian Hindu guy starting saying bad about Islam n their relgion among the group in the stands( i guess he didnt know that there was a muslim indian in that stand)Man, I felt like breaking his jaw n told him to eff off. I can't even imagine what that Indian Muslim must have felt hearing that. P.s. that crazy Indian Muslim guy still kept on abusing the Pakistani players n fans throughout the match:--D loll we lolled all the way throughout the match cuz of his creative gallis:haha:

Cool story bro.

[Dumbbells]

If u think that the Sunny shia conflict is only in Pakistan and not in India, lol. This is what happened in U.P couple of months bacK: Shia, Sunni clash leaves 15 injured in Muzaffarnagar Muzaffarnagar: Atleast 15 persons were injured following clashes between Shias and Sunnis after a violent mob of Shias allegedly burnt down several shops and damaged property at Rithala village under Meerapur police station here this evening. According to police, trouble arose, when fire broke out in a religious place of the Shias and violent mob burnt 12 shops and looted property. Senior police officials rushed to the spot and brought the situation under control, police sources said. Meanwhile, tension continue to prevail in the area and extra police force was deployed control the situation. http://zeenews.india.com/news/states/shia-sunni-clash-leaves-15-injured-in-muzaffarnagar_591225.html

[Dumbbells]

Shia, Sunni clash in Lucknow leaves one dead, many injured Lucknow: A man was killed and more than a dozen people were injured in a clash between members of the Shia and Sunni sects here Wednesday night, police said. Several rounds of gunshots and arson was also reported from the old part of the Uttar Pradesh capital, they said. There was simmering tension between the two Muslim sects for the last one week and it spilled onto the streets Wednesday night, they said. The violence broke out near Deputy Saheb Ka Imambara in Wazirganj area after a religious congregation at a mosque was attacked, leading to several rounds of firing and stone pelting, a senior district police official told IANS. Police rushed to the spot and chased away the rioters. The dead man was identified as Shanu. He died due to gunshot wounds, police said. The injured have been admitted to various medical facilities. Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) Arun Kumar told IANS that the situation was brought under control immediately. "Barring a large crowd at the trauma centre, the situation elsewhere in the old city is peaceful and under control," he said. http://www.ummid.com/news/2013/January/17.01.2013/shia_sunni_clash_in_lucknow.htm

[Muloghonto]

Spirituality is all about a very empirical approach to seeking.

I would agree, with certain semantical reservations, but my point is, the validity of spirituality is not fundamentally dependent on empirical evidence, while in the case of religion, it is. Simply because, if you are going to shove dogma down my throat as 'this is what God commands', you better be prepared to prove it is from God and not dreamt up by someone.

Your second highlighted statement is again based on your ignorance. There is an on-going effort all across the world which believe in more innate religion which is within us not outside. It encompasses all the worldly religions but while digesting lot of religious scriptures, it rightfully, ignores things that do not make sense (again empirical approach). That innate religion is same within all of us whether we believe in it or not. So we are obviously not dependent on a book or books to practice it. You drive it yourself. Its verifiable and that the beauty.

That is not 'religion', that is psychology. What you are talking about, is the psychological inclinations of a species ( homo sapiens), which is a function, almost wholelly, of our senses and our brain's ability to interpret the sensory response and the tendencies to 'fill in the blanks'.

Its about you believe what you experience and not believe what Ã×e been told (per book). Simple as that. Its not true that only muslims trust in Prophet and christians believe in Jesus or hindus believe in Krishna. Actually the so called believers themselves do not know the real divinity of these personalities. And its okay that you donÃÕ believe in them either because as you said you have not experienced anything to prove their divinity.

The last part of your post nails it. No, i have never experienced any so-called divinity. Neither would i know, how to differentiate between 'experiencing divinity' and going schizophrenic. Until someone tells me how they can assess that they are having a divine experience and not scizophrenia, i would chalk up the 'divine experience' as a function of ego, where one refuses to consider the possibility of their experience, while appearing very real, can be fictitious product of a schizophrenic imnd.

[G_B_]

Its no wonder plenty of shia youths in kashmir are joining the indian army.... plenty of shia sunni conflicts in the middle east, Bahrain , Syria etc.

[G_B_]

and lets also keep in mind the hazara's in afghanistan were brutally killed by the sunni taliban as well in the 80s. this is much more than real estate or pak army wanting a slice of the pie. Its no surprise we are also looking as Hezbollah and Hamas fighting each other.

[nikred]

I don't agree with this as we are not even 75% to a perfect society like Canada or Newzealand where everyone is treated equally irrespective of their religion. We do have a relative high hate-mongers among Indian Hindus who really need to differentiate between Indian Muslims and Pakistanis. My bloods boils to no limits when I see Indian Hindus start to insult Islam and their prophets during a Indo-Pak hate discussion. I mean wtf!! Indian Muslims are equally if not more patriotic than Indian Hindus then why do Indians insult fellow Indians relgion n beliefs. I remember back in 2008 when Pakistan' date=' Srilanka n Zimbabwe played a series in Canada n I was in stands among this group of Indian fans where this crazy Indian Muslim guy was abusing Pakistani players like anything. Then suddenly some random stupid Indian Hindu guy starting saying bad about Islam n their relgion among the group in the stands( i guess he didnt know that there was a muslim indian in that stand)Man,[b'] I felt like breaking his jaw n told him to eff off. I can't even imagine what that Indian Muslim must have felt hearing that. P.s. that crazy Indian Muslim guy still kept on abusing the Pakistani players n fans throughout the match:--D loll we lolled all the way throughout the match cuz of his creative gallis:haha:

Man, your every other post talks about wanting to break someones jaw. :nervous:

[ravishingravi]

http://dawn.com/2013/03/04/hunting-down-shias-societys-deafening-silence/

[Swing_n_Speed]

How come no one talking bout the Bangladesh violence? Over 60 dead!