More Pashtun women should be involved in music and arts

[Badlun]

there were religions all over the world. they did not just originate in the east.

Yes I agree but I meant the twelve classical world religions Baha',Buddhism,Christianity,Confucianism,Hinduism, Islam,Jainism,Judaism,
Shinto,Sikhism,Taoism and Zoroastrianism. All these were originated in the East.

However there are mythologies like Mayas, Guarani etc which may also be called as religion which were originated in the West.

[faye]

so, all the other religions you classify as mythologies. isn't that elitist and supremacist, osho?
do you consider these 'others' too 'primitive' to have a 'religion'?

[Badlun]

I don't have any problem to call a mythology a religion or a religion a mythology. What I differentiated was Classical religions and others which are not popularly called religions. Following is the list of western religions/mythologies I got from


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tions#American

which can be called religion or mythology as you wish.

American

• Abenaki mythology
• Anishinaabe
• Aztec mythology
• Blackfoot mythology
• Cherokee mythology
• Chickasaw mythology
• Choctaw mythology
• Creek mythology
• Crow mythology
• Ghost Dance
• Guarani mythology
• Haida mythology
• Ho-Chunk mythology (aka: Winnebago)
• Hopi mythology
• Inca mythology
• Indian Shaker Church
• Inuit mythology
• Iroquois mythology
• Keetoowah Nighthawk Society
• Kuksu
• Kwakiutl mythology
• Lakota mythology
• Leni Lenape mythology
• Longhouse religion
• Mapuche mythology
• Maya mythology
• Midewiwin
• Miwok
• Native American Church
• Navajo mythology
• Nootka mythology
• Ohlone mythology
• Olmec mythology
• Pomo mythology
• Pawnee mythology
• Salish mythology
• Selk'nam religion
• Seneca mythology
• Southeastern Ceremonial Complex
• Sun Dance
• Tsimshian mythology
• Urarina
• Ute mythology
• Wyandot religion
• Zuni mythologyEuropean
• Asatru
• Estonian mythology
• Eskimo religion
• Finnish mythology and Finnish paganism
• Marla faith
• Odinism
• Hungarian folk religion
• Sami religion (including the Noaidi)
• Tadibya
• Wotanism

[Tjanaparh]

What is the problem with music and arts ? Why do You see it as bad?
Music can be as good as bad, it depends on the kind of it. What bad did You find in music?


By the way, "FRIEND", are you the EmKhan of one??? Really?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Osho, it seems that you're making a rhetorical argument rather than an evidential one. You're only making a statement about which you claim is fact, but it lacks any evidence in support of it.If Islam was merely a doctrine of personal morality or spiritual practices; Islam would not have a penal code. Having a penal code implies Law.

Also Muhammad(saw) and the Khulafa did in fact oversee political dealings, had administrators that regulated prices at the markets, and organized representatives who regulated over social affairs and politics. They even sent Governors to other places in the Islamic World to oversee the affairs of those region, in politics, society and economics. This implies a Government existed under auspice of a theocratic leadership, all of this is well documented in the historical record.Your central argument in respects to the historical record was that it was a forgery by later groups to serve their agendas on the account that it contradicts the Qur'an. However there is nothing in the Qur'an contradicts the idea of a theocracy nor is there any evidence that the historical record served any groups agendas. Furthermore there is a lack of evidence that forgeries which demonstrated theocratic practices actually occurred. This is a separate issue from other types of forgeries. However those forgeries are actually MORE secular in nature than theocratic.

In summary; Even if we suppose your statement is true that the Qur'an only deals with personal morality and spiritual practices; the evidence from History shows the Presence of Theocratic Institutions i.e. Shari'ah firmly in place from Muhammad(saw)'s time onwards So the existence of Shari'ah in Islam is real, the debate now is which interpretation of Shari'ah should we follow.

Tho those who thank Osho's posts, Pashtanajan, Bharati, Lewanay Zalmay and the like. if you agree with Osho's narrative; then how do you explain this overwhelming evidence which would have been impossible to forge from so ma many independent sources and records which prove the contrary? Osho, I'd be happy to hear your response; but please if you do respond, please do not merely repeat and recycle your narrative and claims and expect them to be taken as fact on face value. provide evidence in support of your argument.

[Tjanaparh]

so, all the other religions you classify as mythologies. isn't that elitist and supremacist, osho?
do you consider these 'others' too 'primitive' to have a 'religion'?

Religion is different from faith and for my people a negative word, I would pay attention with classifying something as religion and not faith!
Religion cn be translated like"faith replacement" if you like so, it root means to rebound, similarly to revolution it is a word bearing violence in it.

[faye]

how is it different? isn't religion about a belief or faith in a creator?

[Tjanaparh]

No religion is the replacement of the faith that connects people to the creator.

[Tjanaparh]

By the way Faye, I meant it generally, my posting is not related specifically to you!

[faye]

are you saying that all those who have faith in a religions beliefs, cannot connect with the creator?

[کیش]

No religion is the replacement of the faith that connects people to the creator.

And all faith leads to the lord of the universe.

[IamDZJ]

No religion is the replacement of the faith that connects people to the creator.

Dear arevapasht, religion is a faith and a faith which connects people to the creator is a religion.

[Badlun]

Osho, it seems that you're making a rhetorical argument rather than an evidential one. You're only making a statement about which you claim is fact, but it lacks any evidence in support of it.If Islam was merely a doctrine of personal morality or spiritual practices; Islam would not have a penal code. Having a penal code implies Law.

Also Muhammad(saw) and the Khulafa did in fact oversee political dealings, had administrators that regulated prices at the markets, and organized representatives who regulated over social affairs and politics. They even sent Governors to other places in the Islamic World to oversee the affairs of those region, in politics, society and economics. This implies a Government existed under auspice of a theocratic leadership, all of this is well documented in the historical record.Your central argument in respects to the historical record was that it was a forgery by later groups to serve their agendas on the account that it contradicts the Qur'an. However there is nothing in the Qur'an contradicts the idea of a theocracy nor is there any evidence that the historical record served any groups agendas. Furthermore there is a lack of evidence that forgeries which demonstrated theocratic practices actually occurred. This is a separate issue from other types of forgeries. However those forgeries are actually MORE secular in nature than theocratic.

In summary; Even if we suppose your statement is true that the Qur'an only deals with personal morality and spiritual practices; the evidence from History shows the Presence of Theocratic Institutions i.e. Shari'ah firmly in place from Muhammad(saw)'s time onwards So the existence of Shari'ah in Islam is real, the debate now is which interpretation of Shari'ah should we follow.

Tho those who thank Osho's posts, Pashtanajan, Bharati, Lewanay Zalmay and the like. if you agree with Osho's narrative; then how do you explain this overwhelming evidence which would have been impossible to forge from so ma many independent sources and records which prove the contrary? Osho, I'd be happy to hear your response; but please if you do respond, please do not merely repeat and recycle your narrative and claims and expect them to be taken as fact on face value. provide evidence in support of your argument.

First we must be clear that we are members of a discussion forums not members of a think tank or a research organization. We are not writing thesis papers or books or research papers. here if we can cite a book or refer to some evidence then it will definitely substantiate our argument but if I don't cite any source then it does not falsify my claim as in a discussion always you dont have time or facility to give the source.

Even in the above quoted post I don't find any evidence or reference. It is the a statemnet like mine refuting my stance with the same style.

When I will write a research paper then I will quote some sources but my position on Islam as a religion seems a revolutionary idea as I did not find many people thinking on the same lines. Through out the Muslims were deceived with the claim that Islam is a system which guides in all spheres of life but it was never practically shown in any period of time.

Prophet had double role as a prophet of the religion with revelation and an Arab leader as a common person. He has been quoted saying that Muslims must differentiate what he says as a prophet and as a person. You must know about the famous case of his evidence on the plantation of date palms and when the yield was not good he said that not to follow him in non religious matters. The same was the case of caliphs who were as Muslims by religion but rulers as Arab leaders.
Can you find any famous Imam who was part of the government. Imam Abu Hanifa was jailed. Imam Hunbal was killed. Shia Imams were killed or tortured. Through out religion and state had different paths.

I don't believe in any sharia. Can you prove the word Sharia was ever used in Quran or any authentic hadith in this sense.Sharia is just a tool of Mullas and Arab rulers to dominate the life of Muslims by mixing religion with society and politics. There is no Sharia in Islam. Islam is just a religion for your faith, worship and morality. The so called sharia was never promulgated and whenever tried was a complete failure.