PDA

View Full Version : "Islam is peace"


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


billybob
12-27-2004, 02:52 PM
“Islam is peace”

So said my friend from Ankara, Turkey when we had coffee after his last aikido class before moving to Miami. Upon hearing he was leaving I suggested we get a beer. Oops. He took it in stride.

The fast food place served no coffee, so over soda, he remarked that many people know of Islam because of only a few violent groups. I replied that many muslims know of christianity because of something we called ‘The Holy Crusades”; we both laughed.

My friend showed me a letter of recommendation that Sensei had given him for his next aikido school. I was impressed. He had done a sixth kyu test with better mental focus, poise, and if I may, military bearing than I had during my third kyu test. He said he would miss aikido because it helped him pursue his religion.

I asked him how this was. He replied that there is one god, his name is Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet. Above all else, God wants the devotion of humans and in return he gives them peace.

Islam is peace, he said.

When he trains in Aikido he shows and is shown respect. Islam is not about I, I, I, he said. It is about all, and in aikido we all grow together under the teacher’s guidance. When he prays five times a day, he clears his mind, that he may receive God’s word, and teachings. He clears His mind waiting for his partner to attack, and when the attack comes he acts ‘delicately, But decisively’. I probed to see if he meant something else, such as ‘assertively’, ‘boldly’, or ‘forcefully’. No, he said, Islam is peace, I act delicately, but decisively. I do Not destroy my partner, but neither am I harmed, it is a difficult thing to understand.

Yes it is. I’ll miss training with my friend from Ankara.

Peace.

billybob

KamiKaze_Evolution
12-29-2004, 04:34 AM
Great, that isn't Shi'ah denomination! Shi'ah is radicalism, i have no fear that your friend of Ankara isn't from Shi'ah denomination. Aikido is creation by Allah, the purpose is makes the earth peaceful and harmony.

Aikikai Hombu Dojo representative in Malaysia, Yamada Jun Shihan (aka Rashid Yamada), he also converts to islam. He shown that his true muslim spirit, he feel nothing incompatible with anything.

Bill Danosky
12-29-2004, 10:57 AM
I think Muslims get a bum rap from their extremists. The Christian right has a few people who are just as crazy as the worst Shiite (and Sunni!) radicals. True Islam is one of the most peaceful religions. IMHO, it must be their social order that twists it: It's like they've created a splinter "religion" of their own, where hatred is not only tolerated, but encouraged!

I could be completely wrong in my historical facts, but I'm under the impression that the Shiite/ Sunni division was originally over the shift of power when Mohammed died (ascended, or whatever the approved term is). I find it very strange that members of a 1,500 year-old religion can't get along with each other unless they are busy hating someone else (And often, not even then, as we see in Iraq).

So here comes my question- I've had nothing but positive experiences with the local muslim population in the U.S. It makes me wonder what makes the difference between here and the rest of the world? Why are they so filled with hatred? Is this mostly media hype, or is there any truth to it?

garry cantrell
12-29-2004, 02:07 PM
wow. what a topic. and i'm clearly not smart enough to refrain from putting in my two cents.

in no particular order:
1. we're tribal beings. evolution favors those who have big safety nets - and a strong tribal/familial/group system provides just that.
2. us vs. them is an extension of that tribal influence. if we're doing o.k. - then its o.k. for "them" to be doing o.k. - but if we're not, then its because of "them" - can't attack your own tribe/family/group after all, since that's your safety net.
3. if we are doing o.k. - its specifically because we're not letting "them" exert their evil influence and we have to keep it that way - or sometimes the easiest way to elevate yourself is to push down everyone else.
4. some folks are comforted by strict moral/religious systems with lots of rules so they don't have to make any decisions on their own - or because it insures that the staus quo remains the same - and its particularly troublesome when someone defies that system and brimstone doesn't rain down - and that gives rise to closed societies because those in charge don't want their power structure changed - which is what happens when the masses find out about the failure of brimstone to rain down.
5. mostly it comes down to this: we humans are just one bizarre species.

AsimHanif
01-04-2005, 10:25 AM
Bill,
you are right. There was a split after the Prophet Muhammad died over who was the rightful successor. But that IMHO is only part of the issue. To me the issue has always not been of faith (Islam) but of culture. Muslims are no different than Christians. There is good, bad, and ugly. The media portrays the bad and ugly as Muslim issues when it is really about cultural issues. Christians (and other denominations) commit attrocities but they are never identified by their denomination. So a lot of this is media hype. In the US when you have a Black man, in an orange jail suit, made to look menacing, on the nightly news or on a magazine cover, it incites emotions. The media is doing the same with Islam. They are bonding Islam, radicalism, terrorism, militancy, etc all together to incite emotions.
If these idiots were identified by their culture (geo/political/ethnic) instead of their faith, the tone of discussions would be entirely different. Probably less polarizing and sensational.
And yes, David...the teachings of Islam, Aikido, Yoga, Buddhism, etc are all basically the same when you strip them down to their essence. What they're covered in are the only differences.

siraj
01-06-2005, 03:40 PM
Alsalam alakom , that means peace be upon you in Arabic so when Muslims meet others they greet them and wish them peace so how do u expect from some one like that to be violent, Islam is peace but the problem is with people who use the religion for there own political agenda and they are not against nun Muslims but Muslims who don’t approve of there ways as will if u heard of what is happening in my own country Saudi Arabia - the Muslims holly land - they r killing Muslims as will and even if they where just after nun Muslims it still would be wrong and prohibited by Islam and Allah , Christian , Jew or a Muslim we all believe in one god there is no deference between you and me just because I pray to god in a deferent way , I was porn in Egypt and I lived there for a long time there you will see the real meaning of religious tolerance I remember in my neighborhood we had a church and a mosque in front of each other I remember going 2 pray and having 2 wait in front of the church for my friend 2 finish so that we can play together I remember his mum making us the most delicious chocolate cookies , but you see this violence of these groups is promoted to my young Muslim brothers because of what is happening in Palestine , Afghanistan and Iraq the American government ( not the American people) they are giving weapons to the Israelis helping them to keep equipping our land while they r killing my people in Iraq and Afghanistan and for what oil could u believe that I don’t blame Americans they are victimized in this as much as us I blame push he is doing all of that for his own wealth in Afghanistan when the war first started push said we are after usama bin ladin couple month after that he started building oil pips and guess who's company made the profit BUSH and dic chany's same thing in Iraq so my people and yours r dieing so that those asshole can get richer they are sending your fathers sons daughters to kill my family and dieing in the process its about time we but a stop to this madness I hate bush as mush as I hate usama bin ladin coz my people and yours are paying for there mistakes


By the way Aikido kick ass I love it I'm learning so mush yet I still know so little keep on the hard work u guys and god bless

kocakb
01-07-2005, 04:03 AM
Greatings to all,

I would like to introduce you Mevlana, may most of you have not heard about him. He lived about 800 years ago, born as I remember in year 1207...he is a philosopher of Islamic Sufism...He wrote a famous book - Mesnevi, 6 Volume, about 1500 pages as I remember...
The interesting side is, the ideas, the philosphy in some parts reminds O'Sensei's budo - art of peace, love...
Below I found the English Version of Mesnevi on internet

http://www.interactiva.org/Di/English/Rumi/Arts/Literature/Authors/R/

give you time, and I strongly recommend youto read them...it includes stories, and the philosophy is in the stories...

regards,

Bülent

gundisalwa
01-07-2005, 08:20 AM
Hello!

Although I'm not muslim (and so, you muslim guys forgive if I say something wrong), I think the true meaning / essence / spirit of the religion is well captured by Qawwali music, whose origins are related to Samah songs of Persia, more than 700 years ago.

I just know the great singer Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, and just discovered him too late to attend to a life performance, but even listening to a CD you can almost see the spirituality of the guy. I'm sure that if there are singers with divine inspiration, he is one of them.

That's why his name just came to mind when I saw "Islam is peace"!

By the way:
- nusrat.com for some info on NFAK
- www.pilotguides.com/destination_guide/asia/pakistan/qawwali.php for some qawwali info.

Enjoy!

Gonçalo

John Boswell
01-07-2005, 09:25 AM
I have a question for those that are true followers of Islam:

I've heard many westerners ask," If radical islamists are the terrorists in the world and are not true followers of their prophet, why do those who believe in peace and TRUE Islam not stand up and be more outspoken against those who are radical?"

And it's a good question.

Cat Stevens, Josef Islam (sp?), converted years ago and has come under scrutiny for whatever reason. He is a follower of Islam and has spoken out only when provoked. I think the world could benefit from more muslims standing up for their religion and denouncing those that give Islam a bad name. I know if people were going around blowing others up in the name of Christianity, it would only strengthen my own faith and belief and would get me more out there and more vocal against such actions.

Am I wrong or arrogant to think this way? I dunno. I think it is an insteresting subject and worthy of discussion.... but a discussion that does not turn hateful. (*hint hint* not trying to piss anyone off here or start a 'flame thread'! *hint hint*)

PS: Siraj, I just re-read your post and I understand your feelings toward President Bush. Many in the middle east believe that this war with Afganistan and Iraq is over oil. I respectufully disagree. I think many in the world would like us to believe that, but how can it be true... and yet the Saudi Royal Family are good friends with the Bush family and still allow the President to wage war?

Many accuse Bush and Cheney of making money for Halliburton, oil company, when it is my understanding that that company is the only one large enough to go in and make the repairs and get the production back up... in order for Iraq to make money and stand up independently again. Oil truly is their many source of income for ALL Iraqi's.

I don't want this thread to turn into an anti-war or anti-oil thing. I am asking about the relgious aspect and why followers of the Prophet do not do more against those that kill in His name?

Honest question and I submit it with all due respect.

AsimHanif
01-07-2005, 10:59 AM
John, that's a fair question but I submit that it is not a question of radical Islamists doing bad things. It's bad people doing bad things. When those retards blew up the building in OK, no one proclaimed them as radical Christians although from what I understand their actions were based on some religious/political/social agenda. Along the same lines, people blow up abortion clinics "in the name of God". Is that Christ like?
As a Muslim I know these bad guys are not acting on any Islamic principles so there is nothing to defend. No one waged war against the KKK because they were practicing bad Christianity. It was because they were killing people.
Maybe we should be doing more to combat the incorrect messages the media is sending out, though.
For the most part I believe Muslims and Christians do denounce knuckle heads when necessary, we just don't hear about it because the vast majority of media outlets decide who and when to give air time to.
Just my thoughts.

Bill Danosky
01-08-2005, 09:10 AM
I just don't understand how anyone can use religion as a justification to blow up innocent people. No part of that logic adds up for me.

It seems pretty transparent from this far away that attachment to power and money are causing all the problems in the middle east. It's such a familiar fraud to use religion to manipulate the masses I can't believe it's not more of a scandal than it is.

What keeps the people who are bombing, kidnapping and beheading from stopping and thinking, "Wait a minute, God wants me to go blow up myself and whoever is standing at this bus stop?"

Bill Danosky
01-08-2005, 09:23 AM
Bill,
you are right. There was a split after the Prophet Muhammad died over who was the rightful successor. But that IMHO is only part of the issue. To me the issue has always not been of faith (Islam) but of culture...
Asim,
I'd be intersted in hearing your opinion on what the rest of the issue was. I have heard that one side thought the sons of Muhammed should inherit control and the other side thought someone should be appointed or elected. That is why I thought the split was based on power and not issues of faith.

garry cantrell
01-08-2005, 05:46 PM
What keeps the people who are bombing, kidnapping and beheading from stopping and thinking, "Wait a minute, God wants me to go blow up myself and whoever is standing at this bus stop?"


um, er, bill, that whole thinking thing and religion don't always go together. belief systems aren't based on fact, or logic in particular, otherwise they'd be fact systems. and too many religions aren't even based on belief - rather control is the important point. think of historical and modern examples of execution for daring to question a particular tenent, much less adopt a variant view. :yuck: its often easier to choose a course of action and then find a religious maxim to justify same. slavery, rape, genocide, theft, murder. its all been done in the name of one religion or another.

hmmmmm, the above seems more inflammatory than i meant it to be. certainly lots of folks expend a great deal of time and evergy examining and exploring their belief system, and are rewarded with a stronger faith or belief (though certainly not always - sometimes just the opposite) and lots of other folks simply view their creed as yet another set of rules necessary for society to work.

i think i agree with the earlier post (and if i could figure out how to review same while i'm typing this i'd give credit where credit is due) - bad people doing bad things.

Neil Mick
01-09-2005, 01:33 AM
For those interested, this primer (http://www.alhewar.com/gary_leupp_challenging_ignorance_on_islam.htm) on Islam might help.

Bill Danosky
01-09-2005, 07:16 AM
I noticed how when people are running for union office, nobody says they're going to be the most moderate candidate ever. They say they're going to give management the Biggest Screwing Ever and immediately start getting radical.

This helped me understand how things like religion turn into terrorism when it comes down to playing the game of who gets the power.

Our country (the U.S.) was founded on some beautiful philosophical principals. And I bet that lasted about as long as the beginning of the first presidential campaign. Wow- we just found something in common with the Islamic extremists! :)

I see that Tibetan Buddhism teaches non-attachment to the material and I don't think I've ever heard of a corrupt Tibetan Buddhist.

AsimHanif
01-10-2005, 09:27 AM
Garry, I personally didn't take your remarks as inflammatory, but rather right on the mark.
Bill, I'll attempt to answer your question but let me first say I consider myself a non-denominational Muslim. Meaning I believe in the principles of the Islamic faith but not necessarily all of the practices associated with the Islamic religion.
The split was not about who should inherit control after Muhammad. There is not any dispute that Abu Bakr was the right hand of Muhammad and after the death of Muhammad Abu Bakr took control. The split came with the followers of the 3rd and 4th Caliphs (Uthman and Ali). And that was about power and politics not faith. The followers of Uthman were the Umayyads (Sunnis) and the folowers of Ali were the Shiites. Both of these Caliphs were assassinated and tensions to this day are in part based on that.
So Bill, that's why I said this split was based on culture NOT faith. By the time of the split, Islam was a powerful military machine with various sub tribes vying for control. Familial successorship was not an issue since Muhammad only had a surviving daughter.

Don_Modesto
01-10-2005, 10:37 AM
I noticed how when people are running for union office, nobody says they're going to be the most moderate candidate ever. They say they're going to give management the Biggest Screwing Ever and immediately start getting radical.

This helped me understand how things like religion turn into terrorism when it comes down to playing the game of who gets the power.

Our country (the U.S.) was founded on some beautiful philosophical principals. And I bet that lasted about as long as the beginning of the first presidential campaign. Wow- we just found something in common with the Islamic extremists! :)

I like the attempt to find similarities here (rather than the usual litany of differences and "clashes of civilizations").

I see that Tibetan Buddhism teaches non-attachment to the material and I don't think I've ever heard of a corrupt Tibetan Buddhist.

Read a snide reference to the Dalai Lama by Christopher Hitchens (of Mother Theresa-bashing fame). Did a search on Tibet and came up with this less-than-sanguine take on the "peace-loving" Tibetans, alas:

http://www.swans.com/library/art9/mparen01.html

Bill Danosky
01-11-2005, 09:58 AM
At first, I was very disturbed by the article about the human rights record of old Tibet and Buddhists in general. But it's really just the same truth retold about absolute power corrupting absolutely.

If you think about it, it actually contains both the evidence of, and the keys to our evolution as a species- Just as Yin and Yang co-exist, so do attachment/ non-attachment and corruption/ non materialism.

What I took from the article is that no one is beyond the seduction of power and wealth, and that "it" must be the force exactly opposite religion. This is why we have separation of church and state, and once more it's been proven that it's for the very best of reasons.

The one thing I disagreed with was that it's bad to romanticize the "paradise lost" that seemingly never existed. I think even imagining a wholly peaceful, spiritual society is productive to the creation of one, even in our own hearts and homelands.

Now Buddhists, Muslims and Christians have another thing in common. This is how we know when we're on the path of truth- we find more as we go! :)

John Boswell
01-11-2005, 10:39 AM
Neil,

Thanks for that link. I got a lot out of it. A bit one-sided... but other good information nonetheless.

Thanks!

Neil Mick
01-11-2005, 05:03 PM
Neil,

Thanks for that link. I got a lot out of it. A bit one-sided... but other good information nonetheless.

Thanks!

;)

Paul.H
01-11-2005, 09:21 PM
I've heard many westerners ask," If radical islamists are the terrorists in the world and are not true followers of their prophet, why do those who believe in peace and TRUE Islam not stand up and be more outspoken against those who are radical?"

Hi John good question,
Reading this I thought of something similar to the above. Here in Australia (also occured in USA I believe) in recent times we have had a very high number of child abuse cases in various (Christain) Churches. I have to say I didn't see many 'practicing' Christains standing up (in an organised way) and speak out against the church and their inaction/attempts to cover up or limit the damage at the expense of those abused. While the media reported this and everyone was of course against child abuse, not one 'group' of Christains/churchgoers organised into a group to speak out against this (that I heard of)!

I'm sure any half decent Christain would be against child abuse of any kind just as much as a half decent Muslim/Islamist would also be against this or the killing of persons under the guise of anything including Islam.
The answer for why this is so I cannot give you!! Just a thought.

Cheers from Australia
Paul

Bill Danosky
01-14-2005, 03:41 PM
I wonder if we should be calling the Arab militants "Islamish" or "Islamesque" instead of Islamist?

I don't like the idea of associating them with any real religious groups.

Dave Himrich
01-16-2005, 12:14 AM
I was taught that Islam is the Arabic word for "submission," as in submission to God. True?

It appears to me that the Wahabbists (or at the very least a powerful minority of them) are waging jihad with whomever they disagree. They are just as happy to murder Shia and Sufi as Christians and Jews. They also appear to be hell-bent on forming an existential threat to Western civilization, which concerns me personally. The enormity of what is going on is unfortunately bound to reflect poorly on their co-religionists. I'm striving to be fair-minded with regard to individual Muslims, but I also think we've passed the stage of treating this situation as all a big misunderstanding between well-meaning brethren.

Neil Mick
01-16-2005, 02:23 PM
They also appear to be hell-bent on forming an existential threat to Western civilization, which concerns me personally.

Considering the recent activities of the standard-bearer of the West, the US: I'd say that the "threat" is more than simply existential.

Neil Mick
01-17-2005, 06:35 PM
There is something I've been wondering about Islam, and I'd like to pose the question, here:

As I understand it: the sound of the Quran, rather than the text itself, is what is considered sacred. Is this true?

oudbruin
01-19-2005, 12:37 AM
Saddly, more murder has been commited in the name of god, or allah, or whateve religious diety is the flavor of the month than stalin, hitler and nero combined ever achieved.
religious fundamentalism is so often blurred with politics that the "true believer" often misses the message of peace and brotherhood, which is basic to all the worlds religions.
as for those assholes in irag who are beheading noncombattants- they are a disgrace to the sword community and to islam.

Johann Yaeger
01-28-2005, 12:27 AM
I have some muslim friends and they are of the opinion that Jews are "bad" ie Palestine. So therefore blowing up Jews and whoever else gets in the way is just fine. There will never be peace in the middle east or anywhere for that matter so long as Jews, Christians and Muslims live in close proximity to one another. What is peace and can man truly understand it let alone manufacture it.

We are constantly at war and occasionally there is an outbreak of peace!

Bill Danosky
02-01-2005, 10:06 AM
Even though I'm staunchly on the side of the Israelis, I'm for everybody having a homeland over there, IF it helps them coexist. Jordan should match Israel acre for acre any land they stake off for Palestine. They could use Jerusalem as the dividing point, with the land east of it, (extending an equal distance into Jordan) designated as the new Palestine.

I think everyone in the world can live in peace, given the proper perspective. That peace breaks out even occasionally proves it CAN happen. We just have to work on shortening the intervals in-between.

garry cantrell
02-01-2005, 11:35 AM
john,

i disagree - i think jews, muslims and christians should live in closer proximity. here's why: it is far too easy to hate a group, and a lot tougher to hate an individual. the staunchest racist may well have a friend or associate that he declines to include in the group he hates - offering something along the lines of "he's not like those other _____________(fill in the blank ethnic group)" as a rationale. the truth of the matter is not that the friend is different, rather he is perceived differently because there has been an opportunity to get to know the individual. individuals are brimming with great qualities, and once those are recognized, its a lot harder to hate the person.

Johann Yaeger
02-01-2005, 09:53 PM
[QUOTE=Garry Cantrell]john,

i disagree - i think jews, muslims and christians should live in closer proximity.
Should is a nice point to make but not a valid reason to disagree I believe. I was not saying that there should not be peace in the Middle East I was stating fact. These groups live together and work together, play, talk and hate together. Each other even. The chances of breaking into another culture whilst retaining one's own is hard, I have tried. Therefore ignorance and prejudice remain, unfortunate as it may be. It is fact and never the twain shall meet.

Bill Danosky
02-02-2005, 11:11 AM
[QUOTE=John Hunter The chances of breaking into another culture whilst retaining one's own is hard, I have tried. Therefore ignorance and prejudice remain, unfortunate as it may be. It is fact and never the twain shall meet.[/QUOTE]

That's an opinion. I will never believe that hatred is a permanent condition. As Wayne Dyer said, "No one knows enough to be a pessimist!" :)

Johann Yaeger
02-06-2005, 08:58 PM
Yeah good point Bill, have to concede that one.
I live in New Zealand and although some say we have the best race relations in the world there is still an undercurrent of prejudice and mistrust. Among the indigenous Maori and European. That is not an opinion! It is direct observation. But it is not true for all or even the majority so things are O.K.. We don't have reserves or segregation or the like so we all live together warts and all and we all get on for the most part.
Is this relevant? I hope so. :-]

Bill Danosky
02-07-2005, 03:54 PM
I live in a very mixed city, ethnically speaking. We have a very mixed group of students at out dojo, too. We all get along very well, so I reckon it must be a matter of circumstance when people don't. I think it's pretty cool living here because when we're hungry we can get any kind of regional food we want.

That's what got me thinking about what all the fighting in the rest of the world is about- For the majority of people in my town, the diversity is an enhancement to our lives. We don't even want everyone to be like us!

billybob
05-10-2006, 04:31 PM
I did not add to this thread as it was originally being discussed - partly out of not wanting to dilute the brotherhood I felt with my friend, and partly out of cowardice. 10May06 - still a hot topic.

During the coffee with my friend he told me he was particularly impressed with one of our fellow students - a young lady from Japan. He said, 'they are very submissive, and that is good for a wife to be submissive to her husband'. Big gulp of soda for me - wishing it was beer, maybe some whiskey too. Then he asked "David, is your wife submissive." I paused, smiled and replied "Hell no! She's Irish, and a hillbilly to boot. I cook, I help clean, and if I get out of line she tells me off - I'm an arrogant piece of work and this is the only kind of wife I can have if I'm to become a better person."

He laughed derisively. Oh hell no! Things started to get ugly. Then I remembered I wanted to put this nifty message on the aikiweb, and that I really do love my friend. So, I said some diplomatic stuff, agreed to disagree, or that maybe I would catch on to seeing things his way some time in the future. He is a much younger man, so I made allowances. Nobody's perfect.

I'm still glad I posted the message. If I am fortunate enough to meet this man again I will embrace him, and wish to hear everything about his life. He's my friend.

Best I can do on this topic for now.

david

Neil Mick
05-10-2006, 06:33 PM
Jordan should match Israel acre for acre any land they stake off for Palestine. They could use Jerusalem as the dividing point, with the land east of it, (extending an equal distance into Jordan) designated as the new Palestine.

OK, I know that this is an old post, but...

IMO, this is a flawed view, ignoring the events of 1948 and 1965. If the US decided to give back the land that they stole to the Indians: should Venezuala and other S. and C. American countries be required to follow suit?

No, IMO: the lands were stolen, under different circumstances; and that theft continues, today. It's the same, with Palestine, and the Apartheid wall, some of which is built on Palestinian lands.

We now return to your regularly scheduled forum-topic. :hypno:

Neil Mick
05-10-2006, 06:35 PM
Best I can do on this topic for now.

david

Actually, I thought you did pretty well. Kudos.