Since we have been receiving a lot of emails on our purpose behind the analysis of Islam, we thought of compiling this FAQ that summarizes our stand on most of the questions that we are asked.
- Why do you hate Muslims?
- If you do not hate, then why do you write against Islam?
- Why do not you let them believe what they believe? Why do you need to hurt their sentiments?
- Why do you quote from anti-Islamic sites to present a biased view of Islam?
- Does Islam have nothing good? Why you only show the negative aspects?
- If you believe in freedom of personal belief, why you are against gays?
- You present views of one sect of Islam and claim to be applicable for all. Why?
- If Islam is so bad, why is not every Muslim a terrorist?
- If that be so, why do you ask Muslims to convert?
- Are you also not a fundamentalist, when you praise Vedic Dharma?
- Why do not you state your views politely? Why are you so harsh in your expressions?
- Why did you isolate Islam? Why not other religions also that may not be scientific as per you?
- What do you want to achieve from these articles?
Question: Why do you hate Muslims?
No, neither we hate Muslims nor any human being for that matter. That is against the Vedas. In fact, we love the Muslims of the world even though many Muslims may hate us because of our refusal to consider the modern Quran as the final word of God. For us, all human beings including Muslims are as lovable, as a child is to the mother.
Question: If you do not hate, then why do you write against Islam?
We do not write against Islam. We write against the mindset that believes that those who do not blindly follow certain books shall go to Hell forever. Further, we are against any book, person, or ideology that preaches inferior status for certain people based on their birth. Especially we believe in high respect for women and cannot tolerate anything that denigrates them or gives them an inferior status. Additionally, we believe in rationality, and consider it our duty to fight ignorance. Many things in modern Quran and Hadiths are against morality and logic. Many things are self-contradictory. To condemn the majority of people in the world to eternal Hell based on such a book is intolerance and we are resolved to stand against it.
We do not believe in violence, and hence, prefer to present our stand through our expression, which is our fundamental right. While we write against blind beliefs, we still regard their followers as our own family members. So our expression is to be taken in the same spirit as one takes differing views of different members of the same close family.
Question: Why do not you let them believe what they believe? Why do you need to hurt their sentiments?
Vedas say that we should love others in the same manner as a mother loves her child. Mother does not let her child do whatever it wants. If the child is committing a mistake, a mother will not remain ignorant and but will guide the child. Similarly, we do not want to hurt any sentiments. Instead, we want to bring facts and evidence to spur up a rational and unbiased thinking. But we do not want to push our ideology down the throat forcibly. We do not want to threaten anyone to believe in us. That is the way of criminals. We believe in the way of the scientists, wherein, we present our arguments and analysis and leave it on the people to believe or reject it. Only those people would feel hurt who believe blindly without reason. Those having faculty of reasoning will take our articles in the spirit of a scientist. This spirit of a scientist is what we want to inculcate.
Question: Why do you quote from anti-Islamic sites to present a biased view of Islam?
No, all our references are from Islamic sites and Islamic texts written by prominent authors of Islam. So if you have any objection to material on Satyagni, please discuss with Maulvis and ask them to issue a fatwa that the books and sites having references that we are quoting should remove them or face punishment.
Question: Does Islam have nothing good? Why you only show the negative aspects?
We never claimed that Islam has nothing good. There are a lot of good practices in Islam, and we respect that. For example, we respect the fact that Islam is against nudity and vulgarity. Though we rue the fact that no Imam ever issued a fatwa that all Muslims involved in glamor world like actors, actresses, item girls, etc. are anti-Islamic and shall go to Hell. While we receive many death threats, these glamor professionals receive hardly any death threat simply because they were born Muslims!
The only points we want to convey are that:
- Modern scriptures of Islam cannot be claimed to be the final word of Allah.
- To declare that all who do not believe in Muhammad, this Quran, Angels, Heaven and Hell alone can go to Heaven and rest shall burn in Hell forever.
- No religion can be above humanity.
- If any text denigrates women or differentiates between different sections of societies based on their personal beliefs, it is better to reject that text than to reject humanity.
Other than that, we acknowledge the qualities of Muhammad and Islam, as provided in our article – Muhammad – a genius misunderstood!
Question: If you believe in freedom of personal belief, why you are against gays?
We have provided evidence that homosexuality breeds life-taking diseases, is unnatural and that it is a mental and not a genetic characteristic. We thus are against acceptance of homosexuality in the interest of overall society. But we do not deny homosexuals their normal rights as citizens or human beings or believe that a Jaziya should be charged to give them security. It is just that we are against allowing people to make bombs or breed diseases for general public, even in privacy.
Question: You present views of one sect of Islam and claim to be applicable for all. Why?
We agree that Islam has so many sects with differing views, each claiming to be the only right path, that there is hardly anything common between them. Even the interpretations of Quran and Hadiths vary. Hence, we go by the majority or prominent view. Wherever required, we mention that it is the view of one particular sect. For example, Mutah or temporary marriage is allowed only in Shias.
Question: If Islam is so bad, why is not every Muslim a terrorist?
We agree with Zakir Naik that we should never judge a car by its driver. That is why even the statistics of growth of Muslim population is meaningless. Like Zakir, we believe that one should know a religion by its scriptures. Hence, we merely analyze the scriptures and those people who take these scriptures too seriously. Most Muslims are muslims merely by birth and no very little about scriptures except some rituals and traditions. Since the majority Muslims do not take scriptures seriously, most do not even keep a beard which is mandatory for Muslim, hardly do namaz five times a day, or know Arabic, they act as per their inner conscience, interact with non-Muslims and find them nice people and hence much more liberal and human. They are peaceful people, and most follow dominant Islam merely because of the threat of leaders. Most Muslim women follow Islam only because they have no other option, or because they know nothing about Islam and other thoughts on Women rights and hence have accepted it as their destiny that they are inferior to men. Thus, we believe that majority of Muslims are victims rather than perpetrators of fundamentalism and intolerance.
Question: If that be so, why do you ask Muslims to convert?
We ask them to convert because Muslim leaders and clergies have laid such a trap that it is difficult to distinguish a good Muslim from a terrorist. Innocent good Muslims are trapped because of the menace of their leaders. So it is better for them to embrace humanity or Vedic Dharma as their religion and live an honest doubt-free life. To give you an example of how it works, one can view the views of Darul-Uloom Deoband, the most influential school of Islam in Asia.
Visit http://www.darululoom-deoband.com/english/books/rightsinislam.htm to see rights in Islam. It differentiates between Rights of a Muslim and Rights of a Human Being. So rights of a Muslim are different from rights of a non-Muslim. All the concepts of friendliness and brotherhood are for Muslims alone. And among other rights, it lists: Overlook faults of a Muslim (not non-Muslim), conceal shortcomings of a Muslim (not non-Muslim), Accepte excuses of a Muslim (not non-Muslim), Remove difficulties of a Muslim (not non-Muslim), Fulfill promises of a Muslim (not non-Muslim), Do not speak ill of a Muslim (not non-Muslim)
Further, Surat Aal-Imran Ayat 28 states that Muslims should not make non-Muslims their friends and be cautious of them. Tafseer-e-Jalalayn explains further – If one has to make friendship with non-Muslims due to fear or convenience, one should have hatred and enmity with them in hearts. Allah will show his wrath if you make non-Muslims your friends.
Under such scenario, it becomes difficult to trust a Muslim who claims allegiance to modern Quran.
However, we do not emphasize unethical conversion or even ritualistic conversion. We simply demand conversion of minds towards open-mindedness and tolerance.
Question: Are you also not a fundamentalist, when you praise Vedic Dharma?
While we praise Vedic Dharma, we do so because it is the oldest wisdom of humanity and devoid of any discrimination among humans based on caste, gender, belief etc. It is rational and scientific and even noble prize winning scientists have been amazed at its wisdom. Nonetheless, we do not believe that those who refuse to believe in Vedas shall burn in Hell forever. Vedas state that only allegiance to seeking truth is required. Rest everything is part of process. So there is no discrimination based on whether one believes in Vedas or not. In fact blind belief is something against the Vedas. So in a Vedic society, everyone with differing beliefs and births can live and preach as equals, so far they are peaceful and tolerant.
Question: Why do not you state your views politely? Why are you so harsh in your expressions?
1. We differentiate between people and concepts. While we may be harsh on concepts, for people (Muslims) we have same love that we have for non-Muslims. In fact, a couple of Muslim women became our sisters. And unlike Islam, in vedas, there is no difference between an adopted or own relative. So while a mother/sister/daughter is Islam means nothing if its not a blood relation, a Vedic disciple can lay his life to maintain the dignity of a mother/sister/daughter even if there is not a remotest blood relation.
2. We have deliberately avoided even reference to several Ayats and hadiths that are extremely full of hatred or vulgarity. Because this is not a hate-Muslim site. It is a love-humanity site.
3. Had it not been a deep sense of love for our Muslim brothers and sisters, we would not have started this site to receive regular death threats and curses. But we ignore them because we are driven by love for our family than anything else.
Question: Why did you isolate Islam? Why not other religions also that may not be scientific as per you?
While we analyze all ideologies with the same level of objectivity without discrimination (check our other articles except on Islam), we had to focus more on Islam because it is the only religion that states that only it is true, and all other are false and hell-seekers. No other religion is as intolerant of non-believers. Next in series lies the Christianity as in the Bible. But because even Christians do not take Bible so seriously, and one can still live with security in a Christian country after condemning Bible, it is not as serious a problem. Islam is the only religion, where if you speak against its holy book or prophet, you shall be killed in a Muslim country. This intolerance concerns us, especially because it is extremely damaging for women and rational men.
Religions of East are much more tolerant because all believe in Theory of Karma and consider Tolerance to be the first characteristic of Dharma.
Question: What do you want to achieve from these articles?
We quote from Introduction of 14th Chapter of Light of Truth by Swami Dayanand Saraswati:
The object aimed at by this criticism is to contribute to the elevation of the human race and enable all men to sift truth from falsehood by giving them some idea of the teachings of various prevalent religions, as this will afford them opportunities for friendly discussions – so useful in helping men to point out their defects and to appreciate their merits.
It is not our purpose to falsely condemn this or any other religion. On the contrary, what we aim at is that whatever is true should be recognized as such and whatever is false should be condemned as such, so that no one should be in a position to palm off untruth for truth or hinder the progress of truth. One is, of course, free to accept the truth or for the matter of that even refuse to do so after it has been published; compulsion being impossible in such matters. Good men will, as a rule, after they have realized their merits and demerits, imbibe good qualities and reject bad ones and eradicate bigotry and prejudice and wherever found. Who does not know something of the prodigious amount of evil that has been wrought by bigotry? The truth is that it is unworthy of a human being to injure others and throw away his own chance of happiness in this uncertain and transient life.
In case the good reader comes across, in this criticism, anything contrary to facts, it is hoped he will point it out and we shall make the suggested changes if called for, since this criticism is designed to diminish bigotry, obstinacy, jealously, malice, hatred, and (love of ) useless wrangling and not to promote them.
It is our first and foremost duty to avoid injuring others and to further the well-being of each other. We lay this criticism on the Mohammedan religion before all lovers of truth in the hope that they, after having gone carefully through it, accept what appeals to their reason and common sense and discard what is repugnant to them.