Talk:Hindu–Islamic relations

cleanup/sourcing/neutrality issues

"The Indian Hindutva movement sees the Muslims as a "foreign" people bringing in a "foreign" faith into India, while many Pakistani Muslims see the "polytheistic" and "idol-worshiping" Hindus as filthy and abhorrent. "

"Filthy and abhorrent." - someone might want to source this or change the language to something that doesn't resemble a personal blog on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.142.40.224 (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

article reads like a personal essay and is virtually unsourced in most areas. furthermore, there are multiple neutrality problems (i.e. "In Islam, Hinduism found a very different concept of god, truth, violence and civic society than it had encountered earlier.", "The zealous Arab invaders...", "The Jaziya tax was imposed on Hindus for the crime of practicing their religion." - and that's only a sample from the first paragraph.) ITAQALLAH 17:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disagreement with user Itaqallah

I agree that the article does not source well. But islamic and hindu viewpoints are very different. hence the conflict. and India there was jaziya applied to non muslims. 72.93.107.15 (talk) 04:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Islam vs. Hinduism

I think the main contention is for earlier muslims to define Hindus as either idolaters or monotheists... it cannot be denied that many temples were destroyed for baring 'idols' Under Islam, what rights would Hindus have? The main room for movement and cooperation I feel was done mainly due to Sufi influence, Akbar and Kabir helped to bridge the gap it wasn't all negative though both weren't exactly muslims...Domsta333 (talk) 10:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Islam & Hinduism

In South Asia, ie India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan, there have been changes in attitudes and synergistic processes taking place at an acclerating rate.

This may be partly due to the overwhelming desire for more democratic rights for women and the poor. Religion has played a part in both constructs especially in Islam where the poor are recognized and In Hinduism, women are given due respect. So, much of this synergy is as you suggest comes with the intervention of Sufism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.59.97 (talk) 23:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no comparison between hinduism and islamic empires of india.. Look at history and how many hindus have been killed during invasions. Islamic emperors destroyed thousands of temples, killed innocent people and slaughtered sacred cows for food. There is no similarity between hinduism and islamic empires . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.96.165.220 (talk) 07:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

South East Asia?

The article talks exclusively about South Asia, but what about the relationship between Islam and Hinduism in South East Asia? The article should mention the history there of the Hindus who converted to Islam and the Hindus who remained Hindu (the Balinese, Tenggerese, Osing, etc). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.121.31.238 (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"Has had a checkered history?"

WTF. Surely I'm not the only one who notices that that's vehemently inappropriate for an encyclopedia? It's like an essay was being written or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.159.148 (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Elaboration

Hello all, as of today April 10, 2010, I have elaborated the article greatly. Some clean-up is still necessary, as well as inclusion of citations, in which I request your help. Regards, Cygnus_hansa (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edits that Purva Mimansa is monotheistic

It seems that an anonymous user has misunderstood the Hindu philosophy of Purva Mimansa. It is a polytheistic (sometimes interpreted atheistic) philosophy, NOT monotheistic. The Rigvedic Purusha is not regarded as any Omniscient Omnipotent God in this philosophy. One can read any book on Hindu/Indian philosophy for that. I have hence reverted his/her edits to the previous text. Cygnus_hansa (talk) 12:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

The problem lies with terminology used , its misinterpretations , intentions preconcieved and prejudicial conceptions of the writer.GOD is not ALLAH ,ELOHIEM OR ELOYE etc etc These are semetic conceptions.of a PERSON who was MALOCH ,the king , above the law , his wish or whim are the laws .soveriegne ,the autocratic ,dictatorial, ME AND ME only no body else...God is indogermanic word GOTT never mentioned in TOHRA BIBLE or QURAN it is Indogermanic conception of the SUM OF THE FORCES which keep the Universe in MOTION.RE-Legions are opposite to LEGIONS who were the ruling powers in the middle east i.e Roman Legions.Hinduism is not a ISM it is knowledge based Philosophy.It should not be lumped with religions whose language is history .the language of hinduism is MATHEMETICAL REALITIES, it requires discussions, debates and open fearless delibrations ,it accepts and demnds the deletions or additions and correctios to its theses.the Religions cannot accept that.Hindu philosophy is not dogmatic, belief or faith based it is a KNowldge based GURU guided life serving set of teachings necessary for the survival, safety ,security and maintanece of the social structures needed for in this world.The Physincs LAW OF LAW-PRIORY means every thing pre exists, no creation no destruction Confirms the priciple of RE-INCARNATION or RE CYCLING.Hindu philosophy does not acknowledge LORD ALLAHA HELL hEAVEN OR SATAN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroonrooha (talk • contribs) 21:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Scriptures of Islam and Hinduism.

"The Qurān was not written down by Muhammad nor by his followers during his lifetime, but was preserved by oral tradition, like the Vedas. It was the third Khalifah (Caliph: the Sunni successor to Muhammad) Uthmān ibn Affān who had the Qurān compiled and written down as text. Like the Shrutis, the Qurān is considered as Divine Revelation."

The above description is not correct. In fact the Quran was written down from the day one during the life time of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him).Written Quran existed in different pieces. Some on paper, some on animal skin, some on stones etc. and it was in possession of different people in Madinah. Caliph Uthman ibn Affan had it arranged to copy all scattered pieces and compiled them in the shape of one book, which exists today in the same order.

Please make this important correction to the text in order to keep the reputation of your site as one of the best,upto date, and impartial one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.85.217.8 (talk) 06:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Scriptures of Islam and Hinduism.

Here is the extract from the article: "The Qurān was not written down by Muhammad nor by his followers during his lifetime, but was preserved by oral tradition, like the Vedas. It was the third Khalifah (Caliph: the Sunni successor to Muhammad) Uthmān ibn Affān who had the Qurān compiled and written down as text. Like the Shrutis, the Qurān is considered as Divine Revelation."

The above description is not correct. In fact the Quran was written down from the day one during the life time of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him).Written Quran existed in different pieces. Some on paper, some on animal skin, some on stones etc. and it was in possession of different people in Madinah. Caliph Uthman ibn Affan had it arranged to copy all scattered pieces and compiled them in the shape of one book, which exists today in the same order.

In fact what was presrved as an oral traditin was the sayigs of Prophet Muhammad(pece be on him), so that people may not mix the Quran and Sayings.

Please make this important correction to the text in order to keep the reputation of your site as one of the best,upto date, and impartial one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.85.217.8 (talk) 06:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Historical records show that Quran was written in many forms prior to Uthman's Quran. Uthman made changes in the original version and that irked followers and as a result he was slain in very cruel way. Pathare Prabhu (talk) 08:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Monotheism and polytheism

Monotheism of Islam and polytheism of pre-Islamic Arabs is different from that of Hindus. In Hindus polytheism covers monotheism in the sense that they have hierarchy of deities and Parameshwar (Allah) is considered as the ultimate power and other deities are working as its assistants in managing the Universe much like managing a Corporation. In this arrangement Parameshwar belongs to monotheistic position and other gods in the polytheistic position. Islam does not understand this corporate system Hindus have accepted while considering their gods. They do not recognizes lower powers and insist for only Parameshwar or Allah. In pre-Islamic Arab religion polytheism had many gods on equal position (similar to Greeks) and they were treated as partners owning the Universe. Mohammad was against this arrangement, had he had any idea of Hindu concept of Polytheism that includes monotheism I consider he would have accepted Hinduism. Pathare Prabhu (talk) 08:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

death penalty for leaving Islam, dawa

Shouldn't it be mentioned that apostates get punished by death in Islamic societies while on the other hand dawa (spreading Islam) is one of the highest goals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.121.17.150 (talk) 19:19, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Prophet destroyed idols

how can you people say BHAVISHYA PURANAS AND HINDU SCRIPTURES HAVE PREDICTED THE COMING OF MUHAMMAD,DONT YOU FOOLISH PEOPLE REALIZE HE DESTROYED IDOLS AND PREACHED AGAINAST THEM. why are you trying to create a faLSE UNITY BY FAlsely quoting from scriptures —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.247.79.150 (talk) 06:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

"God's immanence"?

Under the Theology and Concept of God section, there is reference to certain names serving "as a reminder of God's immanence." Immanence implies omnipresence, whereas orthodox Muslim theology holds that God is free from all things and separate from His creation. For reference, here is a hadith used in an article devoted to clarifying this issue:

   "I had a slave-girl who used to herd sheep for me. One day I discovered that a wolf had killed one of her sheep, and I'm a man from the children of Adam, I get upset like they get upset, and I slapped her in the face. Then I went to the Prophet who impressed upon me the seriousness of my act. I said, 'O Messenger of Allah, should I not set her free?' He said, 'Bring her to me.' He asked her, 'Where is Allah', She said, 'He is above the heavens.' He said, 'Who am I?' She said, 'You are the Messenger of Allah.' He said, 'Free her, for she is a believer.' (Muslim and Abu Dawud) 

I request that the word "immanence" and its implications be removed from the section on Muslim theology, as it is antithetical to orthodox Islam.

source: http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/whereallah.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainofindustry (talk • contribs) 22:25, 9 May 2011 (UTC)