What's new

Religions must be Chinese in orientation: official

Status
Not open for further replies.
Were not going to start eating dog and squinting our eyes to make you feel better.

You are even incapable of holding a decent conversation.

And you want us to copy this same high standard ideology of yours otherwise we will be brutally tortured by your God?

That's NOT a though choice. I will go by my own historical culture and ideology and accept the torture in the after-world of yours. After all, you will never have the material and ideological capability to hurt us in this world.

1. Chinese members don't know their own religious heritage and assume Islam is something that is new to China, not something that has existed in China for 1400 years. A lot of you guys seem to think Islam is ISIS/Al Queda and knife attacks.

I think we know very well and we get by well, mostly. What we would not tolerate is the even a slight hint at eroding the authority of the state over the religion which assumes universality and disregards nation state.

That kind of sentiment will hardly be tolerated by us.

2. Some Muslim members decided to try to convince Chinese people to abandon thousands of years of their identity and culture and consider someone elses as supreme, simply because they hold that opinion. This s not only foolish it is offensive too.

Definitely agree. I guess everybody should hold on their own belief/ideology and abandon metanarrative or false universality. No matter how much one claims his/her culture know no boundaries and is exportable, that is an offense for a nation that has survived as a state even longer than the first known organized Middle Eastern religion.

We are losing a PR battle because we don't have a PR team.

Who are the "we"? Pakistanis, or British Muslims or all Muslims regardless of nationality? I guess, if you really attempt a PR as an ideology claiming universality, that would be the worst of a PR in our eyes. Promote your nation, culture and local traditions and arts, that would be much more meaningful and acceptable.

I do not see China would even allow a slight hint of religious ideology surpassing state's authority and universality claims trample upon that very authority.
 
Last edited:
.
@Stuttgart001 @TaiShang

Would you guys be willing to participate in a more open conversation about this subject here - https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-thoughts-on-islam-and-muslims.524724/

You have both told me things that I did not previously know. I feel there is a greater benefit in learning from each other on this subject.

You made a mistake. Chinese people do know Islam has been in China for one thousand years. The ancient Chinese history books have recorded a lot of things what muslim people have done in ancient China.

Sorry to tell you. Many bad things happened again and again.
The normal scene was muslim people took the advantage of the crisis of China central government and tried to build a islamic regime by slaughering non-muslim people or converting them forcibly. But in the end, all the attempt s failed only caused huge harm to Chinese non-muslim people and Chinese muslim.
During 1860s, the rebellion caused by Hui muslims made a loss of 20 million population of Han people.

The last attempt (the three districts rebellion)happened in 1940s when China was in the civil war, during which the Ugyhur slaughtered nearly 300 thousands non-muslim people (mostly Han people ,also include Mongolian and Manchurian)in Xinjiang and claimed they were the only native people of Xinjiang and tried to build a state named east-Turkistan. Untill now, some ugyhur extremists bragged how bravely their grandfather butchered Han Chinese during such rebellion.

Trust me. Chinese people know Islam. How could not we know Islam ? Chinese have deal with muslim for more than a thousand years. There are so many Hui muslim living in inner area of China.

We Chinese respect Pakistan and do not want to trigger disputes. We hope Pakistan people respect our culture and stop imposing your religion on us.

I am unaware of this history. Do you think these rebellions were rooted in religion or politics?

I think we know very well and we get by well, mostly. What we would not tolerate is the even a slight hint at eroding the authority of the state over the religion which assumes universality and disregards nation state. That kind of sentiment will hardly be tolerated by us.

Islam is percieved in this way. The truth is Islam does not preach disregard for the state, but it does teach the supremity of God. Muslims who live in non Muslims states are bound to respect the laws of those lands and be loyal to that land, unless those laws compel them to do something that is against the religious values.

For example, Chinese people love pork, Islam forbids the consumption of pork. a Chinese Muslim should not eat pork personally, but has no religious authority to compel anyone else on the matter.

If the state were to impose an unjust law that everyone must eat pork than the Muslim has a duty upon himself to not obey that law. The Muslim can disobey that law by not eating pork, or by speaking out against the law, or even by holding the belief that the law is unjust. If there is no scope for the law to be changed the muslim is duty bound to migrate to somewhere else.

Having said all that, Islam provides flexibility on this matter. For example if the pork is the only source of food available then the Muslim is permitted to eat it if he or she is at risk of falling ill or dying. Also if by disobeying the law the Muslim is likely to be physically harmed, they can also eat the pork.

I don't think any of that is unreasonable - do you?

Definitely agree. I guess everybody should hold on their own belief/ideology and abandon metanarrative or false universality. No matter how much one claims his/her culture know no boundaries and is exportable, that is an offense for a nation that has survived as a state even longer than the first known organized Middle Eastern religion.

I agree with this sentiment. Islam teaches that the best example of Islam is the actions and behaviours of Muslims themselves. The focus for Muslims should be to set the best example of how to live life according to islamic principles by actually abiding by those examples ourselves, rather than trying to project them and their virtues upon others. If indeed we are successful than people will themselves become interested.

Who are the "we"? Pakistanis, or British Muslims or all Muslims regardless of nationality? I guess, if you really attempt a PR as an ideology claiming universality, that would be the worst of a PR in our eyes. Promote your nation, culture and local traditions and arts, that would be much more meaningful and acceptable.

All three. Muslims are not a monolithic block but we do have a pan-national sense of identity. Muslim communities have been maligned as such by the Western media when it has suited their agenda to paint their imperialist attacks on Muslims countries as a "clash of cultures".

Individually as countries and pan-nationally as a religion we have failed to counter the western narrative and expose what they portray as a clash of cultures for it's real face - a resource grab through brutal force by the Americans and their allies.

The problem is "pan-nationally" we don't have an organisation to represent us, that finished with the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924.
I do not see China would even allow a slight hint of religious ideology surpassing state's authority and universality claims trample upon that very authority.

What do you mean when you say universality?
 
.
All three. Muslims are not a monolithic block but we do have a pan-national sense of identity. Muslim communities have been maligned as such by the Western media when it has suited their agenda to paint their imperialist attacks on Muslims countries as a "clash of cultures".

Individually as countries and pan-nationally as a religion we have failed to counter the western narrative and expose what they portray as a clash of cultures for it's real face - a resource grab through brutal force by the Americans and their allies.

The problem is "pan-nationally" we don't have an organisation to represent us, that finished with the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924.

That's the core of the problem, my friend. I think there is enough number of cases to prove that the state of China does not take "Muslim" as an international category. It is not an international political, cultural, ethnic or social category.

A pan-Muslim identity per se is not a legitimate category. However, Indonesian or Malaysian Muslims, for example, are viewed as a national category.

For us, there are states/nations and their unique cultures. Pan-ideologies, especially corrosive ones such as religious ideologies in which unseen authority cannot be questioned (you can challenge socialism by questioning its creator, Marx, for example), is disregarded by the Chinese state.

One example is Myanmar. We do not see it as essentially a pan-religious problem, but, as a local/regional problem that concerns the citizens of Myanmar. Hence, universalist rhetoric surrounding the Myanmar issue as a Myanmar vs. the rest of the "Muslim nation" has been disregarded by China.

I do hope you will never have that supra-national institution to represent "all of you." That would be disastrous for "you all" in the very beginning.

What do you mean when you say universality?

Any argument that religious affinity may overlap or even surpass the state authority and national culture.
 
Last edited:
.
east-Turkistan
@Stuttgart001 @TaiShang
I am unaware of this history. Do you think these rebellions were rooted in religion or politics?
The aim of these rebellions were to building a islamic regime. People got butchered because of their belief.
You can tell what they were rooted in.

Islam is percieved in this way. The truth is Islam does not preach disregard for the state, but it does teach the supremity of God. Muslims who live in non Muslims states are bound to respect the laws of those lands and be loyal to that land, unless those laws compel them to do something that is against the religious values.

For example, Chinese people love pork, Islam forbids the consumption of pork. a Chinese Muslim should not eat pork personally, but has no religious authority to compel anyone else on the matter.

If the state were to impose an unjust law that everyone must eat pork than the Muslim has a duty upon himself to not obey that law. The Muslim can disobey that law by not eating pork, or by speaking out against the law, or even by holding the belief that the law is unjust. If there is no scope for the law to be changed the muslim is duty bound to migrate to somewhere else.

Having said all that, Islam provides flexibility on this matter. For example if the pork is the only source of food available then the Muslim is permitted to eat it if he or she is at risk of falling ill or dying. Also if by disobeying the law the Muslim is likely to be physically harmed, they can also eat the pork.

I don't think any of that is unreasonable - do you?
Chinese non-muslim people do not care about what others should eat or not eat except Chinese muslim.There are no rules about which food could be eaten in the whole history of China.
Only some Chinese muslim people always interfered with what their non-muslim neighbours should eat or not eat.
 
.
That's the core of the problem, my friend. I think there is enough number of cases to prove that the state of China does not take "Muslim" as an international category. It is not an international political, cultural, ethnic or social category.

A pan-Muslim identity per se is not a legitimate category. However, Indonesian or Malaysian Muslims, for example, are viewed as a national category.


I don't understand how it is a problem, perhaps we can revisit this.

I understand why China (nor any other state) does not recognise "Muslim" as an international political, cultural, ethnic or social category. It is impossible - firstly because it is a religion not any of those aforementioned categories and secondly because it doesn't have a governing body or central authority. Islam does not have a pope or any equivalent figure.

For us, there are states/nations and their unique cultures. Pan-ideologies, especially corrosive ones such as religious ideologies in which unseen authority cannot be questioned (you can challenge socialism by questioning its creator, Marx, for example), is disregarded by the Chinese state.

One example is Myanmar. We do not see it as essentially a pan-religious problem, but, as a local/regional problem that concerns the citizens of Myanmar. Hence, universalist rhetoric surrounding the Myanmar issue as a Myanmar vs. the rest of the "Muslim nation" has been disregarded by China.

1. Why do you think Islam is corrosive? or this is for all religions?
2. What part of it do you think cannot be questioned? Or rather which part of it would you like to question? There is a whole field of Islamic philosophy which is based around questioning Islamic prinicples.

I do hope you will never have that supra-national institution to represent "all of you." That would be disastrous for "you all" in the very beginning.

Actually we had one until 1924. At some stages it was a disaster, at others it was responsible for the peak of our civilisations. This was the caliphate. The Caliph was it's leader and though whoever he was never had all the support of all the people all the time, throughout history it's fair to say whoever the caliph was tended to have most of the support of most of the people most of the time. There were times where there were multiple individuals claiming the title, but overall the entity existed (often as an emporer, sometimes as a figurehead under the control of emporers).

Any argument that religious affinity may overlap or even surpass the state authority and national culture.

1. Participation in Islam is voluntary.
2. The degree of participation is voluntary.
3. Difference of opinion and implementation on most principles is tolerated within Islam.
4. Islam is only applicable to Muslims (ie voluntary participators in Islam)
5. In Muslim majority states the rule of law must be compatible with Islamic principles (under which islamic principles are only applicable to Muslims).
6. In states where Muslims are a minority they should abide by the laws of the state where those laws are not prohibitive to their chosen way of life. If this is not possible Muslims should leave the land as a last resort.

I suspect the only one you will issue with is point 6 surely?

I guess we see the world from different views. I think your view is secular and a world where the state is ultimately supreme.
 
.
....

I guess we see the world from different views. I think your view is secular and a world where the state is ultimately supreme.

I guess the truth, state is above religion, especially China. China is a free religion civilization, there are many religions live thru China history. Even a single Chinese can have multiple religions at the same time, while maintaining their tradition.

State must above any religions to maintain and protect the free religion policy.
 
.
The fact is, some muslims have been hating us for long time. Thousands of our people got killed by Jihadists already. What worst it could be? Hate us and hate us more. What's the difference?

Maybe if you treated them fairly, this wouldn't happen now would it genius?
 
. .
Are majority of Muslims killed by Muslims or by others? Do you happen to know the story that Muslim refugees raped and killed volunteer young girls who helped them? What's your reputation in the UK?
These problems wouldn't be happening on such a mass scale if non Muslims didn't stick their nose where it didn't belong and attack us.

The moment we gave up starting wars with our enemies, we became weak.
 
.
Maybe if you treated them fairly, this wouldn't happen now would it genius?
It's an impossible task to make Muslims feel fair in a non-muslim society. I never saw any muslim said they were fairly treated, not just in China, in every non-muslim country. If you ever saw that, tell me.
 
.
It's an impossible task to make Muslims feel fair in a non-muslim society. I never saw any muslim said they were fairly treated, not just in China, in every non-muslim country. If you ever saw that, tell me.
That's because almost everywhere, we're looked down upon. Hate crimes against Muslims are rampant, we are viewed the same way Jews used to be back in the day (perhaps even worse).

As Islam says, the kafir will not be pleased with us until we join his aqeedah.
 
.
I see why that when foreign teachers get hired by a Chinese school they have to sign a 3 NOs agreement for their teaching , No politics, No religions, No sex.
 
.
That's because almost everywhere, we're looked down upon. Hate crimes against Muslims are rampant, we are viewed the same way Jews used to be back in the day (perhaps even worse).

As Islam says, the kafir will not be pleased with us until we join his aqeedah.
Not true. Chinese don't judge people by their religion. Chinese culture is the most tolerant one to religion. Our culture had never been affected by monotheism. All Gods are okay with us. If you can not get along with Chinese, it must be you who have the problem.
 
Last edited:
.
That's because almost everywhere, we're looked down upon. Hate crimes against Muslims are rampant, we are viewed the same way Jews used to be back in the day (perhaps even worse).

As Islam says, the kafir will not be pleased with us until we join his aqeedah.

If everyone has a problem with you, then maybe it's time for some introspection.

As Islam says, the kafir will not be pleased with us until we join his aqeedah.

This is the root of the problem. If you inherently see all non-Muslims as "kafir" (infidels) then what hope is there for peaceful coexistence to begin with.

And why did you thank this racist post by the way?

Were not going to start eating dog and squinting our eyes to make you feel better.

With this kind of attitude towards others, what did you really expect in return?
 
.
If everyone has a problem with you, then maybe it's time for some introspection.



This is the root of the problem. If you inherently see all non-Muslims as "kafir" (infidels) then what hope is there for peaceful coexistence to begin with.

Why did you thank this racist post by the way?

I did some introspection, realised most of the time it wasn't our fault (unlike what I previously thought).

The word kafir means non Muslim. You are by definition a kafir. Just like I am by definition a Muslim, or a Salafi.

I thanked it because certain members started saying rude things about my faith. It's only fair to return the favour. We call this Qisas.

Not true. Chinese don't judge people by their religion. Chinese culture is the most tolerant one to religion. Our culture had never been affected monotheism. All Gods are okay with us. If you can not get along with Chinese, it must be you who have the problem.

Sure doesn't look that way in Xianjiang, where Quran's are confiscated and calling your child Muhammad is a no-no.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom