Should Buddhas Blasted by the Taliban Be Rebuilt?

[EagleEyes]

Taliban cannot consider Afganisthan their home if they do not have respect for Afgan culture and heritage.

Taliban is on their way out anyway.

Taliban was the government of Afghanistan and the majority supported them in that action and probably STILL support them.

 

[Flintlock]

^^^Webby has a point.

Muslims do not permit idolatry, and an Idol in a Muslim ruled land is against their beliefs.

It is perfectly natural that they would try and rid Afghanistan of all vestiges of idol-worship and other un-Islamic practices.

 

[EagleEyes]

Dear WM,

Why do you feel that Taliban are the only people who have the right to like or dislike whatever they feel is right and destroy anything they dont like.

Regards

AN,

Its just an opinion that if some other religion is interfering with your religion in your own country than you can do whatever you want. However, i do believe that such thing is harsh and is uncalled for, but i am just going to state another opinion which necessarily may not be mine.

 

[Always Neutral]

AN,

Its just an opinion that if some other religion is interfering with your religion in your own country than you can do whatever you want. However, i do believe that such thing is harsh and is uncalled for, but i am just going to state another opinion which necessarily may not be mine.

The statues hardly served any religious purpose and were hundered years old more of historic value than religious value. So how did it interfere with the religion there ?

Hence the Taliban had no right to blow it up.

Regards

 

[Wounded Healer]

What the Taliban did to these statues is totally different from what our Prophet did in tha kabaah........plz do not relate these two actions, the circumstances were completely different.

furthermore, islam does not allow muslims to destroy the places of worship of other religions.......nor does it allow us to destroy statues that are reverred by people of other religions.

Idolatry is not permitted by islam, but that is for the Muslims, not the non-muslims........we muslims have been ordered not to interfere with other religions as long as they dont meddle in our affairs. There is an ayat in the Quran that says,

"to you be your religion, and to me be mine."

it would be better if we muslims remember this verse when we think about destroying artifacts and historical sites of other religions.

regards,

 

[Flintlock]

What the Taliban did to these statues is totally different from what our Prophet did in tha kabaah........plz do not relate these two actions, the circumstances were completely different.

Could you explain why the two circumstances were different?

As far as I can understand, they aren't.

Idolatry is not permitted by islam, but that is for the Muslims, not the non-muslims........we muslims have been ordered not to interfere with other religions as long as they dont meddle in our affairs. There is an ayat in the Quran that says,
"to you be your religion, and to me be mine."

Wouldn't the Prophet's actions at the Kabaah be interpreted as "interfering with other religions"?

 

[roadrunner]

The Buddhas were a good part of Afghanistan's history. But they're gone, and probably should be left. Taliban are also a part of Afghanistan's history, so the broken rock is all a part of the same history.

Best to look for the underground buddha. But wait till there's some stability, and Karzai is not in power (would probably sell bits of the rock for crack cocaine).

 

[Wounded Healer]

Could you explain why the two circumstances were different?

As far as I can understand, they aren't.



Wouldn't the Prophet's actions at the Kabaah be interpreted as "interfering with other religions"?

Gladly, my dear friend......

The circumstances were different because in the first instance i.e. the time our Prophet destroyed the idols in kaabah, the muslims had been subjected to great atrocities by the non-muslims.The muslims were very few in number and many of the followers of islam were harmed in a variety of ways, almost constantly. They were beaten, punished, and murdered just because they were muslims. So, when Makkah was conquered by the muslims, the House of Allah, which had been built by Ibrahim in His name, was "cleansed" by the Prophet.

It cannot be construed as interfering with other religions because it was the non-muslims who had placed their idols in the Kaabah in the first place. The non-muslims had been interfering in the teachings of islam, which gave the muslims the right to retaliate.

And let it be known that the Prophet forgave all the non-muslims, even those who had harmed him personally, after the conquest of Makkah.

As far as the second instance is concerned, the Taliban, and more importantly Islam, was not in any danger of being taken over by Buddhism, nor were any Buddhist interfering with islam, so, in my humble opinion, the Taliban had no right to destroy those statues.

regards,

 

[Energon]

Actually, the point raised by WebMaster is valid. The Taliban have always been intolerant of other religions; and they couldn't stand a Buddhist icon dominating their land; so they destroyed it. As I mentioned in my previous post, this incident is by no means a one off thing; destroying and/or defacing historical sites has actually been a very common feature throughout the region; in fact weren't similar statues felled in Swat recently?

Buddha was an insult to the Muslim population in Afghanistan (i.e. SAW breaking stone gods in Kabba).

That is a load of crap. The Buddha statues weren't active sites of religious worship. As far as the Muslim population of Afghanistan is concerned, they were nothing more than rock formations (albeit a lot more sophisticated than anything they've managed to build themselves). The act of destroying someone else's architecture or artifacts is nothing more than vandalism. What I'm trying to say is that this is not a matter of the statues being "insulting" to the Muslim sensibilities of the populace; but rather that the Muslim population in question being an intolerant narrow minded failed society (as indicated by their carrying capacity) who are driven to acts of vandalism.

Also, I'm not sure how many Muslims living in Afghanistan actually found these statues insulting; many may have really loved and appreciated them as cultural heritage and/or as great works of human accomplishment, just as many Egyptians do the historic structures and artifacts of the Pharaohs.

 

[Flintlock]

I found something rather interesting:

This is the seal of the Nawabs of Lucknow during the 18th-19th century. Note the mermaids in the picture as well as the British crown.
Also note the fact that the mermaids are depicted without clothes.

I can say with absolute certainty, that no Islamic theocracy in the 21st century will depict nude females on either its flag or seal.

 

[EagleEyes]

Guys i have no understanding of this really. Wounded Healer knows and now i have learned it. But what the Taliban opinion is.. i have given it.

 

[Awesome]

Taliban cannot consider Afganisthan their home if they do not have respect for Afgan culture and heritage.

Taliban is on their way out anyway.

What is Afghan culture and heritage again?

Taliban claims their pashtun culture is true. The hazara's theirs and the tajiks there.

They are all just as ruthless as the other. In fact the more ruthlessness they show, the more 'noble' and respectful they are in each others eyes. They pride their aggression. They proudly say "I'm an Afghani, I don't think, I just do!". They are the human version of the Klingons of Star Trek and no they won't find these comments of mine insulting.

I would agree, with the writer, the statues should remain as they are, as a reminder to Afghanis that their "aggression" will bring them down to pieces just the same. It should remain in pieces, for there are a few things that bring Afghanis to humility.

 

[Awesome]

I found something rather interesting:

This is the seal of the Nawabs of Lucknow during the 18th-19th century. Note the mermaids in the picture as well as the British crown.
Also note the fact that the mermaids are depicted without clothes.

I can say with absolute certainty, that no Islamic theocracy in the 21st century will depict nude females on either its flag or seal.

Since when are Nawabs theocracy?

 

[Flintlock]

Since when are Nawabs theocracy?

So what should we call them?

 

[Awesome]

Could you explain why the two circumstances were different?

As far as I can understand, they aren't.



Wouldn't the Prophet's actions at the Kabaah be interpreted as "interfering with other religions"?

1) The Ka'abah, was built by the Prophet Abraham and his son the Prophet Ismail
2) The idols were kept within the Ka'abah, when they shouldn't have been there
3) The idols were actively being worshipped, and in fact opposing views on God were subdued.
4) The destruction of the idols was a means of showing to the Makkans who though those idols actually had some powers. When they were broken many of them realized that their idol gods could not even save themselves and thus a handy lesson.

In any case the Bamiyan idols weren't really adversely affecting the Muslim population. In the same way the destroyed idols serve as a lesson of humility, the standing pieces of stones that the Afghans once worshipped would've served as lesson of reminder of their ignorant past (as far as Muslims are concerned).