Our attitude concerning mockery of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon

Come on SAM - ZERO???

You don't find that a little ... ooo I don't know - STUPID? We both know that the Indians' and Greeks wrong extensively about Zero 1000s of years before Islam. Greeks spent volume debating the very concept of zero and Indian notion used zero as it is today (Greek astronomers put a dot in the middle)

Why don't I did up the citation for you? Because we had this same God Damn discussion 1 million times and I am tired of spending half the day digging up the citation to post it for you. If anything YOU should remember and YOU should be the one refuting tresbien and Arsalan. The question is: Why aren't you? Go back to the massive thread about art and sculpture and find it yourself. Christ I posted it for YOU three times now.

Why don't you post to tresbien the fact that zero was most certainly NOT "invented" by Muhammad bin Moosaa. I mean Jesus H Christ.

Michael

The Europeans would have ignored it from the Indians don't you know? Because they were such dirty little savages living in mud huts. They only accepted it through the Arabs because someone (probably an Arab or a Persian) took the trouble to translate it into a language they already knew.
"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."

The symbol changed over time as positional notation (for which zero was crucial), made its way to the Babylonian empire and from there to India, via the Greeks (in whose own culture zero made a late and only occasional appearance; the Romans had no trace of it at all). Arab merchants brought the zero they found in India to the West. After many adventures and much opposition, the symbol we use was accepted and the concept flourished, as zero took on much more than a positional meaning. Since then, it has played avital role in mathematizing the world.
http://www.sciam.com/math/article/id/what-is-the-origin-of-zer
 
Last edited:
Religion has that power. That's why it's so hard to fight. It's not about truth, it's about need. Humans have an instinctive need for faith in something supernatural, that will lessen their burden of being stewards of their world.

Humans also have an instinctive need to commit murder. It took us twelve thousand years of the agonizingly slow process of civilization to overcome that instinct. But we did it. In the Mesolithic Era sixty percent of adults were killed by murder. Today it's less than one percent, even with the wars that flare up sporadically.

We may have to wait another twelve thousand years to conquer our instinctive Stone Age need for religion. We'll just have to be patient. But it will happen. Civilization always triumphs, and civilization has no place for religion.

Civilization has no place for religion? You do realize that religion was one of the prime factors in making civilizations develop and flourish, don't you? Archaeological evidence shows that many early religions supported the practice of marriage, encouraged the stability of the family, laid down rules (or laws) for raising children and caring for the aged, and established the way the dead should be respected. In short, religions helped build civilization. Saying civilization is no place for religion is an ignorant analysis, and shows how oblivious you are to how religion helped progress people from the Neolithic age.
 
Nonsense, civilization came directly out of agriculture. The religion that came from civilizations adapted to this circumstance, not the other way around.
 
Nonsense, civilization came directly out of agriculture. The religion that came from civilizations adapted to this circumstance, not the other way around.

How many civilisations have come about without religion?
 
A book on the History of Zero.
Zero

My point is WHY don't you call tresbien and these others on this? Why SAM? Are you happy to let your silence perpetuate their ignorance? You know Zero was not "invented by Muhammad bin Moosaa".

Why don't you say something?


Secondly, many Greeks and Indian's got along great. After their wars, people from Greece settled in Indian and Indian's went and visited Greece. Many Greeks LOVED Indian philosophy. LOVED IT. Intellectuals were delighted by what they found in India. So take you're "dirty little savages" and shove it.

Michael
 
Civilization has no place for religion? You do realize that religion was one of the prime factors in making civilizations develop and flourish, don't you? Archaeological evidence shows that many early religions supported the practice of marriage, encouraged the stability of the family, laid down rules (or laws) for raising children and caring for the aged, and established the way the dead should be respected. In short, religions helped build civilization. Saying civilization is no place for religion is an ignorant analysis, and shows how oblivious you are to how religion helped progress people from the Neolithic age.
I agree with this.

I also think polytheism really helped a lot - it allowed people respect other people's beliefs.
 
A book on the History of Zero.
Zero

My point is WHY don't you call tresbien and these others on this? Why SAM? Are you happy to let your silence perpetuate their ignorance? You know Zero was not "invented by Muhammad bin Moosaa".

Why?

The zero as it is used by the west was "discovered" by the Arabs. The West did not get it from Babylon, where they currently have a military base, nor from India, which they colonised for centuries.

Nope, they got it from the Arabs.

Now since the Arabs themselves provided citations for everything they used (no matter how insignificant or evven from a translation) (even though western scholars skip this little step because they are not stealing, no, never), we don't have to worry about the ethics of the Arabs.

Secondly, many Greeks and Indian's got along great. After their wars, people from Greece settled in Indian and Indian's went and visited Greece. Many Greeks LOVED Indian philosophy. LOVED IT. Intellectuals were delighted by what they found in India. So take you're "dirty little savages" and shove it.

Michael

Yeah pretty much like the Arabs.

But I don't consider the Greeks as Europeans, they have a history and culture parallel to the East.

I'm talking about the Europeans who told us we were dirty little savages, though I use the term loosely.

Upon his arrival in 1810, the Governor-general Marquis of Hastings wrote:

"…the Hindoo appears a being merely limited to mere animal functions, and even in them indifferent...with no higher intellect than a dog..."

In 1790, Dr.Claudius Bucchanan, a missionary attached to the East India Company, arrived in Bengal. Not long after his arrival, the good doctor stated-
"Neither truth, nor honesty, honor, gratitude, nor charity, is to be found in the breast of a Hindoo."


"The whole history of this famous god (Krsna) is one of lust, robbery, deceit and murder…the history of the whole hierarchy of Hindooism is one of shameful iniquity, too vile to be described."-historian George Gogerly


"We cannot avoid recognizing in the people of Hindustan a race of men lamentably degenerate and base...governed by malevolent and licentious passions...and sunk in misery by their vices."-Charles Grant (1746-1823), Chairman of the East India Company



In his Education Minute, Macaulay wrote that he couldn’t find one Orientalist. "…who could deny that a single shelf of good European library is worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia…Are we to teach false history, false astronomy, false medicine because we find them in company with false religion? The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education…The superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable."

Pretty much the opinion you reflect of people from the ME.

You'd have made a great colonialist.
 
Last edited:
Nonsense, civilization came directly out of agriculture. The religion that came from civilizations adapted to this circumstance, not the other way around.

Agriculture does not constitute a "civilization". A civilization is an advanced society marked by the development and use of a written language, by advances in the arts and sciences, and by the development of laws governing human behaviour. Several factors contribute to the growth of civilization. Favorable geography, the growth of cities, the establishment of a government, and the practice of religion and morality all add to the progress of civilization. You may say, as of 2008 AD, that you don't need religion to make you a moral, law-abiding citizen. However, back in the Stone Age, religion and its concepts of morality became the cement to growing societies, and was practically the only reason people didn't constantly kill/steal from each other to benefit themselves.
 
Now compare those attitudes to that of the Muslims who visited India:

when Sultan Mahmood Ghaznawi conquered his homeland, he took al-Biruni along with him in his journeys to India several times and thus he had the opportunity to travel all over India during a period of 20 years. He learnt Hindu philosophy, mathematics, geography and religion from thre Pandits to whom he taught Greek and Arabic science and philosophy. He died in 1048 C.E. at the age of 75, after having spent 40 years in thus gathering knowledge and making his own original contributions to it.

He recorded observations of his travels through India in his well-known book Kitab al-Hind which gives a graphic account of the historical and social conditions of the sub-continent. At the end of this book he makes a mention of having translated two Sanskrit books into Arabic, one called Sakaya, which deals with the creation of things and their types, and the second, Patanjal dealing with what happens after the spirit leaves the body. His descriptions of India were so complete that even the Aein-i-Akbari written by Abu-al- Fadal during the reign of Akbar, 600 years later, owes a great deal to al-Biruni's book. He observed that the Indus valley must be considered as an ancient sea basin filled up with alluvials.

Though the information about this period is scanty, it appears that Biruni served as a major catalyst in the exchange of East-West knowledge and philosophies early in the eleventh century. Biruni went into greater depth in his study of Indian religion, philosophy and literature than anyone before or after him. As far as we know, Biruni was the first scholar to study the Puranas, vast collections of Indian stories about myths and gods. He was familiar with the Mahabharata, with its account of a great war, and the Bahagavad Gita finding it, as many others past and present, a guide to understanding the complex Indian religion.

Despite Biruni's unparalleled knowledge of Indian science, religion, and geography, his work in India had very little influence until the Persian historian Rashid-al-Din used it as a major reference in his book on the history of the world written in 1305. Not for over eight hundred years would another writer examine India with such thoroughness and understanding.

http://www.bookrags.com/research/foreign-exploration-and-description-scit-021/
 
The zero as it is used by the west was "discovered" by the Arabs.
The word was "invented" SAM. The quote had nothing to do with the West it was Mohammad blah blah invented zero.

Also note, Romans had the concept of zero and they used zero as a word
nihil or along as a symbol N in this sense: if a person does not have a bank account then this person's balance is nothing. If he/she does have a bank account, that person may very well have a balance of zero

Distinguishing this subtle difference is what INDIAN mathematicians invented.

Nope, they got it from the Arabs.
The Italian mathematician Fibonacci brought Indian numerals to Europe (including zero) from Arabic treaties expanding on the above discover made in Indian numerology. Yes I agree to this. This is NOT what tresbien was suggesting. He was suggesting that Arabs made the discovery. They didn't. That's a fact of History.

The question I wonder is why don't you call him on it?
Michael
 
The word was "invented" SAM. The quote had nothing to do with the West it was Mohammad blah blah invented zero.

Also note, Romans had the concept of zero and they used zero as a word
nihil or along as a symbol N in this sense: if a person does not have a bank account then this person's balance is nothing. If he/she does have a bank account, that person may very well have a balance of zero

Distinguishing this subtle difference is what INDIAN mathematicians invented.

The Italian mathematician Fibonacci brought Indian numerals to Europe (including zero) from Arabic treaties expanding on the above discover made in Indian numerology. Yes I agree to this. This is NOT what tresbien was suggesting. He was suggesting that Arabs made the discovery. They didn't. That's a fact of History.

The question I wonder is why don't you call him on it?
Michael

I don't need to. I'm sure you will be glad to "enlighten" him about his backward tribes and their mud huts.

I would hate to take away from your pleasure in belittling him.
 
Now compare those attitudes to that of the Muslims who visited India:
Talk about cherry picking. Jesus. Some English were very found of India and respected India and fought for Indians to be treated equally. Some Muslims thought their religion was "perfect" and fought and killed Indians as polytheistic heretics who had a lot of loot to steal. Some English wanted to exploit India and thought white skinned Xians were superior in all ways and some Muslims loved India and respected their culture.
 
Talk about cherry picking. Jesus. Some English were very found of India and respected India and fought for Indians to be treated equally. Some Muslims thought their religion was "perfect" and fought and killed Indians as polytheistic heretics who had a lot of loot to steal. Some English wanted to exploit India and thought white skinned Xians were superior in all ways and some Muslims loved India and respected their culture.

The most authoratative work on Indian history was written by a man who never put a foot in India. That mans work determined colonial foreign policy for decades. It created an umbrella term of Hinduism that diminished the breadth and depth of Indian philosophy, literature, science and mathematics to animals with the intellect of a dog.

I am familiar with the tools of demonisation. It has been a part of Indian culture for the last 200 years. The damage to our self perception and culture is incalculable.
 
I am familiar with the tools of demonisation.
No SAM tresbien made the claim that Arabs invented ZERO which is clearly false. They did not invent ZERO.

tresbien also makes the claim Arabic is the Perfect language, Muslim invented the theory of relativity, etc..

Which goes hand in hand with this fantasy crap that Islam magically caused the enlightenment. You know: Marble Sculpture, Opera, Ballet, Italian Painting, Calculus, etc... etc.... etc...

It's the same crap I hear from Chinese who try to take credit for all of the Japanese accomplishments. Those Japanese use Chinese writing, they were just backwards monkey's before "we" civilized them, blah blah blah...

Only with Islam it goes much much deeper. Because Islam is based on the "Perfect" book and so it MUST have somehow been the source of European inspiration. (Why the Muslims themselves never got inspired is simply a mystery - but God works in mysterious ways). And so to this day we have Muslims claiming Arabic is the perfect language and the Qur'an is the Perfect book and the only reason Westerns went to the moon is purely to do with Islam. Must be - because Islam is perfect.

You see, Europeans regained the ability to think this thought: The possibility existed that my religious beleif may be wrong. In other words - the ability to think. Only a few Muslims can do this and those one's are the ones who become the great thinkers. Sadly, the dogged ability with which Muslim pound their superstition into their heads makes such individuals few and far between.

Michael
 
No SAM tresbien made the claim that Arabs invented ZERO which is clearly false. They did not invent ZERO.
We're on the same team and you're basically right about everything except this. The Indians invented the positional decimal numbering system, but they did not have a way to express the concept of zero. The Arabs added that around the eighth or ninth century. That is what turned the positional decimal system into the powerful tool it is today. Fibonacci brought it to Europe before the Enlightenment, but it didn't really catch on except among mathematicians for several centuries.
 
Europeans appear like well dressed savages to me, carving up the world into profit zones, driving people to starvation while pimping for dictators so they can have an easy life.
European used to yes. How many times have I said that such actions were despicable? Many times SAM. Unlike some one here who still thinks the Muslim Crusades were sugar and spice and everything nice. Which common sense, or the present Iraq war, will tell you that is not the case.

I don't consider you to be enlightened. Very much like the Mills of yore, the self proclaimed expert who never walks in the footsteps of the people he prognosticates about. Who sees only what he wants to see, because really, nothing else could possibly be real.
That's your provocative. Anything could be real. I take the stance that since there is no evidence for Gods I lack a beleif in them. You do to. We both lack a beleif in many many Gods and Aliens and etc.. you just hold on to this last one for your security blankie. That's fine, some people hold onto Xenu. Same thing to me.

Yeah, I make no bones about it, an entire civilization pounding a superstitious beleif so deeply into their heads that they now lack the ability to even question the possibility that a beleif in Xenu and spending 5 times a day praying to Xenu may indeed be a complete and utter waste of time will indeed makes the potential of such a society creating truly great individuals few and far between.

What do you think SAM. Do you think spending all day worrying about what Xenu thinks about you and your theta levels and khan kahn levels and ingrain things is really going to promote enlightenment within society? Do you truly think such is the case?

Michael
 
Yeah second thoughts :rolleyes::eek:

I'm in a pissy mood and it makes me more catty than usual
 
Sam,

Take a break from responding to Michael. He loves capturing you in these circular arguments, wherein he asks you questions, ignores your answers, rants, and then asks you the same questions again (as if to torment you). He's a nice guy, but at times is aggravatingly unimaginative and repetitive. Actually, I'd say it's a good idea for anyone who values their time and sanity to avoid Michael in the religion forum at all costs.
 
Back
Top