March 23, 2015
https://www.facebook.com/mehtarahulc/posts/10152674872981922
My second discovery in History is ----- not many fought in the name of God ; the fights were for REAL issues such as
.
(1) who decides which persons will become "judges" (judges = those decide facts, criminality and length of punishment)
.
(2) who will decide tenure of judges --- lifetime or fixed number of years?
.
(3) should interest on loan be permitted or banned !!! .
.
(4) Inheritance , family laws
.
And so forth,
.
IOW, people of different "religions" fought for these REAL issues --- not just for sake of God and beliefs about God.
.
===============
.
Since childhood, I wondered --- can so many men who otherwise so rational that they can make magnificent marvels in engineering , medicine etc be so irrational that they will fight only in the name of God ? ".
.
To me, it looked like "rational in morning and irrational in afternoon" , and ddidnt addup.
.
After many many readings, my conclusion is that fights between communities were for REAL physical material reasons which do effect day to day lives of all humans, I have mentioned some of the physical reasons above. There are many more.
.
A key question is "who decides who will decide guilt". Please note that this question is more important that "who will decide guilt" and also more important that "what is crime"? Because finally , what is crime and what is not crime is NOT decided by written law, because written law can alway be twisted like a piece of wax by the person who is "interpreting" and "applying the law on the case". And before law is applied, the fact has to be decided by humans, and the human who is deciding facts in effect decides the case.
.
So who will decide guilt is important. And even if society of million managed to find one saintly soul, the question is only 1% solved because that one lone saintly soul cant decide 1000s of cases coming every year. So that soul will APPOINT junior officers / judges / sabha / jurors etc
.
So the "appointment procedures to decide WHICH PERSONS will decide guilt" are important, because finally the punishment will be decided by thee men who decide the guilt/punishments ".
.
And there were real reasons as well such as --- should interest-bearing loans be allowed or not.
.
So here are key differences between religions etc. And these differences are real.
.
1. Mohammad created the tradition in Islam that "everyone must gather at one place aka mosque at least once a day aka on Friday". The "gathering of all" is powerful tool to make things public. And many disputes are decided in this gathering by Maulavi. But Maulavi cant decided the dispute in private. He must give ruling in gathering before all, which acts as a check on him. The judge i.e. Maulavi isnt inherited or self-appointed position. The maulvi is chosen by town elders who manage the mosque. And the elders do NOT have permanent tenure. A set of elders is replaced by another set of respected elders every few years.
.
2. Not so in Hindus. The different sects have different traditions. But except Sikhs and Arya Samaj, temples are almost private properties !! And there is no "gathering" i.e. everyone must gather at one place on one specific day in a week. And since ages , temples, except in Sikhs, reduced public work as well as giving rulings on disputes. The punishments are decided solely by Panch or "learned men" appointed by Kings, and Kings are hereditary !!! IOW, temples as well as administration are heriditary or "learned men" appointed by previous set of "learned men". And appointments are life time.
.
3. The priests in Catholics used to do many tasks which Maulvis do - such as deciding punishments , resolving disputes , keeping records of marriages / births / deaths etc . But the priests are appointed by priests' heirachy and NOT by town elders.
.
IOW, each "religion" has a court structure at local level which is incompatible with court structure of other. IOW, the fight want not just for beliefs but which court structure should be prevail.
.
Likewise, interest on loans was a real issue. Back then , gold was currency. And gold cant be created like today's money by fiat. So even 5% per YEAR interest on gold loans is sufficient to create extreme concentration of wealth and cause bankruptcy. And back then, bankruptcies meant slavery of borrower , sometimes slavery of family members of borrowers as well, and sometimes borrower's sons have to toil for generations to pay back the debt.
.
Here, different "religions" took different stand
.
1. Hinduism and Judaism have no rules against limit on interest rates.
.
2. Catholics / Muslims banned even 0,001% interest rate !!
.
So if a Jew or Hindu money lender becomes Muslims, he loses his income from interest. And if Hindu borrower becomes Muslim or Catholic, then he gets partial or whole relief from debt !! Whether interest on loans is good or bad is another topic. But what I want to show is that "its NOT just God, but something real" which playing role. .
.
Likewise, the fight between Protestants and Catholics had some real issue. In Protestants, the priest is appointed NOT by central hierachy but by church trustees, and church is community property and trustees are twon elders or community elders. And trustees arent life time and change every few years and there is no inheritance and life long appointment.
.
And in protestants in UK, Germany etc, the disputes were to be resolved by not by Priests by but Jurors or officers of kings. The priests confined to spiritual world only.
.
IOW, the clash was due to REAL reasons, not just their differences on interpretation of religions.
.
All in all, I have made a list of 10s of REAL issues , like appointment of judges, tenure of judges, powers of judges, interest on loans etc and NOT mere abstract issues like God , which became causes of serious clashes.
.
IOW , rational men fought WW1 for iron and coal, and fought WW2 for crude oil, iron and coal in that order, and not for religions. And men in past also fought wars for REAL RATIONAL factors like appointment / tenure of judges and interest on loans. Good or bad, world was never an irrational place.
.
https://www.facebook.com/mehtarahulc/posts/10152674872981922
My second discovery in History is ----- not many fought in the name of God ; the fights were for REAL issues such as
.
(1) who decides which persons will become "judges" (judges = those decide facts, criminality and length of punishment)
.
(2) who will decide tenure of judges --- lifetime or fixed number of years?
.
(3) should interest on loan be permitted or banned !!! .
.
(4) Inheritance , family laws
.
And so forth,
.
IOW, people of different "religions" fought for these REAL issues --- not just for sake of God and beliefs about God.
.
===============
.
Since childhood, I wondered --- can so many men who otherwise so rational that they can make magnificent marvels in engineering , medicine etc be so irrational that they will fight only in the name of God ? ".
.
To me, it looked like "rational in morning and irrational in afternoon" , and ddidnt addup.
.
After many many readings, my conclusion is that fights between communities were for REAL physical material reasons which do effect day to day lives of all humans, I have mentioned some of the physical reasons above. There are many more.
.
A key question is "who decides who will decide guilt". Please note that this question is more important that "who will decide guilt" and also more important that "what is crime"? Because finally , what is crime and what is not crime is NOT decided by written law, because written law can alway be twisted like a piece of wax by the person who is "interpreting" and "applying the law on the case". And before law is applied, the fact has to be decided by humans, and the human who is deciding facts in effect decides the case.
.
So who will decide guilt is important. And even if society of million managed to find one saintly soul, the question is only 1% solved because that one lone saintly soul cant decide 1000s of cases coming every year. So that soul will APPOINT junior officers / judges / sabha / jurors etc
.
So the "appointment procedures to decide WHICH PERSONS will decide guilt" are important, because finally the punishment will be decided by thee men who decide the guilt/punishments ".
.
And there were real reasons as well such as --- should interest-bearing loans be allowed or not.
.
So here are key differences between religions etc. And these differences are real.
.
1. Mohammad created the tradition in Islam that "everyone must gather at one place aka mosque at least once a day aka on Friday". The "gathering of all" is powerful tool to make things public. And many disputes are decided in this gathering by Maulavi. But Maulavi cant decided the dispute in private. He must give ruling in gathering before all, which acts as a check on him. The judge i.e. Maulavi isnt inherited or self-appointed position. The maulvi is chosen by town elders who manage the mosque. And the elders do NOT have permanent tenure. A set of elders is replaced by another set of respected elders every few years.
.
2. Not so in Hindus. The different sects have different traditions. But except Sikhs and Arya Samaj, temples are almost private properties !! And there is no "gathering" i.e. everyone must gather at one place on one specific day in a week. And since ages , temples, except in Sikhs, reduced public work as well as giving rulings on disputes. The punishments are decided solely by Panch or "learned men" appointed by Kings, and Kings are hereditary !!! IOW, temples as well as administration are heriditary or "learned men" appointed by previous set of "learned men". And appointments are life time.
.
3. The priests in Catholics used to do many tasks which Maulvis do - such as deciding punishments , resolving disputes , keeping records of marriages / births / deaths etc . But the priests are appointed by priests' heirachy and NOT by town elders.
.
IOW, each "religion" has a court structure at local level which is incompatible with court structure of other. IOW, the fight want not just for beliefs but which court structure should be prevail.
.
Likewise, interest on loans was a real issue. Back then , gold was currency. And gold cant be created like today's money by fiat. So even 5% per YEAR interest on gold loans is sufficient to create extreme concentration of wealth and cause bankruptcy. And back then, bankruptcies meant slavery of borrower , sometimes slavery of family members of borrowers as well, and sometimes borrower's sons have to toil for generations to pay back the debt.
.
Here, different "religions" took different stand
.
1. Hinduism and Judaism have no rules against limit on interest rates.
.
2. Catholics / Muslims banned even 0,001% interest rate !!
.
So if a Jew or Hindu money lender becomes Muslims, he loses his income from interest. And if Hindu borrower becomes Muslim or Catholic, then he gets partial or whole relief from debt !! Whether interest on loans is good or bad is another topic. But what I want to show is that "its NOT just God, but something real" which playing role. .
.
Likewise, the fight between Protestants and Catholics had some real issue. In Protestants, the priest is appointed NOT by central hierachy but by church trustees, and church is community property and trustees are twon elders or community elders. And trustees arent life time and change every few years and there is no inheritance and life long appointment.
.
And in protestants in UK, Germany etc, the disputes were to be resolved by not by Priests by but Jurors or officers of kings. The priests confined to spiritual world only.
.
IOW, the clash was due to REAL reasons, not just their differences on interpretation of religions.
.
All in all, I have made a list of 10s of REAL issues , like appointment of judges, tenure of judges, powers of judges, interest on loans etc and NOT mere abstract issues like God , which became causes of serious clashes.
.
IOW , rational men fought WW1 for iron and coal, and fought WW2 for crude oil, iron and coal in that order, and not for religions. And men in past also fought wars for REAL RATIONAL factors like appointment / tenure of judges and interest on loans. Good or bad, world was never an irrational place.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment