Support NeoGAF

[samven582]

Nope. None in Houston, Texas.

Can someone clear something up for me? Are dogs REALLY considered that unclean or impure? People say you can't keep an animal for companionship (why?) but they allow you to keep cats? Why? Because the prophet did? That seems backwards and hypocritical?

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/377/dog

 

[Atrus]

The Quran doesn't claim perfection on how *humans* follow the word.

And those phrases always refer to self defense or conduct in war and then call for pacifism and tolerance in peacetime.

Now self defense is a concept that, necessary as it is, is ridiculously easy to abuse.

Quote from Hermann Goering: "Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

That the same holds true for the Islamic conception of self defense doesn't say anything about Islam. It says a whole lot about humans.

Yes I can. I refer you to "Who speaks for Islam."by John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed.

If the Quran is not responsible for how humans follow the word then what good is it? It's not like it was meant for animals to read. Surely a supreme being would have known how to effectively convey an idea such that it isn't used as a basis for murder and mayhem?

I was watching Obama being questioned on middle-east issues, and it was very obvious that he was thinking furiously and carefully picking the particular words he spoke. He realizes the long-reaching consequences each word can carry. Surely a superior being like God would or should be flawless? That is unless it intends for malicious interpretations to occur.

I will pick up the book, but my argument is not about the majority. In any religion the lunatics are a minority due to innate human nature, but my particular point is why the Islamic minority has a greater concensus and a united ideology. Islamic militants appear to be global rather than regional, and they have a particularly common set of ideologies despite different end goals.

Just recently we saw 4 black men not tied to any militant organization intent on killing Jews and attacking US planes. Let's say they were lunatics before they were Muslim, what is it about Islam that attracts vicious bloodthirsty murderers? Why does thinking "I hate Jews, I hate US guardsmen, I love killing" lead to "I'll join Islam, kill in its name and join the Jihad!".

If it's not the militantism in the religion that is the attractor, then why don't we see these same sort of lunatics turning to Hinduism, Buddhism, Druidism or whatever nonsense for their Jew/US guardmen killing fetish? There are certainly no armies launched against them, unlike the several in Pakistan, Afganistan, Iraq, Somalia and whoever is fighting 'the good fight' to quote Fallout 3.

While religions share common abuses, there are stratifications, and Islam is not guilty in equal measure. There's something particular to it that has made it more problematic in the current world than any other religion today and given the abuses of others, that should say a lot. I personally think it's the reinforced militarism.

 

[PistolGrip]

Oh God, that site.

Guys, check this out:

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/20798

:lol

This site...:lol

oh my that is truly horrible. Its amazing people are still following such barbaric ancient immoral teachings.

 

[epitome]

If the Quran is not responsible for how humans follow the word then what good is it? It's not like it was meant for animals to read. Surely a supreme being would have known how to effectively convey an idea such that it isn't used as a basis for murder and mayhem?

I was watching Obama being questioned on middle-east issues, and it was very obvious that he was thinking furiously and carefully picking the particular words he spoke. He realizes the long-reaching consequences each word can carry. Surely a superior being like God would or should be flawless? That is unless it intends for malicious interpretations to occur.

I will pick up the book, but my argument is not about the majority. In any religion the lunatics are a minority due to innate human nature, but my particular point is why the Islamic minority has a greater concensus and a united ideology. Islamic militants appear to be global rather than regional, and they have a particularly common set of ideologies despite different end goals.

Just recently we saw 4 black men not tied to any militant organization intent on killing Jews and attacking US planes. Let's say they were lunatics before they were Muslim, what is it about Islam that attracts vicious bloodthirsty murderers? Why does thinking "I hate Jews, I hate US guardsmen, I love killing" lead to "I'll join Islam, kill in its name and join the Jihad!".

If it's not the militantism in the religion that is the attractor, then why don't we see these same sort of lunatics turning to Hinduism, Buddhism, Druidism or whatever nonsense for their Jew/US guardmen killing fetish? There are certainly no armies launched against them, unlike the several in Pakistan, Afganistan, Iraq, Somalia and whoever is fighting 'the good fight' to quote Fallout 3.

While religions share common abuses, there are stratifications, and Islam is not guilty in equal measure. There's something particular to it that has made it more problematic in the current world than any other religion today and given the abuses of others, that should say a lot. I personally think it's the reinforced militarism.

I'd suggest reading a book The End of Faith by Sam Harris to me it explained alot of why Islam in general is alot more militant in these religious matters. But the book over all is about all religions and how they effect peoples view of the world and life in general.

 

[speculawyer]

Oh God, that site.

Guys, check this out:

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/20798

:lol

This site...:lol

That site is a gold mine . . .

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/127233

How do we smack children to make them pray?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Abu Dawood (459) and Ahmad (6650) narrated from ‘Amr ibn Shu’ayb from his father that his grandfather said: The Messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said: “Teach your children to pray when they are seven years old, and smack them if they do not pray when they are 10 years old, and separate them in their beds.” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Irwa’ (247).

Falseness of the theory of evolution
There are people who say that long ago man was a monkey and he evolved. Is this true? Is there any evidence?.

Praise be to Allaah.

This view is not correct, and the evidence for that is that Allaah has described in the Qur’aan the stages of the creation of Adam. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, the likeness of ‘Eesa (Jesus) before Allaah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: ‘Be!’ — and he was”

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/34508/evolution

 

[m3k]

there is alot of misinformation about... can somebody address the issue of multiple wives to me? i have muslim friends that i can ask but i dont think they approve of it and i dont really feel like having said discussion with them... not because theyre not open with me or islam or whatever its just im not bothered bringing it up

but its curious to me that i got into an argument with a muslim guy about it at work about it. He never answered my, or any others questions properly. He explained that its ok if you can support them, but then he started going on about it being ok because there are way more men than women, which is about the time i stopped arguing cause he said all my biology lessons in highschool were wrong and that i could go on the internet to find out about it, whereby it was made up to slander muslims with multiple wives, which is retarded. The guy is usually level headed and really open to answer my questions on religion or anything else but in this instance he wasnt.

Anyway is there a particular line in the quaran that talks about this? Or is this more of a specific cultural law. For reference he is indian with strong links to saudi arabia.

 

[Azih]

If the Quran is not responsible for how humans follow the word then what good is it?

Humans are responsible for how they behave not any book. Kind of the whole point of free will

Surely a supreme being would have known how to effectively convey an idea such that it isn't used as a basis for murder and mayhem?

Not the way humans are designed, no. Simply put if all of us were able to derive the same meaning from a text then we wouldn't be human, we'd be something else. What motivations any supreme being may have had in designing a species such as ourselves is not in my power to answer.

I will pick up the book, but my argument is not about the majority. In any religion the lunatics are a minority due to innate human nature, but my particular point is why the Islamic minority has a greater concensus and a united ideology.

Irani extremists are completely unlike Al-Qaeda types in ideology, as are Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic brotherhood, the Taliban, the Saddam type dictators, etc. Hell there are differences of opinion on policy and tactic within all of those groups. Even the lunatics in Islam aren't even close to being a monolithic bloc.

The only 'greater consensus' and/or 'united ideology' that ties these groups together is the extremely generic "We don't want foreigners messing around in our lands!" idea.


Wahhabi style extremism is the most global of these, how these guys came to power in Saudi Arabia has a pretty clear history and how it spread using the immense oil wealth in that region in the past few decades is also well documented. It's not some mysteriously inherent part of Islam.

You need to lump so many radically different areas with radically different issues together to create your ideas that it is rendered completely pointless. Afghanistan has been a violent unstable hell since before the days of Alexander the Great, and wow it still is and currently that instability is being spread to Pakistan. Iraq was born out of random lines drawn at the end of World War I that lumped three different peoples together, and I could go on and freaking on.

And the idea that is something uniquely anti semitic about Islam/Muslims is complete bullshit. How soon we forget that antisemitism was a very European Christian phenomenon for thousand of years until the second half of the twentieth freaking century where the land dispute between Jews and Arabs in the 'Holy' Land erupted.

Again the idea that is something uniquely anti semitic about Islam/Muslims is complete bullshit that requires completely ignoring everything before the nineteen freaking thirties.

 

[pizzaguysrevenge]

You're making a mistake that many un-educated in Islam make, which is confuse Hadith (which was often law of the land at the time) with actual Quranic verses. My guess is you pulled most of the above lines from some anti-Islamic site, since I am having difficulty confirming the translations and exact phrases.

In any case, on the example you mentioned about the killing of apostates (those who turn away Islam). Whilst that may have been, and in some Islamic countries still is the law, it is NOT what is written in the Quran itself. Law of the land exists to set about specific rules required for specific controls at whatever point in history. At the time Islam was expanding, a slightly sterner set of laws was required to ensure it's adequate growth.

When you are fighting a war to spread your religion, the last thing you want is to open the flood gates for possible problem areas. Allowing people to turn away from Islam in those days could have been extremely detrimental to Islams overall success. But it was something that was done at the time for the reasons discussed (not that I agree with them).

Again however, I have to highlight the fact that this is not what is written in the Qur'an. No where in the Qur'an does it say to kill or harm infidels, non-believers or apostates. Only that God disapproves of them. We (as individuals) however, are not given the task to deal the punishments, that is decided by the law of the land and by God himself on the day of judgement.

We are only allowed to have a Fatwa (an opinion) and nothing more.

Back to the Apostates thing. I'd just like to phrase this sentence from the Qur'an, that does indeed confirm that the killing of apostates is something that was linked to only law of the land and not ordained by the Qur'an itself.

"There is no compulsion in religion" 2:256

"Let him who will believe it and let him who will reject it" 18:29

"Those who believe then reject faith then believe (again) and (again) reject faith and go on in increasing unbelief, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them on the way." 4:137


Now tell me, why would the Quran suggest that one can denounce Islam multiple times? Simple, because the Quran itself does not permit the death of apostates (nor infidels), that again, is something that was set about by Hadith, which unfortunately is often confused with simple law of the land at the time.

And another point on infidels...

"Lo! Those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans - whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right - surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve." (2:62)

There is also another sentence in the Quran that says non-believers can enter paradise whilst a Muslim can still end up in Hell. I just don't have it off hand with me right now, I have a page cornered in my Quranic translation somewhere. I'm not saying the Quran looks fondly on non-believers, but how we deal with them is not expressed in the Quran. In-fact, murder of any kind is completely haram (disallowed). You certainly can't go around killing non-believers or apostates, and no where does it say you will be rewarded for that either. As I said before, Allah decides that on the day of judgement, not us laymen. I think you should try and get a new angle on Islam, since your current sources offer a very anti-Islamic exaggerated distortion of things. We shouldn't keep confusing the verses of the Quran itself, and boundaries of law (of the land) with Hadith.


.

This would be fine and dandy if the Koran didn't contradict itself all willy-nilly.

 

[PistolGrip]

Honest question

What do you guys think is the best way to get rid of Islam? Or any religion? How can I eliminate this cancer of society. I met a friend who was muslim and she was terribly beaten by her fiance for shaking hands with a guy friend. After that day I made it a mission of mine to rid the world of religion and I want to gather enough information here to really make a difference.

Seriously I know most of you are bright and know deep inside that we need to move away from this. I would love any advice or links to organizations that promote educating kids and especially women of the real world in these third world countries and away from dogmatism that is ruining society.

 

[ice cream]

Honest question

What do you guys think is the best way to get rid of Islam? Or any religion? How can I eliminate this cancer of society. I met a friend who was muslim and she was terribly beaten by her fiance for shaking hands with a guy friend. After that day I made it a mission of mine to rid the world of religion and I want to gather enough information here to really make a difference. .

Get rid of that man, not the religion.

And and to the other post, Islam has no problems with evolution, just that humans have a common ancestor with apes.

 

[Instigator]

there is alot of misinformation about... can somebody address the issue of multiple wives to me? i have muslim friends that i can ask but i dont think they approve of it and i dont really feel like having said discussion with them... not because theyre not open with me or islam or whatever its just im not bothered bringing it up

but its curious to me that i got into an argument with a muslim guy about it at work about it. He never answered my, or any others questions properly. He explained that its ok if you can support them, but then he started going on about it being ok because there are way more men than women, which is about the time i stopped arguing cause he said all my biology lessons in highschool were wrong and that i could go on the internet to find out about it, whereby it was made up to slander muslims with multiple wives, which is retarded. The guy is usually level headed and really open to answer my questions on religion or anything else but in this instance he wasnt.

Anyway is there a particular line in the quaran that talks about this? Or is this more of a specific cultural law. For reference he is indian with strong links to saudi arabia.

Since no one will touch this...

I can give you the general theological answer, not specific koranic verses or hadith quotes.

Essentially, it's a window of the times Islam was first formed. A bit like the slavery issue, it seems Islam wants to do away with it in theory, yet tolerates it in practice, probably not to alienate precious allies which the fledgling Muslim faith in early Arabia could use.

It's similar with polygamy. It seemed it was already widespread, but there is no call for a unilateral ban like for alcohol. Islam then sets a series of loose 'rules' like you must be able to support your wives financially or that you must treat them fairly.

In modern day, it seems like Muslims are split on this issue. Some countries outlaw polygamy, others allow it.

Since Mohammed, founder of Islam, was a polygamist himself, iit is usually hard to make Muslims outright denounce polygamy.

 

[ice cream]

Man, polygamy is allowed in Islam. End of.

 

[Ydahs]

It is allowed, but under certain circumstances. I think it is that you must be able to provide for all of them equally and treat them all equally. Treating or favouring one more than the other is prohibited.

 

[Darackutny]

i guess the Quran suffers from the same thing the Bible suffers from; not being clear enough and waaaay too open to interpretation.

I agree with Devil Trigger, the Qur'an is in need of an authoritative explanation. If one didn't exist then, as you mentioned, it would be way to open to interpretation. The problem with this is that it wouldn't be a religion. Every rule in the book could be bent and broken because every man would interpret any "problematic" verse according to their own intellect.

The Qur'an itself admits that it is in need of an explanation:

75:16-19
Move not thy tongue concerning the (Qur'an) to make haste therewith.
It is for Us to collect it and to promulgate it:
But when We have promulgated it, follow thou its recital (as promulgated):
Nay more, it is for Us to explain it (and make it clear):

Another verse I'd like to direct the attention of you folks is this one:

41:3
A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand;-

Well?! Has the Qur'an been explained in detail...?! Those that reject the hadith will have two responses:

1- It hasn't
2- It was explained by Mohammed but it wasn't protected

The problem with the first answer is that it is a direct contradiction of the Qur'an. By choosing #1, hadith rejectors are rejecting the Qur'an as well. The problem with #2 is that it implies that Mohammed failed in delivering his message. Of course, they'd rather shrug away from answering the question because they'd rather live in an Islam in which all the rules are bendable. An Islam in which hundreds if not thousands of interpretations attributed to the Prophet didn't exist, solely because it would be easier to get up in the morning and shout to the world, "I am a liberal Muslim! Accept me!"

Ironically, this exact mentality is one of many evidences that Mohammed was indeed a prophet from God.

لا ألفين أحدكم متكئا على أريكته ، يأتيه الأمر من أمري مما أمرت به ، أو نهيت عنه ، فيقول : لا أدري ! ما وجدنا في كتاب الله اتبعناه

Abu Dawud and Al-Tirmithi both recorded Abu Rafi's narration:

He said: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

"Let me not find one of you reclining on his couch when he hears something regarding me which I have commanded or forbidden and saying: 'We do not know. What we found in Allah's Book we have followed.'"

*sighs*

Ignorance.

 

[ZiZ]

No they aren't unclean or impure. This concept comes from the hadith. The Quran, on the other hand talks about the sleepers in the cave (sura 18) as having a dog, inside their dwelling place and allows meat killed by hunting dogs. Obviously if we can eat meat of animals killed by hunting dogs, we are allowed to have dogs! There is nothing in the Quran, which even remotely suggests that dogs are unclean as pets.

actually, about the sleepers in the cave.

I think the dog was near the entrance of the cave.

" وكلبهم باسط ذراعيه بالوصيد "

here the word waseed means doorway or threshold.

also from what I understand, there is no problem in having dogs as guard dogs or sheep dogs or seeing eye dogs... etc, but not as pets.

also if a dog happens to lick or drool in a plate, you have to wash that plate multiple times because their saliva is what's considered unclean.

 

[Darackutny]

^ I'd also like to add that Riz's argument about the dog is batil(incorrect) because Islam abrogated all previous sharai'i (religious rulings attributed to earlier religions). If we were to use this "measurement" on other verses, then we would have to believe that prostrating to man is permissible because the family of Joseph prostrated to him.

012.100
And he raised his parents high on the throne (of dignity), and they fell down in prostration, (all) before him. He said: "O my father! this is the fulfilment of my vision of old! Allah hath made it come true! He was indeed good to me when He took me out of prison and brought you (all here) out of the desert, (even) after Satan had sown enmity between me and my brothers. Verily my Lord understandeth best the mysteries of all that He planneth to do, for verily He is full of knowledge and wisdom.

*sighs*

Ignorance.

 

[Azih]

He explained that its ok if you can support them, but then he started going on about it being ok because there are way more men than women,

The reasoning there is that in a situation like war way more men die than women causing an issue where there are far fewer men than women and polygamy resolves that situation.

How open people are to it varies from culture to culture. In South Asia it is rare to the point of non-existence.

Darack, you're misrepresenting the argument. All Riz is saying is that nothing in the Quran *forbids* owning dogs even when the Quran mentions them, which is true.

Well?! Has the Qur'an been explained in detail...?! Those that reject the hadith will have two responses:

1- It hasn't
2- It was explained by Mohammed but it wasn't protected

Those aren't the only possible responses.

My response is that the verses in the Quran have been explained in great detail by the other verses in the Quran.

Hell the absurd standard that both you and Atrus are setting for the Quran (that it not be possible for it to be misinterpreted, him because God's work should be perfect and not be open to misinterpration, you through the additional 'detailed explanations' of the Hadith/Sunnah) has not been met even for people who follow the Hadith as most muslims follow the Hadith and Sunnah and all of them have different interpretations of what is allowed or what is not, of how to pray, how to give to charity etc. The Hadith have proved to be failures for the standard that you seem to be demanding of them. Your point is destroyed by your *own* point 2 as the undeniable fact is that your detailed explanations (Hadith/Sunnah) have plenty of variations and are themselves freaking open to plenty of different interpretations.

This is true today and hell it became true *the moment the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) died*. There were sharp disagreements about how to succeed him in leadership and three of the first four caliphs were assassinated with the fourth, Ali, being murdered by an assassin who had *theological disagreements* with Ali. If this was the state of affairs less than 30 years after the Prophet died when your detailed explanations (Hadith/Sunnah) were fresh in everyone's minds how the heck can you claim that it is possible for this not to be the case 1400 years later?

because it would be easier to get up in the morning and shout to the world, "I am a liberal Muslim! Accept me!"

Do *NOT* put words in other people's mouths or claim to know the motivation of other people. I personally do not give a damn if you, or anyone else accepts me or not. Good Lord.

 

[PistolGrip]

And and to the other post, Islam has no problems with evolution, just that humans have a common ancestor with apes.

The whole point of evolution is that all species derived from less modern species... Single Cell organisms are our earlier ancestors... So if we find that we actually evolved from lizards it would be ok for Islam? cause we probably did

 

[m3k]

Since no one will touch this...

I can give you the general theological answer, not specific koranic verses or hadith quotes.

Essentially, it's a window of the times Islam was first formed. A bit like the slavery issue, it seems Islam wants to do away with it in theory, yet tolerates it in practice, probably not to alienate precious allies which the fledgling Muslim faith in early Arabia could use.

It's similar with polygamy. It seemed it was already widespread, but there is no call for a unilateral ban like for alcohol. Islam then sets a series of loose 'rules' like you must be able to support your wives financially or that you must treat them fairly.

In modern day, it seems like Muslims are split on this issue. Some countries outlaw polygamy, others allow it.

Since Mohammed, founder of Islam, was a polygamist himself, iit is usually hard to make Muslims outright denounce polygamy.

thanks for answering, i thought it wouldnt have been something in the koran

 

[speculawyer]

And and to the other post, Islam has no problems with evolution, just that humans have a common ancestor with apes.

But that is the whole point of evolution!

Or are you saying they can believe evolution except man was created separately? That's a ridiculous absurd concept . . . but then again . . . well, if you believe the rest of it I guess that isn't any different.

 

[Zapages]

The thing about Evolution is sound and all but the whole thing is based upon Nature creating the set events that causes those mutations to occur that cause the eventual humans to form or any other species to become what is to change. What controls Nature everything, eventually this only leads to the answer of that Allah is controlling everything...

Another point to raise is that Allah transformed Humans that disobeyed Allah into Apes... This is the reason why we are Human and Ape's DNA are so similar.

 

[Darackutny]

My response is that the verses in the Quran have been explained in great detail by the other verses in the Quran.

Wrong interpretation since that goes against the implied meaning of 75:19.

ثم إنا علينا بيانه

This carefully chosen words indicated that the explanation exists outside the Qur'an.

Hell the absurd standard that both you and Atrus are setting for the Quran (that it not be possible for it to be misinterpreted, him because God's work should be perfect and not be open to misinterpration, you through the additional 'detailed explanations' of the Hadith/Sunnah) has not been met even for people who follow the Hadith as most muslims follow the Hadith and Sunnah and all of them have different interpretations of what is allowed or what is not, of how to pray, how to give to charity etc.

The disagreements that occur in hadith aren't in the foundations of the religion, but are there when it comes to the furu'u. Last time I checked, all those that follow the hadith agree on how to pray and the amount for basic zakat. Furthermore, disagreements in hadith, in most cases, are due simply because contradictions are found in weak hadiths. In any case, the foundations of monotheism, how to perform the prayer, alms, the pilgrammage, and hudood in general are a lot more clear than the Qur'an. Heck, once again, you folks don't even know how many raka's are in a prayer.

This is true today and hell it became true *the moment the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) died*. There were sharp disagreements about how to succeed him in leadership

Where did you get this information from? From Shia hadith? =/

 

[Instigator]

The thing about Evolution is sound and all but the whole thing is based upon Nature creating the set events that causes those mutations to occur that cause the eventual humans to form or any other species to become what is to change. What controls Nature everything, eventually this only leads to the answer of that Allah is controlling everything...

Nature seems to do well on its own. And it can be predictable.

Unless you mean Allah set everything up in the beginning and then let his creation be self-sufficient. That's a better idea, but unprovable.

Another point to raise is that Allah transformed Humans that disobeyed Allah into Apes... This is the reason why we are Human and Ape's DNA are so similar.

It doesn't explain why we have common DNA with other animals, the ability to mutate over time or the extensive fossil record.

I know it is a matter of faith for you guys, but once you try to reconcile myth and science with logic, this opens the debate up for everyone else.

 

[DSWii60]

I don't see why Islam is incompatible with evolution. I believe in both, in their entirety.

 

[TheHeretic]

Another point to raise is that Allah transformed Humans that disobeyed Allah into Apes... This is the reason why we are Human and Ape's DNA are so similar.

:lol :lol :lol

 

[Aurora]

Religious people denying evolution is just hubris on their part. They can't stomach the fact that we are just mammals and want to attribute all this grandeur to the human species.

 

[ice cream]

In the Qur'an it says God made Humans, but that doesn't mean Humans haven't evolved. Whatever humans were back then (neanderthals, etc etc) can have evolved.

 

[ZiZ]

this probably doesn't belong in this thread, but I'm not sure if it deserve it's own thread.

so I read this in a local paper

apparently Rabbi Manis Friedman in a response to the question, “How Should Jews Treat Their Arab Neighbors?” answered:

I don’t believe in western morality, i.e. don’t kill civilians or children, don’t destroy holy sites, don’t fight during holiday seasons, don’t bomb cemeteries, don’t shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral.

The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle).



http://www.momentmag.com/Exclusive/2009/2009-06/200906-Ask_Rabbis.html

did this really happen? and if, so has the western media picked up on this? if it was an American Muslim scholar, the media would've been all over him.

 

[ice cream]

this probably doesn't belong in this thread, but I'm not sure if it deserve it's own thread.

so I read this in a local paper

apparently Rabbi Manis Friedman in a response to the question, “How Should Jews Treat Their Arab Neighbors?” answered:


http://www.momentmag.com/Exclusive/2009/2009-06/200906-Ask_Rabbis.html

did this really happen? and if, so has the western media picked up on this? if it was an American Muslim scholar, the media would've been all over him.

Word, but everyone knows that western media is pretty biased against Islam.

 

[Instigator]

this probably doesn't belong in this thread, but I'm not sure if it deserve it's own thread.

so I read this in a local paper

apparently Rabbi Manis Friedman in a response to the question, “How Should Jews Treat Their Arab Neighbors?” answered:


http://www.momentmag.com/Exclusive/2009/2009-06/200906-Ask_Rabbis.html

did this really happen? and if, so has the western media picked up on this? if it was an American Muslim scholar, the media would've been all over him.

Assuming this is true and some Jews share the views of this particular rabbi then I hope they don't complain about the Romans. They fought the Jewish revolt the Jewish way.

 

[speculawyer]

The thing about Evolution is sound and all but the whole thing is based upon Nature creating the set events that causes those mutations to occur that cause the eventual humans to form or any other species to become what is to change. What controls Nature everything, eventually this only leads to the answer of that Allah is controlling everything...

Yeah, that is the theistic evolution theory. It is a much better rationalization than the creationists . . . but the point of evolution is that it is a completely natural process that requires no outside control. And it is the such a weird 'prankster god' theory . . . god made us . . . but he did it in way that makes it look like exactly as if we were created naturally. Oh you prankster, god!

Another point to raise is that Allah transformed Humans that disobeyed Allah into Apes... This is the reason why we are Human and Ape's DNA are so similar.

:lol

 

[kobashi100]

London UK, 21st July 2009 – Earlier today, Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia convened an unprecedented gathering of thousands of ulama, and ustadhs from all over the Muslim world, pledging their support for the re-establishment of the Islamic Khilafah state. Ulama from Indonesia, Malaysia, Lebanon, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Turkey, Palestine and Algeria were amongst those who attended the gathering of over 10,000 Muslims in Jakarta, Indonesia.

In the conference declaration signed by the ulama, it was stated that the only way to realize the pride of Islam and the Muslims, address their problems correctly and spread the blessing of Islam for the whole universe is through re-establishing the Khilafah.
They also pledged that, as inheritors of the Prophets, it is their duty to be at the forefront of the work for the Khilafah, guiding and directing the people so that the ideals of the struggle for Khilafah can be realized. The conference was also addressed by Sheikh Ata Abu Rashta, amir of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Prophet Muhammad (saw) said:

«اَلْعُلَمَاءُ وَرَثَةُ الأَنْبِيَاءِ»

“The ulamas are the inheritors of the prophets”
(Narrated by Abu Dawud and Tirmidzi from Abu Darda’)

 

[Maleficence]

The Muslim world is too fragmented for that to happen, the people in positions of power and authority have become corrupt and turned away from the true interpretation of Islam, these leaders influence the younger generation and the cycle continues. Frankly I don't see how Islam can come together in this state, it really needs to start fresh. People seem to ruin so much good, it's absurd.

I guess that's quite biased of me as an Ahmadi, but I don't see how that point could be argued very much, the Muslim world has been in a downward spiral for a long time and something drastic needs to happen for that to change.

 

[Azih]

They also pledged that, as inheritors of the Prophets, it is their duty to be at the forefront of the work for the Khilafah, guiding and directing the people so that the ideals of the struggle for Khilafah can be realized.

Convenient.

 

[Kinitari]

Holy shit :lol

I just went to see my mom, as she just got back from her trip to Dubai/Ethiopia and it was a nice visit, except for the fact that some of my moms friends were there, I haven't seen these women in what feels like years, and I remember why I tried to avoid them. When they saw me with my dreads they were all shocked and shit, they pretty much force their kids to near shave their heads. So they started making up shit about why I shouldn't have dreads (Girls don't like it, everyone will think you smoke drugs, one time I knew a guy who died because he had dreads etc) and I was pretty much shrugging it off, without too much arguing cause... why bother? Anyway, I am taking this abuse until finally one of them pipes up and says "You know... they say that when men wear their hair long, shey'tan (the devil) sits on his head". At this point I started busted up laughing, but I didn't want to let on that I am not a believer anymore so I just played along "Who says this?" and she replies "It's in the Qu'ran! Wa'Allahe! I don't remember the exact Sura and I don't have my Qu'ran on me, but next time I see you when your hair is short I'll show you. And we can laugh at the devil because he wont be able to be your friend anymore". This is almost verbatim.

Now my question is - I know she is a liar, but is she like... lying about this too? I mean I am not quite up to date with my scripture reading, but I can't imagine this woman being sacrilegious just to get my to cut my damn hair. If she isn't lying, holy shit that's ridiculous, if she is lying - I am pretty sure she's going to 'hell' for that.

 

[DemonSwordsman]

Holy shit :lol

I just went to see my mom, as she just got back from her trip to Dubai/Ethiopia and it was a nice visit, except for the fact that some of my moms friends were there, I haven't seen these women in what feels like years, and I remember why I tried to avoid them. When they saw me with my dreads they were all shocked and shit, they pretty much force their kids to near shave their heads. So they started making up shit about why I shouldn't have dreads (Girls don't like it, everyone will think you smoke drugs, one time I knew a guy who died because he had dreads etc) and I was pretty much shrugging it off, without too much arguing cause... why bother? Anyway, I am taking this abuse until finally one of them pipes up and says "You know... they say that when men wear their hair long, shey'tan (the devil) sits on his head". At this point I started busted up laughing, but I didn't want to let on that I am not a believer anymore so I just played along "Who says this?" and she replies "It's in the Qu'ran! Wa'Allahe! I don't remember the exact Sura and I don't have my Qu'ran on me, but next time I see you when your hair is short I'll show you. And we can laugh at the devil because he wont be able to be your friend anymore". This is almost verbatim.

Now my question is - I know she is a liar, but is she like... lying about this too? I mean I am not quite up to date with my scripture reading, but I can't imagine this woman being sacrilegious just to get my to cut my damn hair. If she isn't lying, holy shit that's ridiculous, if she is lying - I am pretty sure she's going to 'hell' for that.

Lot of old ladies make up shit to try and get kids to do stuff. Or to make a point. They are stupid.



Oh and i think you guys might find this interesting: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/07/06/ancient.bible.online/index.html

 

[noah111]

:lol :lol

Dude, people will use anything they can to propagate what they might believe, I experienced a lot of this back in the day as well, it's hilarious sometimes. Hate to say it but that's how people act, of all religions, if they disagree with something they will try to put their religion behind it, unfortunately.

Don't worry about it bro, but seriously you should probably cut off those dreads, you will regret it come judgment day.

Spoiler

LOL

 

[kobashi100]

Fox News coverage of the Khilafah conference in chicago last week.

Classic BS!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvPSoJ9Ou4c&feature=fvw

 

[Gomu Gomu]

Fox News coverage of the Khilafah conference in chicago last week.

Classic BS!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvPSoJ9Ou4c&feature=fvw

ugh. That's just...... There are no words.

 

[Darackutny]

Anyway, I am taking this abuse until finally one of them pipes up and says "You know... they say that when men wear their hair long, shey'tan (the devil) sits on his head". At this point I started busted up laughing, but I didn't want to let on that I am not a believer anymore so I just played along "Who says this?" and she replies "It's in the Qu'ran! Wa'Allahe! I don't remember the exact Sura and I don't have my Qu'ran on me, but next time I see you when your hair is short I'll show you. And we can laugh at the devil because he wont be able to be your friend anymore". This is almost verbatim.

...

Now my question is - I know she is a liar, but is she like... lying about this too? I mean I am not quite up to date with my scripture reading, but I can't imagine this woman being sacrilegious just to get my to cut my damn hair. If she isn't lying, holy shit that's ridiculous, if she is lying - I am pretty sure she's going to 'hell' for that.

Not everything one says that is false needs to be considered a lie. I'm assuming she saw some wacko on TV that said something like that, forgot where she saw it, and confused it with something she read in the Qur'an... but yeah, she could be lying.

Here is something you might find interesting:

It was narrated that Umm Haani’ said: The Messenger of Allaah (pbuh) came to Makkah and he had four braids. (Al-Tirmidhi, 1781; Abu Dawood, 4191; Ibn Maajah, 3631).

'Tis an authentic narration btw.

I do need to mention that his hair was only shoulder length, so you probably would have a hard time with people if your hair was much longer than that.

 

[i_am_ben]

anyway I've a question for islamic-gaf. In Australia they recently arrested some people for allegedly planing to carry out a suicide bombing of an army barracks. Anyway, when they were in court some have refused to stand for the Judge on religious grounds. I was wondering if there is an actual religious reason or if the men are just religious crazies?


either way the Judge was less than impressed.



edit: it's technically a Magistrate and not a Judge but in reality there is very little difference.

 

[activatethesmile]

anyway I've a question for islamic-gaf. In Australia they recently arrested some people for allegedly planing to carry out a suicide bombing of an army barracks. Anyway, when they were in court some have refused to stand for the Judge on religious grounds. I was wondering if there is an actual religious reason or if the men are just religious crazies?


either way the Judge was less than impressed.

No, no, as far as I know there is just simply no reason to refuse like that. Although, if you can, can you provide an information of what exactly this "religious grounds" is?

Nevertheless, it seems to me that they simply hiding behind "religious walls" so to speak to avoid any potential punishment that may come their way due to their actions.

 

[i_am_ben]

No, no, as far as I know there is just simply no reason to refuse like that. Although, if you can, can you provide an information of what exactly this "religious grounds" is?

Nevertheless, it seems to me that they simply hiding behind "religious walls" so to speak to avoid any potential punishment that may come their way due to their actions.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25884118-2862,00.html

Suspect Nayef El Sayed refuses to stand in courtArticle from: Font size: Decrease Increase Email article: Email Print article: Print John Hamilton

August 05, 2009 12:00am
NAYEF El Sayed sat bearded, big and burly behind the thick glass screen of the dock in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court and pleaded through his lawyer that he had a headache.

He wanted to see a nurse, he said through his lawyer.

Then he refused to stand up when Magistrate Peter Reardon asked him to.

Arms folded and flanked by two guards, the accused just sat and muttered something incomprehensible.

"Any reason why your client can't stand? You might ask him," the magistrate suggested to lawyer Anthony Brand.

Mr Brand had a short conversation through an intercom.

"He declines to stand on religious grounds. He believes he should not stand for any man except God," the lawyer said.
"Oh, a new branch . . ." said the magistrate, sitting under the coat of arms of the State of Victoria. "Well we won't want to carry him out."

And so Mr El Sayed then stood and walked from the court, one of five men named in a charge sheet of having "conspired with each other and unknown persons to do acts in preparation for a terrorist act, namely an armed attack on the Australian Army base at Holsworthy in New South Wales".

Mr El Sayed was the only person to have been charged by late afternoon.

But three other suspects made brief appearances in the tightly closed courtroom as federal police sought more time to question them.

First up was Saney Edow Aweys, a slight bearded man who rubbed his face often and held his hands as if in prayer.

The court was told he had been questioned for one hour and 45 minutes after being arrested at 4.45am.

Mr Aweys pleaded to the magistrate that he needed a rest. "I have been up for 35 hours," he said.

"Was up for 24 hours already when they got me. They put me in a small room . . . lights . . . federal police surrounded me. I want a rest."

Mr Aweys said he was a boilermaker who worked around the clock in Sunshine.

He said he had no connection to a man mentioned in evidence by one of the federal policemen as having carried out surveillance of the Holsworthy army base in Sydney.

The magistrate granted Mr Aweys his wish for a rest, ruling that questioning could resume at 6pm and that the respondent should reappear before him today at 11am.

"Acts of terrorism such as Mumbai, Madrid and London strike at the heart of our democratic society and in my view investigating officers should be able to investigate fully such allegations," the magistrate said.

After Mr El Sayed made his appearance and complained of a headache, it was Yacqub Khayre's turn to face the court.

Of African appearance and wearing a brown jacket, he listened impassively as federal agent Brendan Castles told the court Mr Khayre left Australia between April 11 and July 14 this year for Somalia where he attended a frontline camp where weapons and military training might have occurred.

The magistrate ruled that, like the other men, he could be questioned eight hours more.

Then Abdirahman Ahmed was led into the dock. Another tall man of African descent, he was wearing a black turtle-neck sweater and handcuffs.

Federal officer Nipanjan Jirasinha told how Mr Ahmed was apprehended at 4.39am and questioned for three hours and 15 minutes, but that another eight hours were needed.

"We believe that Ahmed was seeking a fatwah and a fatwah would have assisted the group," the agent said.

The fatwah was being sought from a sheik who lived elsewhere, in a country overseas, "out of this state".

And so the magistrate adjourned the cases involving alleged international terrorism until today as rain began to fall softly outside the guarded court in William St, Melbourne.

oh and lol at the smartarse Magistrate :lol

 

[Gomu Gomu]

anyway I've a question for islamic-gaf. In Australia they recently arrested some people for allegedly planing to carry out a suicide bombing of an army barracks. Anyway, when they were in court some have refused to stand for the Judge on religious grounds. I was wondering if there is an actual religious reason or if the men are just religious crazies?


either way the Judge was less than impressed.

No there isn't. It's a matter of pride or respect I would guess. See, over here, when someone comes to you wanting to say hello while you are sitting, and you respect that guy, it would polite to show your respect by standing up and while you guys shake hands or say hello or whatever.

or if the men are just religious crazies?

Anyone who wants to bomb and kill himself is a religious crazy. Islam or Jihad isn't about killing yourself at all.

 

[Anaxagoras]

anyway I've a question for islamic-gaf. In Australia they recently arrested some people for allegedly planing to carry out a suicide bombing of an army barracks. Anyway, when they were in court some have refused to stand for the Judge on religious grounds. I was wondering if there is an actual religious reason or if the men are just religious crazies?

either way the Judge was less than impressed.

edit: it's technically a Magistrate and not a Judge but in reality there is very little difference.

Let me point something out that many people totally forget about, there is no real Islam, there is no such thing as the one and only way to understand the Quran, the sunna and hadeeth, there is my interpretation, your interpretation and his interpretation of the quran.
To prove this I challenge you or in fact anyone else to prove a single verse from the quran that the Al-Qaida has misinterpreted, again, there are different interpretations but there is nothing that proves that this understanding that they are having is incorrect.

 

[activatethesmile]

Well that is just stupid. Won't stand for any man except God? That is just ridiculous. First of all, for such a self-proclaimed Islam die-hard he should realize that by saying "wont stand for any man except God" he insinuates that God is just another form of "man", which in Islam of course a big No No.

Second, he is being incredibly arrogant, as if he is the ultimate numero uno Muslim in the entire world. Who the fuck is he to assume that he is so great and beyond anyone else in this world? I sincerely doubt God would approve such display of arrogance in the first place.

Really, sometimes I just don't understand the mindset of people who commit suicide bombings--the bomber, the planner, and especially the sick fucktards who whispered stuff like "you're doing this for the sake of Islam/Allah/Honor" or whatever. Suicide--no matter what the case--is one of the most seriously offensive law-breaking act ever in Islam, one thing that even Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is very seriously dislike.

There's a hadits saying that those who commit suicide will be judged harshly by sending them to the eternal hell where they will be forced to recommit their suicide over and over and over again forever and ever. For ANY sane Muslim to think that by suiciding--and killing other people too in the process even!--God will grant them a smooth pathway to heaven is seriously, seriously, seriously fuckingly retarded.

 

[i_am_ben]

Let me point something out that many people totally forget about, there is no real Islam, there is no such thing as the one and only way to understand the Quran, the sunna and hadeeth, there is my interpretation, your interpretation and his interpretation of the quran.
To prove this I challenge you or in fact anyone else to prove a single verse from the quran that the Al-Qaida has misinterpreted, again, there are different interpretations but there is nothing that proves that this understanding that they are having is incorrect.

Well i'm not Muslim at all hence the reason i asked. if their refusal to not stand in front of the magistrate is justifiable then it would be interesting to know what it was based on.

 

[SmokyDave]

Well i'm not Muslim at all hence the reason i asked. if their refusal to not stand in front of the magistrate is justifiable then it would be interesting to know what it was based on.

I think what Nizar was trying to say is, as a non-muslim, don't worry about it. Even if someone had presented the relevant verse, someone else would have contradicted it. For the perfect word of god, it is utterly open to interpretation.

 

[Gomu Gomu]

Just for the record, They should've stand up.

Let me point something out that many people totally forget about, there is no real Islam, there is no such thing as the one and only way to understand the Quran, the sunna and hadeeth, there is my interpretation, your interpretation and his interpretation of the quran.
To prove this I challenge you or in fact anyone else to prove a single verse from the quran that the Al-Qaida has misinterpreted, again, there are different interpretations but there is nothing that proves that this understanding that they are having is incorrect.

I don't think so. There is one real Islam. However, and it is clear to every Muslim that killing yourself no matter what is prohibited.

As for the terrorist groups who claim that what they are doing is Islamic, such as Al-Qaida. What they do is that they take from The Holey Quraan the only parts that serves their twisted goals and, for no appearent reason, ignore other parts, that actually TELLS THEM NOT TO KILL YOURSELF OR NEVER KILL SOMEONE WHO DIDN'T DO ANY HARM TO YOU.

If you take whatever verses from the Holy Book these guys use, and then interpret them alone. You will think that Islam is a blood thirsty dark twisted religion that makes your sole purpose in life is to kill who ever is not a Muslim. But, if you actually study ALL Islam, which means understand everything in the Holy Book, and Hadeeth. You will know that Islam is nothing like that at all.

 

[Anaxagoras]

I find it funny how most of the Muslims in here are so damn sure about their views and understandings of Islam as if there is no other possible interpretation but theirs.
Go study some Arabic and attend a quranic school before you answer other peoples questions by suger coating Islam, and always remember to answer questions by '' I believe that this this this means that that that hence bla bla bla '' and do not make definite claims about what is islamic and what isn't without having read the Quran and by just recalling what your parents told you.

Let me make something clear, The Quran is written in formal traditional Arabic, a language that is very poetic in nature, which allows every single verse in it to be interpreted into several way with several meanings, the writing of the quran took place over a span of 30 years of the prophet Mohammed's life, in this time span the prophet and the religion have been through several wars and different situations.

There are versus in the Quran that asks muslims to kill the nonmuslims where ever they find them, in earlier parts of the quran when Islam wasn't as dominant in the region, it asks the followers to treat nonmuslims as ~friends and with tolerance and patience.
At this point the Quran is asking muslims two different things, and here is where your own understanding of Islam plays role, clerics claim that when God asked the muslims to fight the nonmuslims it was because they were at a religious war, jihad, some people believe that Islam is being attacked today by Israel and the west and thus do what god asked them to do in the quran.

And yes, Islam is a violent religion, proof? read the quran, for example: verse 4:34 in the Quran, God orders men to beat their wives if they rebel them, now its up to the reader to do the interpretation and what is meant by beat and rebel, beat with a chainsaw or a pillow, rebel as in refuse to take order or cheat on the husband.

Enough said already.