• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Islamic Thread

O

OttomanScribe

Member
Dever said:
But if you assert justice is simply determined by god, that puts you on a crash course with the Euthyphro dilemma.
Click to expand...
If it interests you, here is an explanation of the Sunni position on the question. It is from here and its author is Shaykh Faraz Rabbani.

Question: In a hadith, a sahabah willing to enter Islam approached the Prophet (pbuh) and informed of his only objection, which was regarding the prohibition of fornication. The Prophet(pbuh) responded by questioning whether he would object against if someone else did the same to his sister or daughter. So here a rational basis was provided, rather than than simply claiming “God willed it”. Does this mean rationality can be a basis for morality?

If it is simply rationalization of God’s law, than, hypothetically speaking, if rape was legal in God’s Law, would that make rape morally right (and rational) ?

In Essence, my question here is, whether a action is moral because the action is intrinsically moral? Or is it because God’s Will defines morality ?

Thirdly, does Quran 91:8 imply our fitra or souls have a natural ability to distinguish between right and wrong?

Answer: Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah,

I pray this finds you in the best of health and faith.

The essential question you ask is whether morality is intrinsic in actions or assigned only by revelation. This was historically a point of disagreement among Muslim theologians.

The Mu’tazili Position

The Mu’tazila, or strict rationalists, maintained that actions have an intrinsic moral value of either good or evil, which is necessary and independent of revelation. The Sacred Law comes with legal rulings that are secondary and that correspond to the intrinsic moral value of actions, which is primary. According to them, the intellect is the one that determines the moral value of actions, not Allah. Therefore, the intellect (aql) is capable of discerning the moral value of actions on its own, without any need for revelation.

The Sunni Position

There are two opinions among Sunni orthodoxy (Ahl al-Sunna) on this issue. Yet both opinions are in agreement that Allah alone is the One who assigns moral value to actions, not the intellect. This is a crucial point and the key difference between the Sunnis and the Mu’tazila. Due to this and other important differences, Sunni Orthodoxy considered the Mu’tazila innovators in creed, whose positions are not valid or followable.

The two Sunni opinions are as follows:

(1) The Ash’aris did not consider actions to have intrinsic moral value; rather, revelation and the Sacred Law form the basis of all morality. What Allah deems good is good, and what He deems evil is evil, irrespective of the judgment of human intellect. Because an action is commanded by Allah, it is good; and because it is prohibited by Allah, it is evil. The Sacred Law is the judge of what is right and wrong, while the intellect has no role in that judgment. It is merely a tool by which the Sacred Law can be understood. Morality cannot be ascertained until a messenger comes with revelation.

The basis of this position is that true moral value can only be known by appreciating the full context of any particular act. For example, severing a person’s arm would seem to be inherently evil. However, if a person had gangrene which would spread to destroy the entire body, then a doctor’s severing of his arm would be seen as a good and beneficial act. Full context of any given act is known only to Allah; the intellect does not have access to the entire context, and hence cannot ascertain the moral value of acts. Only revelation affirms morality.

(2) The Maturidis adopted a middle position between the two positions described above. Like the Ash’aris, they too considered assignment of moral value as belonging to Allah rather than the intellect. Allah alone is the Hakim (Authoritative Judge). Yet the intellect is not merely a tool to understand the Sacred Law. It can perceive the moral value of actions, and with some actions can do so independent of the Sacred Law. However, this would occur only by Allah creating that knowledge in the servant’s intellect.

Examples include the goodness of faith in Allah and of obeying Allah’s messengers. That is, recognizing a true messenger and obeying him is deemed good by the intellect alone, since before that action the intellect does not yet have access to revelation. Its goodness therefore does not depend on the Sacred Law, but rather is independently ascertained by the intellect.

However even according to the Maturidis, with respect to most legal rulings in the Shari’a, the intellect can discern moral value only after revelation. The judgment of the intellect then confirms the moral value given by Allah Most High.

[Ibn Abidin, Nasamat al-Ashar Sharh Ifadat al-Anwar; Ibn Nujaym, Fath al-Ghaffar bi Sharh al-Manar; Buti, Dawabit al-Maslaha]

Qur’an 91:8

Allah Most High states, “Then He cast in it [the soul] its transgression and its piety.”

There are two main interpretations of this verse according to classical exegetes.

(1) The verse means that Allah Most High taught the soul transgression and piety, and made it understand that transgression is evil and piety is good. In addition, Allah taught the soul the outcome of each and gave the soul the freedom to choose one over the other. [Nasafi, Madarik al-Tanzil wa Haqa'iq al-Ta'wil ; Abu Suud, Irshad al-Aql al-Salim ila Mazaya al-Kitab al-Karim]

This interpretation would seem to favor the Mutazili and Maturidi positions, in that the intellect is endowed with the ability to ascertain, independent of revelation, the moral value of transgression and piety. However, it does not give proof of the Mutazili opinion that the ultimate judge of morality is the intellect.

(2) The verse does not deal with assessment of moral value but rather alludes to the phenomenon of tawfiq and khidhlan. That is to say, when Allah wills good for a servant, He inspires that servant to piety by casting that inclination in the servant’s heart. And when He wills harm for a servant, He Most High inspires the servant to evil by casting that inclination in the heart.

Imam Razi cites al-Wahidi as differentiating between the word used in the verse (ilham) and between words that mean teaching or giving understanding. Ilham is different in that it refers to Allah’s casting something in the servant’s heart, whereby the servant inclines to do that thing. This is supported by the root linguistic meaning of ilham, which is to cause one to swallow something.

Imam Razi supports this meaning by context as well. He states that the preceding verses of the Surah show how all of creation - from the heavens above to the earth below - are under the control and predestination of Allah Most High. Yet only one thing in creation remains unclear as to whether it is under Allah’s control and decree or whether it is totally independent - the free will of humans and jinn. So Allah explicitly states here that even the willful choice of the servant falls under Allah’s control and decree, since He Most High even inspires to good and evil. This does not negate free will, but rather confirms it as a part of creation, as all of creation exists only by the divine will. [Razi, Mafatih al-Ghayb]

This interpretation does not support or negate either of the three views on morality above, as it deals with another issue altogether.

And Allah knows best.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Funny stuff :D

http://notmynaseeb.wordpress.com/

it is a blog where sisters submit messages they have recieved on Muslim matrimonial websites lol.

My favourite would be: 'small man with a soft heart, i love allah his mesenger and i have a pet ferret.'

sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam

also this one:

'How are dear i went through your profile i like it and pictures i liked this picture you was standing into water and seagull next to you i liked seagull more'
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
A great article by the sister of a friend of mine:

http://muslimvillage.com/2011/06/04/are-you-married-yet-2/

'Are you married yet'
by Raidah Shah-Idil.

One minute, you’re an invincible 21 year old fending off oh-so-lame marriage proposals, and the next minute, you’re 28, single, and wondering what happened.

For those quick to accuse single sisters of being “too picky”, I’d like to offer a reality check: none of the single sisters I know choose to be single because they feel like it. It’s either a lack of good proposals, or good proposals that just haven’t worked out. Many of these amazing women are women of deen and adab, women who contribute to our community in their chosen field. They’re doctors, dentists, teachers, academics, researchers and yet, they continue to receive scathing rebukes for not settling down and starting a family ASAP, as though the fabric of reality would tear apart if they didn’t just get on with it. Ladies, we should start up a a club: Not Yet Wives Clubs. God Grant Me Contentment Club. Get Them Off My Back Club.

In my case, despite spending a life-changing almost two years in the Middle East, when I came home to Sydney, the marriage question reared its ugly head. The first question most women asked me was: “Are you married yet?” Sigh. Allah gave me the gift of Hajj, brought me to the pyramids of Egypt, took me to the Ummayd masjid in Damascus, showed me the pristine beauty of the desert in Wadi Rum, Amman…but that doesn’t seem interesting enough.
Click to expand...

The sister studied with Sheikh Nuh in Amman, and I believe has written a book, mash'Allah.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
http://www.cnngo.com/explorations/life/be-muslim-month-178215
A new tourist program has been set up to allow non-Muslims to experience what it's like to live under the Islamic faith.

In what it claims is an attempt to showcase the real Islam, not the fundamentalist flag-burning version so often seen on TV in recent years, a social enterprise called the Blood Foundation is running a “spiritual development program” called Muslim for a Month.

Participants will immerse themselves in the Islamic religion with a focus on Sufi traditions.

The itinerary, which can run for nine or 21 days, includes communal prayer five days a week, a day of fasting, choir singing, workshops, a spiritual city tour, lessons on Sufism and other activities.

The scheme is being run in Istanbul, Turkey.
Click to expand...
Ah yes. Choir singing. An integral of Islam *sigh*
 
N

Nemo

Will Eat Your Children
OttomanScribe said:
My favourite would be: 'small man with a soft heart, i love allah his mesenger and i have a pet ferret.'
Click to expand...
Oh god, this made me laugh way too much
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
slider said:
There was a Channel 4 documentary much like this a few years ago. A bunch of average Brits going to live as Muslims. If I recall correctly the guy running the camp was a Sufi as well. Coincidence? Of course but still thought I'd mention it.
Click to expand...
It happened in Australia too. I think it gets weird when people are paying for 'the Muslim experience'. I don't think it is a problem more generally.

In terms of sufism, I find it problematic the implication in many of these articles that Sufism is like an 'easy, liberal' Islam, which, from the Sufis I know, is really not the case. In fact quite the opposite, most of the really orthodox people I know are Sufis.
Crazy Monkey said:
salams how is it going? I was on break for some times.
Click to expand...

Walaykum Salaam Wa Rahmetullah, kind of dead around these parts lol.
 
C

crazy monkey

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
It happened in Australia too. I think it gets weird when people are paying for 'the Muslim experience'. I don't think it is a problem more generally.

In terms of sufism, I find it problematic the implication in many of these articles that Sufism is like an 'easy, liberal' Islam, which, from the Sufis I know, is really not the case. In fact quite the opposite, most of the really orthodox people I know are Sufis.


Walaykum Salaam Wa Rahmetullah, kind of dead around these parts lol.
Click to expand...

ya brother I can see. You do very good job of communicating with community though. Rusty also is good with it.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
NapoleontheChimp said:
Is it true that the hijab predates Islam and that there is no cast iron proof that the Qur'an mandates that women absolutely have to wear a veil or hijab over their hair and neck? It seems that this is more of a bullshit cultural issue that has become confused with religion.
Click to expand...

It is indeed true that the hijab predates the coming of the Prophet Mohammed (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam). Quite a few historians hold that that kind of atire (veiling, even face veiling) was a standard for the upper class women in Europe, the Middle East, Subcontinent and Central Asia for much of history. Veiling is often described as a symbol of class. With going unveiled symbolising one who is owned by another, or who is lower class.

However in addressing the second question, we must understand what the source of conduct is for the Muslim. The Qur'an is not the only source of conduct for the Muslim. Indeed in specifics, it is fairly lacking. Much of the Qur'an is taken up with stories with specific lessons, or poetry with a broader, often esoteric explanation of things. When it comes to the everyday, the Muslims look to the Messenger of God (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam).

The Qur'an is the command, and the Messenger (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) is the one who shows the Muslim how to carry out the command. When the Qur'an says 'establish the prayer', it does not give specifics, the Messenger (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) does: 'pray as you see me pray'.

In a practical sense, this means that the source of conduct for a Muslim is four main things, the Qur'an, the Hadith, the scholars and the community of the believers. When it comes to the hijab, in operationalising the Qur'anic imperative, a Muslim looks to the example of conduct given by the Mothers of the Believers (radiAllahu anha). This example, along with direct words from the Messenger of God (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) is the main reason that the hijab (as we know it, everything but face and hands) is a religious requirement.
 
J

Jeels

Member
So I was arguing with, in my belief, a very politically infused Muslim who adheres to a type of Islam I only see certain Pakistanis have, at least in my surroundings. It basically came down to an example like this. Let's take fornication. He would argue that yes, fornication should be met with lashes, and that is Islamic-ally justified. My argument was, this type of politicization of Islam is actually deviating further and further from what I consider. So my question is this, is there an Islamic basis to lashings for fornication? Would prefer if Ottoman answered, since he really pools all his knowledge from Islamic Sources, History, Culture, etc etc and presents it in a very non bias (although still very purely pro Islamic) view.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Hey Jeels, will answer your question when I get a chance (so that I can address it in full) I only have time for one post tonight, and made it in the Kuwaiti thread.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Jeels said:
So I was arguing with, in my belief, a very politically infused Muslim who adheres to a type of Islam I only see certain Pakistanis have, at least in my surroundings. It basically came down to an example like this. Let's take fornication. He would argue that yes, fornication should be met with lashes, and that is Islamic-ally justified. My argument was, this type of politicization of Islam is actually deviating further and further from what I consider. So my question is this, is there an Islamic basis to lashings for fornication? Would prefer if Ottoman answered, since he really pools all his knowledge from Islamic Sources, History, Culture, etc etc and presents it in a very non bias (although still very purely pro Islamic) view.
Click to expand...
There is an Islamic basis for the punishment. It is part of the consensus of the scholars, however it must be understood in the legal context of what constitutes a witness to fornication. Unless 4 people perceive the act, 'as a snake entering a box' then there is no basis for a conviction.

One must remember that it is impermissible for one to enter a residence without permission. One who would break that law (entering a dwelling without permission) would be an invalid witness.

Thus, unless the fornication occurs in public, and is witnessed by many people. The only way for it to be carried out would be through a person confessing. As I understand it, in the historical records, there are possibly 3 instances of the punishment being carried out in a valid Islamic state (not talking Saudi or Afghanistan here) by Sunni authorities. These were cases where the individuals involved admitted to the crime, and would not recant their confession.

This is the case for all the examples in the hadith. There is one (Allah forgive me for paraphrasing, I do not have the reference to hand) where a man came to the Messenger of Allah (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) and confessed repeatedly to fornication with a particular woman. He would not recant his confession and the punishment was carried out. However it was not carried out upon the woman he claimed to have committed the sin with, as she had not confessed.

For the believer, punishment in this life is far less grievous than punishment in the next. One who truly believes that they would not be forgiven for such a sin (a strange assumption considering that they can make tawba) could seek out a punishment in this life instead. It seems that this is part of the function of the punishment. Though of course, Allah always knows best.

I hope this is an explanation to you. Many people assume that the Muslim state is the same as the modern nation state. The modern nation state, with its laws, is far more intrusive. It is far better to assume the best of someone, than to seek their punishment. Therefore if he believes that a Muslim state would be hunting down people in their homes, searching for fornicators, he is mistaken.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Ashes1396 said:
What about kissing in public?
Click to expand...
For unmarried couples? I've never read anywhere that such a thing is punishable, but it wouldn't be advisable either. That kind of relationship outside the bounds of marriage is not permissible as I understand it.

The state punishing you for doing something is one thing, it being personally permissible is another.
 
A

Acid08

Banned
I work with a couple Muslims. They seem pretty hardcore about it(pray 5 times a day, no drinking or tobacco). The one thing that really REALLY bothers me about them is that they're very openly homophobic. I cannot even explain how often I've had "the gays need to be exterminated. The world is ending because everyone is turning gay" speeches from them. It makes me sad :(
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
My friend Susan Carland got Australian Muslim of the Year :)

http://www.onislam.net/english/read...ntemporary-stories/452639-aussie-convert.html

What will you do if your beloved mother tells you “I don’t care if you marry a drug dealer, but don’t marry a Muslim?”

This is exactly what was told to Susan Carland when she was 17 years old after declaring that one of her New Year’s resolutions was “to investigate other religions.”

Of course, Islam was not in her priority list as she used to say “It looked violent, sexist and foreign.” Two years later, at the age of 19, Susan who has been raised as a Baptist became a Muslim without the influence of any man!

This was the same girl who at around 14 years of age had joined a “funky, happy, clappy church” that was part of the charismatic movement. Around her, people were claiming to speak in tongues and announcing that God had spoken to them in the night.

One night, her mother announced they were having pork chops for dinner. That was when the mother discovered that her daughter had become a ‘victim’ of Islam. “My mother gave me a hug,” she recalls, “but she was crying.” A few days later, Susan began wearing a headscarf.
Click to expand...
I work with a couple Muslims. They seem pretty hardcore about it(pray 5 times a day, no drinking or tobacco). The one thing that really REALLY bothers me about them is that they're very openly homophobic. I cannot even explain how often I've had "the gays need to be exterminated. The world is ending because everyone is turning gay" speeches from them. It makes me sad :(
Click to expand...

Ask them if they associate with any Christians? Then ask them what they believe is more of a sin in the eyes of Allah, being a man-worshipper, or sodomy. Ask them if they would have bad manners or conduct towards a Christian, if they would not, then why would they have bad conduct towards someone who is gay?
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Instigator said:
Mother is bigoted, but it sounds like the daughter only converted to piss her off.
Click to expand...
You would think that would wear off after a year or so. I think that is a very patronising thing to say, that her only valid reason to convert would be anger at her parents. If there is an emphasis on her parents, it is probably more about the person writing the article than anything she said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4y2kFBnnH4
 
Aad

Aad

Member
What do you guys recommend as the best English translation to read alongside the Arabic Quran? There's just so many different translations I don't know where to start.

Thanks.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Apparently Sheikh Hamza took a tumble, but he is okay alhamduliLlah. He will be meeting my Sheikh at the Rihla in Turkey insha'Allah :)

Hasn't effected his intellect, great article:

Where are the 'No Smoking' signs in Medina?

http://sandala.org/blog/2011/06/21/where-are-the-no-smoking-signs-in-medina/

We clearly suffer from those very tribulations the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, identified, and we have to realize that the source of the tribulations is not the big bad West, nor is it the evil rulers in Muslim countries, or the unjust judges. We need only look within our selves. We are consumed by our indulgences and our excesses. These problems are all only symptoms, and as long as we treat the surface symptoms, the disease lies beneath and only gets worse. The antidote is to follow the Prophet’s sunnah.

In another hadith, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, was reported to have said, “God is never angered with a people except that they suffer from inflation, their markets become depressed, corruption becomes the norm, and unjust governance becomes more severe. When that happens, the wealthy among them forget the rights of the poor, governance loses its virtue, and the poor stop praying.”

If we look at the current economic crisis, the prevailing view is that there are clearly discernible causes for it that have been studied, documented, analyzed, and articulated. And there are legal and legislative and systemic solutions being offered. But these are merely symptomatic analyses, and as long as the metaphysical roots are ignored, the tribulations will only recur. When God’s limits are transgressed, certain responses are incurred. God is not susceptible to emotions, so when He is “angered” (sakhita), this should not be understood anthropomorphically.

The solution then is to work to attain God’s pleasure (rida). One of the prayers of our Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, every day was, “O God, I seek refuge in You from your anger and the fire, and I ask You for Your pleasure and Your paradise.” The pleasure of God is only discerned through following, to the best of our ability, the way of His beloved Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. Our task is to learn and live by it. It begins with sincere intention, is followed by disciplined study, and is fulfilled through purposeful actions based upon sound knowledge.
Click to expand...
 
I

Instigator

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
You would think that would wear off after a year or so. I think that is a very patronising thing to say, that her only valid reason to convert would be anger at her parents. If there is an emphasis on her parents, it is probably more about the person writing the article than anything she said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4y2kFBnnH4
Click to expand...

Does she post in this thread? No, then we're just casually discussing the issue.

It's difficult for it to wear off when you do more than convert. She married a dude and popped some children in the process. She's made important life choices at a critical period in her life, she's in so deep and it would be hard (but not impossible) for her to go back. If she's happy, then good for her, but I don't consider this story a model to follow.

Since Islamic proselytizing is limited in the West, she probably had to look for Islam herself. The mom set off a chain reaction by making it a forbidden fruit. I've seen it happen before (not just with religion).
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Instigator said:
Does she post in this thread? No, then we're just casually discussing the issue.

It's difficult for it to wear off when you do more than convert. She married a dude and popped some children in the process. She's made important life choices at a critical period in her life, she's in so deep and it would be hard (but not impossible) for her to go back. If she's happy, then good for her, but I don't consider this story a model to follow.

Since Islamic proselytizing is limited in the West, she probably had to look for Islam herself. The mom set off a chain reaction by making it a forbidden fruit. I've seen it happen before (not just with religion).
Click to expand...
As I said, she is a friend of my wife and I. She converted some time before she met Waleed. I think that your attidude is as sad as it is patronising. It implies that an intelligent, strong woman could not make a logical decision to become Muslim. You paint her as some flippant, rebellious teen unable to go back on a decision she made in her youth because of the social entrapment of her husband and kids.

I am unsure what you base this assumption on, but I find it to be an illogical and inappropriate characterisation, not least because you don't know her from Adam.
Hmmm. Interesting...
Click to expand...
?
 
I

Instigator

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
As I said, she is a friend of my wife and I. She converted some time before she met Waleed. I think that your attidude is as sad as it is patronising. It implies that an intelligent, strong woman could not make a logical decision to become Muslim. You paint her as some flippant, rebellious teen unable to go back on a decision she made in her youth because of the social entrapment of her husband and kids.

I am unsure what you base this assumption on, but I find it to be an illogical and inappropriate characterisation, not least because you don't know her from Adam.

?
Click to expand...

A woman could, just like a man could, but I'm sorry to tell you people make irrational decisions all the time. And reading the story, I got this familiar vibe.

Don't like it? Don't post stories where perfect strangers can comment on them. At least not stories of people you know so you don't get hurt.
 
F

fossil coast

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
Ask them if they associate with any Christians? Then ask them what they believe is more of a sin in the eyes of Allah, being a man-worshipper, or sodomy. Ask them if they would have bad manners or conduct towards a Christian, if they would not, then why would they have bad conduct towards someone who is gay?
Click to expand...
I am quite sure they could turn it around and reference some related hadith. Mohammed was no friend to gays, as well you know.
 
A

Ashes

Banned
Instigator said:
A woman could, just like a man could, but I'm sorry to tell you people make irrational decisions all the time. And reading the story, I got this familiar vibe.

Don't like it? Don't post stories where perfect strangers can comment on them. At least not stories of people you know so you don't get hurt.
Click to expand...

People hardly ever turn their entire life around to piss mum off... Wait something in there made sense to you.. Interesting viewpoint to say the least...

Btw most converts study the religion, whichever one, quite thoroughly, before converting... It's not a one night thing I'm presuming...
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Instigator said:
A woman could, just like a man could, but I'm sorry to tell you people make irrational decisions all the time. And reading the story, I got this familiar vibe.

Don't like it? Don't post stories where perfect strangers can comment on them. At least not stories of people you know so you don't get hurt.
Click to expand...
I'm not hurt lol, don't concern yourself.

The purpose of the story was that she got Australian Muslim of the Year :)
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
fossil coast said:
I am quite sure they could turn it around and reference some related hadith. Mohammed was no friend to gays, as well you know.
Click to expand...
The Sheikh that I quoted was Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, the person who asked is welcome to print off his list of ijaza (qualifications) and then ask these people whom they think is more knowledgable, the Sheikh, or themselves. If they are quoting random hadith without daleel or reference to the Ulema, then they are beyond the logic of the Sha'riah regardless.
 
F

fossil coast

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
The Sheikh that I quoted was Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, the person who asked is welcome to print off his list of ijaza (qualifications) and then ask these people whom they think is more knowledgable, the Sheikh, or themselves. If they are quoting random hadith without daleel or reference to the Ulema, then they are beyond the logic of the Sha'riah regardless.
Click to expand...

What do you think? Do you think any of the hadith that claim Mohammed said death was an appropriate penalty for homosexuality are historical and accurate?
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
fossil coast said:
What do you think? Do you think any of the hadith that claim Mohammed said death was an appropriate penalty for homosexuality are historical and accurate?
Click to expand...
I think there is a serious distinction between state punishment for public sodomy and the basic standard of conduct one employs every day.

Homophobia, as I understand the use of the term, is most often manifested in derogatory remarks, rudeness and other such things. No such things are appropriate conduct for a Muslim, regardless of whom the person who it is aimed at. I see Muslims who deride people they believe to be guilty of the sin of sodomy, who themselves don't even establish the 5 prayers, who are themselves involved in usury or do not have basic aqidah understandings, all such things are major sins, indeed back biting (talking behind the back of another in a derogatory manner) is a major sin, like sodomy.

So like I said, the person who asked the question should ask those people who act improperly when the suspected sin of another became an excuse for them. Too often do those with flaws point out the flaws of others as an excuse. This is a reminder for myself included.
 
F

fossil coast

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
I think there is a serious distinction between state punishment for public sodomy and the basic standard of conduct one employs every day.

Homophobia, as I understand the use of the term, is most often manifested in derogatory remarks, rudeness and other such things. No such things are appropriate conduct for a Muslim, regardless of whom the person who it is aimed at. I see Muslims who deride people they believe to be guilty of the sin of sodomy, who themselves don't even establish the 5 prayers, who are themselves involved in usury or do not have basic aqidah understandings, all such things are major sins, indeed back biting (talking behind the back of another in a derogatory manner) is a major sin, like sodomy.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can see how I'm confused. Do we bury back-biters under rubble and set them on fire or not?
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
fossil coast said:
Perhaps you can see how I'm confused. Do we bury back-biters under rubble and set them on fire or not?
Click to expand...
There are no hadith that say that such a punishment was mandated by the Prophet (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam). Indeed execution by fire is prohibited in the Sha'riah. The Prophet (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) in one Sahih (sound) and a few hasan (fair) hadith, said the punishment for sodomy was death, though there is no recording of this ever manifesting itself as a sentence in his time. The law is not taken from random hadith quoted on their own though, it is taken from scholars.

Regardless, that means nothing to the conduct of a Muslim living in non-Muslim society where such things are permissable, or indeed living in Muslim society, as a person cannot be called a sodomite unless they perform the act in public, in front of witnesses.

I highly doubt that these people were being homophobic about people who had publicly sodomised each other. Though I am open to correction. There is a serious difference between public and private sin.
 
F

fossil coast

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
There are no hadith that say that such a punishment was mandated by the Prophet (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam). Indeed execution by fire is prohibited in the Sha'riah. The Prophet (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) in one Sahih (sound) and a few hasan (fair) hadith, said the punishment for sodomy was death, though there is no recording of this ever manifesting itself as a sentence in his time. The law is not taken from random hadith quoted on their own though, it is taken from scholars.
Click to expand...

That particular punishment wasn't mandated by Mohammed - just as long as they died, he wasn't too fussed about the details - but that is the one that was administered by Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, to some poor terrified 'sodomite'. I'm sure the masonry between the fire and the man underneath kept ol' Abu from breaking Sha'riah, though - heaven forbid. Glad to see where you stand on executing gay people, I honestly thought it would be harder to coax it out of you than that.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
fossil coast said:
That particular punishment wasn't mandated by Mohammed - just as long as they died, he wasn't too fussed about the details - but that is the one that was administered by Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, to some poor terrified 'sodomite'. I'm sure the masonry between the fire and the man underneath kept ol' Abu from breaking Sha'riah, though - heaven forbid. Glad to see where you stand on executing gay people, I honestly thought it would be harder to coax it out of you than that.
Click to expand...
Again, not something supported in the hadith. If you wanted to ask my stance on public sodomy in a state ruled by Muslims (which is what we are talking about here) then you could have just asked me. As I previously said, the law is not taken from random hadith, especially not ones made up. It is taken from the traditions and from the scholars. The Hanafi school, for example, proscribes no physical punishment for sodomy.


As I understand it, that is not the circumstance we are talking about. Though again, I could be wrong.
 
K

Killamangiro

Member
So I have a question. Even though I consider myself a muslim, I have mixed feelings about certain things. I was raised as a muslim but I have developed quite liberal dispositions. For example I don't mind gay people, in fact I even have gay and lesbian friends, I have experimented with drugs and alcohol during my university days but although all these things are wrong in Islamic terms I somehow don't really regret or feel bad about them.

I find these feelings confusing because at the same time I do believe in the principles of Islam and try to pray regularly. Another thing is girls, I can't imagine getting married in the foreseeable future (i'm 23) as I don't hang in muslim circles and find the idea of arranged marriage cringing although most of my siblings have been hitched that way.

Am I meant to not have sex for like however many years until I meet the person who will be acceptable in familial and religious terms? I feel like the best years of my remaining youth will pass in vain doing this. I wanted to run this past you guys.. Any feedback will be appreciated
 
S

SUPREME1

Banned
OttomanScribe said:
When it comes to the hijab, in operationalising the Qur'anic imperative, a Muslim looks to the example of conduct given by the Mothers of the Believers (radiAllahu anha). This example, along with direct words from the Messenger of God (sullAllahu alayhi wasalaam) is the main reason that the hijab (as we know it, everything but face and hands) is a religious requirement.
Click to expand...


HAHAHAHA!!!


Caught slipping, OS. Your extremism is showing.



What happened to '...It is a woman's choice to wear hijab or not, as an act of modesty...'?

You're full of shit.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
Killamangiro said:
So I have a question. Even though I consider myself a muslim, I have mixed feelings about certain things. I was raised as a muslim but I have developed quite liberal dispositions. For example I don't mind gay people, in fact I even have gay and lesbian friends, I have experimented with drugs and alcohol during my university days but although all these things are wrong in Islamic terms I somehow don't really regret or feel bad about them.

I find these feelings confusing because at the same time I do believe in the principles of Islam and try to pray regularly. Another thing is girls, I can't imagine getting married in the foreseeable future (i'm 23) as I don't hang in muslim circles and find the idea of arranged marriage cringing although most of my siblings have been hitched that way.

Am I meant to not have sex for like however many years until I meet the person who will be acceptable in familial and religious terms? I feel like the best years of my remaining youth will pass in vain doing this. I wanted to run this past you guys.. Any feedback will be appreciated
Click to expand...

The last one was the only real question I can see to answer :)

As I understand it, you are not meant to have sexual relations before marriage. If you feel this will be difficult for you, get married sooner rather than later. It is an unfortunate thing that in our community it is so hard for people to get married young, as parental support (far more so than religious support) is often so slow in being forthcoming.

I met my wife to be when I was 20, it took my in-laws 3 years to be okay with stuff. It is difficult to veer away from the haraam in such a situation. The advice I was given was avoid situations of temptation, and fast when you can. Both are effective means of avoiding getting yourself in a place where you might do something you regret.

Hang around Muslims if you can, an environment made up of pious people is always beneficial. I know many people who have gotten married to people whom they have met through Muslim friends in such a manner.

If you have a scholar or learned person near to you, seek advice from them. They have been through some form of such things, and are far more capable of advising you than internet forum goers.
 
O

OttomanScribe

Member
SUPREME1 said:
HAHAHAHA!!!


Caught slipping, OS. Your extremism is showing.



What happened to '...It is a woman's choice to wear hijab or not, as an act of modesty...'?

You're full of shit.
Click to expand...
The two points are not incompatible. It can be both a woman's choice, and a religious requirement simultaneously. Indeed were it not the woman's choice, it would not be a religious thing at all.

Modesty, veiling, hijab, are a religious requirement upon all believers. This is not something enforced by states, but something a believer should take upon themselves to adopt. For a brother, this entails the compulsory requirement of growing a beard if they are able, wearing loose fitting clothing, covering their head etc. for a sister it is the same, though with hijab (the scarf) rather than a turban or khufi.

Could you show me a point where I said that it was not a religious requirement? I thought my 'extremism', whatever that means, would have showed in the amputation thread surely?

If you can't show me a point where I contradict myself, one would be forgiven to assume the accusations of falsehood you extended to me instead apply to yourself. That or you can't understand my arguments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Too Timid to Tell the Boss You’re Quitting? There’s a Service for That
28
1K
Superkewl replied
NYT: The Palace Coup at the Magic Kingdom (Iger vs. Chapek)
27
1K
Tertullian replied
The man who owes Nintendo $14m: Gary Bowser and gaming’s most infamous piracy case
2
85
6K
SHA replied
Nine minutes of R-rated Deadpool 3 footage shown at CinemaCon (Spoilers)
Spoilers
12
3K
Husky replied
the events for Titus between Space Marine 1 and 2 has been revealed!
6
2K
TintoConCasera replied
Top Bottom