Society Religious Discussion and Q&A Thread

[Zehahaha]

as for the site i agree that there is a contention amongst the source but the source of this later contention is weak, the History of Imam tabari has a preface saying he collected any saying without proper checking of Isnads so that later gen can weed out the weak narration after study and dont need the lengthy task of compiling sayings in the first place, thats y you have the satanic verses there.
Though Imam Ibn Kathir quoted it in Al biday an Nihaya, so that is the only decent source of information that we have. apart from some works of Imam Bukhari
Given that that site is ahmadiyya so its better not to indulge much into it.
the correct view is (as far as i know) it was a norm then. my own great grandmother married at the age of 14, back trace it to 1400 years ago. It wasnt a social stigma then. Thats y Prophet never affirmed any one to marry young girls because he knew that specifying it is wrong, maritial social norm changes as time goes, we cant use our social justice system to justify or incriminate an action that was socially justified 1000 years ago.
The age for marriage is a fluid issue in Islam you can marry girls at their early age(after puberty) but that is saying you can choose a number after 12.
We dont specify the age of marriage its an issue subjective to culture social norm of ones time

Read this again

And this

I see logical proofs in here, I don't see why it should be disregarded because Ahmadiya or what not

 

[silver_soul]

not exclusively no, but sure it's part of it. maybe the beard leads to the thought that the rest of the body is just as hairy though? is there any place to read about the fitra though, because our old chap wikipedia is somewhat void there.

http://islam1.org/iar/imam/archives/fiqh_basics.pdf

Page 10 onwards.

I have to ask is living in a secular, yet mostly Muslim country, like Turkey(I think others were as well?) better for practicing the religion than a total Islamist country, like Iran? I mean it is pretty obvious, but maybe I should word that in this way: Are people that have freedom of religion in Muslim countries are more devoted to their faith than those that are in totally under a "religious dictatorship"(which can in ways bend the rules of the religion and ruin the core of it to fit it's won needs, ahh Machiavelli. xD).

Good question. I can't really say about Iran but maybe Pakistan would be a better example? The country faced a major shift towards Islam in the '70's, I think which could be described as a religious dictatorship and what followed was as you describe the bending of rules to suit individuals. As for practicing the dominant religion, it may have been easier to access but at the same time it gave lesser qualified individuals the ability to dictate and oppress using religion as a tool. The effects are seen more today as over time the purpose of those laws has decayed, we have fringe laws in the country which really weren't part of Islam to begin with, (e.g. blasphemy law). It was an unnecessary change. If people are brought up with these laws then that's 'Islam' they will learn.

Also, I think it was Max Weber that predicted the decline of religion in the West, could such a phenomenon come for free Muslim countries as well?

No idea. I'll have to think about that, the next time I'm visiting such a country.

I can only go from what I have seen Turkey, but I really want to visit free Muslim countries that practice the religion like some in the far East.

I wen to Turkey, once. Hated it.

 

[shaheer]

Read this again

And this

I see logical proofs in here, I don't see why it should be disregarded because Ahmadiya or what not

true there are logical proofs there but the point is the source materials are secondary. Now that doesnt make it untrue rather it makes the whole thing unclear ie we dont know much about this particular incident.
Imam Tabari is a great commentator of the QUran so is Imam Ibn Kathir but their historical books are not as authentic as that of Bukhari and Muslim,

the reason for disregarding is because Islamic source mandates that if you hear sth from a fasiq you should verify it
i dont have Al Bidaya, i managed to collect An nihaya only. So i wont be able to verify the exact quote from Ibn kathir's Al Bidaya, second off we barely have the books from Imam Tabari to verify it. And the most important Imam tabari s book has many fabricated hadith, until we have muhaddith classifying what is authentic in that account we cant say whether its true or not.

Now i dont know any muhaddith saying that this particular narration is true in Imam tabaris book nether did i hear them categorizing it as false either
but if you study the Usul al Hadith (science of hadith) there are 5 categories from which you can say whether or not a hadith is sahi or not
in ny relatively small knowledge of hadith study i think this particular one falls to be daweef if we check it in accordance with the 5 category , atleast
the first 3 catagory requires the knowledge of the chain of narrators as its unavailable to us here so i wont be able to comment on those
the last catagory is too high level for me to judge any hadith by, only a scholar who is EXTREMELY well versed in hadith can do that , and we dont have some one of that caliber alive after the demise of shaikh al albany rahimuAllah in 1999. In catagory 4 its showing out to be a daweef, not ie Daweeef Jiddan but atleast daweef
So we cant conclusively say what really was the case. Rather we should say we cant ascertain.

 

[M3J]

Hmm good to see there's such a thread here
Well... This may be a bit controversial, but what do you think about Islam ?

P.S : I'm a muslim, by I just want a healthy debate here and see what you think

I personally think Islam is uptight, but like with most religions, I also think it's boring. Apart from that, I have no problem with the Islamic community, and I know some Muslims that are some of the coolest people I've met. It's why I can't handle the whole "DEATH TO ISLAM! ALL MUSLIMS SUCK!!!1" bullshit that anyone spouts.

One thing I don't get though is honor killing. If I recall, I mentioned that here and someone told me it's not a part of the Muslim religion or tradition. So, does anyone know where the idea came from or how it started? Is it just an excuse for the murderers since it sounds better than "I just lost my temper and killed her because the harlot refuses to listen to me!" Cuz in my opinion, it just sounds like a shitty excuse for temper loss or need to be in control/dominant.



FYI: I'm an atheist, so my view on religions is negative by default.

 

[shaheer]

If I recall, I mentioned that here and someone told me it's not a part of the Muslim religion or tradition. So, does anyone know where the idea came from or how it started?

hmm i said its not in Islam,
this mentality creeped in from the cultures Islam spread, a lot of people used to bury their children if it was a she.not to mention there are essence of honor killing in the Biblical scripts hence many converts brought some of the other concept in too

 

[Doraku]

One thing I don't get though is honor killing. If I recall, I mentioned that here and someone told me it's not a part of the Muslim religion or tradition. So, does anyone know where the idea came from or how it started? Is it just an excuse for the murderers since it sounds better than "I just lost my temper and killed her because the harlot refuses to listen to me!" Cuz in my opinion, it just sounds like a shitty excuse for temper loss or need to be in control/dominant.

I believe such tradition is derived from pre-Islamic Influence Arab culture rather than directly from Koran text or the Prophet sayings. Honor kliling was even already practiced in Moses era (according to Koran). Like shaheer said, there was this shameful tradition to kill a newborn girl in the family, since a girl cannot be brought to the war.

---------------------------------------------------------------

While I agree that apparently Islam is the religion which still stick to its origin, but in fact, the understanding of Islam itself is very polarized. There are many school of thoughts that are contradicting with each other on particular matters.

 

[Zehahaha]

I believe such tradition is derived from pre-Islamic Influence Arab culture rather than directly from Koran text or the Prophet sayings. Honor kliling was even already practiced in Moses era (according to Koran). Like shaheer said, there was this shameful tradition to kill a newborn girl in the family, since a girl cannot be brought to the war.

---------------------------------------------------------------

While I agree that apparently Islam is the religion which still stick to its origin, but in fact, the understanding of Islam itself is very polarized. There are many school of thoughts that are contradicting with each other on particular matters.

Well, sexual relationship outside marriage are considered a sin... But honor killing doesn't have anything to do with Islam, it's just overzealous people who takes it too far

As for different schools of thought, yes there are many, but the pillars are all agreed upon : Praying, Fasting, Hajj, Zakat etc

 

[Akainu]

4 out of 5 pillars? didn't remember the last one or are there more minor ones the existance of which I don't remember from religion class?

 

[Zehahaha]

4 out of 5 pillars? didn't remember the last one or are there more minor ones the existance of which I don't remember from religion class?

Chahada is the first pillar, it's to say that there's no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet basically

These are the five pillars, adding to it the values/ethics/morals too

 

[shaheer]

While I agree that apparently Islam is the religion which still stick to its origin, but in fact, the understanding of Islam itself is very polarized. There are many school of thoughts that are contradicting with each other on particular matters.

this is the kind of discussion i love

True there are multiple interpretation on particular matters in islam but the tennets are the same.
The largest section of people claiming to be Muslim is the Ahle sunnah wal jamah(sunni) which i belong to is roughly 82% of all the muslim mass. We do have basically certain degree of internal difference in interpretation which gives rise to different school of thought but it only exist on the fine issues of rulings which are vague in the hadith or Quranic verse. Like saying Basmallah before the surah fatiha(first chap in Quran) in prayer.
3 of the 4 popular school of thought believes that its not necessary one believes it is.
but no school believes that you cant pray 5 times a day that is not there.
The difference within the sunni mass is regarding the concoction of meaning from the vague verse of Quran or hadith which can be interpreted in many ways, thus there are no conflict when the differences of opinion arises in those interpretation.

the conflicts occurs with the different umbrellas in muslims like the sunni and shitte. There are some striking ideological differences between the groups.

 

[M3J]

How do you guys feel about honor killing? I'm asking for your thoughts on the subject, how you feel about it personally.

The idea isn't restricted to just Islam though, as I have read Sikhs or Punjabis do the same as well. I mean, why participate in the activity now when times are different?

 

[Zehahaha]

How do you guys feel about honor killing? I'm asking for your thoughts on the subject, how you feel about it personally.

The idea isn't restricted to just Islam though, as I have read Sikhs or Punjabis do the same as well. I mean, why participate in the activity now when times are different?

Totally against

 

[Doraku]

this is the kind of discussion i love

True there are multiple interpretation on particular matters in islam but the tennets are the same.
The largest section of people claiming to be Muslim is the Ahle sunnah wal jamah(sunni) which i belong to is roughly 82% of all the muslim mass. We do have basically certain degree of internal difference in interpretation which gives rise to different school of thought but it only exist on the fine issues of rulings which are vague in the hadith or Quranic verse. Like saying Basmallah before the surah fatiha(first chap in Quran) in prayer.
3 of the 4 popular school of thought believes that its not necessary one believes it is.
but no school believes that you cant pray 5 times a day that is not there.
The difference within the sunni mass is regarding the concoction of meaning from the vague verse of Quran or hadith which can be interpreted in many ways, thus there are no conflict when the differences of opinion arises in those interpretation.

the conflicts occurs with the different umbrellas in muslims like the sunni and shitte. There are some striking ideological differences between the groups.

I think Sunni and Shitte are similar to Christian and Catholic, while apparently they're the same, in fact they are not. The term "School of thoughts" is not what actually the word I intended to describe the situation, though. It's not like Maliki, Hanafi, etc but more like groups or sects. Actually I've seen with my own eyes several practices by Sunni muslims in my country which can be considered as "heretical" from conservative muslim point of view, since they are disobeying the traditional muslim tenets (such as praying, for example). Well, I think such discrepancies on the religious practices are not only happening in Islam, but I just wanted to assert my point that Islam is not really that strict when it comes to religious text interpretation.

How do you guys feel about honor killing? I'm asking for your thoughts on the subject, how you feel about it personally.

The idea isn't restricted to just Islam though, as I have read Sikhs or Punjabis do the same as well. I mean, why participate in the activity now when times are different?

I'm a freelance believer, can I answer it?

I'm disgusted by the fact that such tradition is still exist on earth. Like in my previous post, I still believe that such tradition is more like a sociological thing rather than a religious one. In a place where the society is so isolated from the modern world, it's not really that strange to find that some of people still do such inhumane action.


So, I want to ask to Muslim people, do you agree with the application of traditional Islamic penal code in the modern society? like the one stated in Koran

[As for] the thief, the male and the female, amputate their hands in recompense for what they committed as a deterrent [punishment] from Allah . And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.

 

[shaheer]

Actually I've seen with my own eyes several practices by Sunni muslims in my country which can be considered as "heretical" from conservative muslim point of view, since they are disobeying the traditional muslim tenets (such as praying, for example).

Well truth be said the pioneer of the madhabs(school of though) were students of one another, their fatwas or religious verdict/opinion are similar in many instances. The major clashes in Sunni school are not issues regarding heretical practices. as for some one disregarding the 5 daily prayers that is not a sunni practice nor a non conservative practice, if you want to claim you are a muslim praying is one thing that you must establish, even if you are non conservative by your claim it is an incumbent practice.
i dont think such people can boldly claim that they are following the sunni practice in the first place to say that they are sunni muslims.

Now as for the sharia or legal rulings of the Quran, yes i am a Muslim its my belief that any practice sanctioned by the Quran or the authentic sunna must be obeyed by the Muslims or Muslim states.
now that is not to say that you find a street urchin pickpocketing you will have to cut his hand no, every ruling of the sharia is not just as it is
to give you an example during the time of the second caliph this particular ruling was not put to practice because there was a famine so people couldn't get food.
The Islamic system of penalty is not a stand alone system, you have to apply all the other practice into place before you go to penalty like you have to make the rich pay zakah you have to have a baytul Maal you have to have the thief stealing a big amount and not something petty and the prosecutor must take it to the court. if the one who stole some thing settled it with some one who he/she stole from the huduud doesn't apply.

i remember that during the time of a caliph called Umar bin Abdul Aziz the people payed zakah so much that there went poor people to give zakah from. now in that situation if a guy steal for the sake of stealing and not to meet is basic needs and that stealing is not like some one came and pick pocketed you its like some one came and stole your safe ie a large sum then yes. The law will be applied

 

[Zehahaha]

Well truth be said the pioneer of the madhabs(school of though) were students of one another, their fatwas or religious verdict/opinion are similar in many instances. The major clashes in Sunni school are not issues regarding heretical practices. as for some one disregarding the 5 daily prayers that is not a sunni practice nor a non conservative practice, if you want to claim you are a muslim praying is one thing that you must establish, even if you are non conservative by your claim it is an incumbent practice.
i dont think such people can boldly claim that they are following the sunni practice in the first place to say that they are sunni muslims.

Now as for the sharia or legal rulings of the Quran, yes i am a Muslim its my belief that any practice sanctioned by the Quran or the authentic sunna must be obeyed by the Muslims or Muslim states.
now that is not to say that you find a street urchin pickpocketing you will have to cut his hand no, every ruling of the sharia is not just as it is
to give you an example during the time of the second caliph this particular ruling was not put to practice because there was a famine so people couldn't get food.
The Islamic system of penalty is not a stand alone system, you have to apply all the other practice into place before you go to penalty like you have to make the rich pay zakah you have to have a baytul Maal you have to have the thief stealing a big amount and not something petty and the prosecutor must take it to the court. if the one who stole some thing settled it with some one who he/she stole from the huduud doesn't apply.

i remember that during the time of a caliph called Umar bin Abdul Aziz the people payed zakah so much that there went poor people to give zakah from. now in that situation if a guy steal for the sake of stealing and not to meet is basic needs and that stealing is not like some one came and pick pocketed you its like some one came and stole your safe ie a large sum then yes. The law will be applied

This

The Sharia goes hand in hand with other practices
As shaheer explained it very well... Personally, the golden age of Islam is the era of the Four Righteous Caliph (and I can add Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz to that since he was considered as the Fifth Righteous Caliph)

Because in my opinion, only Abu Bakr, Umar Ibn Al Khattab, Uthman Ibn Afan and Ali Ibn Abi Talib and finally Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz grasped the essence of Islam

 

[Akainu]

So this stupid movie... what do you think about it and the reactions towards it?

As far as media reports go here, it seems to be a project later redubbed and now used to stir exactly this kind of violence by a known ... well lets call him offender, who already called for burning the Quran causing unrest in Afghanistan. Aside from his strategy being successful, the protests do seem staged to me .-.

 

[shaheer]

So this stupid movie... what do you think about it and the reactions towards it?

As far as media reports go here, it seems to be a project later redubbed and now used to stir exactly this kind of violence by a known ... well lets call him offender, who already called for burning the Quran causing unrest in Afghanistan. Aside from his strategy being successful, the protests do seem staged to me .-.

i learned that an ambassador was killed in the ruckus
Quran 6:151 Say: "Come, I will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from": Join not anything as equal with Him; be good to your parents; kill not your children on a plea of want;- We provide sustenance for you and for them;- come not nigh to shameful deeds. Whether open or secret; take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus doth He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.

But that said the movie terming Islam as a cancer is a some thing that i dont want to comment on
seriously, last time salman rusdie wrote satanic verse huge uproar was ensued which promped 40 muslim death now this which started off with uproar
now who much is really happening and how much is blown out of proportion

and ya the protest seems to be staged but i dont know the details
i am in dark regarding this issue

 

[M3J]

Thank you all for answering the question. :3

But that said the movie terming Islam as a cancer

Basically proves that religion itself is a cancer. If there wasn't such thing as religion, then I don't think stuff like this would happen.



Although Muslims shouldn't have targeted innocent people, I do think they're in some way justified for their anger, considering the movie portrays them in bad light, apparently. It's most likely inaccurate, but I'm not gonna watch the movie so I can't really judge. The filmmaker is either capitalizing on the anti-Islam ideas for money or genuinely believes that the religion sucks. I wonder how he or majority of his religion would react if Muslims reacted with the same kind of film.

Still disgusting how Muslims are unfairly attacked. Sikhs are apparently even brought in the racism too because they look a lot like Muslims. I won't lie that I do get nervous whenever I see Muslims wearing their traditional clothes, but it's no excuse for treating them badly or differently.

 

[Zehahaha]

Bah what do you expect from countries that boasts high levels of illetrecy and a misunderstanding of religion ?
The " film " was clearly targeted towards us, it was a taunt, and dumbasses fell for it

The best reaction to this kind of shit is to ignore it, you don't respond to mediocrity with more mediocrity

The guy who did this wanted this kind of reaction... And people don't get that the guy who made this =/= Governement of the USA
Europe went through its dark age, it's the same for us, and it will just get worse anyway

 

[shaheer]

Basically proves that religion itself is a cancer. If there wasn't such thing as religion, then I don't think stuff like this would happen.

well i agree with you mostly apart from that, these kind of racism based chaos is not routed in religion rather in human psychology, the apartheid the cold war had nothing to do with religion but people suffered though chaos