View Full Version : islam question
VAE VICTUS
11-07-2005, 10:29
in america a great curiosity in islam has awakened,while listening to a iman,preacher(not sure what they are called) and his basic sermon was a rip on christianity(he was supposed to be explaining islam) he stated that muslims were relatively spotless when compared to christians. although this very well may be true,have muslims ever spilled innocent blood?(the answer has to be yes,but any specific accounts would be greatly appreciated).
Adrian II
11-07-2005, 15:08
in america a great curiosity in islam has awakened,while listening to a iman,preacher (not sure what they are called) and his basic sermon was a rip on christianity (he was supposed to be explaining islam) he stated that muslims were relatively spotless when compared to christians. although this very well may be true,have muslims ever spilled innocent blood?(the answer has to be yes,but any specific accounts would be greatly appreciated).Some basic research would suffice to demonstrate that the imam/mullah was horribly ill-advised. You can easily do that research yourself, Brother Vae Victus. If you want to discuss the history of Islam, please be more specific. If you want to discuss the imam's views and motives, this thread might be more appropriate for the Backroom.
:bow:
EDIT
My Sticky for historical websites gives all the necessary leads. This site Web Resources for the Study of Islam (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~rs143/Resources/index.html) was originally suggested by Brother Mouzafphaerre.
Mouzafphaerre
11-07-2005, 20:51
.
In addition to that, a semi-extensive Google -or else- search will lead to several websites with searchable and classified Kuran translations (not only in English) and reliable hadith collections. :bow:
.
For reading the Qur'an, I'd recommend the 'The Noble Qur'an' software from Islamasoft (http://www.islamasoft.co.uk/). Quraan.com (www.quraan.com) has the online version of the same translation.
For Hadith (Prophetic traditions), once again, Islamasoft has something called, aptly enough, 'The Hadith Software'. If you wish to view them online, I would recommend you give the excellent USC MSA website (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/) a visit. Four of the six major Hadith collections are there - Bukhari, Muslim, Malik's Muwatta, and Abu Dawud. Before you actually browse the collections, read that page and the topics under 'the Science of Hadith' to give you the proper perspective on how Muslims use Hadith, and how they have been transmitted.
Enjoy your readings!
Mouzafphaerre
11-08-2005, 00:21
.
Thanks for the website. :bow:
.
BalkanTourist
11-08-2005, 07:10
There is a really good book that I read recently - A Time of Violence. Although a fiction it closely depicts the 17th century forced islamization of the Rhodope mountains in Bulgaria by the Ottoman Turks. Faced with a decline after the siege of Vienna, the Ottomans turned on their christian subjects who were left to worship their religion before. In the story, a janissary who was taken by a Bulgarian village in the Rhodopes comes back with a detachment to convert the whole region to the "true" faith. The plot is just heart breaking and there is a lot of blood to be shed in this beautiful place high in the mountains. There were three villages before Karaibrahim came, two were annihilated and one remained which now had the remaining Bulgarians joining the new faith.
The Turks would come to a village and would gather everyone at the central plaza. There'd be two ways - the right way where turbans and women's muslim clothes awaited and the left way with a log and an axe. You keep your faith - you lose your head, you keep your head - you lose your faith. There are about 200,000 Bulgarians left who are isolated in the Rhodope mountains to the south of Bulgaria. They speak no Turkish, but are moslems. They are discendant of the ones forcibly converted and are called Pomaks. Some of them are turning back to christianity, yet some are falling under the influence of islamic fundamentalists from Saudi Arabia, who set up madrasas (religious schools) teaching intolerance against christians.
Just A Girl
11-08-2005, 08:04
You cant just say Islamic like that and Tar all islamic people with the same brush.
Some Beleve in islamic Pluralism, They Embrace music,
These good people, And they ARE good people, Arent people who go terrorizing people.
They sing about the love of god and i concider them to be Purer than Christians. (cos cristians Killed Many people to force there religion in to such a high % of belevers), "after all if you had a choice, Renounce your faith or be burned alive... What would you do?"
but Other islamic groups Condem music.
and just like the christians did are attacking other religions They deem to be Wrong,
Please define which Islamic group you mean.
Here is a Quote from. the holy book of Qur'an
"Believers, Jews, Christians, and Sabaeans -- whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is right -- shall be rewarded by their Lord; they have nothing to fear or to regret." Qur'an 2:62
P.s
Maby this would be beter suited in the backroom.
Samurai Waki
11-08-2005, 08:54
A good former friend of mine (lost contact) came to the US to study mechanical engineering. I once asked him what he thought about americans, christians, and jews. He told me that America was a terrible place, it was full of "non believers"...yet it was still the greatest place he has ever been and wouldn't want it to change otherwise. He said that at least in the US you had a choice wether to be a muslim or not. He said that most people in Iran that he knew where secretly atheist, and the gap in Iran continuously grows between the fervent and the spiteful. His grandmother would pray for forgiveness every day for being born a muslim, and even though he was continuously told throughout his life that Islam is the greatest religion in the world, in the underground of Iranian society it is widely hated for bringing them so much misery.
Eventually he ran into an Imam who was teaching a more moderate form of shi'ite Islam, of course he had been downcasted from teaching Islam because of his "liberal" views, he told them to continue their lives as normal, go to the mosques, but do not listen to the state sponsored mullahs or Imams, they teach a perverted form of the religion, much like the Catholics did during the 14th-15th century, but Iran and the muslim world will eventually have their "Martin Luther" who will shake the very foundation of muslim society, and the bondage that muslims have endured for the last 1400 years will be lifted. He said he had learned the real Islam and embraces it for it's openness, and peaceful nature towards every man and woman, Islam...Christian...Jew or not at all.
I think this radical form of Islam is just a phase, it will die out in time, and be replaced with something better. I think history will repeat itself, and the Islamic dark age will eventually turn into an age of enlightenment. Discontent is growing in the underground, especially in Iran. American...or allied invasion will not be necessary I think, but he believes, and I believe as well that in our lifetime that nations like Iran will throw off their shackles and sieze power for themselves. Perhaps not in the same form that happened in the west, but in a similar fashion (Spanish Inquistion anyone). I do not think that radicalism can last for long before it wears itself out. and Muslims at heart are peace loving and kind.
Kind Regards,
~Waki
Just A Girl
11-08-2005, 09:24
and Muslims at heart are peace loving and kind.
Kind Regards,
~Waki
This is correct.
But it all depends on wich Islamic teachings they belive in.
As i said in my previous post,
Some are true to their religion WHICH has NEVER said music is bad or other religions are bad.,
"The belief in Allah, God, Jehovah Or what ever other name you would give the almighty Is all you need to have"
And then there are some who have been taught A different interpretation of the religion,
Where they Condem music and other forms of religion, Which is basically what happens to all religions at some time or another,
But as you said,
as In the case of other religions This could just be a passing phase Which will eventually Give in to enlightenment,
Weebeast
11-08-2005, 11:03
When people relate America with being free it's the freedom to choose religion. That's true. In Indonesia bunch of muslim fanatics could just close a bar without asking proper law and stuff.
Anyway, don't listen to 'sermon,' just read the holybook[s] yourself.
Leet Eriksson
11-08-2005, 12:39
Muslim preachers (Da'ya/Da'ia, singular, Du'aa, plural) usually talk about the benefits of converting to islam and not ripping on other religions.
Your best bet is ignoring them, i been in debates, its pretty unfortunate some people are very blind and hate other becuase of their religion.
ajaxfetish
11-08-2005, 16:40
You cant just say Islamic like that and Tar all islamic people with the same brush.
. . .
i concider them to be Purer than Christians. (cos cristians Killed Many people to force there religion in to such a high % of belevers), "after all if you had a choice, Renounce your faith or be burned alive... What would you do?"
Perhaps Muslims aren't the only ones who shouldn't be lumped together and stereotyped?
Ajax
Papewaio
11-09-2005, 01:34
When people relate America with being free it's the freedom to choose religion. That's true. In Indonesia bunch of muslim fanatics could just close a bar without asking proper law and stuff.
Anyway, don't listen to 'sermon,' just read the holybook[s] yourself.
How many bars in Indonesia have you been to?
kataphraktoi
11-09-2005, 03:57
Keep it simple:
You want to know what a religion/belief system is? Just read their sacred texts and form a conclusion yourself.
You've got to divorce what the sacred texts stand for and what believers do to form your own opinion.
If I was to listen to stupid Mullahs calling for the destruction of Israel of the face of the earth, i would think that Islam was a militant belief system. If you read the Quran, however, it is not so much militant, but more a complete way of lfie that specifies principles, values and beliefs to live by. Likewise, if all I saw were Christian televangelists telling me that I'm not doing God's will if I don't blow my salary to help purchase their gold watches and plush grand church buildings, I'd think that Christianity was one great big con-man's paradise. If you read the Bible, principles such as forgiveness and unconditional love are proscribed as ways to live. The world certainly needs more forgiveness and unconditional love nowadays.
Watchman
11-10-2005, 09:20
A few centuries after the death of Gautama Bussha, a Sri Lankan prince mounted a Buddhist relic on his spear and went on a crusade against his Hindu neighbors. And the Buddhist monasteries of Japan used to sort out their dogmatic disputed with private armies.
The moral of the story ?
It doesn't really matter what a faith teaches - sooner or later someone will kill in its name, and feel extremely pious and justified in doing so. And let's not even get started on the liberties that sooner or later get taken with interpretations for the sake of temporal expediency - the convoluted arguments the Church had to develop to resolve the glaringly obvious discrepancy between the ideals of the warrior class and its masters on one side and the pacifistic ideals of Christianity are a good example of that. Well, actually, it was rather older - regardless of what had once been taught, it became necessary for a Christian to be capable of being a soldier the second the Roman Empire went Christian and had to be defended against invading pagans... ~:rolleyes:
Well, you get the idea. Nothing, but nothing, drags down the noblest of ideals like the practical necessities of an uncaring reality.
ajaxfetish
11-10-2005, 16:53
Well put. :bow:
Ajax
VAE VICTUS
11-11-2005, 00:24
This is correct.
But it all depends on wich Islamic teachings they belive in.
As i said in my previous post,
Some are true to their religion WHICH has NEVER said music is bad or other religions are bad.,
,
paganism is well, many different religions, if i am correct the Q'uran denounces pagans as unbelievers.
Leet Eriksson
11-11-2005, 00:32
paganism is well, many different religions, if i am correct the Q'uran denounces pagans as unbelievers.
Well everyone denounces pagans as unbelievers anyway ~;p
but nothing is wrong with someone calling you unbeliever, as long as you believe in something just ignore them.
Just A Girl
11-11-2005, 00:50
Perhaps Muslims aren't the only ones who shouldn't be lumped together and stereotyped?
Ajax
It was a responce to the question,
but i guess its hypocrytical
Wazikashi, I doubt that there will ever be a muslim Martin Luther.
The dogma of Islam is more set in stone than the one of christianity ever was. Not because it is more invasive, but because the words of Quran are considered the perfect words of Allah. Thus they can't be altered ever, and any line in it is holy.
So what Martin Luther did, that is to deal with a few rather odd points is not possible. His more political, or should we say anti-political issues would also be problematic as Islam is political in nature where Christianity has seen the church TRY to make it politcal without a proper background (it couldn't fall back on holy scriptures and was thus more easily attacked by people like ML).
I think it is up to each muslim out there to form his own opinion if we are to see any change, and in many countries they do so. People are in general pragmatic and fair, they know that hate is not way forward.
Why do you think that we see western muslims be part of society and actually like being citizens of whatever country they are in? Because they are just like you and me and understands that certain aspects of religion is not all that great.
Besides ML was a pigheaded bigot (despite being a social visionary), and I most certainly wouldn't like his muslim counterpart to pop up now. That would be extremely dangerous.
yesdachi
11-11-2005, 18:15
Keep it simple:
You want to know what a religion/belief system is? Just read their sacred texts and form a conclusion yourself.
I agree to a point but not completely. The “sacred texts” are sometimes tough to read. As an example many phrases in the bible have been interpreted to mean multiple things. I have participated in a few bible studies and after hearing the way others understood some of the phrases it amazed me how our own experiences cloud the way we understand things we read (note: I don’t blindly trust what the study leader suggested was the true interpretation either, one reason I don’t go anymore). I would recommend a combination of both reading and discussing. (Another note: knowing a religion/belief is often a bit different than knowing the practice of the religion/belief.):bow:
kataphraktoi
11-15-2005, 14:00
When I referred to sacred texts, I mean the parts that are discernible and clear, not the controversial, more esoteric stuff.
Eg. Love your neighbour.
Easy enough to understand. Unless someone manages to turn it into a justification of homosexuality. ~D
It is true that practical realities force revisions of spiritual perspectives but that is the problem. But some religions advocated non-entrenchment within the social system: politics, army, etc, etc.
Martin Luther was funny. He's like an irascible irritable fanatic senior citizen.
Gosh. WHy doesnt everyone just forgive each other....maybe if we did we wouldn't hav3e Total War.~D
Incongruous
11-19-2005, 00:04
Deos anyone know why people seem to think it ok to bash Christians but when someone bash's Islam Lefty's and Righty's alike bring out the heavy artillery?
Watchman
11-19-2005, 00:33
'Cause Christianity is pretty much something of an "our thing" - so it's okay for us to diss it too. Islam is not "our thing"; it's somebody elses, and that somebody often takes it quite seriously (certainly more so than we thoroughly secularized, cynical, godless Westerners tend to take ours) - so it would be quite rude to diss it, all the more so as our firsthand knowledge tends to be limited indeed.
I for one am perfectly okay with Muslims themselves hitting it with big hammers if they want to, though. That's just a sign of healthy growth.
Weebeast
11-19-2005, 01:17
How many bars in Indonesia have you been to?
I don't know, not many. I'm not into crowded places that much. Why?
The Wizard
11-20-2005, 03:42
When people relate America with being free it's the freedom to choose religion. That's true. In Indonesia bunch of muslim fanatics could just close a bar without asking proper law and stuff.
Anyway, don't listen to 'sermon,' just read the holybook[s] yourself.
Indonesia is one of the most liberal of the Muslim countries.
And Tarrak, my friend -- already in the 9th centuries Muslim philosophers and scientists established the fact that the Qur'an was written down by people. Not by Muhammad, and not by God, but by people who wrote down what Muhammad had said.
Therefore, the Qur'an could be wrong. And therefore, in the 9th century, when the Church was just beginning to slip into its decadence and revelry after having been granted power by the Carolingians, Islam determined that if there ever was any doubt to be expressed on the text of the Qur'an by scientific discoveries, then those discoveries and not the text of the Qur'an should get precedence.
Adrian II
11-20-2005, 03:50
Deos anyone know why people seem to think it ok to bash Christians (..)It is not OK to bash Christians here and it never has been. People have been warned and berated for it, some have termporarily lost editing, forum access and other privileges because of it. Offensive posts have been deleted or corrected by moderators, posters have apologised for bad posts, and the whole matter has been amply discussed here and in the Watchtower to make doubly sure that everyone got the message.
Mouzafphaerre
11-20-2005, 09:10
.
And Tarrak, my friend -- already in the 9th centuries Muslim philosophers and scientists established the fact that the Qur'an was written down by people. Not by Muhammad, and not by God, but by people who wrote down what Muhammad had said.
That's definitely against the foundation of Islamic faith. The Qur'an was reveletad to the Prophet in divine meaning and transmitted to human intelligibility in his speaking. As the verses came down, they were immediately dictated by him to secretaries responsible for doing that specific job. It is God's word, it is unfailable and it can't be wrong. Anything out of these bundaries is also out of Islamic faith.
.
Papewaio
11-20-2005, 11:49
In Indonesia bunch of muslim fanatics could just close a bar without asking proper law and stuff.
How many bars in Indonesia have you been to?
I don't know, not many. I'm not into crowded places that much. Why?
Well off the top of my head of have gone to at least eight.
4 in Jakarta, 2 in Sumatra and the rest in Borneo.
I have drank with Muslims... just like Christians they will break with the strictly fundamental viewpoints and/or do 'the wrong thing'... I have also taken a very drunk Muslim friend home to have his two wives with arms crosses, standing on their front porch tapping their feet in disgust with their husband... me and the other geos made a hasty retreat at that point like whipped dogs.
In fact I drank more alcohol in Indonesia and had easier access to it in shopping centres then I did in Kalgoolie... which ain't light on beer.
Yes fanatics do lots of things like blow people up... one has to remember that a country that has the population of USA and a capital city with a population almost as much as Australia has in total that you will get a whole diverse spectrum of people.
From my time I worked in Indonesia they are some of the nicest, friendly and easy going people. That is the vast majority that I had day to day dealings with... all the locals dislike the Javanese though due to the amount of explotation... but it was more like the way we view our politicans then any real level of hatred.
So I would say take a look at your local newspaper... imagine if your locality was judged by all the morons and violent idiots... would it be an accurate discripton or inaccurate to base all ones views on them?
Weebeast
11-20-2005, 14:22
Indonesia is one of the most liberal of the Muslim countries.
Well not everywhere really. Trust me, I was born there, lived there for more than 16 years. I went to school. I was born muslim (technically still muslim now as I never converted to anything else although you can argue I'm an infidel). I can say it's still equally populated by both. You know people there get 'religion education' at school, right? That's not liberation.
From my time I worked in Indonesia they are some of the nicest, friendly and easy going people. That is the vast majority that I had day to day dealings with... all the locals dislike the Javanese though due to the amount of explotation...
That's true. Most people in urban places like tourists/ guests. You said the locals dislike Javanese so you're not in Java then? Where were you, may I ask?
It's very easy to get alcohol - not to mention you don't need ID's in first place, but that's more of a goverment thing than religion. ~D
I was just saying that in America is much more "free" and fun whether or not you have a religion. The fact is Indonesia is still that extreme. I never said, "Oh all Indonesians are bunch of stupid zealots." I know it's pretty diverse - not to mention there are other major religions there such as Christianity, Hinduism, Budhism. I know damn well that my family is pretty diverse as my christian aunt celebrates christmas.
Wazikashi, I doubt that there will ever be a muslim Martin Luther.
The dogma of Islam is more set in stone than the one of christianity ever was. Not because it is more invasive, but because the words of Quran are considered the perfect words of Allah. Thus they can't be altered ever, and any line in it is holy.
Everytime a muslim does something, that person says "Bismillahi Rahmanir Rohhim[sp]" which means "in the name of Allah, the giver, the lover." It is also mentioned somewhere that Allah always forgives. It is also said Allah is the best of the best which translates than Allah could be the most understanding ...thing. It means in some circumstances you may do something a little different than what's written in the book. For example, muslims can't eat pork but why? They say it's dirty but it's not the same anymore like back in the days. We have food inspector now. Also beef and chicken are more expensive than pork (at least at Safeways). Then again, I'm just an infidel.
Everytime a muslim does something, that person says "Bismillahi Rahmanir Rohhim[sp]" which means "in the name of Allah, the giver, the lover." It is also mentioned somewhere that Allah always forgives. It is also said Allah is the best of the best which translates than Allah could be the most understanding ...thing. It means in some circumstances you may do something a little different than what's written in the book. For example, muslims can't eat pork but why? They say it's dirty but it's not the same anymore like back in the days. We have food inspector now. Also beef and chicken are more expensive than pork (at least at Safeways). Then again, I'm just an infidel.
In complete agreement.
There was a reason why pork was banned, it was directly unhealthy in Arabia and other hot areas because of the physiology of the pig. But today we work around that. It is not unhealthy anymore.
The same is true for the halal and shik (or what it is called in Hebrew), where you cut the throat of the animal and let it bleed to death by its own fear (fear causes the animal to produce lots of adrenaline which in turn stresses it so that it tenses all the muscles, forcing out the blood). That is plain cruel if it hasn't got a damn good reason. That reason is that blood becomes poisonous if it isn't cooled, and we all know that that wa pretty hard back even 150 years ago. But today that is not the case.
Here in Denmark we have forced a legislation through that the animal MUST be knocked out first, in the case of big animals it is by the use of a sort hammer-pistol to the forehead.
But since these things are so hardcoded into religion you can't argue with it, because the other side just says: "Look, it says right here that blah blah blah... So you see it is decreed by God/Allah."
Papewaio
11-21-2005, 04:24
That's true. Most people in urban places like tourists/ guests. You said the locals dislike Javanese so you're not in Java then? Where were you, may I ask?
I was working in Sumatra and Borneo, with stopovers in Jakarta.
Working in gold exploration with the local guys mainly. The mine adminstrators were primarily from Jakarta and would tell us that they had cleared it with the local farmers that we could explore on their land... except half the time they had not cleared it and we had to come back the next day... this would annoy the exploration field hands who were locals and related to the farmers, and the geophysicists who would lose time on very time dependent projects.
All because when you ask someone if they have done something they will answer "Yes" even if they havn't as they don't want to lose face. ~:eek:
The Wizard
11-28-2005, 18:08
Well not everywhere really. Trust me, I was born there, lived there for more than 16 years. I went to school. I was born muslim (technically still muslim now as I never converted to anything else although you can argue I'm an infidel). I can say it's still equally populated by both. You know people there get 'religion education' at school, right? That's not liberation.
Perhaps liberal was not the right word.
Think of it as... not extreme. More akin to secularity. Wasn't there this Indonesian (read: Javanese) leader who preached acceptance etc., making Indonesia one of the least 'radical' countries as far as Islam goes out there? I read about this man in one of the primary newspapers here, NRC Handelsblad.
One question though, on Indonesia: is it true that Dutch still binds the disparate regions more than Malay does? What is the influence of the Dutch colonial structure of the region -- Nederlands-Indië -- on the modern state of Indonesia? I'm Dutch, therefore I'm interested in our current role in Indonesian society. ~;)
Mouza -- same here. Also read about this Islamic scholar I mentioned in NRC Handelsblad. Dammit, I should archive interesting (historical) articles in there ~;p
Tarrak -- we (ashkenazim; not sure about sephardi and sabra Jews) call it kosher. And it's quite good ~D
Mouzafphaerre
11-28-2005, 22:13
.
Tarrak -- we (ashkenazim; not sure about sephardi and sabra Jews) call it kosher. And it's quite good ~D
Hey, you're Jewish? Sephardim call it kasher. (If you're a strict Muslim abroad and don't want to pretend being a vegetarian, find a Jewish restaurant. ~D)
.
The Wizard
11-28-2005, 23:44
Yep, not an orthodox one though. I prefer some pig's meat here and there every now and then. ~;)
Although I gotta agree with orthodox Jews and strict Muslims: the pig isn't a clean animal, and as such, I don't enjoy its meat quite as much as I do a cow's or another animal's. ~;p
doc_bean
12-01-2005, 16:01
[I]
I have drank with Muslims... just like Christians they will break with the strictly fundamental viewpoints and/or do 'the wrong thing'... I have also taken a very drunk Muslim friend home to have his two wives with arms crosses, standing on their front porch tapping their feet in disgust with their husband... me and the other geos made a hasty retreat at that point like whipped dogs.
In fact I drank more alcohol in Indonesia and had easier access to it in shopping centres then I did in Kalgoolie... which ain't light on beer.
Technically, isn't it just *wine* which is forbidden by the Quo'ran ?
Bah, pigs are no dirtier naturally than pigs or cows.
And even in their pens they'll divide into clean and dirty areas.
The problem arises because they're a much more tolerant, less disease prone animal, if you leave a pig in 3 inches of mud he'll get by for a while where a sheep will come down with rot fairly quick. Also, since they're not grazers they don't neccacarily need access to open spaces, but they should get it nonetheless.
Go to a well run organic farm and see how pigs should be cared for.
Also, Saladin drank as a young man and only after going to Egypt and becoming more orthodox did he give it up I thought?
Mouzafphaerre
12-01-2005, 16:35
Technically, isn't it just *wine* which is forbidden by the Quo'ran ?
.
No. Anything with the nature of making you drunk.
A Muslim breaking the rule is a person on his/her own. The rule prevails.
.
Just A Girl
12-01-2005, 16:50
I thought Drinking wanst dissalowed but geting drunk was.
Years ago before they figured out how to Make water drinkable and not get ill,
Alcohol was the best drink to drink As the brewing process, caused it to become clean.
I know that in most places way back when,
that Ale was usualy drank and a really weak ale was breewed for children,
I thought hotter countrys did the same but with wine.
Prehaps when people lernt to boil water to make it clean they re-assesed the pro's and con's of drinking.
.
No. Anything with the nature of making you drunk.
A Muslim breaking the rule is a person on his/her own. The rule prevails.
.
Now that we have someone here who knows this stuff, I want to know how deep the rules are.
Are they so that a Muslim who has a drink goes to hell or something? Likewise with pigs?
Also does this also mean hashish and khat which are both rather well(ab)used by the muslim community here in Copenhagen?
Mouzafphaerre
12-01-2005, 20:22
Now that we have someone here who knows this stuff, I want to know how deep the rules are.
Are they so that a Muslim who has a drink goes to hell or something? Likewise with pigs?
Also does this also mean hashish and khat which are both rather well(ab)used by the muslim community here in Copenhagen?
.
Who ever goes to hell or something (~;)) can only be determined by the divine will. But drinking stuff with the potential of making one drunk is strictly prohibited even at the minimum possible amount.
"Poisoning yourself" is also forbidden. What the members of the muslim community in Copenhagen you report are doing is in violation with the faith.
Whoever follows the rules and prohibitions at what strictness is totally a personal choice; you make your own choice and withstand the consequences. I don't drink a drop while my uncle has two restaurants (one of them being a "meyhâne", particularly for drinking, as opposed to having drinks with the meal) but neither of us can change the rules. (Not that I'm the most pious muslim you can find, just for example...)
Can lookup the exact references for you if you wish.
.
Mouzaphere, how is it that you can read/write Ottoman (Turkish in Arabic script, and previous to the systematic de-Arabization and de-Persianization)?
Mouzafphaerre
12-01-2005, 21:22
.
Learned it when I was a kid. It's easy, I taught two friends two years ago in about two weeks. That said, I can't "recite" it really fluently but that's due to my lack of reading practice (<-- laziness).
.
.
Who ever goes to hell or something (~;)) can only be determined by the divine will. But drinking stuff with the potential of making one drunk is strictly prohibited even at the minimum possible amount.
"Poisoning yourself" is also forbidden. What the members of the muslim community in Copenhagen you report are doing is in violation with the faith.
Whoever follows the rules and prohibitions at what strictness is totally a personal choice; you make your own choice and withstand the consequences. I don't drink a drop while my uncle has two restaurants (one of them being a "meyhâne", particularly for drinking, as opposed to having drinks with the meal) but neither of us can change the rules. (Not that I'm the most pious muslim you can find, just for example...)
Can lookup the exact references for you if you wish.
.
No no, this is fine, unless you really want to of course.
But this 'poisoning' wouldn't that realistically include tobacco? If anything it is poison and nicotine does give a slight 'high'. Is it really that vaguely expressed?
But now you mention something that could be interpreted as muslims could in fact drink alcoholic drink if they just didn't get drunk or try to do so. After all I like good beer for its taste, not for the sake of getting drunk (that is only an added benefit if I'm out, but usually I only drink good beer in unison with food or simply for the taste alone). This would fit well with a muslim 'direction' where you are indeed allowed to drink beer and wine and stuff (haven't inquired if getting drunk is implied though).
Btw I have hear that Turks are fairly liberal when it comes to alcohol, true?
Just A Girl
12-01-2005, 22:32
Mozafphaerre.....
Did you see my post about Ale and wine a few posts back?
if not
could you see your way to reading it then giving me your oppinion of my post?
Mouzafphaerre
12-02-2005, 00:44
.
What kind of an opinion? It seems to me like a sociological assumption or hypothesis. Might be true in certain communities in a certain period of time, or not. I don't know.
Kraxis,
The "poisoning" part is me paraphrasing. Tobacco has been a major issue of debate among scholars but the majority opinion seems to be against its abuse, not itself. Smoking tobacco won't make you lose your consciousness or make you drunk. Its abuse, OTOH, is a matter of harming your own body, which isn't really yours but given under your posession for your life period; which you must take care of during that period until you "return" it to the ultimate owner.
Although I'm more knowledgable in Islam than the average person, I'm still no expert and wouldn't wish to give false information. Will consult sources and return. ~;)
.
“The "poisoning" part is me paraphrasing. Tobacco has been a major issue of debate among scholars but the majority opinion seems to be against its abuse, not itself. Smoking tobacco won't make you lose your consciousness or make you drunk. Its abuse, OTOH, is a matter of harming your own body, which isn't really yours but given under your posession for your life period; which you must take care of during that period until you "return" it to the ultimate owner.”
Interesting point you point out but what about hashish? I read somewhere that the Old Man in the Mountain gave this kind of product to his followers to give them a taste of the future paradise waiting them after they assassinate some crusaders and the ineluctable death after this act? I went in different Muslim countries and I saw a lot of drugs such as kat in Yemen, or kif in Marrocco.~:confused:
And if the Talibans were against opium, the Afghans were know for their crops...~D
Mouzafphaerre
12-06-2005, 00:48
.
Hasan Sabbah (the Old Man in the Mountain) was part of a "heretic" cult. They had little if any connection with Islam, save their names. Hashsi is forbidden, no question about that. But the prohibition fits in a different "act" that the one about becoming drunk, AFAIK.
As I said above, people may think and do whatever they want and still claim having the faith; it doesn't affect the stance of the faith itself. I've seen such extreme ones, as one particular Wiki edit warrior Dr.Something, who was utterly denouncing one of the essential elements of the faith and insistently reediting my corrections. (At one point I gave up. That said, don't rely the Wiki on Islamic faith issues as a source.)
.
Watchman
12-07-2005, 21:53
I understand the Assassins were a pretty fringe sect of an already pretty fringe branch of a splinter of the Shi'ite side of Islam, which when you think about is also something of a splinter sect. You don't get much farther away from mainstream religion than that, methinks. I've also read the buggers eventually went and ended up as de facto atheists - something about "religion being but a veil over the Truth" being what I've read about it, but no details. Anyway, one of the Old Men was dumb enough to make the matter public, earning the utter hatred of all good Muslims on the side (not that the Assasins had ever been very popular) and not too long afterwards providing the Mongols with a lot of highly motivated volunteers to assault the sect's strongholds with...
That said, one doesn't need to look very carefully at them history books to find out Muslims don't seem to have been markedly more faithful about their particular ban on intoxicants (or less creative in inventing loopholes) than any other believers about theirs'; ecce homo, I guess.
EDIT: Oh, Brenus ? The Taliban actually took the "no drugs" line quite seriously; during their reign the total output of Afghanistan absolutely collapsed. The place was shipping out record tonnage only a year or two after they were gone, tho'.
“Oh, Brenus ? The Taliban actually took the "no drugs" line quite seriously;” Yeap, I know. The same thing for music and all others things like freedom of speech, religion, equality and others decadent’s aspect of the rotten Westerners… They were deadly serious…
“Hasan Sabbah (the Old Man in the Mountain) was part of a "heretic" cult.” I am quiet surprise by the use of the world Heretic concerning Islam. Islam has no equivalent of the Pope. For what I know, Islam is based on the interpretation of the Koran (Sunnites) and the way show by Mahomet during his life (Shiites). That gives a plural point of view and different thinkers and scholars… So the Sufism, the Wahabism (sp), the Dervishes and so…
I thing you can have heretic only in religions were you have a clear leader and a doctrine which can’t be questioned, a dogma. If you don’t accept that God, Jesus and the Holly Ghost are one, you can’t be a Christian. If you don’t accept Mary as virgin, you can’t be a Catholic. All possible developments are heretic (as learned by the Cathares)~D
Watchman
12-07-2005, 22:43
*shrug* The Taliban were hardcore puritans, with all that entails. But you gotta hand it to them - whatever the practical necessities of financing their doings may have dictated, they didn't get sloppy over opium. I find consistent fundamentalists to be marginally more palatable than hypocritical ones.
It is my understanding that Islam works on a sort of consensus. Obviously Sunnis and Shi'ites tend to have a strong concensus among themselves that the other group is little short of a bunch of heretics, reprobates, apostates etc. etc. (kinda like Catholics and Protestants whenever they get hardline), but both rather universally agreed the Assasins were everything that and more, plus rotten bastards, dangerous loons and generally despicable eyesores.
So, by general consensus, the Assasins were "heretics". ~D
“I find consistent fundamentalists to be marginally more palatable than hypocritical ones.” I can’t agree with that. I prefer corruption to fundamentalism. You’ve got a chance to buy the judge and to escaper the flames…~:)
Watchman
12-07-2005, 23:08
Notice I was talking about hypocritical fundamentalists. You know, the sort of "true believer" who nonetheless excuses himself of assorted breaches of conduct.
Opportunistic bastards don't really count as that, since it can be argued they only actually believe in opportunism anyway.
So, if I have to choose from two varieties of "true believers", I'll prefer the ones who stick to their rules consistently. The holier-than-thou sorts who don't follow their own rules under assorted pretexts really turn my stomach.
Callous opportunists are preferable to either, however. They can be reasoned with.
Mouzafphaerre
12-08-2005, 00:35
.
Brenus,
I used the word heretic in quotes on purpose. It has no formal place in Islam, true.
.
Actually the Taliban were a bit hypocritical... Not much though.
When they fled they left a hoard of computers that had emails sent between top leaders of the Taliban and Al Qaida (interchangeably). What was found was of little worth to Intelligence, but it gave an insight into the daily life. There seems to have been a bit of a problem with members having sex with several women who weren't their wives... Obviously nothing real was done about it as it would have been a serious blow to them if it was exposed. by the time it was found out it was largely ignored by our media (hey it contained no juicy information for the war so it got little attention back then).
Watchman
12-08-2005, 08:39
Ecce homo.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.