Ask Me Anything: Muslim Edition

  • Thread starter Thread starter shazirah
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do you say “peace be among them” every time a prophet is mentioned ?
 
In fact one could even argue that it was the Catholic religion that brought about the dark ages of Europe and wasn’t until movements that ultimately decreased the influence of the Church such as the reformation and enlightenment and renaissance that science and philosophy flourished.

Even if one doesn’t buy this argument it’s hard not to notice that the pagan Greek and Romans had great philosophy science and engineering. And when Christianity became a dominant religion in Europe, the dark ages were ushered in.

To be fair though I also don’t think it was religion Islam that achieved the Islamic Golden Age per se. One can see that those caliphs who were more tolerant and open minded, that’s when great advances in civilisation happened. Those caliphs who were more dictatorial in religious matters we then see a downturn in achievements.
 
So in other words a political power struggle cause the split between the Sunni and the Shia and the stronger most powerful won. Not necessarily the right one. Is this not true ?
 
Sharia law is founded on basic principles that almost all scholars agree on. In Islam, we consider actions according to five categories: things that are expressly required by the Koran, things that are meritorious but not required, things that are neutral, things that are ignoble but allowed, and things that are prohibited by the Koran. The schools of jurisprudence govern anything that is not explicitly forbid or required by the Koran as well as interpreting the spirit of the intent of Koranic law. So, while sharia has the same tendencies all over the world, the Koran and hadith allow a lot of room for laws to suit particular places and times at the discretion of qualified judges.
 
Forced marriage is not the same as arranged marriage. For example, I am currently considering an arranged marriage. No one, under Islam or otherwise, can force me to agree to marry that person. My consent is required. If my parents were to try and force or coerce me into marrying the person I’m considering, then that would be illegal both under secular laws and under all but the most ultraconservative interpretations of sharia. What is allowed is for my parents to suggest someone that I might want to consider. If both I and that person consent and a marriage settlement can be reached, then we have an arranged marriage. My father as my Wali is in charge of ensuring that my safety and interests are respected in the arrangement process, but I and the intended groom are the ones who make the decision.

I’ve already addressed the passages that are claimed to allow spousal abuse up above.
 
No side “won” in any sense of the word, and one has to remember that Islam was both a religion and a state in the beginning so the issue of succession has both political and religious ramifications. Sunni are more numerous mostly because the Shia opinion has always been a minority from the beginning and have typically been a bit more aggressive about it. It’s no longer really possible to unravel who started the animosity, as both groups claim the other one did and both sides have not behaved well at various points over time. More people support the idea of elected religious leaders than the existence of a inherited clergical class. Sayyids have always been respected in Islamic culture, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they have a divine right to lead. It’s been a source of great consternation for the Muslim world that the schism exists, but it’s actually starting to fade out more and more in recent history. There are many more “Sushi” Muslims like me with a foot in both worlds and your average Muslim on the street usually considers themselves just Muslim these days. In many places, Sunni and Shia worship together quite happily. There are also now ethnic identities attached to the sects in some places, as Iran and Saudi Arabia are two of the big Shia and Sunni players respectively and they hate each other for reasons that go far beyond religious sectarian problems.
 
Adding the honorific “Peace be upon him” after the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) name is the salawat. Technically it can be included after the name of any recognized prophet. Some Muslims would include the salawat after the names of Jesus, Moses, and David as well. It’s considered respectful, and some people believe that there are spiritual benefits to the practice.
 
Your explanation creates a lot of confusion, which explains the disunity in Islam.
 
If you want to read more about it, I recommend A Concise History of Sunnis and Shi’is by John McHugo as a starting place.
 
It just doesn’t seem that either Christians or Muslims can live in peace. The United Nations signed a declaration in 1992 called Agenda 21. In it the 175 + nations that signed it see religion as a determent to world peace and security and recommended ridding the earth of all organized religion. Have you read that.
 
No, but I have a general distaste for politics and I was but a tot in 1992. I just looked it up, though, and it appears to be the subject of rather melodramatic conspiracy theory type activity, so I’m inclined not to worry about it too much. Anyone who thinks they can eradicate religion is basically shouting at clouds. Religion has been with modern humans for almost our entire history as a species and it’s not going anywhere anytime soon. Even secular people often claim to be “spiritual”, bless their hearts.

I think it’s entirely possible for religions of all kinds to coexist peacefully. There are many places now and in historical times where the Abrahamic religions coexisted quite well. Everywhere I’ve traveled, I’ve come away with the impression that most people in any given population just want to live their lives and not bother others or be bothered. So, we need to magnify those voices to drown out the shouty trouble-makers who try to instigate otherwise peaceful people against each other. People are just people. Your average Muslims are, on the whole, no different from your average Christians. One day, Inshallah, I fully believe we’ll get there as long as there are people who are willing to reach across the divide.
 
Last edited:
Why in the North Caucasus preference is given to Wahhabism?
Wahabis are charismatic Muslims or are they closer to ISIS in philosophy?
 
I can understand and appreciate that you (and many other women) on a personal level have never felt unequal under Islam and it is a reality that the advent of the Islamic religion improved the conditions for women in the Middle East (much greater equality but not total equality) and provided moral guidelines + stability.
Of course thats with the provision that a woman is not forced to follow it or what to wear etc.
Muslim women,just like Christian women can have different views on what modesty means,Muslim women can be “moderate feminists” and so on…

There are lot of people here that live live’s as moderate Muslims and are very lovely people.
The reality is though that most of these people are semi secular/influenced by the culture here and not deeply religious and they don’t know the “ins and outs” of Islam (although they may have a great personal faith in God).
I mean no offence, but unfortunately the “problem” is when someone starts becoming deeply religious/really studying the Quaran as then there are some “questionable” things that Muslims can’t provide satisfactory answers for the “hard questions” or the inconsistencies.

For example you still haven’t answered whether a wife with a higher sexual desire than the husband is permitted a second husband under Islam?
You simply mentioned that Islams teachings are created with the acknowledgement that men/women have different biological needs but you neglect the instances when this isn’t always biologically the case.
There are documented and anecdotal cases of some women with higher sexual desire.
So if Islam is a religion that is truly equal amongst men and women as you state-then surely it allows wives to take a second husband in these circumstances (as it does allows men)?

Sorry if it was mentioned earlier in the thread but out of curiosity,do you mind if I ask what is your background/nationality?
 
Last edited:
I appreciate your wishful thinking but it is not realistic. Religious wars have been fought since the beginning of mankind, and they still are. Politicians have long recognized the benefit of culling religious favor. Most countries have their own state religion which supports them politically. Take Hitler for example. He won his election with the assistance and support of the Catholic Church. [a concordat was signed in I believe 1931] The Muslim world is no different. The governments now realize that to save the planet, religious divisions must be eliminated. The Holy book [the Bible] makes note of this in Revelation chapter 17. You need to study the Bible as much as you do the Koran. Best wishes… Bruce
 
Brucejlb said:
Religious wars have been fought since the beginning of mankind, and they still are. Politicians have long recognized the benefit of culling religious favor.
Click to expand...
I don’t get this. So the politicians are not especially religious but they are using it as an excuse? If there are no religions then they’ll find some other excuse.

So I think shazirah is right. The root cause is still geopolitics. History reflects this assessment.
 
Sorry to address what wasn’t addressed to me but I just wanted to add that arranged marriages are not specific only to Muslims.
An arranged marriage is pretty much the equivalent of being “set up” by your parents (or other relatives) as opposed to a forced marriage where a person is co-erced or pressured to marry someone.
In my (Bosnian Croatian Catholic) background some people did arranged marriages in the Middle Ages.
Ie:people of one village would arrange a single young man to meet a single young woman from a neighbouring village.
Even in America etc there are “arranged marriages” in some form or another-eg:the show Married at First Sight is in essence an arranged marriage (albeit only temporary and not legally binding).
Same for when a friend “matchmakes” and arranged a male and female friend of hers to meet each other.
Arranged marriages are also very common amongst Hindu Indians, and even English monarchies in the past would have done this to some extend-ie:a princess would have been introduced to males from families of “good royal stock” or “prestige” blah blah blah and it would have been disapproved for her to marry some “average guy” from down at the shops etc.
Also Dating agencies are offering an “arrangement” of sorts.

Some people may choose arranged marriages due to tradition,desperation at finding a partner,highly valuing their parents opinions/views and (name removed by moderator)ut,social awkwardness,working in environments where it’s hard to meet someone of the opposite sex etc…
It really just means being open to the parents suggestions and while I can’t speak for Muslims,I think Indian Hindu women do usually meet the man first before agreeing or “rejecting” him.

Iow not every “arranged” marriage is forced.
That’s not to say though that some aren’t forced though in a sense because if a young woman’s parents are poor (or superficial) she may feel pressured to marry the “wealthy” guy option they find where she may have actually loved the “poor village boy” or some men could use women for a visa etc.
 
Last edited:
Are we worried about the Arians waging a war? What about nestorians?
If Muhammad didn’t win all his wars and is confined to a unknown remote place, are we worried about Islam wars?
Are communists the most peaceful?

Religion without geopolitics is nothing. Geopolitics without religion will still have wars. These wars are no different except that the name religion is not attached to it.
 
Last edited:
ratio1 said:
Religion without geopolitics is nothing. Geopolitics without religion will still have wars. These wars are no different except that the name religion is not attached to it.
Click to expand...
Religion provides the motivation for the people to fight. The leaders would have to provide another reason without religion.

The Japanese people believed their emperor was Almighty God during WWII, gave them quite the motivation to continue the fight.
 
Most religions believe their leader is god-like. The crusades and the inquisition
only happened because of people following the leaders of their church. And this holds true to many of the other wars fought in “god’s name”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top