Resolution On Being Faithful Muslims and Loyal Americans

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahimsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hussein was in collusion with the Nazis when they were emerging in the 1920’s…this was the beginning of the Muslim Brotherhood, and there were Arab sponsored pogroms of Jews then as well.

Hussein was the uncle of Arafat.

I read that the Copt Christians are suffering the worst persecution in hundreds of years. I see what American military strategy did to the Iraqi Christians, what has happened to the Afghan Christian population…it is there, women in burkas making the sign of the cross before our troops when they first were arriving…what is happening to the Palestinian Christians…met an artisan last Advent and the violence is running them out…the israeli government agitating the Muslims who were allowed to build a mosque in front of the church in Nazareth…hearing the minoret on Christmas day, and several years ago, coming out of Christmas Day Mass with Muslim believers on mats outside their front door praying…A Catholic priest and others tell me the most uncharitable behavior is that of the Israelis in the areas they have been.

An interesting and informative site, www.salvationisfromthejews.com…a Jew who became Catholic and states he is more Jewish now than before.

Jerusalem has been overcome various times in its history…but everything is pointing to Christ as the means of lasting peace…but present times look like things are coming to some kind of apex or climax…

An Irish priest is telling his clerics for a forthcoming Eucharistic Congress to put on sackcloth and ashes for the scandals there and the times we are living in regarding our own church as well.
 
Crdl2Grv said:
nytimes.com/2011/11/01/opinion/israel-and-the-apartheid-slander.html?_r=1

Aaaaaaand cue POC speculating about my race/ethnicity in 3…2…1…
Click to expand...
I’m sorry I have given that impression; I’m aware I come across as a bit of a pompous a.ss (meaning donkey in my country). Forgive me
Thank-you for the link. It is hard to get a clear picture of The Israel - Palestein conflict as there is so much propaganda. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the subject, sounds like manualman is your man.
However, I do question the objectivity of the New York Times, since it is so heavily Jewish. The same paper also praised Joan Peters’ ‘Myth’ which has to be one of the greatest works of fiction in recent times. Anyway, the article has brought to my attention an interesting point.
Generally see Islam as more my ‘field’
 
Khalid said:
“Qur’an and Hadith only” is Salafism and Wahhabism (they love to call themselves “ahl al hadith”, the people of the hadith, instead of “ahl al sunnah wa jama’ah”, the people of the Sunnah and the Community, of Sunni Islam). Middle roads (between pure Koranic and Hadithic literalism and complete obscurantism/allegory) are the Four Schools. Sufism is Qur’an, Hadith (not always the standard Sunni “sahih” ones either, so, like the Four Books of Shi’i, almost “different hadith”, and almost always interpreted in an extremely creative way), and a bunch of mystical literature (from my experience, Rumi’s poetry is held to be almost canonical).
Click to expand...
Sorry missed this 😊 may have covered some of the same ground. Yes this would seem fair. Wouldn’t say Sunni ‘sahih’ ones I don’t think, since they are Sunni (well the Sunni ones :p) but only a slight quibble. Of course there are ahadith that are mentioned by Sufis that donot fit the sahih criteria of the muhadithun such as the ‘hidden treasure’ one, but again there is a difference in stringency of criteria for law and say encouragement, as I’m sure you know.
Thanks for the Copt admonishment… Although I really meant and also Arabs, but no matter 👍
 
manualman said:
You calling me a ‘Know it all?’

Hey, how come my foot feels all comfortable and supported all the sudden…😃
Click to expand...
You made an interesting post, sounds like you could offer a little more on the subject. Also perhaps some of my comments were a little ill thought out with reference to Zionism (by this i mean the modern atheistic movement) given my fairly limited knowledge (a couple of books mainly focused on limited Zionist literature)… Easy to make throw away comments and since that’s my main objection to some posts then a bit hypocritical really - sorry.
Was the ‘foot’ thing reference to another post? I forget
 
Nah, the shoe just fits, I AM an irksome know it all…

I think the big deal is to be careful of the definition of Zionism (did I say this already?) There may be some ‘zionists’ who hold dreadfully evil goals (possibly among their settlers, IMO). But the more generic definition, and that more widely held is “We’d like to have our own country where we can make sure we don’t get screwed again, please.” IMO it’s hard to argue with that definition.
 
manualman said:
Nah, the shoe just fits, I AM an irksome know it all…

I think the big deal is to be careful of the definition of Zionism (did I say this already?) There may be some ‘zionists’ who hold dreadfully evil goals (possibly among their settlers, IMO). But the more generic definition, and that more widely held is “We’d like to have our own country where we can make sure we don’t get screwed again, please.” IMO it’s hard to argue with that definition.
Click to expand...
Defo agree with the importance of definition 👍
I was reading interesting book by a rabbi where he described the difficulty of defining the Jewish people. He made a simile to a tomato; the botanist says it’s a fruit and the chef says it’s a veg. Anyway he went on to say the tension of religious Jews and secular would tear Israel in two if it wasn’t for the heavy military presence. So it struck me Zionism then would also have many layers… A school boy mistake 😊
I’ve read some pretty scary stuff where they have justified removing people because they have more right to the land!? Also gross fabrications of the extent of historical Palestinian presence to try and make it sound as though they weren’t there. Anyway, as you say this is not necessarily the normative case and it certainly isn’t the ‘religious’ view.
Either way, it is there like it or not so we have to deal with it… How about the Pope as an arbitrator? 😃
 
Peace_of_cake said:
Defo agree with the importance of definition 👍
I was reading interesting book by a rabbi where he described the difficulty of defining the Jewish people. He made a simile to a tomato; the botanist says it’s a fruit and the chef says it’s a veg. Anyway he went on to say the tension of religious Jews and secular would tear Israel in two if it wasn’t for the heavy military presence. So it struck me Zionism then would also have many layers… A school boy mistake 😊
I’ve read some pretty scary stuff where they have justified removing people because they have more right to the land!? Also gross fabrications of the extent of historical Palestinian presence to try and make it sound as though they weren’t there. Anyway, as you say this is not necessarily the normative case and it certainly isn’t the ‘religious’ view.
Either way, it is there like it or not so we have to deal with it… How about the Pope as an arbitrator? 😃
Click to expand...
As of a couple days ago, the UN general assembly decided Palestine gets a UN seat and the UN is taking over the “peace process”… 70 nations’s reps voted for it.
 
FWIW, Edwin’s thoughts prompted me to do a bit more homework.

Turns out that the common assertion that there has never been an Islamic regime that allowed real religious liberty or pluralism may not be true.

firstthings.com/article/2007/02/render-unto-atatuumlrk-48

This article points out that the last century of the Ottoman Empire saw some remarkable reforms within Islam and its practices and policies regarding christians and Jews, especially. Well worth a read for those who worry that Osama lurks in the heart of every muslim.
 
manualman said:
FWIW, Edwin’s thoughts prompted me to do a bit more homework.

Turns out that the common assertion that there has never been an Islamic regime that allowed real religious liberty or pluralism may not be true.

firstthings.com/article/2007/02/render-unto-atatuumlrk-48

This article points out that the last century of the Ottoman Empire saw some remarkable reforms within Islam and its practices and policies regarding christians and Jews, especially. Well worth a read for those who worry that Osama lurks in the heart of every muslim.
Click to expand...
There have been several through the centuries. They are the exceptions, not the rule. In all cases, the Dhimmi were no less 2nd class citizens, just not as thoroughly hosed by system as in the average Muslim state. Moreover, the periods of tolerance were not throughout the history of those states, just a few better-off periods.

Turkey is still one of the least oppressive secular Muslim states, and still persecutes Christians (and Zoroastrians) extensively, tho’ subtly. It’s even less openly oppressive than the spanish muslims, who at their best are the model of “tolerance” of Christians and Jews.
 
OrdinaryMelkite said:
A question, Khalid--------
Al-Ghazali, probably the most “influential” Sufi (as far as I know) has been proven to have written things against non-believers which would shock people who think of him as a peaceful Sufi------what about Rumi?

I say this especially since Rumi is held by some to be the most “read” poet in America. Has Coleman Barks (his most famous translator) withheld any “damning” excerpts that would somehow lessen him in the West (and mine) eyes?

Just asking. Curious. 👍👍
Click to expand...
My dear brother 🙂

Rumi was a blessed soul, far ahead of his time and a great saintly mystic. I firmly believe in the genuineness of his spiritual experience and his love for Shams-i-Tabrizi. However he was also a man constrained, to a certain extent, by his time, culture and religion. This does not shine through in Coleman Bark’s fradulent, free-style paraphrases of actual Rumi translations.

As I quoted on another thread, this is not exactly the most flattering of statements from Rumi to our modern eyes:

"…Since the Messenger of Allah was the Prophet of the sword, (the people of) his community are heroes and champions. In our religion the right thing is war and terror; in the religion of Jesus the right thing is retirement to cave and mountain…”

- Jalaluddin Rumi (1207 – 1273), Sufi Muslim mystic

The Mathnawi also characterizes Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians as disobedient (1150. Vol. III), accursed (1200. Vol. III) and infidels (405. 825. Vol. III). It describes the Messenger of Allah (Mohammed) as a Prophet of the Sword. It holds that in the Islamic religion, the right thing is war and terror. Rumi also displays a certain degree of intolerance for others, particularly the Jews, that would have been socially acceptable in his own day, as it often was in Christian Europe, but not in ours where it would be classed as anti-semitism. For example, Jews are described as having white bodies, but black hearts (1025. 1050. Vol. VI), and as miscreants (1370.Vol. V), accursed (965. Vol. VI), merciless (990.Vol. VI) asses (1005.Vol. VI) with stony hearts (1030. Vol. VI).

There is one particular anti-semitic story from Rumi’s Mathnawi that comes to mind:

“…It is related that a certain Jew lived next door to one of the Companions of God’s Messenger. This Jew lived in an upper room, whence descended into the Muslim’s apartment all kinds of dirt and filth, the piddle of his children, the water his clothes were washed in. Yet the Muslim always thanked the Jew, and bade his family do the same. So things continued for eight years, until the Muslim died. Then the Jew entered his apartment, to condole with the family, and saw all the filth there, and how it issued from his upper room. So he realised what had happened during the past years, and was exceedingly sorry, and said to the Muslim’s household, ‘Why on earth didn’t you tell me? Why did you always thank me?’ They replied, ‘Our father used to bid us be grateful, and chided us against ceasing to be grateful.’ So the Jew became a believer…”
  • - Jalaluddin Rumi (1207 – 1273), Sufi Muslim mystic
In his Fihi-ma-Fihi sayings collection to his disciples, we also have Rumi declare that all idolaters and non-Muslims are going to go to a literal Hell, which is a real place of eternal suffering. However he moderates this traditional doctrine, quite substantially, by suggesting that in sending non-believers to hell God is actually being merciful because it allows them to remember God through their eternal sufferings and torments, just like a prisoner in prison reflecting on his actions and regretting them:

“…If a blind man should say, 'I was created blind like this, it is not my fault, ’ it will do him no good to say ‘I am blind’ and ‘It is not my fault.’ That will not relieve him of his suffering. Those infidels who are fixed in unbelief-after all, they suffer because of their unbelief. Yet when we look at the matter again, that suffering too is itself a Divine grace. When the unbeliever is left at ease he forgets the Creator; so God reminds him by means of suffering. Therefore Hell is a place of worship, and is the mosque of the infidels, for there the unbeliever remembers God; just as in prison and suffering and toothache-when the pain comes, it tears away the veil of forgetfulness. The sufferer acknowledges God and makes lamentation…”
  • - Jalaluddin Rumi (1207 – 1273), Sufi Muslim mystic
Actually this is a rather innovative and mature, not to mention compassionate, view of Hell - which is a far cry from the traditional Islamic understanding then and now. However it is still a place of suffering called Hell, and New Agers don’t want to hear Rumi saying that.

This does not diminish at all, in my eyes, the greatness and importance of Rumi. It actually enhances it because I see a real, inspired, intoxicated, incredible human being who still reaches out to us despite the passage of the centuries with his rhapsoidic and truly lyrica, beautiful, lush, timeless poetry.

I’d take that real Rumi any day over a manufactured, New Age puppet who sings a song fit for the ears of our selfish, materialist, “feel-good” age of fake spirituality.

(continued…)
 
And so I leave you with a beautiful - though far more heterodox - poem from the later life of this very holy, if like all of us flawed, man who I am sure is probably in heaven now with his Saviour Jesus whom he loved so dearly as a Prophet yet was unable in life to accept as his Lord:

“…A true Lover doesn’t follow any one religion,
be sure of that.
Since in the religion of Love,
there is no irreverence or faith.
When in Love,
body, mind, heart and soul don’t even exist.
Become this,
fall in Love,
and you will not be separated…”
  • - Jalaluddin Rumi (1207 – 1273), Sufi Muslim mystic
"…In the name of the Catholic World, I bow with respect before the memory of Rumi…”

- Blessed Pope John XXIII, Message to Turkey, 1958
 
No question Rumi was a great poet. I didn’t know he was a Persian until reading this thread; much like the Persian Gulf (called by Arabs the Gulf of Arabia), he’s claimed by Arabs as one of their own: I thought my Arabic versions of his works were the original language. When I converted, I sold or threw out my books of ahadith, kept one book of Islamic law that’s not available on the internet (to refer to absurdities), kept my Korans (not the Islamic-theologically-correct mus’haf, but actual Korans, in the plural), and my Rumi.

I don’t read the Umdat al-Salik, nor do I read the Korans, but I still read Rumi.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top