S
samaan
Guest
What exactly is "weird’ about it? Can you specify?
- Status
S
samaan
Guest
I love this story. I counted once and found about 27 different hadith from different collections narrating it almost the same form.
F
french
Guest
Shariah law is certainly conservative… It would even make some American conservatives roll in their graves!
But, if implemented correctly, it is not violent. There are some harsh punishments for certain acts… Adultery, sodomy, leaving the faith, etc… But, there are also very harsh implications that must be met first.
Let’s take adultery for example. Firstly, there must be four witnesses who saw the act taking place. Also, they must have not been spying.
Islam values privacy, to the maximum extent. If someone spies on someone, they are deemed a sinner… And, if caught, the person could even pluck their eyes out! So, if 4 people saw someone commit adultery by spying on them through the window, and they reported it… The judge would most likely throw out the case because the people were spying, and they are deemed untrustworthy by the scholars.
So, though the punishment for adultery could be harsh, it is nearly impossible to get punished for it!
It is indeed true that there are a LOT of Muslims at this time who are doing grave things… Like killing their daughters if they catch them with a guy who is unrelated to them, etc. A lot of Muslims have gone violent, and have killed people who simply disagree with them. But, this isn’t true Islam. It is just people going to extremes.
But, if implemented correctly, it is not violent. There are some harsh punishments for certain acts… Adultery, sodomy, leaving the faith, etc… But, there are also very harsh implications that must be met first.
Let’s take adultery for example. Firstly, there must be four witnesses who saw the act taking place. Also, they must have not been spying.
Islam values privacy, to the maximum extent. If someone spies on someone, they are deemed a sinner… And, if caught, the person could even pluck their eyes out! So, if 4 people saw someone commit adultery by spying on them through the window, and they reported it… The judge would most likely throw out the case because the people were spying, and they are deemed untrustworthy by the scholars.
So, though the punishment for adultery could be harsh, it is nearly impossible to get punished for it!
It is indeed true that there are a LOT of Muslims at this time who are doing grave things… Like killing their daughters if they catch them with a guy who is unrelated to them, etc. A lot of Muslims have gone violent, and have killed people who simply disagree with them. But, this isn’t true Islam. It is just people going to extremes.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
What is 'true Islam"?
B
Benjamin8o8
Guest
We don`t want to know…
S
sedonaman
Guest
The first mark of the dhimmi is ignorance of Political Islam.
“Political Islam’s most famous duality is the division of the world into believers, dar al Islam, and unbelievers, dar al harb. The largest part of the Trilogy relates to treatment of the unbelievers, kafirs. Even Hell is political. There are 146 references to Hell in the Koran. Only 6% of those in Hell are there for moral failings – murder, theft, etc. The other 94% of the reasons for being in Hell are for the intellectual sin of disagreeing with Mohammed, a political crime *. Hence, Islamic Hell is a political prison for those who speak against Islam.” – “The Study of Political Islam” frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26769
[Islam apologist’s] reference is ‘nice.’ A moderate is a nice person [Muslim] who won’t harm a kafir (an unbeliever).
"But we are talking about a Muslim, so the only valid reference for moderation is Islam, not ‘nice’. It is the model of Mohammed who determines what Islam is. So if a Muslim imitates the Sunna of Mohammed, then he is moderate. Sunna is the words and deeds of Mohammed, the perfect pattern for all Muslims. The Koran says over 70 times that all Muslims are to imitate Mohammed in every detail of their life. To that end Islam has an enormous literature about Mohammed in the Sira (his sacred biography) and the Hadith (his sacred traditions).
"At this point we meet the main sticking point in understanding the doctrine of Islam. Muslims are to be Mohammedans and follow the Koran. But which Mohammed and which Koran do they follow? Mohammed preached the religion of Islam in Mecca for 13 years and gained 150 followers. In Mecca the Koran is generally religious.
“Then Mohammed moved to Medina and became a politician and warrior. In 10 years time he annihilated the Jews of Medina, who were half of the town’s citizens. Then he turned to attacking all kafirs. In the last 9 years of his life he was involved in a violent event every 6 weeks, on the average. He died without a single enemy left in Arabia. The Koran in Medina is political in nature and very violent.
…
“The term ‘moderate’ Muslim has no meaning because it does not identify which side of Islam the moderate is.
…
“What does ‘radical’ [extreme] mean? Killing, robbing, enslaving, assassination, torture, deceiving, jihad?*** As long as those behaviors occur with the kafirs on the receiving end, they are all acts that were performed by Mohammed.*** If Mohammed did them, then they are not radical [extreme]. Mohammed defines the middle of the road – normative behavior.
…
“The strict meaning of kafir is unbeliever, but unbeliever is a neutral term. The Koran defines kafir by its usage. Kafirs can be robbed, raped, crucified, tortured, deceived, enslaved, plotted against, insulted, and more. Kafir is the worst word in human language.” politicalislam.com/blog/refuting-counter-terrorism-dhimmitude [Emphasis added]
So, not only are you a dhimmi, but you are a kafir and don’t know it.*
F
french
Guest
What was taught by Muhammad through the Sunnah, and through what the Qur’an says. What the madhabs have taught, and what the scholars have said.
A lot of people here constantly quote hadeeth and immediately think they are authentic. I mean, after all, if they are in X or Y collection, they must be authentic.
This is not true though. People here have absolutely no knowledge of ulum-al-hadeeth. The Sciences of the hadith. And, until they do, they shouldn’t quote these sources!
Look, there are millions of hadiths out there. Literally. Millions. But not even half are authentic. The scholars have created a methodology of authenticating a hadith. A very stern system that really fishes out what is authentic and what is not. A lot of people think that Ibn Ishaq’s writing is authentic. Though there is some truths in it, there are a lot of errors too.
Also, Hadiths compliment each other and explain others and lay out more implications. For example, there is a hadith that says that if someone commits adultery, they should be stoned. But, what are the implications? How do we know if they did? We have to look at the other hadiths, where Muhammad lays out the implications. You put them together, and you see that it is almost impossible for adultery to be carried out.
Islam is not complex or confusing. But, it is intense. It has answers to pretty much everything. This is why people rely on the scholars so much. Because they have devoted years to study. And, this is why they hold their “classical” scholars in high esteem too; Like Abu Hanifah, who existed just within a few generations of Muhammad. His writings are held in very high esteem, and they are like 1300 years old!
A lot of people quote and quote, but don’t have knowledge behind it. They just copy and paste. I could do that with the Bible though, and if I did, people would NOT be happy. Midianites. Slicing children’s heads through rocks. The list goes on and on.
A lot of people here constantly quote hadeeth and immediately think they are authentic. I mean, after all, if they are in X or Y collection, they must be authentic.
This is not true though. People here have absolutely no knowledge of ulum-al-hadeeth. The Sciences of the hadith. And, until they do, they shouldn’t quote these sources!
Look, there are millions of hadiths out there. Literally. Millions. But not even half are authentic. The scholars have created a methodology of authenticating a hadith. A very stern system that really fishes out what is authentic and what is not. A lot of people think that Ibn Ishaq’s writing is authentic. Though there is some truths in it, there are a lot of errors too.
Also, Hadiths compliment each other and explain others and lay out more implications. For example, there is a hadith that says that if someone commits adultery, they should be stoned. But, what are the implications? How do we know if they did? We have to look at the other hadiths, where Muhammad lays out the implications. You put them together, and you see that it is almost impossible for adultery to be carried out.
Islam is not complex or confusing. But, it is intense. It has answers to pretty much everything. This is why people rely on the scholars so much. Because they have devoted years to study. And, this is why they hold their “classical” scholars in high esteem too; Like Abu Hanifah, who existed just within a few generations of Muhammad. His writings are held in very high esteem, and they are like 1300 years old!
A lot of people quote and quote, but don’t have knowledge behind it. They just copy and paste. I could do that with the Bible though, and if I did, people would NOT be happy. Midianites. Slicing children’s heads through rocks. The list goes on and on.
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
We need to know to counter its lies. The western dhimmi is more dangerous than the jihadist.
F
french
Guest
V
Verisimilitude
Guest
A brutal religious warrior justifying murder and theft approved by a diety. If the Koran were written today doubtless it would be called hate speech.
The ‘relaible witnesses’ of 14 centuries ago are meaningless today. Approval by consensus as a menas to determine religious faith/authority is not faith but closer to secularism.
Please start another thread and do so because the biblical text has logic, reason, and have proved themselves true to explain itself. Islam cannot prove itself peaceful, just, or legitimate.
I
inJESUS
Guest
S
sedonaman
Guest
That’s the excuse use to justify a protection extortion racket. I would buy it if Muslims had to pay the jizya on an equal basis with the dhimmis, but that was not the case.
In fact, the Mafia runs a similar racket with the businesses in their area. The Mafia:
takes over an area;
extorts “protection” money;
kills its opposition;
and its members are in it for life. Therefore, Islam is not much more than a Mafia with a manual. About the only difference is Islam throws in some pseudo theology to fool the people into believing that it is a religion. And that theology is used to justify the male’s reverting to his feral state.
Like disagreeing with him? Or like existing? Besides, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Of course there was no coercion, like wanting to go on living, or the oppressive jizya. Plus, “these are just tribes we are talking about,” not exactly mighty thinkers.
That “message of reform, love, tolerance, etc.” ended after Mohammed used his wife’s money and wealth from raids to raise an army and return to Mecca and kill its inhabitants to extract revenge. And please spare us the “mercy” he showed by letting some of them live. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature could figure out that no one would have been killed if Mohammed had remained a businessman.
C
chrisse
Guest
Would you do me a favour and go warn the Midanites (and the other non-existent people mentioned in the Old Testament) that the Christians are coming.
S
sedonaman
Guest
The ultimate source for Warner’s analysis is the Islamic foundational texts. I guess that is a shame … for Muslims.
S
samaan
Guest
Yes, French. What is true Islam? Would you care to elaborate?
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
And I thought all along this would be a thread about Shari’ah.
What in fact it has turned into is non-Muslims declaring that criminals should not be punished for their crimes!!
Q: Where is justice?
A: In the next world.
Innocent people are being tortured today and all you lot can do is whine about people being punished for their crimes 1400 years ago. How annoying!
I’m out of this thread!
What in fact it has turned into is non-Muslims declaring that criminals should not be punished for their crimes!!
Q: Where is justice?
A: In the next world.
Innocent people are being tortured today and all you lot can do is whine about people being punished for their crimes 1400 years ago. How annoying!
I’m out of this thread!
S
samaan
Guest
Too bad. I was looking forward to continuing our conversation.
S
sedonaman
Guest
A
algebra
Guest
The question that must be asked is this.
What is shari’ah?
The sheer number of Mutawatir hadith alone make a single judicial code impossible to define.
We have only to look at the history of the islamic empire to realise that very quickly (at the time of Ali) after the death of Mohammad, muslims already had varying interpretations of Mohammeds actions.
Did he appoint a leader from his family? a shi’aa would say yes, and even provide sound hadith to support his view.
A sunni would counter by providing more hadith to deny the shi’aa claim.
But which of them is law? Well the answer is - whatever the majority of scholars have decided.
Now here is the conundrum.
is it the majority of scholars in your area? or the majority of scholars world wide?
Is what is true for subsaharah africans as true for dixie muslims?
So this one code one sharia nonsense is just that - nonsense.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Yes. And while these questions are contemplated, keep in mind that the Qur’an is the “perfect word of Allah for all time,” and “not subject to human interpretation.” “It is what it is.”
- Status