Where is that in the quran?

[eliasaph99]

Elias, Muslims reject most of the Ibn Ishak and Tabari as non-authentic, as far as i know.

I thought they were considered holy scripture just underneath the Quran in authority. But, even if that is the case, there’s plenty of material without those sources.

 

[Kadaveri]

They’re not considered ‘holy scripture’ at all. Ibn Ishaq refers to a biography of the Prophet written by Ibn Ishaq about 100 years after his death, not as a book but lots of scrolls of bits and pieces put together. It is entirely lost now however and all we have left are notes taken from his pupils (namely Ibn Hisham), and what has been partially preserved is of questionable authenticity and later scholars like Bukhari viewed it as mostly worthless. And Tabari is another author who wrote a ‘history of the world’ style book from an Islamic view, from the Creation up to the time of Muhammad (saaw). However, Tabari did write in the foreward of his book that he’s only writing down things that’d he heard about from outside sources, and that if anyone found anything written in his book objectionable to reject it. And indeed, many later Islamic scholars such as Ibn Al-Arabi, Abu Al-Su’ud, Ali Al-Jassas, Ahmad Al-Thalabi, and others, have criticised some of his work as being unreliable and containing spurious accounts (such as the ‘Satanic Verses’ story).

And Montalban, if you read further on from the quote you took from the Shi’a site you’ll find that Taqiyya is spoken of immediately after it, not as part of if. If you read the whole article it really should be evidently clear what Taqiyya refers to, hiding your faith when your life is in immediate danger.

And I’m not impressed by the article you gave from a Hindu site saying otherwise, some evidence from Islamic sources would be much more weighty (I know Wikipedia isn’t an ‘Islamic’ source but it’s mostly impartial and provides views of Islamic scholars on the subject). And considering that site also claims that Pakistan and the Bush Administration co-operated in carrying out the 9/11 attacks so they could launch a war against ‘the people of Afghanistan’ under the pretence of fighting terrorism, I’d say it’s not to be given too much credibility…

 

[Montalban]

And Montalban, if you read further on from the quote you took from the Shi’a site you’ll find that Taqiyya is spoken of immediately after it, not as part of if. If you read the whole article it really should be evidently clear what Taqiyya refers to, hiding your faith when your life is in immediate danger.

It doesn’t matter. Muhammed gave permission for someone to lie to kill someone.

And I’m not impressed by the article you gave from a Hindu site saying otherwise, some evidence from Islamic sources would be much more weighty (I know Wikipedia isn’t an ‘Islamic’ source but it’s mostly impartial and provides views of Islamic scholars on the subject). And considering that site also claims that Pakistan and the Bush Administration co-operated in carrying out the 9/11 attacks so they could launch a war against ‘the people of Afghanistan’ under the pretence of fighting terrorism, I’d say it’s not to be given too much credibility…

What Hindu site? You quoted Wiki, and I quoted your source as backing me up.

 

[lightofeyes]

It’s in the tradition, not quran:

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu’ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them). (Sahih Muslim, Hadith number 6303-05; Sahih al-Bukhari 3.857)

Muhammad condoned lying it seems when it suited him:

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, “You may say it.” … (Sahih al-Bukhari 5.369)

But that has nothing to do with lieing in cause of thr religion as this brother asked. for mainstream Islam no its not permited to lie except for reconciliation like the first hadith.

Peace…

 

[eliasaph99]

They’re not considered ‘holy scripture’ at all. Ibn Ishaq refers to a biography of the Prophet written by Ibn Ishaq about 100 years after his death, not as a book but lots of scrolls of bits and pieces put together. It is entirely lost now however and all we have left are notes taken from his pupils (namely Ibn Hisham), and what has been partially preserved is of questionable authenticity and later scholars like Bukhari viewed it as mostly worthless. And Tabari is another author who wrote a ‘history of the world’ style book from an Islamic view, from the Creation up to the time of Muhammad (saaw). However, Tabari did write in the foreward of his book that he’s only writing down things that’d he heard about from outside sources, and that if anyone found anything written in his book objectionable to reject it. And indeed, many later Islamic scholars such as Ibn Al-Arabi, Abu Al-Su’ud, Ali Al-Jassas, Ahmad Al-Thalabi, and others, have criticised some of his work as being unreliable and containing spurious accounts (such as the ‘Satanic Verses’ story).

And Montalban, if you read further on from the quote you took from the Shi’a site you’ll find that Taqiyya is spoken of immediately after it, not as part of if. If you read the whole article it really should be evidently clear what Taqiyya refers to, hiding your faith when your life is in immediate danger.

And I’m not impressed by the article you gave from a Hindu site saying otherwise, some evidence from Islamic sources would be much more weighty (I know Wikipedia isn’t an ‘Islamic’ source but it’s mostly impartial and provides views of Islamic scholars on the subject). And considering that site also claims that Pakistan and the Bush Administration co-operated in carrying out the 9/11 attacks so they could launch a war against ‘the people of Afghanistan’ under the pretence of fighting terrorism, I’d say it’s not to be given too much credibility…

So.

You answered half a charge. And somewhat poorly. The standing which you claim for the referenced works is not the standing I have read. I read this assessment of these books as scripture in the Islamic world in a non-biased secular book. I believe the book was called “Islam in the World.” It was a textbook my wife used in her Quranic Law class.

You have cited no evidence to back up what you have said. You have only asserted it. But I have no reason to believe you. What is your source? Why should I believe that your understanding is the same as the Islamic world in general, or even a simple majority of the Islamic world?

Anyways, dismiss the quotes from those sources if you like. I’ll acquiesce and remove them from the discussion. There are still plenty from Bukhari and the Quran itself showing that lying is a part of Islam. It is described as being an action of god, as there are quotes which have Allah stating that he will deceive people. How do you answer these quotes?

 

[eliasaph99]

But that has nothing to do with lieing in cause of thr religion as this brother asked. for mainstream Islam no its not permited to lie except for reconciliation like the first hadith.

Peace…

Bologna. Read the quotes above in my posts. There are multiple quotes which show that lying is perfectly acceptable in Islam.

 

[lightofeyes]

You can go to the website above to see how to interpret the numbers indicating the location of the citation in question. For the Quran, it’s just like the system we use for the Bible. For the Hadith, it’s more complicated.

Anyways, for anyone who didn’t want to read all of those, I just want to highlight one of my favorite examples.

Here, we see just how loving their god is:

Qur’an 5:41 “Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.”

Here we see that Allah does not give people free will, allowing them to choose him or forsake him. Instead, he intends for some to be disgraced and tortured. Moreover, he intends to do the disgracing and torture himself.

There is another great verse where Allah says that he will torture men until their skins are worn out, and then he will give them new skin so that he can torture them again.

Can’t you just feel the peace and love!

You even have not quoted the full verse and just interpreited out of context. here is the full verse:
[5:41] O Messenger (Muhammad (peace be upon him))! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you, of such who say: “We believe” with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. And of the Jews are men who listen much and eagerly to lies - listen to others who have not come to you. They change the words from their places; they say, “If you are given this, take it, but if you are not given this, then beware!” And whomsoever Allâh wants to put in Al-Fitnah (error, because of his rejecting of Faith), you can do nothing for him against Allâh. Those are the ones whose hearts Allâh does not want to purify (from disbelief and hypocrisy); for them there is a disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a great torment.

 

[Montalban]

But that has nothing to do with lieing in cause of thr religion as this brother asked. for mainstream Islam no its not permited to lie except for reconciliation like the first hadith.

Peace…

It is. Muhammed gave permission for someone to lie, in order to kill someone who’d insulted the religion.

 

[eliasaph99]

You even have not quoted the full verse and just interpreited out of context. here is the full verse:
[5:41] O Messenger (Muhammad (peace be upon him))! Let not those who hurry to fall into disbelief grieve you, of such who say: “We believe” with their mouths but their hearts have no faith. And of the Jews are men who listen much and eagerly to lies - listen to others who have not come to you. They change the words from their places; they say, “If you are given this, take it, but if you are not given this, then beware!” And whomsoever Allâh wants to put in Al-Fitnah (error, because of his rejecting of Faith), you can do nothing for him against Allâh. Those are the ones whose hearts Allâh does not want to purify (from disbelief and hypocrisy); for them there is a disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a great torment.

OK.

I’m surprised that you didn’t notice, but in “context” the meaning hasn’t changed at all and worse material has been added.

Here Allah condemns all the Jews and calls an entire race liars.

In fact, considering that the Jews are the people of the Book, to whom solemn promises were given, this is one of the most appalling things I have ever read. Allah, who supposedly chose the Jews out of all peoples, turns his back on them completely and consigns them all to hell. Moreover, he tells Muhammad that there’s nothing to be done about it.

Also, it’s Allah, supposedly god himself, who is doing the deceiving. Notice that it is Allah who “put in Al-Fitnah.” Not the free will of the people. No. Allah does it and then says, there is no hope for them, because I want to disgrace them.

So much for that.

And what about all the other verses? Do you have any answer for them?

P.S. The Quran has no “context” because it is not a narrative. It is a collection of disjoint often unrelated statements supposedly “revealed” at different times. It was haphazardly put together with no particular order.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Chapter 8 Islamic Honesty and Honor
islamundressed.com/#_Toc113793223

this a long chapter on muslim lying to non-muslims.

In the Hadith, Mohammed emphasizes the same concept. From “Ehiaa Oloum al-Din,” by the famous Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, Vol. 3: PP.284-287:

One of Mohammed’s daughters, Umm Kalthoum, testified that she had never heard the Apostle of Allah condone lying, except in these three situations: 1) For reconciliation among people. 2) In war. 3) Amongst spouses, to keep peace in the family.

  One passage from the Hadith quotes Mohammed as saying: "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies except those uttered to help bring reconciliation between Muslims." The following quote demonstrates the broadness of situations in which the prophet permitted lying. "The sons of Adam are accountable for all lies with these exceptions: During war because war is deception, to reconcile among two quarreling men, and for a man to appease his wife." Considering that Islam has been in a perpetual state of war with non-believers, it appears there is neither accountability nor any practical limitation to deceiving non-Muslims.

 

[Lance]

How would one know that a Muslim was not lying if he said it is not OK for Muslims to lie. The Quran seems to say it is OK.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Reminds me of an episold of startrack.

Captin Kurt: All Valcuns are liars.

Spock: He is telling the Truth;

 

[Montalban]

I think the key here is even if lying for one’s own protection is the only definition on can give for Al-Taqiyah, it still doesn’t negate the general ‘okay’ to lying as illustrated in the example I gave where Muhammed said his follower could in order to lure someone near in order to kill him.

 

[Kadaveri]

And again if you look up a Hadith quoted earlier, deception against the enemy is permissible in war/battle.

 

[Montalban]

And again if you look up a Hadith quoted earlier, deception against the enemy is permissible in war/battle.

So it’s not strictly speaking self-defence, as you tried to suggest - like if you’re being threatened.

And as Islam’s in a permanent state of ‘jihad’, it means you’re allowed to lie all the time to kaffir.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

If you read the long article in the link I posted you will see that they do not have to live up to their oaths either.

 

[Montalban]

If you read the long article in the link I posted you will see that they do not have to live up to their oaths either.

I thank you for the link. It is very long, though.