Is ISIS a disaster for all muslims?

[Looncall]

You are just underestimating the Muslims. There is something which you might not be aware of. Scholars heavily criticized the hadith and have pointed out in many published books the hadiths which they believe to be false. There are many degrees of hadiths, some will be totally false because they have suspicion about him or the they don't believe the story itself being told since it might not be consistent with Quran and Prophet Mohamed teachings. Some will have a medium statues which is neither correct nor false if they are not sure, etc.

Ṣaḥīḥ (صَحِيْ&#1581 is best translated as "authentic".

Ḥasan (حَسَن meaning "good") is used to describe hadith whose authenticity is not as well-established as that of ṣaḥīḥ hadith, but sufficient for use as (religious) evidence.

Ḍaʻīf (ضَعِيْ&#1601 is the categorization of a hadith as "weak".

Discontinuity in the beginning of the isnād, from the end of the collector of that hadith, is referred to as muʻallaq (مُعَلَّق meaning "suspended").

Mursal (مُرْسَل meaning "hurried").

Muʻḍal (مُعْضَل meaning "problematic").

A hadith described as munqaṭiʻ (مُنْقَطِع meaning "broken") is one in which the chain of people reporting the hadith (the isnād) is disconnected at any point.

Munkar (مُنْكَر meaning "denounced").

Shādhdh (شاذّ meaning "anomalous").

Muḍṭarib (مُضْطَرِب meaning "shaky").

A hadith that is mawḍūʻ (مَوْضُوْ&#1593 is one determined to be fabricated and cannot be attributed to its origin.

Causes of fabrication
There are several factors which may motivate an individual to fabricate a narration:
political differences;
factions based on issues of creed;
fabrications by heretics;
fabrications by story-tellers;
fabrications by ignorant ascetics;
prejudice in favour of town, race or a particular leader;
inventions for personal motives;
the desire to promote proverbs into hadith.

Hadith terminology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a science. Muslim scholars don't accept a hadith on a whim. They heavily examine it to avoid fabricated hadiths which they already acknowledge that this problem exist.

It's easy to condemn Muslims history if you allowed your emotions to be altered and affected by the ignorance and nonsense which happen in the Muslim world today. Don't judge the early Muslims based on the actions of the Muslims of today. They all have their own circumstances.

We are not blind and we are not naive. You have to understand this point clearly.

You make good points here.

Still, I have never been able to find a muslim who is willing to acknowledge the dark side to muslim history or to explain why some of those dark aspects continue in the modern world.

A test case I find compelling is the slave raiding done by muslims: they were a pestilence in that way, raiding as far as Iceland kidnapping people for use as slaves; doing that until forced to stop by others as late as the 19th century. Even today, when muslim groups find themselves next to a vulnerable population they indulge in slavery: Sudan, ISIS and Boko Haram are examples.

The only response is silly claims about islam freeing slaves. What am I to make of that?

 

[TashaN]

You make good points here.

Still, I have never been able to find a muslim who is willing to acknowledge the dark side to muslim history or to explain why some of those dark aspects continue in the modern world.

A test case I find compelling is the slave raiding done by muslims: they were a pestilence in that way, raiding as far as Iceland kidnapping people for use as slaves; doing that until forced to stop by others as late as the 19th century. Even today, when muslim groups find themselves next to a vulnerable population they indulge in slavery: Sudan, ISIS and Boko Haram are examples.

The only response is silly claims about islam freeing slaves. What am I to make of that?

I really appreciate the effort you make to understand more. Thank you so much for being respectful. People like you encourage me to put effort into explaining in regardless of whether my explaination is going to be accepted or not.

We Muslims acknowledge the dark side of our history and we don't deny it, and within ourselves we heavily criticize our past as we criticize our present.

The problem arise when people don't think of more than 1 billion Muslims around the world, but get affected by hundreds here and thousands there.

Now i would like you to sit back and think before you make the next post. Are you asking why more than 1 billion Muslims around the world have issues, or you are asking why a minority behaving in a certain way? when you answer me i'll be more able to know where you are coming from and i'll gladly answer you honestly about everything you would like to know to the best of my ability and knowledge.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Still, I have never been able to find a muslim who is willing to acknowledge the dark side to muslim history or to explain why some of those dark aspects continue in the modern world.

Those are weak faith Muslims. I'd say radical too unless I didn't know better.

 

[outhouse]

There are many degrees of hadiths, some will be totally false because they have suspicion about him or the they don't believe the story itself being told since it might not be consistent with Quran and Prophet Mohamed teachings.

.

Do all muslims agree on what category of truthfulness or fabrication is determined ?

 

[TashaN]

Do all muslims agree on what category of truthfulness or fabrication is determined ?

Please read the link i have provided.

 

[beenie]

Do all muslims agree on what category of truthfulness or fabrication is determined ?

There is very little (if anything) that ALL Muslims agree upon.

 

[Smart_Guy]

There is very little (if anything) that ALL Muslims agree upon.

I agree

 

[Nakosis]

There is very little (if anything) that ALL Muslims agree upon.

Always better, IMO, to treat people as individuals rather than members of some group one may or my not have prejudices about.

 

[Looncall]

Always better, IMO, to treat people as individuals rather than members of some group one may or my not have prejudices about.

Please let me know how that works out the next time you offer a bacon sandwich to a muslim,

 

[Mycroft]

There is very little (if anything) that ALL Muslims agree upon.

I think all muslims would agree with this.

 

[Looncall]

I really appreciate the effort you make to understand more. Thank you so much for being respectful. People like you encourage me to put effort into explaining in regardless of whether my explaination is going to be accepted or not.

We Muslims acknowledge the dark side of our history and we don't deny it, and within ourselves we heavily criticize our past as we criticize our present.

The problem arise when people don't think of more than 1 billion Muslims around the world, but get affected by hundreds here and thousands there.

Now i would like you to sit back and think before you make the next post. Are you asking why more than 1 billion Muslims around the world have issues, or you are asking why a minority behaving in a certain way? when you answer me i'll be more able to know where you are coming from and i'll gladly answer you honestly about everything you would like to know to the best of my ability and knowledge.

The problems one is concerned about (slavery, gender oppression, blasphemy laws etc) do not turn up as aberrations of lone nut cases, but as behaviours of large groups (ISIS), national regions (northern Pakistan) and whole countries (Iran). Further, the more the participants are enthusiastic muslims, the worse the abuses turn out to be. Even further, the abuses tend to be similar among very disparate cultures.

The fact that large numbers of muslims do not partake of the abuses can have several causes. Perhaps one is too busy merely surviving, or one's neighbours (or commercial customers) would not permit the abuses, or one belongs to a faction that lacks the means, etc, etc.

In any case, the abusers clearly hold that their abuses are sanctioned, or even mandated, by their religion, even though any decent person should find them abhorrent.

The sensible conclusion from all this, then, is that there is something horribly amiss with the religion involved.

If you think any of this is inaccurate, I would like to know why.

 

[TashaN]

Please let me know how that works out the next time you offer a bacon sandwich to a muslim,

Or to a Jew, or to a Christian (who believe in the OT law and more specifically the Book of Leviticus).

 

[TashaN]

The problems one is concerned about (slavery, gender oppression, blasphemy laws etc) do not turn up as aberrations of lone nut cases, but as behaviours of large groups (ISIS), national regions (northern Pakistan) and whole countries (Iran). Further, the more the participants are enthusiastic muslims, the worse the abuses turn out to be. Even further, the abuses tend to be similar among very disparate cultures.

The fact that large numbers of muslims do not partake of the abuses can have several causes. Perhaps one is too busy merely surviving, or one's neighbours (or commercial customers) would not permit the abuses, or one belongs to a faction that lacks the means, etc, etc.

In any case, the abusers clearly hold that their abuses are sanctioned, or even mandated, by their religion, even though any decent person should find them abhorrent.

The sensible conclusion from all this, then, is that there is something horribly amiss with the religion involved.

If you think any of this is inaccurate, I would like to know why.

How about the other way around. Why most of Muslims are condemning those extremists? why not simply leave them be, or worse, join them? If it's truly in the core of their religion, they would have been part of it without a problem. What do you think?

 

[YmirGF]

How about the other way around. Why most of Muslims are condemning those extremists? why not simply leave them be, or worse, join them? If it's truly in the core of their religion, they would have been part of it without a problem. What do you think?

It isn't the theology Muslims disagree with, by and large, it is the interpretation and methodology.

 

[Smart_Guy]

How about the other way around. Why most of Muslims are condemning those extremists? why not simply leave them be, or worse, join them? If it's truly in the core of their religion, they would have been part of it without a problem. What do you think?

The point you're implying here makes complete sense. But I guess people will still look for other excusing against Muslims and Islam.

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone here by the way, I'm speaking generally.

 

[YmirGF]

The point you're implying here makes complete sense. But I guess people will still look for other excusing against Muslims and Islam.

I'm pointing fingers at anyone here by the way, I'm speaking generally.

You should review the PEW research poll conducted a few years ago. A large amount of Muslim responders sympathized with extremists and an even larger group were quite non-committal. About the same number of people were strongly against the extremists as there were who sympathized. All in all, it painted a troubling picture.

 

[TashaN]

Who read The Clash of Civilizations? It's is a theory and also there is a book with the same name by political scientist Samuel P. Huntington.

Many answers to your questions are there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clash_of_Civilizations

 

[Chev Chelios]

The majority of the people that ISIS are killing are Muslims.

No. This argument relies on people’s ignorance so that it can then be used as a deceptive tool to tease out Islam’s clear role in what motivates ISIS. Sure, to the ignorant observer (who may naively view Islam as a cohesive unit) I can see why they’d find the fact that ISIS are killing Moslems as clear evidence that ISIS and their actions are un-Islamic. But you conveniently failed to mention the ancient schism which caused the Shia- Sunni divide so that each sees the followers of the other as heretics and basically NOT Moslems. You also failed to mention that ISIS, a Sunni outfit, are (crudely) targeting/killing Shia NOT Sunni and or those Moslems it does not see as adherents of the same faith so that they are as indifferent to them as they are to Jews, Christians and the rest.

It is this sectarian dispute which explains why the punishment meted out to these Moslems by ISIS is comparable to that mandated in the Koran and which is to be administered to non Moslems – ISIS is killing Moslems which it doesn’t see as Moslem. This is all very simple stuff so it is quite incredulous that people would conveniently omit this internal divide and so audaciously try and dress up the action's of ISIS in a way which expunges Islam from ISIS. ISIS are not an enemy of Islam– they are an enemy of non Moslems and they are clearly motivated by Islam and indeed, offer up a plausible interpretation of it.

I must just add that despite the fact Sunni and Shia disagree on who is rightfully a Moslem the fundamentals of their faith are fairly indifferent, subscribing to much of Islam’s theological injunctions such as its prescription on how to treat religious minorities, oppress females and its overarching worldview of Islamic hegemony etc etc. Thus, we know that regardless of whether we find Sunnis as the majority or the Shia, we will see the same Islamic characteristics of religious persecution, female oppression, Homosexual intolerance and a desire to propagate its own brand of Islam. So, by removing the internal dispute between themselves we come to see that there is nothing that separates the Sunni or Shia ‘extremist’ in terms of ideological motivations – Islam.

That excuse makers seize on this oppression by ISIS (Moslems) on Moslems as evidence that we are not seeing the true nature of Islam is a work of complete fiction and monumental myth making.

 

[Chev Chelios]

Islam forbids those atrocities they are doing.

Please explain this statement – I often hear Moslems say this yet never see them offer anything to back it up. Even if it is true, the message clearly isn’t getting through! However I am very sceptical about this claim given the copious mandations of violence within the Koran and Hadith and so I would be sincerely interested in what evidence you can supply to support this well used argument.

For what its worth, I find this assertion by the followers of Islam to be strange, not only because of what is seen within its scripture but also because to say such a thing diametrically opposes the actions of its own prophet, the perfect man and example to be followed for all time, who ordered and partook in beheadings and an un-provoked genocide. This fact alone should be enough to suggest that Moslems who try to isolate the actions of what ISIS are doing from Islamic theology are inevitably going to fail.

Sure, Moslems seem eager to qualify all the dubious scripture with the convenient caveat that Islam allows for war/violence only in a defensive capacity but this is simply not true as shown by the example of Muhammad himself (and even if it was true it is open to much interpretation of what is 'defensive' - many see a mere critique of Islam as being blasphemous and so therefore an attack on Islam!!!).

I see no difference to what ISIS are doing to what Muhammad and the subsequent caliphs did. They are merely carrying on a long tradition of Islamic conquering and subsequent supplantation of the indigenous faiths with that of Islam – something clearly so attested to by just a brief look at its historical record and which is fully backed up by its doctrine.

 

[Chev Chelios]

Except that it was freaking 1400 years ago for God's sake. The world was different than what it is today. Regarding sources, feel free to bring to the table non-Muslim sources. Who prevented you from doing so? go a head please.

Comparing the actions of fallible men to those of Gods and prophets is completely nonsensical. You seem to have conveniently forgot that Muhammad was being divinely guided by Allah – so the fact that his murderous actions occurred 1400 years ago is completely irrelevant. God’s morality does not change and his notion of right and wrong isn’t governed by timelines and so if the God of Islam allowed/commanded Muhammad to carry out beheading’s in the name and defence of Islam in 650 AD he’d sure as hell allow him to do it now – wouldn’t he!

What ISIS are doing is no different to what Muhammad did – you can try and obscurant as much as you want but this is just a plain fact. (I must add that Moslems who try to claim beheadings has nothing to with Islam display astonishing duplictiousness – their own prophet did it, the Koran clearly references and mandates it and so it has been that this savagery has been the Modus Operandi of slaughter by Moslems throughout its entire history).