islam and barbarity

[Looncall]

I'm afraid then your level of awareness drastically needs to raise, since when did majority of populations/ communities were left to decide anything for their own good in the contemporary capitalist-psuedo -demoratic deceptive system of today?

. All cultures or communities CAN be managed by just implication of law&order/ a transparent socio-economic justice system & etc, and the reason they are not let being managed by Islamic Law in muslim majority countries; is the ugly islamophobic face of this secular democracy which is trying to marginalize/eliminate all those people who want to truly live by the spirit of Islamic law, e.g Afghanistan. Give 2 reasons why US invaded Afghanistan, and why they cant digest the fact that 80% of Afghanistan's population wants to be ruled by Islamic Law, and supports the Taliban's stance?

You need a very basic brush with History and Politics. Govts from Egypt to Saudia, to any Muslim country in the world are running under secular leadership and systems, appointed and approved by guess who?

Muslims believe that there can not be full justice in any scope of life, unless Islamic Law is enforced in our lives. what you refer to as decent muslims living among other peoples, are people who've worked hard to get out of the mayhem in their countries to make a life for their families and thats how they are. All muslims by default cannot always be decent people, there always will be crime and evil among all nations, but, under Islamic law everything is well taken care of and the society is meant to grow in its best potential; personally,economically, morally and socially. Evil is supposed to be in firm check; other religions can decide their matters with their own laws, and nobody can escape justice whether you are the president or the peasant.



Letme ask you this, Is Anglo saxon Race an inherently evil, barbaric and blood hungry race? Honoured to have almost ethnically cleansed the US of its native inhabitants extending its genocide to the reduction of the North American Indian population from an estimated 12 million in 1500 to barely 237,000 , killing a race for nearly 4+ centuries, representing a"vast genocide . . . , the most sustained on record."



Fast forward to today, what is happening around the world?Who's blood is being majorly shed, all over the world? Muslims. Is there an agenda? not really, muslims just deserve to die as some have decided and continue to decide.

Only Might is still right, right?

Exactly.

I don't buy this stuff. The more a country is officially muslim, the less it demonstrates what you say of islamic law.

You hold up Afghans as wanting all this islamic morality. I guess you are not a woman, then, and not someone with any non-orthodox religious notions. The Taliban! The worst barbarians of all.

 

[MeLtiZBleaCh]

The Taliban are barbarians but they are not muslims according to the laws of Islam.

 

[rusra02]

A classic example of the tea pot calling the kettle black. Christianity has fostered just as much barbarity as Islam. We can identify Christianity by the "rotten fruitage" that it has produced.

No question the vast majority of professed "Christians" do not really follow Christ's teachings or example. But find those who do produce good fruitage and you find the one true religion. (John 13:34,35)

 

[McBell]

No question the vast majority of professed "Christians" do not really follow Christ's teachings or example. But find those who do produce good fruitage and you find the one true religion. (John 13:34,35)

Define "good fruitage".

Does repeating blatantly false information over and over even after having been told the truth constitute "good fruitage"?

 

[Philomath]

No question the vast majority of professed "Christians" do not really follow Christ's teachings or example. But find those who do produce good fruitage and you find the one true religion. (John 13:34,35)

So now it's this?

 

[Looncall]

The Taliban are barbarians but they are not muslims according to the laws of Islam.

But, they think that they are especially good muslims. How can that be?

 

[Riverwolf]

But, they think that they are especially good muslims. How can that be?

I've heard that the Taliban are only taught small bits of the Qur'an, but don't know the whole of it.

 

[MeLtiZBleaCh]

I've heard that the Taliban are only taught small bits of the Qur'an, but don't know the whole of it.

Yup that's true. Some verses are even fabricated. However i believe the reason is much deeper its related with pure hatred against the West etc. If half your family was killed in missile attacks and then someone comes and says
"Hey come with me and blow yourself up. You'll get revenge for your family + PARADISE" Illiteracy is another major factor ofcourse.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yup that's true. Some verses are even fabricated. However i believe the reason is much deeper its related with pure hatred against the West etc. If half your family was killed in missile attacks and then someone comes and says
"Hey come with me and blow yourself up. You'll get revenge for your family + PARADISE" Illiteracy is another major factor ofcourse.

With enough hatred, it's possible to completely overwrite all ethical and moral rules/laws, empathic instincts, and self-preservation instincts.

 

[Meeka_S]

Hey Assad91,

What is the meaning of لبيك يا حسين ?

 

[Looncall]

I've heard that the Taliban are only taught small bits of the Qur'an, but don't know the whole of it.

That's interesting and important. I wonder if it applies in other groups such as al-shabab.

I gather that they memorize the quran in their madrassas. I wonder what language they memorize it in and whether they understand what they are memorizing.

I am beginning to suspect that the problem is muslim clerics, not the rank and file muslims. Any suggestions?

 

[Assad91]

Hey Assad91,

What is the meaning of لبيك يا حسين ?

Labayka Ya Husayn. At your Service Oh Husayn

 

[gilligan8914]

The Taliban are barbarians but they are not muslims according to the laws of Islam.

The problem is that real believing muslims will not disown, speak out against, seperate themselves from, or even fight back against the taliban. Guess its a muslim thing.

 

[McBell]

The Taliban are barbarians but they are not muslims according to the laws of Islam.

The problem is that real believing muslims will not disown, speak out against, seperate themselves from, or even fight back against the taliban. Guess its a muslim thing.

I agree it is rather difficult to take the claim that the likes of the Taliban are not Muslim when Muslims refuse to speak out against them.

 

[Assad91]

I guess Meltz was just speaking kindly

 

[Riverwolf]

The problem is that real believing muslims will not disown, speak out against, seperate themselves from, or even fight back against the taliban. Guess its a muslim thing.

I agree it is rather difficult to take the claim that the likes of the Taliban are not Muslim when Muslims refuse to speak out against them.

How do we know they're not?

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

When I read the Qur'an, it seemed perfectly compatible with a democratic government.

Then you must have some basic comprehension problems :

قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا ۖ لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ ۚ مَا لَهُم مِّن دُونِهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

Translation:

"Say (قُل&#1616, Allah (اللَّه&#1615 [is] most-knowledgable (أَعْلَم&#1615 of what (بِمَ&#1575 [time] they stayed (لَبِثُوا, lit. remained). For him (لَه&#1615 [is] the unseen (غَيْب&#1615 [knowledge?] of the heavens (السَّمَاوَات&#1616 and the earth (وَالْأَرْض&#1616: he sees clearly (أَبْصِر&#1618 [and] hears clearly (وَأَسْمِع&#1618 of them (بِهِ other than him (مِّ&#1606 [there is] not for them (مَا لَهُ&#1605 any guardian (مِن وَلِيٍ&#1617 and [he, i.e. Allah, does] not (وَلَ&#1575 share (يُشْرِك&#1615 in his commands (فِي حُكْمِه&#1616 with anyone (أَحَدً&#1575 other than him[self] (دُونِه&#1616."
- Qu'ran 18:26

As we can see, the Qur'an does not support a democracy, but instead equates it with kufr/shirk. I personally deeply dislike Islam, but I find it dishonest when some groups (usually radical liberals) seek to "defend" Islam with fallacious claims which most Muslims themselves don't seem to support. I have shown you a verse which goes against your statement, so the burden of proof is on you to show me the verse(s) you're referring to which seem to be "compatible" with a democratic political system.

 

[Riverwolf]

Then you must have some basic comprehension problems :

قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا ۖ لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ ۚ مَا لَهُم مِّن دُونِهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

Translation:

"Say (قُل&#1616, Allah (اللَّه&#1615 [is] most-knowledgable (أَعْلَم&#1615 of what (بِمَ&#1575 [time] they stayed (لَبِثُوا, lit. remained). For him (لَه&#1615 [is] the unseen (غَيْب&#1615 [knowledge?] of the heavens (السَّمَاوَات&#1616 and the earth (وَالْأَرْض&#1616: he sees clearly (أَبْصِر&#1618 [and] hears clearly (وَأَسْمِع&#1618 of them (بِهِ other than him (مِّ&#1606 [there is] not for them (مَا لَهُ&#1605 any guardian (مِن وَلِيٍ&#1617 and [he, i.e. Allah, does] not (وَلَ&#1575 share (يُشْرِك&#1615 in his commands (فِي حُكْمِه&#1616 with anyone (أَحَدً&#1575 other than him[self] (دُونِه&#1616."
- Qu'ran 18:26

As we can see, the Qur'an does not support a democracy, but instead equates it with kufr/shirk. I personally deeply dislike Islam, but I find it dishonest when some groups (usually radical liberals) seek to "defend" Islam with fallacious claims which most Muslims themselves don't seem to support. I have shown you a verse which goes against your statement, so the burden of proof is on you to show me the verse[s) you're referring to which seem to be "compatible" with a democratic political system.

I fail to see how this is against democracy, which is an earthly governmental system designed to allow masses more say in earthly governmental affairs. If we apply this verse to other forms of government(monarchy, despotism, oligarchy, republic, anarchy, etc), we see that none of them would be supported.

If anything, this verse seems to be about dispelling polytheism and polytheistic thinking.

That said, I believe I pointed out that I haven't read the whole Qur'an (it's really hard to follow due to frequently jumping around topics), so I don't even know if it really goes into governmental affairs beyond judicial ones.

Furthermore, I don't read Arabic at all(and have no plans to learn any time soon), and so require translations.

 

[McBell]

Then you must have some basic comprehension problems :

قُلِ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا لَبِثُوا ۖ لَهُ غَيْبُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۖ أَبْصِرْ بِهِ وَأَسْمِعْ ۚ مَا لَهُم مِّن دُونِهِ مِن وَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

Translation:

"Say (قُل&#1616, Allah (اللَّه&#1615 [is] most-knowledgable (أَعْلَم&#1615 of what (بِمَ&#1575 [time] they stayed (لَبِثُوا, lit. remained). For him (لَه&#1615 [is] the unseen (غَيْب&#1615 [knowledge?] of the heavens (السَّمَاوَات&#1616 and the earth (وَالْأَرْض&#1616: he sees clearly (أَبْصِر&#1618 [and] hears clearly (وَأَسْمِع&#1618 of them (بِهِ other than him (مِّ&#1606 [there is] not for them (مَا لَهُ&#1605 any guardian (مِن وَلِيٍ&#1617 and [he, i.e. Allah, does] not (وَلَ&#1575 share (يُشْرِك&#1615 in his commands (فِي حُكْمِه&#1616 with anyone (أَحَدً&#1575 other than him[self] (دُونِه&#1616."
- Qu'ran 18:26

As we can see, the Qur'an does not support a democracy, but instead equates it with kufr/shirk. I personally deeply dislike Islam, but I find it dishonest when some groups (usually radical liberals) seek to "defend" Islam with fallacious claims which most Muslims themselves don't seem to support. I have shown you a verse which goes against your statement, so the burden of proof is on you to show me the verse[s) you're referring to which seem to be "compatible" with a democratic political system.

Do you seriously equate the US government to being gods?

 

[Jaskaran Singh]

I fail to see how this is against democracy, which is an earthly governmental system designed to allow masses more say in earthly governmental affairs.

Did you even read the part I purposely boldened, which shows that according to the Qur'an, the ẖukm (power of legislation/command) lies only with Allah, and no-one else? This applies to "divinities" and humans, as walā aẖadan (وَلا أَحَدًا ) literally means "not with anyone." Again, I don't see why this is so hard to understand.

If we apply this verse to other forms of government(monarchy, despotism, oligarchy, republic, anarchy, etc), we see that none of them would be supported

Yes, that's obvious. Hence, the concept of a Khilāfa (an Islamic pseudo-theocracy based on fiqh) is generally supported by many Islamists.

If anything, this verse seems to be about dispelling polytheism and polytheistic thinking.

That's the point I'm trying to make regarding Islam and democracy being incompatible. If you actually read my post before commenting, you would have noticed that I wrote the following sentence:

"the Qur'an does not support a democracy, but instead equates it with kufr/shirk"

In Islam, tawhid encompasses more than just "monotheism" in the religious sense. For example, the majority of Christians believe in a Triune-God and classify themselves as monotheists, yet according to the vast majority of traditional Muslims, this would not constitute proper tawhid and is considered a form of shirk, this is stated explicitly within the Qur'an:

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلَا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ ۚ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ ۖ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۖ وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ ۚ انتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَّكُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ أَن يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ ۘ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا

Translation: "O people (يَا أَهْل&#1614 [of] the book (الْكِتَاب&#1616 do not (لَ&#1575 commit excess (تَغْلُو&#1575 in (فِ&#1610 your religion (دِينِكُم&#1618 nor (وَلَ&#1575 speak (تَقُولُو&#1575 about (عَلَ&#1609 Allah (اللَّه&#1616 except (إِلَّ&#1575 the truth (الْحَقَ&#1617 [that] the Masih [i.e. Moshiach/Messiah] (الْمَسِيح&#1615 Isa/Jesus (عِيسَ&#1609,the son (ابْن&#1615 of Mary (مَرْيَم&#1614 [was] only (إِنَّمَ&#1575 a messenger (رَسُول&#1615 of Allah (اللَّه&#1616 in his words (وَكَلِمَتُه&#1615 which he spoke (أَلْقَاهَ&#1575 to (إِلَى&#1648 Mary (مَرْيَم&#1614 and a spirit (وَرُوح&#1612 from him. (مِّنْه&#1615 [Therefore], believe (فَآمِنُو&#1575 in Allah (بِاللَّه&#1616 and [his] messengers (وَرُسُلِه&#1616 and do not (وَلَ&#1575 say (تَقُولُو&#1575 "of three" [i.e. trinity] (ثَلَاثَة&#1612: desist (انتَهُو&#1575, [it] is better (خَيْرً&#1575 for you (لَّكُم&#1618. Allah (اللَّه&#1615 alone (إِنَّمَ&#1575 is God (إِلَٰهٌ the one (وَاحِد&#1612 [who is] exalted/glorified above (سُبْحَانَه&#1615 [the concept] that he (أَ&#1606 should have (يَكُون&#1614 for him (لَه&#1615 a child ( ۘوَلَد&#1612. To him [belongs] (لَّه&#1615 whatever exists (مَ&#1575 in (فِ&#1610 the heavens (السَّمَاوَات&#1616 and (وَمَ&#1575 on (فِ&#1610 the earth (الْأَرْض&#1616. Allah [alone] (بِاللَّه&#1616 is sufficient (وَكَفَى&#1648 [as a] manager of affairs (وَكِيلً&#1575."
-Qur'an 4.171

Similarly, just as most traditional Muslims classify the belief in the Christian trinity as shirk (idolatry), even though it is still "monotheistic" [which, come to think about it, is not very different from Judaism, where many schools of Halakha also classify trinitarianism as Avodah Zarah], the majority of traditional Muslims also generally take the view that giving legislation to any individual other than Allah is a form of major shirk (idolatry) and according to the some of the more strict schools (such as the Hanbali maddhab), taking part in voting and/or actively letting yourself take part in being governed by the the will of the majority rather than the Qur'an and Sunnah is a tantamount transgression which could possibly make you a Munạfiq (hypocrite). Some topics, such as Shi'as doing tawassul at the graves of Imams are somewhat controversial (some view it as Bid'ah others view it as Shirk), but practically every orthodox Islamic scholar I've met agrees that supporting democracy is idolatry from an Islamic perspective.

That said, I believe I pointed out that I haven't read the whole Qur'an

Perhaps therein lies the problem?

(it's really hard to follow due to frequently jumping around topics), so I don't even know if it really goes into governmental affairs beyond judicial ones.

Really? I thought it was quite repetitive, especially regarding hell/Jahannam. It seemed like much of the text (or should I say, recitation) was little more than scare-tactic based propaganda, although this is just my opinion. As much as I dislike Islam though, I don't think it's right to misinterpret it (or make claims to the effect of Islam being inherently compatible with democracy).

Furthermore, I don't read Arabic at all(and have no plans to learn any time soon), and so require translations.

I translated the previous ayah which I cited word for word, so how is this relevant at all? In addition, if you are unsure, you could always check the Pickthall or Yusuf Ali translation online (they're pretty common, really).

Do you seriously equate the US government to being gods?

No, I do not. I can't tell whether you're trolling or just simply being ignorant. My beliefs about the US Government have absolutely nothing to do with the conversation. The topic at hand is the relationship between shirk and supporting democracy in regards to Islam.

My basic understanding is that they were both equally intolerant of each other.

Maybe in your PC-fantasy world. Unfortunately, however, that didn't seem to be the case in real life:

"The nastiest thing I saw the Quraysh do to the Messenger occurred when their nobles assembled in the Hijr [standing place]. They discussed Muhammad, saying, 'We have never seen the kind of trouble we have endured from this fellow. He has derided our traditional values, declared our way of life foolish, abused and insulted our forefathers, reviled our religion, caused division among us, divided the community, and cursed our gods. We have endured a great deal from him.' While they were saying this, the Apostle walked up and kissed the Black Stone. Then he performed the circumambulation of the Ka'aba. As he did they said some injurious things about him. I could see from the Messenger's face that he had heard them. When he passed a second time they made similar remarks. When he passed them the third time, the Prophet stopped and said, 'Hear me, O Quraysh. By Him who holds my [Muhammad's] life in his hand, I will bring you slaughter.'" - Tabari VI:101