Sunnah

[firedragon]

Can you rephrase, I don't get what you mean by a 'prototype understanding' of religion.

Let me ask you.

1. Do you think Islam is "facing Mecca and praying"? Is that it?
2. Do you think Islam teaches that Mecca was always the Qibla?
3. What is your understanding of Islam? Is it all about rituals?

I think the answers to these are right there on this very page. This is just to get it in your own words.

 

[stvdv]

Of course it was good advice. It was God's. My master is God. The Quran says the only Maula is God himself. So this "advice" is a verse of the Quran.

That is good, to have "God as your Master". My Master is also God.

 

[danieldemol]

Let me ask you.

1. Do you think Islam is "facing Mecca and praying"? Is that it?
2. Do you think Islam teaches that Mecca was always the Qibla?
3. What is your understanding of Islam? Is it all about rituals?

I think the answers to these are right there on this very page. This is just to get it in your own words.

1. I think that a part of what I would refer to as the Muhammadan religion is"facing Mecca and praying", to me Islam just means submitting to God, so I differentiate between the two (Ie Islam and Muhammadanism).
2. No, hence the point about are they the same Islams (or put another way, is Muhammadanism the same as Islam)
3. My understanding of Islam is that it is submission to God, not Muhammadanism.

 

[Rival]

Thats not Islam.

What you are speaking of is one portion of Islam. In fact, please dont get offended by this yet its easier to say that you imposing this upon Islam. Even Muslim traditions dont make you "no Islam" due to getting rid of one of these things like festivals.

You know something? Al Azhar university and its teen are considered very high authority in Islam. And some of the Muslims that I know of consider them fanatical. I mean some. Even this so called "fanatical" entity does not make this claim that you do.

If you have some time, take up a writing of Imam Malik Ibn Anas. This guy is the oldest school of though in Islam. I mean older than all the other traditions in the history of Islam. To stress upon it, it is older than Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Hanbali, Hanafi, Shafii, Ashari, Wahabi, Zahiri, Deobandi, this, that, and the other. Just read it. You will understand Islam better.

Dont believe it. But know it.

Peace.

I'm not saying they are not Muslims, bro, I'm not sure where you are taking this? I'm just honestly asking if they want to go beyond the bare minimum, and if they have no sunnah, how do they know what is and isn't acceptable?

For example, let's say Noah wants to go above and beyond what is required of him. He wants to jump off the ark when they land and pray in a particular fashion. Then he wants to drink some juice but he wants to bless the juice.

How is Noah to know that his method of prayer is acceptable before G-d and also his blessings and his juice?

 

[firedragon]

1. I think that a part of what I would refer to as the Muhammadan religion is"facing Mecca and praying", to me Islam just means submitting to God, so I differentiate between the two (Ie Islam and Muhammadanism).
2. No, hence the point about are they the same Islams (or put another way, is Muhammadanism the same as Islam)
3. My understanding of Islam is that it is submission to God, not Muhammadanism.

Daniel. I think you have answered it all to everyone in this thread. Maybe you have no clue how much of it you have answered with this simple three points you have put up there.

I shall concede and withdraw. Apologies.

 

[firedragon]

I'm not saying they are not Muslims bro, I'm not sure where you are taking this? I'm just honestly asking if they want to go beyond the bare minimum, and if they have no sunnah, how do they know what is and isn't acceptable?

For example, let's say Noah wants to go above and beyond what is required of him. He wants to jump off the ark when they land and pray in a particular fashion. Then he wants to drink some juice but he wants to bless the juice.

How is Noah to know that his method of prayer is acceptable before G-d and also his blessings and his juice?

I understand.

Noah should know, God hears him, not his recitation. Thus, his prayer should be just prayer and not some set of words written down and recited like a mantra.

I hope you understand sis.

 

[stvdv]

That's a claim almost all new groups make "we are the best, we are the original, we are the source". I call it PR. Not all PR is truth-based

That does not answer the question of the OP. Sorry brother, but it seems like you saw an opportunity to take a put shot and you took it. Surprising really.
When someone asks a question, try and answer it, not pick one sentence and use it to hurl at someone. It is beneath you my friend.

My master told me to investigate when you are given information.

I was surprised you read so much in my reply, that was not there. And you missed the things that were there. Hence I'll explain:
1: New groups do make often the claim "we are the best, original, source" etc. Just observation, no judgment. Especially because I agree here
2: And of course it is good PR, people love this kind of verses. My Master did the same. Any good Master can claim this. I won't object
3: To be complete, I did add "not all PR is truth-based". Just a fact (we had a few so called Jesus' on RF, not all truth-based)

* So, the way I phrased it was actually not a shot at all. Above that, it was just a neutral observation I gave, as I explained above

* And I do believe (as I already explained in my posts) that "Islam teaches that it is the original religion as practiced by Adam, Noah, Abraham", and that this is correct. I would start doubting Islam IF they claimed the opposite. Islam teaches that Adam, Noah, Abraham practiced the original religion too, the Koran is giving thereby quite some credit to the Bible I would say. I like that a lot. I love it when one Religion gives so much credit to the other Religions. Very healthy, and that is the way to make Islam the Religion of Peace.

So, I hope that these few extra lines clarify enough what I meant and what I believe (how I see it today).

 

[atanu]

I am talking about what each religion says about itself. You can believe the above, but that isn't what those religions say. Those religions are very different to each other too, as one cannot base what the religion says on proof texting, as it ignores the context of the scriptures.

Sir. I am talking about ‘surrender’ being the ultimate teaching of religions.

...

 

[firedragon]

I was surprised you read so much in my reply, that was not there. And you missed the things that were there. Hence I'll explain:
1: New groups do make often the claim "we are the best, original, source" etc. Just observation, no judgment. Especially because I agree here
2: And of course it is good PR, people love this kind of verses. My Master did the same. Any good Master can claim this. I won't object
3: To be complete, I did add "not all PR is truth-based". Just a fact (we had a few so called Jesus' on RF, not all truth-based)

* So, the way I phrased it was actually not a shot at all. Above that, it was just a neutral observation I gave, as I explained above

* And I do believe (as I already explained in my posts) that "Islam teaches that it is the original religion as practiced by Adam, Noah, Abraham", and that this is correct. I would start doubting Islam IF they claimed the opposite. Islam teaches that Adam, Noah, Abraham practiced the original religion too, the Koran is giving thereby quite some credit to the Bible I would say. I like that a lot. I love it when one Religion gives so much credit to the other Religions. Very healthy, and that is the way to make Islam the Religion of Peace.

So, I hope that these few extra lines clarify enough what I meant and what I believe (how I see it today).

Now I think I am gonna go completely irrelevant. Rival, please reprimand me.

• Islam does not claim it is the original religion. It claims to be the only. Thus, even if one believes in it or not, every single theology that came up in the entire world are all either offshoots of Islam, or Islam itself in a flavour.
• Islam means peace and submission. Its not an "Ism" or an "ity". Its not named after a person.
• If you read the Quran, it does not claim anywhere to be the religion of Muhammed. It claims that Muhammed came to reiterate existing monotheism.
• It does not claim to be a superior theology but the only one that ever existed. Its not like someone coming up yesterday saying I am the God you must worship and has always have been. Muhammed is mentioned 4 times in the Quran, and he is absolutely human, a meagre servant.
• The Quran does not give credence to the Bible. It, and the Bible, both give credence to Adam, Noah, Abraham etc. There is a big difference. But it depends on your naturalism and if you consider Muhammed to be a copy artist and a liar.

Maybe there is more.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Sir. I am talking about ‘surrender’ being the ultimate teaching of religions.

...

That is the problem, you are addressing one aspect of all the religions only and saying that it is the ultimate teaching of religions, which firstly doesn't apply to all religions, and secondly is not the only teachings in these religions. Also, whether "surrender" is the ultimate teaching of these religions is debatable. For instance, in Christianity, the ultimate teaching would most likely be "God's love for us".

 

[stvdv]

• Islam means peace and submission. Its not an "Ism"

Islam means peace and submission. Its not an "Ism"

But it still has the 3 letters "Ism" in it, and that is quite special, because it's 5 letters total
But, if I am correct then "la" in arabic means "No", so I won't debate you on this one
(Must be a little joke of Allah, He just had to put in "Ism" ... or coincidence ... nah)

 

[loverofhumanity]

If one looks at the sun with respect to the days of the week then we can say there is a sun which appears each day, so seven Suns. But if one look at the sun it is one alone.

So with the Suns of Truth. They appear to differ outwardly, but inwardly, They are one and the same.

So in the outward appearances we see Muhammad, Christ, Buddha, Moses and Baha’u’llah as different but in reality They are represent the same truth and reality. They all teach good character and heavenly virtues. In this respect They are one and the same and always existed.

 

[firedragon]

Islam means peace and submission. Its not an "Ism"

But it still has the 3 letters "Ism" in it, and that is quite special, because it's only 5 letters
But, if I am correct then "la" in arabic means "No", so I won't debate you on this one

What? What I meant by saying its not an "ism" to show you that its not Buddhism, Hinduism, or any thing like that which is a made up name. Islam is a description. A process. The word itself shows it.

And it does not break down to syllables like you had done mate. It doesn't make sense.

Over and out.

 

[stvdv]

Islam means peace and submission. Its not an "Ism"

But it still has the 3 letters "Ism" in it, and that is quite special, because it's 5 letters total
But, if I am correct then "la" in arabic means "No", so I won't debate you on this one
(Must be a little joke of Allah, He just had to put in "Ism" ... or coincidence ... nah)

What? What I meant by saying its not an "ism" to show you that its not Buddhism, Hinduism, or any thing like that which is a made up name. Islam is a description. A process. The word itself shows it.
And it does not break down to syllables like you had done mate. It doesn't make sense.
Over and out.

I was just a bit creative today. Don't sweat it.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

This is a question for Muslims mostly but anyone is free to add to the discussion.

As far as I know, Islam teaches that it is the original religion as practiced by Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc. and I'm wondering how can this be, since Islam includes the sunnah of Muhammad, which surely could not have existed at the time of the Patriarchs, since Muhammad was thousands of years after them? How did they, in your belief, practice Islam?

Thanks.

It's a false claim, as is the Islamic claim that Islam is an Abrahamic religion. It is NOT.

The claim to being an "Abrahamic religion" is based on Abraham as the Father of Ishmael. Ishmael was Abraham's son with his hand-maiden, Hagar. Abraham's wife Sarah was jealous of Hagar, so she banished Hagar and her son.

Ishmael is generally considered to be the "Father" (or progenitor) of the Bedouin (Arab) peoples.

However, Islam did NOT exist until approximately 700 A.D. That's more than 1,200 years. So Ishmael was NEVER a Muslim. No one was, until around 700 A.D.

So Islam is NOT an "Abrahamic" religion.

 

[Rival]

It's a false claim, as is the Islamic claim that Islam is an Abrahamic religion. It is NOT.

The claim to being an "Abrahamic religion" is based on Abraham as the Father of Ishmael. Ishmael was Abraham's son with his hand-maiden, Hagar. Abraham's wife Sarah was jealous of Hagar, so she banished Hagar and her son.

Ishmael is generally considered to be the "Father" (or progenitor) of the Bedouin (Arab) peoples.

However, Islam did NOT exist until approximately 700 A.D. That's more than 1,200 years. So Ishmael was NEVER a Muslim. No one was, until around 700 A.D.

So Islam is NOT an "Abrahamic" religion.

It is an Abrahamic religion in the sense that it claims Abraham et al. as prophets and belongs to broadly the same monotheistic tradition.

 

[firedragon]

I was just a bit creative today. Don't sweat it.

Haha. Alright alright. Cheers.

 

[firedragon]

It's a false claim, as is the Islamic claim that Islam is an Abrahamic religion. It is NOT.

The claim to being an "Abrahamic religion" is based on Abraham as the Father of Ishmael. Ishmael was Abraham's son with his hand-maiden, Hagar. Abraham's wife Sarah was jealous of Hagar, so she banished Hagar and her son.

Hmm. Who claimed that "Islam is an abrahamic religion"?

 

[Jacques de Molay]

It is an Abrahamic religion in the sense that it claims Abraham et al. as prophets and belongs to broadly the same monotheistic tradition.

They can claim anything they want, but that doesn't make it factually accurate.

Again...Abraham lived more than 1,000 years before Mohammed claimed to have his visions that led to writing the Koran.

There's nothing in scripture that justifies claiming Abraham as a Prophet for Islam (which did not exist until 700 AD).

 

[Rival]

They can claim anything they want, but that doesn't make it factually accurate.

Again...Abraham lived more than 1,000 years before Mohammed claimed to have his visions that led to writing the Koran.

There's nothing in scripture that justifies claiming Abraham as a Prophet for Islam (which did not exist until 700 AD).

Muslims believe Abraham was a prophet and claim to worship the same G-d he did. There's no dispute about that. That makes it an Abrahamic religion. I could say the same about Christianity - that Christians are not Jews and have nothing to do with Abraham whatsoever, but that's not what 'Abrahamic means'. So Maybe you can stop inventing your own definition. Abrahamic religions claim the G-d of Abraham.