Misconceptions about Islam

[luecy7]

What are the authoritative texts of Islam?

I see your question as no different than asking a Christian community whether the Bible, or Gospel of Thomas, is an authoritative text.

The Koran, Gospel, and Pentateuch each state that it is God that has authority... not the book. The Koran discusses the Pentateuch and Gospel in a similar light. In fact the Koran further states that people should not take a 'Lord' between them and God, much less a book. If there is a book that is authoritative, then it is the one that you write, and I know the Koran and Gospels discuss that too. Any text or translation of a text is not authoritative, it is a guide to help you.

The obsession with an authoritative book appears to be Western (USA), rooted in disowning responsibility for one's actions. Example:

Dramatic Bank Robbery-Gone-Wrong Caught on Tape - The Early Show - CBS News

Friday morning there was an armed robbery of Capital One bank just North of Washington DC in Maryland, a bank known for profitting by actually targeting 0% credit cards to sub prime borrowers and quickly racheting that rate to loan shark 18-30% interest rates for hair trigger reasons. Thanks to the socialist (government) aid of $3.5 billion, Capital One was armed with the funds to expand and purchase the Maryland bank, formerly known as Chevy Chase.

The hardened criminal is so professional at the crime, he slips on the ice, loses his hostage, and goes running right past police officers, who open fire on him:

Police Chief Ricucci has praise for his officers, "We train for this every day. Everything went according to the book. Our officers did an outstanding job. … There was firearm discipline. There was not a crossfire … even with six officers shooting. … we were able to take the suspect out and save the life of the hostage, which was our goal."

Common phrase... what book? You watch the video, and though the foolish man committed a crime, he did not exactly have to be shot to death. What book is of such value, that is so authoritative, that following it makes this Robocop scene a good thing?

Infidel (criminal) or not, was it the Koran? Is there a verse that says to slay a bank robber on-site? I don't think it was the gospels, do you? I don't think God was clapping and cheering, but I find that the majority of US citizens think this way. In my opinion Capital One, the US government, and the 6 police officers are greater criminals under God than the foolish robber, yet every one of them thinks they are good because they think they got away with it by obeying their book. The obsession with an authoritative book guides people away from taking responsibility for their actions under God. Anyone think the bank takes responsibility for it's actions? The US government? The 6 police officers? Athough the Koran is a highly valued text central to guidance in Islam, the concept that 'the book' is the authority is counter to the very teaching. The teaching is: you have the authority for your actions, and you are responsible for them under God.

That is my experience and understanding... your mileage may vary.

 

[Muslimwoman]

This is quickly becoming very confusing. Let's break it down.

Ok I will try to give very short answer to your questions and see if that makes it easier

What percentage of Muslims accept the Quran as authoritative/infallible? (I assume all Muslims do.)

100%

What percentage of Muslims accept the Hadith as authoritative/infallible?

Bugger this needs a longer answer ... sorry.

Sunni and Shia do not share the same hadith books and I am Sunni so will only speak for our hadith books.

I would say 95% or more consider hadith authoratative BUT as for infallible ..

"A Hadith can be categorized with regards to its authenticity into 5 types, 1) Sahih (authentic), 2) Hasan (sound), 3) Dha'eef (weak), 4) Dha'eef Jiddan (very weak), and 5) Mawdhoo (fabricated)."

Q & A: Hadith Categories Based on Authenticity

So I look up everything in Sahih Bukhari ... Bukhari collected over 300,000 hadith and then began testing them for their authenticity ... his sahih book contains around 2900 hadith (without repetition).

Do all Muslims accept all Hadith?

No Muslim should as you can see from the above catagories of hadith.

Is the Tirmidhi a Hadith?

He was a scholar who made a collection of hadith.

What percentage of Muslims accept the Tirmidhi — with its idea of 72 ‘virgins’ — as authoritative/infallible?

No way of knowing this but none that I know view Tirmidhi to be as reliable as Bukhari.

1. whether you (Muslimwoman) accept something (for example, the Tirmidhi) as authoritative/infallible.

No I don't, nothing other than the Quran is infallible to my mind, although I do consider sahih Bukhari to be authoratative.

2. whether you can find ‘authoritative’ references and quotes to justify accepting and believing particular quotes from the Quran and other books.

The Quran is the Word of Allah (swt) so I need no references to justify anything in it. Everything else I investigate, reading scholars opinions and then decide.

I'll give you an example .. this hadith would obviously not be acceptible to me and it is all over the net as shaih Bukhari:

Bukhari (72:715) - A woman came to Muhammad and begged her to stop her husband from beating her. Her skin was bruised so badly that she it is described as being "greener" than the green veil she was wearing. Muhammad did not admonish her husband, but instead ordered her to return to him and submit to his sexual desires.

Firstly it goes completely against the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet (pbuh) so I must question it.

When I look up the hadith I find the full hadith and find no fault with it, as we should not lie and malign people to get what we want:

Bukhari :: Book 7 :: Volume 72 :: Hadith 715

Narrated 'Ikrima:

Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When 'AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, 'Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that 'AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"

3. whether the majority of Muslims accept a particular book as authoritative/infallible. If you do not, but the majority of Muslims do, then it is authoritative/infallible and we must treat it as such.

Again the problem is that Shia have over 180 hadith collections. Shia make up about 10% of Muslims in the world ... so if I had to pick a book and say the majority of Muslims accept it as authentic/authoratative I would have to choose sahih Bukhari.

The way I see it, the only choice that carries weight is the third; what the majority of Muslims believe. What they ‘should’ believe, or whether they have incorrectly interpreted a particular verse (for example, the ‘sword’ verse) is unimportant. The only thing that is important (to me) is what the majority of Muslims believe.

The majority of Muslims are perfectly aware of the context and history of the sword verse, however a minority use it for their own ends.

There is one more issue, which is the interpreting of specific passages. You have quoted the passage about killing pagans, yet you are saying you are trying to find the correct ‘interpretation.’

No I said I am waiting for something to be checked in the Arabic texts. My query is about abrogation and tafsir, not about interpretation.

but for now I’m going with the idea that the verse you quoted says Muslims can kill all pagans, because that is what it actually says. Let’s see if you can convince me this verse only applies to killing pagans in self-defense

Oh that's easy, just read the verses above and below the sword verse:

[This is a declaration of] disassociation, from Allah and His Messenger, to those with whom you had made a treaty among the polytheists.(9:1)

So travel freely, [O disbelievers], throughout the land [during] four months but know that you cannot cause failure to Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.(9:2)

And [it is] an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is disassociated from the disbelievers, and [so is] His Messenger. So if you repent, that is best for you; but if you turn away - then know that you will not cause failure to Allah . And give tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment.(9:3)

Excepted are those with whom you made a treaty among the polytheists and then they have not been deficient toward you in anything or supported anyone against you; so complete for them their treaty until their term [has ended]. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].(9:4)

And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.(9:5)

And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah . Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.(9:6)

How can there be for the polytheists a treaty in the sight of Allah and with His Messenger, except for those with whom you made a treaty at al-Masjid al-Haram? So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous [who fear Him].(9:7)

The emphasis in bold is mine to make it easier to see the point. So we can see that if anyone asks for protection (bear in mind they are in the middle of a war) then they must be protected ... it's a far cry from kill everyone until they are dead or become Muslim. It's all about breaking peace treaties and waging war on the Muslims but you have to read it all to understand it.

Which brings up an important point. Are Muslims encouraged to read a verse and come up with their own interpretation about what it means, or are they encouraged/forced to accept one particular teacher’s interpretation of the verse? Does Islam encourage me to make my own interpretation of what these verses about pagans, ‘virgins,’ and sex in heaven actually mean?

No we are not encouraged to make our own interpretations. However we are also not forced to accept anyone's opinion. If all the 4 Sunni schools agree on an interpretation then, as men of knowledge, I should accept that. If they differ on interpretation then I am free to choose which interpretation to follow.

To myself, and I think most males, that doesn't actually sound enjoyable. I could not help but be reminded of the addendum that the lawyers require on all advertisements for Viagra and related drugs: "Seek immediate medical attention if you experience an erection lasting longer than four hours!"

heehee that was really funny Bob. It also makes a serious point, these gung-ho eternal erection type interpretations aren't even realistic but if you imagine standing in front of an army and telling them if they die in the war they will get 72 virgins and an eternal erection it may just be enough to get them stirred up?!

Infidel (criminal) or not,

Salam Luecy7

Interesting isn't it, the word infidel is actually a Christian word and was used by Westerners when they first translated the Quran ... funny how such things stick around and are then used against a faith who never used the word.

 

[luecy7]

I was thinking of another way of making the point I was trying to make:

If a car manufacturer writes a manual on how to drive the car, the manual is not the authority. The car manufacturer is still the authority.

Or in science, what is the authoritive physics book? A professor might offer a good physics book, and the professor might be a great teacher, but the authority of physics is the laws of physics.

Even if the one that made the physics provides the book, the book is still not the authority... the one that made the physics is the authority.

People talk about the severity of having a hand cut off for stealing. That sounds like a better deal than the armed robber in Maryland. A taser or a shot in the leg would have stopped the man, and then he could have lived and learned from it. I think the police officers are now criminals. They are now guilty of something that the armed robber was not guilty of.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Nick I didn't miss your quesion about abrogation but I think we need to deal with one topic at a time. At the moment we are looking at how the Quran and hadith are viewed/followed by Muslims.

I'm waiting for an answer on the abrogation of the Quran .. it's a difficult topic even for Muslims so have tried to discuss with hubby via email but it's not working so will get an answer when he is next home in a couple of weeks I hope.

Once we get our head round these we can tackle apostates.

 

[Quahom1]

To myself, and I think most males, that doesn't actually sound enjoyable. I could not help but be reminded of the addendum that the lawyers require on all advertisements for Viagra and related drugs: "Seek immediate medical attention if you experience an erection lasting longer than four hours!"

Yes, it is called priaprism, and is very dangerous for male or female...(yep it can affect both).

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste and salaam Muslimwoman,

thank you, in advance, for your efforts

i'll open briefly. what is your view on the general Islamic view that women are inferior to men? iirc the verse says something like 'men exceed women' and the rest.

metta,

~v

 

[Muslimwoman]

Namaste and salaam Muslimwoman,

thank you, in advance, for your efforts

i'll open briefly. what is your view on the general Islamic view that women are inferior to men? iirc the verse says something like 'men exceed women' and the rest.

metta,

~v

Salam V

Thank you for your question. I would start by disagreeing with your statement "the general Islamic view that women are inferior to men" ... I would say the general Islamic view that men and women are different and have different roles in life.

I'm going to answer this in a rather odd way but I hope you'll bear with me for a moment:

But let them who find not [the means for] marriage abstain [from sexual relations] until Allah enriches them from His bounty. And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you. And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. (24:33)

We are so often confronted with the view of early Muslims as barbaric murdering lunatics who took women in war as sex slaves and beat their wives for sport.

So why am I quoting this ayat? Muslims are commanded here to listen to what non-Muslim women want and adhere to their wishes, even though these women are considered property in terms of being a slave ... so why would we think Islam tells men to treat their wives in a worse way than they treat slave women? So with that in mind let us look at the verse you refer to:

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.(4:34)

Who are these women? Their wives, daughters, mothers, sisters.

This verse has been translated as men are in charge, men are guardians, men exceed, etc. The Arabic word is qawwamun, men are qawwamun over women ... so what is qawwamun?

The root of the key word, qawwamun (pl. of qawwam), is qama which means "to stand or to make something stand or to establish something". It is often used in the Holy Qur'an in the sense of establishing religion or prayer. A related word is qa'im which means "one who stands or makes something stand". Qawwam is an intensive form of qa'im and has a sense of continuity in the action involved. So it means one who is continuously standing over something (as, for example, a guard or caretaker) or one who is continuously making something stand, i.e. is maintaining it. In the Qur'anic usage of qawwam and related words there is almost always present an idea of propriety. For example, aqamah of salah is not only praying but also praying properly. The function of qawwam is also understood in the Qur'an to be characterized by fairness.

Tafseer of Surah an-Nisa, Ayah 34

Now we have to consider the economic and social role of men and women at the time the Quran was revealed. We know the Prophet's (pbuh) first wife was a businesswoman but we also know she was from a noble family (ie rich), so she was not the norm. Women were, as they still often are now in Muslim families, wives and mothers. Men would pay for their lives and protect them physically and for this women owed a duty of care to their husband.

Women can choose to work or not, it is up to them but men have to work and provide for the family. Women have rights of inheritence and men cannot touch their money but men must use their inheritence to pay for the family .... there are so many examples of women's rights which show both the rights and duties of both men and women in Islam, they are simply different from each other according to gender.

Other than the amazons of greek mythology I have yet to hear of a society where, when danger nears, men cower in houses with the children while women go out to protect the men. That is not to say women are weak or inferior, I served in the army, it is just the natural order in the average family, men are the head of the household (the disciplinarian of the children, the decision maker, the worker, etc) and are physically stronger than women.

Remember Islam came to a patriarchal society and it is astonishing the lengths it went to but we must understand that changes, like the issue of slaves, would take time to change. Top understand women's role in Islam or what rights and obligations Islam offers to women we have to, as usual, zoom out and view Islam as a whole.

This is from the Farewell Sermon of Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) and sums up exactly how marriages should be viewed in Islam:

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.

This is not inequality, it is simply married life. So my view is ... I wouldn't convert into a faith which stated I was inferior

 

[Vajradhara]

Salaam Muslimwoman,

thank you for the considered response. please pardon me if mine is somewhat out of character.

Salam V

Thank you for your question. I would start by disagreeing with your statement "the general Islamic view that women are inferior to men" ... I would say the general Islamic view that men and women are different and have different roles in life.

i had thought the general view was that men exceed women as that is found in Al Qur'an. of course saying that men and women are different isn't all that noteworthy

I'm going to answer this in a rather odd way but I hope you'll bear with me for a moment:

But let them who find not [the means for] marriage abstain [from sexual relations] until Allah enriches them from His bounty. And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which He has given you. And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. (24:33)

We are so often confronted with the view of early Muslims as barbaric murdering lunatics who took women in war as sex slaves and beat their wives for sport.

So why am I quoting this ayat? Muslims are commanded here to listen to what non-Muslim women want and adhere to their wishes, even though these women are considered property in terms of being a slave ... so why would we think Islam tells men to treat their wives in a worse way than they treat slave women?

there is so much wrong with this, Sally, that i'm simply unable to grasp it. the ayat you quoted says that they could be forced anyway but that Allah would be forgiving of them if they were forced into prostitution for the benefit of their male muslim master. just saying such things sickens me. the whole idea of slavery is anathema and no justification of it exists. one of my main objections to Islam is the general view of women as chattel which is evinced throughout.

So with that in mind let us look at the verse you refer to:

Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.(4:34)

Who are these women? Their wives, daughters, mothers, sisters.

men are in charge of women because they spend their money on women? of course, as you point out, it was rather rare for women to have money and so that works out pretty well for the men there, doesn't it?

Now we have to consider the economic and social role of men and women at the time the Quran was revealed. We know the Prophet's (pbuh) first wife was a businesswoman but we also know she was from a noble family (ie rich), so she was not the norm. Women were, as they still often are now in Muslim families, wives and mothers. Men would pay for their lives and protect them physically and for this women owed a duty of care to their husband.

interesting wording.. women owe men an obligation of duty and submission yet i wonder if the same is true. "wives and mothers" as if a woman that has a job outside of the home couldn't be a wife and or a mother. it's horrible to me that you find this view compelling Sally.

Other than the amazons of greek mythology I have yet to hear of a society where, when danger nears, men cower in houses with the children while women go out to protect the men. That is not to say women are weak or inferior, I served in the army, it is just the natural order in the average family, men are the head of the household (the disciplinarian of the children, the decision maker, the worker, etc) and are physically stronger than women.

what the heck does that even mean?! you've made up some concept of natural order or as is most often the case, popular cultural indoctrination has inculcated this view into you. the average man and the average women are no more or less strong than each other. i've been over this very basic physiological point till i'm blue in the wrists but it's how it is.

Remember Islam came to a patriarchal society and it is astonishing the lengths it went to but we must understand that changes, like the issue of slaves, would take time to change. Top understand women's role in Islam or what rights and obligations Islam offers to women we have to, as usual, zoom out and view Islam as a whole.

This is from the Farewell Sermon of Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) and sums up exactly how marriages should be viewed in Islam:

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.

This is not inequality, it is simply married life. So my view is ... I wouldn't convert into a faith which stated I was inferior

it may be married life for you, Sally, a muslim woman but it doesn't resemble anything that i'd be interested in calling marriage. of course we may define that word quite a bit differently so that's no worry. it's a husbands right that you can't make friends with someone he doesn't approve of? balderdash.

i understand full well the cultural millieu in which Islam arose and the patriarchal tribal societies that dominated pre-Islamic Arabia in large part Islam exists to lend legitimacy to that very same tribal culture which views women as chattel.

thank you for explaining your view of how women are viewed in Islam.

metta,

~v

 

[Muslimwoman]

Salam Vaj

i had thought the general view was that men exceed women as that is found in Al Qur'an.

Depends which translation you read, which country the translator is from and which era he lived in.

Either way, I certainly come from a family where my father was the bread winner and therefore the head of the household .. that seems to be perfectly acceptable to people until God says it

there is so much wrong with this, Sally, that i'm simply unable to grasp it. the ayat you quoted says that they could be forced anyway but that Allah would be forgiving of them if they were forced into prostitution for the benefit of their male muslim master. just saying such things sickens me. the whole idea of slavery is anathema and no justification of it exists. one of my main objections to Islam is the general view of women as chattel which is evinced throughout.

Allah (swt) speaks to everyone in the Quran, to Muslim and non-Muslim, to men and women, to old and young.

Women in 2011 in my country (Britain) are forced into the sex slave industry ... so what is wrong with God telling those women there is no sin on them?

Allah (swt) tells Muslim men NOT to do this. He also tells men not to drink, not to kill, not to steal but Allah (swt) knows some men will still do wrong ... so He tells the non-Muslim women there will be no sin on them.

So what is wrong with that? Would you object if Allah (swt) told men not to steal and that if men did steal there would be no sin on the victim?

The Atlantic slave trade began hundred of years after the Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) walked this earth. The Prophet taught Muslims they must free slaves for even small misdemeanours but if it was ended overnight where would those slaves go?

men are in charge of women because they spend their money on women? of course, as you point out, it was rather rare for women to have money and so that works out pretty well for the men there, doesn't it?

Would you like me to go and change history or perhaps human biology? Men have been the head of the house and the main breadwinner since human history began and it has only started evening up in my own lifetime. Hoewever, even now in this "age of equality" in my country women get 52 weeks maternity leave and men only get 2 weeks ... what does this suggest to you?

interesting wording.. women owe men an obligation of duty and submission

If I had said this or even suggested it I would bother commenting on it.

what the heck does that even mean?! you've made up some concept of natural order or as is most often the case, popular cultural indoctrination has inculcated this view into you. the average man and the average women are no more or less strong than each other. i've been over this very basic physiological point till i'm blue in the wrists but it's how it is.

Then I suggest you contact the Olympic committee and tell them men and women should not have segregated events and write to ll the female world record holders and tell them you are retracting their medals, because clearly they haven't earned them yet!!! You should also contact every army in the world where women and men have differing training regimes because men are physically stronger than women

At some point you need to be realistic about human life. It doesn't matter that we are recently moving toward a more equal society, the fact remains that throughout history, in every culture in the world, men have been the head of the family .. you cannot change that by simply saying it's "indoctrination".

i understand full well the cultural millieu in which Islam arose and the patriarchal tribal societies that dominated pre-Islamic Arabia in large part Islam exists to lend legitimacy to that very same tribal culture which views women as chattel.

Amazing then that Islam gave women rights beyond anything that was even imagined for women in virtually every (if not all) other areas of the world for hundreds of years. Rights to inheritence, rights to own property, rights to divorce, rights to accept or decline marriage proposals, rights to be educated, the right to work if they choose to but no obligation to do so and even the right to VOTE. And you call that chattel ... hahahaha

 

[Vajradhara]

Salaam Sally,

thank you for the post.

Depends which translation you read, which country the translator is from and which era he lived in.

Either way, I certainly come from a family where my father was the bread winner and therefore the head of the household .. that seems to be perfectly acceptable to people until God says it

the transliteration of terms is something my religion has it's issues with as well

i come from a family that only had a mother, so she was the breadwinner and head of the household and that seems perfectly acceptable to people until God says otherwise.

Allah (swt) speaks to everyone in the Quran, to Muslim and non-Muslim, to men and women, to old and young.

Women in 2011 in my country (Britain) are forced into the sex slave industry ... so what is wrong with God telling those women there is no sin on them?

but that's not what the ayat says at all. it doesn't say that theirs no sin on them... it says that Allah will forgive them of their sin, which somewhat different than not actually having any sin, wouldn't you agree?

Allah (swt) tells Muslim men NOT to do this. He also tells men not to drink, not to kill, not to steal but Allah (swt) knows some men will still do wrong ... so He tells the non-Muslim women there will be no sin on them.

So what is wrong with that? Would you object if Allah (swt) told men not to steal and that if men did steal there would be no sin on the victim?

the very next line in that ayat says otherwise.. it says that those women could still be forced into doing it and that if they were they would be forgiven for it. which is all well and good and all but it would be far better if it simply stated that women were not to be slaves or forced into prostitution for any reason.

The Atlantic slave trade began hundred of years after the Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) walked this earth. The Prophet taught Muslims they must free slaves for even small misdemeanours but if it was ended overnight where would those slaves go?

Would you like me to go and change history or perhaps human biology? Men have been the head of the house and the main breadwinner since human history began and it has only started evening up in my own lifetime. Hoewever, even now in this "age of equality" in my country women get 52 weeks maternity leave and men only get 2 weeks ... what does this suggest to you?

an unequal society is what it suggests to me. i'm not changing history, Sally, i'm actually reading it from other sources than the ones approved of by men which typically support the notion you are floating here. there's no value in rehashing other brilliant researchers main points in this thread suffice it to say that your "just so" argument isn't correct in my estimation.

Then I suggest you contact the Olympic committee and tell them men and women should not have segregated events and write to ll the female world record holders and tell them you are retracting their medals, because clearly they haven't earned them yet!!! You should also contact every army in the world where women and men have differing training regimes because men are physically stronger than women

because Olympic athletes are average men and women? the military training i went through was the same for men and women, i know because men and women were in my classes with me.

though i honestly can't understand the whole idea of stronger=superior, in my world smarter=superior and the evidence clearly indicates that women are far exceeding men in college graduations and far outstripping men in nearly all scholoastic endeavors. i actually think this is due to the fact that there are so few men teachers in pre-school and elementary schools.

At some point you need to be realistic about human life. It doesn't matter that we are recently moving toward a more equal society, the fact remains that throughout history, in every culture in the world, men have been the head of the family .. you cannot change that by simply saying it's "indoctrination".

no, you can't change it by calling it what it is but calling it what it is seems to be the best way to actually understand what is going on. if what you are saying is that in nearly every culture in the world men have treated women as second class citizens, if they were even considered that, and we should just accept that, then i would have to say that you and i have very different ideas of what it means to be free thinking sentient beings.

Amazing then that Islam gave women rights beyond anything that was even imagined for women in virtually every (if not all) other areas of the world for hundreds of years. Rights to inheritence, rights to own property, rights to divorce, rights to accept or decline marriage proposals, rights to be educated, the right to work if they choose to but no obligation to do so and even the right to VOTE. And you call that chattel ... hahahaha

of course i call it chattle for though those rights may have been granted in Al Qur'an, you can't change history just because you'd like to, and the Arab culture that Islam has taken with it has continued to spread that same attitude towards women.

right to refuse marriage? that's laughable, Sally, when children are married to men that their parents pick for them. it's common and widespread and whilst Islam may have promised something else, that is what it delivered.

metta,

~v

 

[Muslimwoman]

Salam Vaj and thank you for your reply

i come from a family that only had a mother, so she was the breadwinner and head of the household and that seems perfectly acceptable to people until God says otherwise.

Where does God say women cannot be the breadwinner? Islam says women can work through necessity or out of choice but recognises that in the vast majority of families throughout history the father has been the natural breadwinner and therefore head of the household.

Which child, growing up in a two parent family, hasn't heard the words "you wait until your father gets home" coming from their mothers lips?

but that's not what the ayat says at all. it doesn't say that theirs no sin on them... it says that Allah will forgive them of their sin, which somewhat different than not actually having any sin, wouldn't you agree?

We know from televised interviews with women, from former eastern block countries, who have been brought to the UK with the promise of respectible work and then forced into the sex trade how the traders operate and what life has been like for them. Through sheer fear these women often agree to have sex with men brought to them. After some time it becomes ... dear I say, easier to bear and they just do it to keep themselves safe.

So obviously these women have been forced into the sex trade but over time they become resigned to their situation and agree have sex outside marriage, which is a sin. Allah (swt) tells them that even when they agree to commit a sinful act in this situation there will be no punishment for it.

the very next line in that ayat says otherwise.. it says that those women could still be forced into doing it and that if they were they would be forgiven for it. which is all well and good and all but it would be far better if it simply stated that women were not to be slaves or forced into prostitution for any reason.

The Quran also says do not commit adultery ... and then tells of the punishment for committing adultery. It also says do not murder .... and then gives the punishment for murder. Are you suggesting Allah (swt) should have simply said do not kill or commit adultery and assumed every human would obey?

The ayat clearly states DO NOT force women into prostitution ... so what if you are a Christian or Jewish woman who understands the sin of sex outside of marriage, should God not speak to these women too?

there's no value in rehashing other brilliant researchers main points in this thread suffice it to say that your "just so" argument isn't correct in my estimation.

If you can point to a known truely matriarchal society anywhere in human history I will change my mind about the issue.

"but this hypothesis of matriarchy as having been an early stage of human development is mostly discredited today, most experts saying that it never existed" Matriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You could point to something like the Mor Soue people in China but of course they are a small pocket of people living in the largest society on earth .. which is of course a paternal society.

because Olympic athletes are average men and women?

Precicely because they are NOT average, they are the elite, the best a man or woman can be, the strongest a man or woman can be ... and their entire life is devoted to being the fastest/strongest/quickest in their sport. Yet we see in power lifting men's top weight competitions are 105 kg (231 lb), and over 105 kg BUT women's are 75 kg (165 lb), and over 75 kg. 400 meters sprinting ... so are women just not trying hard enough or is this a suggestion than men, by nature, are physically stronger than women?

the military training i went through was the same for men and women, i know because men and women were in my classes with me.

In the British army we have gone through stages .. when I joined men and women had different basic fitness tests. To avoid the accusations of gender bias they then made men and women do the same fitness test but allowed women to do so in trainers rather than combat boots and they had longer times to complete the test. I understand that after I left they still had the quandry of gender bias and as they couldn't get women to complete the tests in the same way as men they simply reduced the fitness requirements for men ... hey presto, gender equality and proof that men and women are equal physically

Same happened in our police forces.

That is not to say no women could complete the men's fitness test, some could but the majority simply couldn't compete on a level playing field with men.

if what you are saying is that in nearly every culture in the world men have treated women as second class citizens, if they were even considered that, and we should just accept that, then i would have to say that you and i have very different ideas of what it means to be free thinking sentient beings.

To me you are mixing up what is and has been with what you think should be. Until 100 years ago in western culture women were not only considered second class citizens but it was enshrined in law .. they could not vote, they could not own property, etc. That is fact so yes we have to accept it .. doesn't mean I agree with it or would ever agree in this day and age to live that way.

of course i call it chattle for though those rights may have been granted in Al Qur'an, you can't change history just because you'd like to, and the Arab culture that Islam has taken with it has continued to spread that same attitude towards women.

I couldn't agree with you more but then you must blame Arab or Indian culture for their treatment of women, instead of accusing me of being indoctrinated because I chose to convert to a faith which offers me all of those rights as a woman.

Here is an interesting read. It's a 1927 lecture by Marmaduke Pikthall, one of the most relied upon Quranic translators and it begins:

[SIZE=+2]T[/SIZE]oday I have to speak to you about a delicate subject -- the Islamic position of women -- a subject which is delicate, and to me painful, only because at every turn while examining it I am reminded that I am in a country [India] where, among the Muslims, a woman is emphatically not in her Islamic position, and where men are generally indifferent to the wrongs done to her. The state to which the great majority of Muslim women in India are reduced today is a libel on Islam, a crime for which the Muslim community as a whole will have to suffer in increasing social degradation, in the weak and the sickly, in increasing child mortality, so long as that crime is perpetuated. An unconscious crime on the part of the majority, I know, begun in ignorance, through pursuit of an un-Islamic tradition of false pride. But ignorance of the law is no excuse for anybody to escape its penalties -- least of all, in the case of the operation of natural laws can the mere plea of ignorance exempt a man from undergoing the natural consequences of transgression. The laws of the Shari'ah [Islamic Law] are natural laws, and the consequences of transgressing them are unavoidable, not only for Muslims, but for everyone. The fool who does not know that fire will burn him, is burnt by fire just like anybody else. And the excuse of ignorance, in the case of Muslims and the Shari'ah, is worse than the offence. Since they, of all mankind, should have that special knowledge which it is their mission to convey to all mankind. Please do not, upon hearing me thus inveigh against the present pitiful condition of Muslim womanhood in India, think that I am judging it by any foreign standard for wishing to recommend foreign ways. I am judging it only by the Shari'ah and I wish to recommend only the way of the Shari'ah; and I judge the Western status of woman, as I judge her Eastern status, solely by the Shari'ah as I, following the most learned and enlightened Muslims of all ages, understand it.

"Thus have We set you as a middle nation that ye may bear witness against mankind and that the Messenger may bear witness against you." [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1][Qur'an 2:143][/SIZE][/FONT]​

So if you want to bash cultural practices within Muslim communities I'll lend you my baseball bat, as it's my favourite sport but if you want to say my faith either teaches or approves of such cultural practices then I will argue until the cows come home.

right to refuse marriage? that's laughable, Sally, when children are married to men that their parents pick for them. it's common and widespread and whilst Islam may have promised something else, that is what it delivered.

It is a cultural practice dating WAY before Islam came, also practiced in a number of countries prior to Islam reaching them, so how could Islam deliver it?

It all comes back to the same thing ... Allah (swt) says do not do something, then when men do it people try to blame Islam.

 

[Snoopy]

Hi MW,

Hope you are OK in Egypt?


Q. How does one determine if something is a misconception?

s.

 

[Vajradhara]

Salaam Sally,

thank you for your reply.

Where does God say women cannot be the breadwinner? Islam says women can work through necessity or out of choice but recognises that in the vast majority of families throughout history the father has been the natural breadwinner and therefore head of the household.

Which child, growing up in a two parent family, hasn't heard the words "you wait until your father gets home" coming from their mothers lips?

given that i don't believe in God, i'd say "nowhere does God say anything" but that's not what you are asking me. i have no idea of God says women cannot be breadwinners. i was replying to this:

Either way, I certainly come from a family where my father was the bread winner and therefore the head of the household .. that seems to be perfectly acceptable to people until God says it

my point was that i come from a family that has a woman breadwinner and that seems perfectly acceptable until people think that God has said it's not.

i suppose it depends on who works outside of the home, doesn't it? at my fathers house, he works from home and his wife works outside of the home. i would submit that modern life isn't all that compatible with 7th century tribal cultural norms.

We know from televised interviews with women, from former eastern block countries, who have been brought to the UK with the promise of respectible work and then forced into the sex trade how the traders operate and what life has been like for them. Through sheer fear these women often agree to have sex with men brought to them. After some time it becomes ... dear I say, easier to bear and they just do it to keep themselves safe.

So obviously these women have been forced into the sex trade but over time they become resigned to their situation and agree have sex outside marriage, which is a sin. Allah (swt) tells them that even when they agree to commit a sinful act in this situation there will be no punishment for it.

of course there wouldn't be... unless you are of the conviction that someone that does something against their will is equally as culpable as someone that freely chooses to do something. in fact, i can't even really understand the logic train of this whole process.

being forced into prostitution is far, far different from adultery.

The Quran also says do not commit adultery ... and then tells of the punishment for committing adultery. It also says do not murder .... and then gives the punishment for murder. Are you suggesting Allah (swt) should have simply said do not kill or commit adultery and assumed every human would obey?

yes to the first part and no to the second part. yes, Allah should have just said "no slaves" and "no murdering" and all the rest. providing for exceptions and allowances and such simply allows those practices to continue unabated as it would take you no time at all to find information on that very subject within Muslim lands.

The ayat clearly states DO NOT force women into prostitution ... so what if you are a Christian or Jewish woman who understands the sin of sex outside of marriage, should God not speak to these women too?

it *ALSO* clearly states that they may be forced into it anyway and that Allah wouldn't hold that against them.

which is it to be? you really cannot have it both ways.. it's either all or nothing in the sex slave department for me. either you cannot be or you can be. the Ayat says they shouldn't be but it may happen anyway.

If you can point to a known truely matriarchal society anywhere in human history I will change my mind about the issue.

"but this hypothesis of matriarchy as having been an early stage of human development is mostly discredited today, most experts saying that it never existed" Matriarchy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You could point to something like the Mor Soue people in China but of course they are a small pocket of people living in the largest society on earth .. which is of course a paternal society.

i'm curious if you read the rest of the information from that link?
more to the point, however, is that i'm not trying to change your mind or persuade you of anything. you are free to believe as you'd like in my world view though i understand not all beings feel like extending the same courtesy.

Precicely because they are NOT average,

but since i'm not talking about elites rather just average people, i'm unclear why you'd mention this again.

in any event, please review at your leisure:

Age and gender comparisons of muscle strength in 654 women and men aged 20?93 yr ? Journal of Applied Physiology

A cross-sectional study of muscle strength and mass in 45- to 78-yr-old men and women ? Journal of Applied Physiology

in short women have less "absolute" strength within muscles, but the difference is not present when strength is normalized for muscle mass. woman and man of same size = same strength.

men can be larger than women and that is really the only difference in this respect.

In the British army we have gone through stages .. when I joined men and women had different basic fitness tests. To avoid the accusations of gender bias they then made men and women do the same fitness test but allowed women to do so in trainers rather than combat boots and they had longer times to complete the test. I understand that after I left they still had the quandry of gender bias and as they couldn't get women to complete the tests in the same way as men they simply reduced the fitness requirements for men ... hey presto, gender equality and proof that men and women are equal physically.

how interesting. i don't know how close we are in age however i was in the military in the 80's and got out in 1989. my training classes weren't like that, it was pass or fail irrespective of gender. as a great deal of my training involved conquering personal fears and phobias there didn't seem to be any real difference, provided you were able to make the course to begin with, between the women and men. there were different criteria for people in the training classes but these were based on age rather than gender.

Same happened in our police forces.

That is not to say no women could complete the men's fitness test, some could but the majority simply couldn't compete on a level playing field with men.

i wonder if that's due to an inherent difference (no) or due to the nature of the type of recruits (yes) that are being trained.

To me you are mixing up what is and has been with what you think should be. Until 100 years ago in western culture women were not only considered second class citizens but it was enshrined in law .. they could not vote, they could not own property, etc. That is fact so yes we have to accept it .. doesn't mean I agree with it or would ever agree in this day and age to live that way.

I couldn't agree with you more but then you must blame Arab or Indian culture for their treatment of women, instead of accusing me of being indoctrinated because I chose to convert to a faith which offers me all of those rights as a woman.

perhaps i am, i cannot say. perhaps i am not, however, and that is the angle which i'm taking... fairly pointless to dialog otherwise, yes?

nevertheless, there are many modern Muslim societies where women *still* cannot vote.. indeed, one only need look at Saudi Arabia to see this for oneself. it's all well and good to say that Islam per se insists upon a certain level of equality between the genders the cultural millieu in which Islam arose doesn't insist upon that and, in a great many ways, Islamic teachings have been corrupted to lend legitimacy to cultural or tribal customs. of course Saudi Arabia isn't alone in this attitude towards women...

and before we get off track, i'm certainly not making an exhibit of western culture and it's treatment of women for i find them not too dissimilar.

... there are plenty of other places where Islam plays a leading role in life and yet women are denied that opportunity.

i'm certainly not alone in the view that women receive unequal treatment in traditionally Muslim lands, you'll note interestingly that the lowest score for every continent where a Muslim country is, is that Muslim country.
Global Gender Gap Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So if you want to bash cultural practices within Muslim communities I'll lend you my baseball bat, as it's my favourite sport but if you want to say my faith either teaches or approves of such cultural practices then I will argue until the cows come home.

it doesn't teach them nor approve of them.. what it does, however, if give them a pass until such time as the society is ready to change as such it gives it's tacit permission to what is happening and has happened to women throughout Islams history.

the difficult thing regarding speaking about Islam in any general sense is that there are other groups following different jurisprudence that understand the same verses differently and whilst it may be that you find the gender related manifestations of your religion to be cultural in origin many others professing the same creedo explain that it's religion which shapes their culture and their practices are derived from Al Qur'an.

in much the same way as i wouldn't expect you to understand the nuances between the various Buddhist schools i hope you don't expect me to understand the nuances between the various Islamic schools of jurisprudence. i grew up in Libya attending mosque and then spent 8 years studying Islam but i am, of course, not a Muslim.

It is a cultural practice dating WAY before Islam came, also practiced in a number of countries prior to Islam reaching them, so how could Islam deliver it?

i'm certain that an omnipotent creator being could figure this out even if i cannot. off the top of my head, though, i would suggest saying that women couldn't be married to someone without their consent.. or, better yet, saying that women and men were equal partners and allowing people to marry whom they love.

It all comes back to the same thing ... Allah (swt) says do not do something, then when men do it people try to blame Islam.

not for me.. i don't blame anyone actually, i hold them accountable for their actions just like everyone else does, by and large. when blame comes around i usually have a large dose to heap upon myself. in any event, i don't judge Islam by what some Muslims do and i don't judge Christianity by what some Christians do... indeed, i try not to judge the teachings of any tradition by the actions/words/thoughts of their followers. i try to judge the teachings by what they teach and form my conclusions thereof.

metta,

~v

 

[Muslimwoman]

Hope you are OK in Egypt?


Q. How does one determine if something is a misconception?

Allo, Allo ... listen carefully, I shall say this only once ....

We are in UK now, so perfectly safe but missing all the excitement.

A. Erm ... good question lol

 

[Muslimwoman]

Salam Vaj

i have no idea of God says women cannot be breadwinners. i was replying to this:

Either way, I certainly come from a family where my father was the bread winner and therefore the head of the household .. that seems to be perfectly acceptable to people until God says it

my point was that i come from a family that has a woman breadwinner and that seems perfectly acceptable until people think that God has said it's not.

I can understand your feeling on the subject. Allah (swt) does say it is better for women to remain in the home (ie being wives and mothers) but there is nothing to prohibit their working. Indeed, as more women in Mid East countries are educated more choose to go out and work but those without a husband and children to feed have always been able to work and provide for their families.

i would submit that modern life isn't all that compatible with 7th century tribal cultural norms.

The Quran is written for all time, it is up to us (the people) to form our lives within it's limits. I accept that has and still is in many instances working against women because it's men who interpret the faith but that is the fault of people, not of Allah (swt) or the Quran.

of course there wouldn't be... unless you are of the conviction that someone that does something against their will is equally as culpable as someone that freely chooses to do something. in fact, i can't even really understand the logic train of this whole process.

Exactly and the Quran simply points out that someone who does something freely is different from someone who is forced .. I don't see the problem with that.

being forced into prostitution is far, far different from adultery.

Sex outside marriage is also a sin, it doesn't have to be adultery.

yes to the first part and no to the second part. yes, Allah should have just said "no slaves" and "no murdering" and all the rest. providing for exceptions and allowances and such simply allows those practices to continue unabated as it would take you no time at all to find information on that very subject within Muslim lands.

I don't understand what you are having difficulty with here. Let's try it another way.

In the UK in 2011 the law clearly says DO NOT force someone into the sex trade.

Are you content to simply leave it there or do you accept it was right to enshrine in our laws a punishment if this law was broken?

it *ALSO* clearly states that they may be forced into it anyway and that Allah wouldn't hold that against them.

..... And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. (24:33)

Where does it say men may (as in allowed) to force them? It is very clear, men are not allowed to force women BUT if a man chooses to ignore the prohibition of forcing women into prostitution there is no sin on the woman.

which is it to be? you really cannot have it both ways.. it's either all or nothing in the sex slave department for me. either you cannot be or you can be. the Ayat says they shouldn't be but it may happen anyway.

The Quran also says do not murder but offers a punishment for murderers, which accepts that some people will choose to ignore the prohibition and murder anyway.

The only way to get what you are suggesting is for Allah (swt) to remove free will from mankind.

i understand not all beings feel like extending the same courtesy.

I am quite happy for you to hold your own point of view, you asked me a question and I am simply trying to explain my beliefs, understanding and point of view.

in short women have less "absolute" strength within muscles, but the difference is not present when strength is normalized for muscle mass. woman and man of same size = same strength.

and yet elite athletes (again I mention them because they are men and women at their peak physical abilities) cannot compete on an equal level ... can you explain why?

I have also found studies which "prove" women are actually stronger than men ... so I'll stick with the absolute knowledge that my 70 year old terminally ill father can still lift a hay bale higher than I can

how interesting. i don't know how close we are in age however i was in the military in the 80's and got out in 1989.

We served at around the same time. These are the old BFT times:
Re: Old BFT Times

Up to age 29 11:30
30+ 12:00
35+ 12:30
40+ ?

Women u30 14:00 or a step test
​

The reduction in men's times, if I remember correctly, was after they decided men and women should all do the same test in the same time. Obviously some women could pass but a majority couldn't ... women then cried foul saying they were trying to get women out of the army and reduced men's times.

i wonder if that's due to an inherent difference (no) or due to the nature of the type of recruits (yes) that are being trained.

So it's just because the wrong type of women are joining up??

nevertheless, there are many modern Muslim societies where women *still* cannot vote.. indeed, one only need look at Saudi Arabia to see this for oneself.

Muslim countries women CAN vote in ... Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and South Yemen.

Muslim countries women CANNOT vote ... Saudi

Sorry but you don't make a very strong point here

Timeline of women's suffrage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

cultural millieu in which Islam arose doesn't insist upon that and, in a great many ways, Islamic teachings have been corrupted to lend legitimacy to cultural or tribal customs.

I'm not here to answer for different cultures, their practices or corrupted teachings, I am here to answer questions about Islam ... but thank you for acknowledging this is often the case.

... there are plenty of other places where Islam plays a leading role in life and yet women are denied that opportunity.

Indeed that is true. I was listening to a female Middle Eastern Uni lecturer this week talking about Egypt and it's current situation. She said that men living in oppressive societies often oppress their women and children and as many Middle Eastern countries have lived under brutal dictators it is no surprise women have come in second ... let us hope that the current wave of troubles brings in a new era for women in Arab countries.

it doesn't teach them nor approve of them.. what it does, however, if give them a pass until such time as the society is ready to change as such it gives it's tacit permission to what is happening and has happened to women throughout Islams history.

I simply cannot agree with you. Islam was radically before it's time in offering women's rights, the fact that Muslim men have chosen to steamroller over those rights is certainly not "tacit permission" by Islam for the mistreatment of women ... it's just pig ignorant men playing the "my willy is bigger than your willy game". If you want to lay blame put it where it belongs .. with men, not God.

many others professing the same creedo explain that it's religion which shapes their culture and their practices are derived from Al Qur'an.

Indeed they do, in Egypt they still mutilate womens genitals and say it is derived from the Prophets sunnah (although Christians do it too there) because he doesn't forbid it and an obscure hadith says "When you circumcise then do not cut severely, since that is better for her and more pleasing to the husband." ... yet they are the only Arab country who do this and of course they did it long before Islam came.

In this anti-Islam site they have had to rely on one source for this practice being "Muslim" or "Islamic" and guess which ountry the author is from ... oh yes, Egypt!! Islamic Law on Female Circumcision

Of course people have differing views and will delve into books to support their own cultural practices. It is dreadful the way women have been treated in virtually all cultures of the world but in Western countries women eventually said enough (and not that long ago) and Arab women will do the same, in fact the process already started.

I also read Muslim opinions on some subjects and even holding the Quran upside down and wearing my knickers on my head I cannot fathom how they manage to twist an ayat to their thinking. Are they wrong or am I? I can't answer that but I do know people are responsible for what people do and we are responsible for changing.

i'm certain that an omnipotent creator being could figure this out even if i cannot. off the top of my head, though, i would suggest saying that women couldn't be married to someone without their consent..

O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion. And do not make difficulties for them in order to take [back] part of what you gave them unless they commit a clear immorality. And live with them in kindness. For if you dislike them - perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good.(4:19)

"The widow and the divorced woman shall not be married until their order is obtained, and the virgin shall not be married until her consent is obtained." [Bukhari]

 

[Snoopy]

Allo, Allo ... listen carefully, I shall say this only once ....

We are in UK now, so perfectly safe but missing all the excitement.

Oh good. I think this might be excitement best missed.

s.

 

[Snoopy]

kill the polytheists wherever you find them

The emphasis in bold is mine to make it easier to see the point. So we can see that if anyone asks for protection (bear in mind they are in the middle of a war) then they must be protected ... it's a far cry from kill everyone until they are dead or become Muslim. It's all about breaking peace treaties and waging war on the Muslims but you have to read it all to understand it.

How does one determine if something is a misconception?

The context you place this in seems to be justification of killing on the basis that this is war and concerning broken peace treaties.

If a creator deity has made all of the universe, why is this deity giving instructions on the circumstances in which sentient beings within the deity’s creation are to be killed? Why would these be concerns of such a deity? The quote from the Koran I used above seems not untypical of text I have ready elsewhere. Hence I have a certain perception. Is it a misperception?

s.

 

[Muslimwoman]

If a creator deity has made all of the universe, why is this deity giving instructions on the circumstances in which sentient beings within the deity’s creation are to be killed? Why would these be concerns of such a deity? The quote from the Koran I used above seems not untypical of text I have ready elsewhere. Hence I have a certain perception. Is it a misperception?

Salam Snoopy

Islam did not come as a new faith, it came from The One God to confirm and correct (in human understanding/interpretation) of the message He had sent before .. there will therefore be many common themes through the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths.

Obviously I can't say why God would allow or instruct the faithful to defend themselves and kill those attacking or planning to attack them ... a very rough guess is that for the message to survive the carriers of the message must survive?! In the same way I cannot say Why God allows children to die of horrible diseases.

Allah (swt) is aware of the movement of every grain of sand in His creation, so why wouldn't He be concerned with the human carriers of His message? Allah (swt) chose to give mankind a message and He gave instructions to each Prophet (pbut) to ensure that message had a chance to take hold .... well that's my belief anyway.

 

[Quahom1]

Salam Snoopy

Islam did not come as a new faith, it came from The One God to confirm and correct (in human understanding/interpretation) of the message He had sent before .. there will therefore be many common themes through the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths.

Obviously I can't say why God would allow or instruct the faithful to defend themselves and kill those attacking or planning to attack them ... a very rough guess is that for the message to survive the carriers of the message must survive?! In the same way I cannot say Why God allows children to die of horrible diseases.

Allah (swt) is aware of the movement of every grain of sand in His creation, so why wouldn't He be concerned with the human carriers of His message? Allah (swt) chose to give mankind a message and He gave instructions to each Prophet (pbut) to ensure that message had a chance to take hold .... well that's my belief anyway.

I'm sorry, 1400 years after Abraham and 700 years after Jesus, Mohammed, who never prophised about anything "ANYTHING", who's followers have caused such pain and deception over the past 1600 years (no better than the Christian church), and with Muslim "bombers" everywhere...?

Seems to me the only innocents are the Jews and the Zorastrians, and the B'ha'ai...at least they don't fight until provocked...

 

[Snoopy]

there will therefore be many common themes through the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths.

thank you for your reply

I'm reading a history of the world ( a very big book!) and I'm afraid it's very depressing reading about all the killing done by followers of the Abrahamic religions, all supposedly carried out in the name of the same God.

s.