NationStates Jolt Archive

Does anybody know if the link below reflects the majority of Muslim thought on the way war should be fought (including if/when it should be fought)?

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996016516&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

I realize not everyone follows all interpretations of a religion, and this link presumably represents the author's view, but would most Muslims on this board describe the link as reasonably accurate?

It's probably a favourable interpretation, and I suspect that at times Muslim leaders weren't being particularly nice to people either, but at least his theological case is probably okay.

Of course it is.

But then again, there's a big difference between calling oneself muslim and actually being muslim.

In that sense, christians are lucky in that regard; The only qualifications for getting getting into heaven are faith in Christ and remorse for your sins.

Islam is considerably more restrictive.

Of course it is.

But then again, there's a big difference between calling oneself muslim and actually being muslim.

In that sense, christians are lucky in that regard; The only qualifications for getting getting into heaven are faith in Christ and remorse for your sins.

Islam is considerably more restrictive.

Restrictive in the sense of prohibitions and exhortations being more numerous, or less negotiable?

If I decided to be a Muslim tomorrow, would adherence to its dictums take a majoritive portion of my personal energies?

If I decided to be a Muslim tomorrow, would adherence to its dictums take a majoritive portion of my personal energies?
Let's put it like this: It would certainly require you to rethink your lifestyle.

Restrictive in the sense of prohibitions and exhortations being more numerous, or less negotiable?

If I decided to be a Muslim tomorrow, would adherence to its dictums take a majoritive portion of my personal energies?

Muslim I'm not, so I'm not certain exactly what's involved, but I believe you are expected to behave as the Prophet Muhammed would have at all times. Sort of a permanent case of WWMD?(What Would Muhammed Do?)

Let's put it like this: It would certainly require you to rethink your lifestyle.

I would imagine compliance becomes easier over time, but I wonder, once acclimated to the dietary requirements (if there are any), would my daily life be all that different?

I have always admired Islam for its teachings on war; and by the same light, I am disheartened by those who claim to be Muslim, yet violate these teachings.

This goes for any religion.

I would imagine compliance becomes easier over time, but I wonder, once acclimated to the dietary requirements (if there are any), would my daily life be all that different?

Depends how you live your life. Probably the praying would be the biggest change.

Yes, I'd say that's a pretty accurate description of how Muslims are supposed to engage in war.

I would imagine compliance becomes easier over time, but I wonder, once acclimated to the dietary requirements (if there are any), would my daily life be all that different?
Well, of course you'd have to change your diet a little (ie no pork, ramaddan and so on), if you were strict, you'd also need to pray six times (I think) a day.
Obviously there are other things as well (like travelling to the Hajj), but I'm not a Muslim, so I can't tell you in detail. And I imagine it also depends on your denomination.

If I decided to be a Muslim tomorrow, would adherence to its dictums take a majoritive portion of my personal energies?

Yes. It does get easier over time, though, as you get used to the routine.

The 5 daily prayers are the most obvious change and anyone's first Ramadan is always difficult. If you drink alcohol, stop. Even if it's just a little. If you smoke cigarettes, some will frown, but it's not really forbidden. For some reason, though, marijuana use seems to be acceptable. (Hashish ... what're ya gonna do?)

I'd say your life will be very different. Physically as well as spiritually. I know mine is.

Yes. It does get easier over time, though, as you get used to the routine.

The 5 daily prayers are the most obvious change and anyone's first Ramadan is always difficult. If you drink alcohol, stop. Even if it's just a little. If you smoke cigarettes, some will frown, but it's not really forbidden. For some reason, though, marijuana use seems to be acceptable. (Hashish ... what're ya gonna do?)

I'd say your life will be very different. Physically as well as spiritually. I know mine is.

May I ask if you are a practicing Muslim then?

I only smoke pipe tobacco, in moderation, and my body has never tolerated alchohol well. Is anything forbidden outside of pork? Is there any arrangement of dietary restrictions comparable to the Jewish observance of kosher (sic?) law?

Of course it is.

But then again, there's a big difference between calling oneself muslim and actually being muslim.

In that sense, christians are lucky in that regard; The only qualifications for getting getting into heaven are faith in Christ and remorse for your sins.

Islam is considerably more restrictive.


What gives you the right to talk about Islam while you have no knowledge about it? It is indeed possible to go to Heaven in Islam by having faith in Allah alone and by not associating anything with Him.

It's probably a favourable interpretation, and I suspect that at times Muslim leaders weren't being particularly nice to people either, but at least his theological case is probably okay.

The primary basis for conduct during warfare by Sunnis was written by Zangi during the First Crusade, and forms the basis of everything ever since.

I have a translated copy.

Shias have a slightly different set of rules, but I haven't looked into them.

The primary basis for conduct during warfare by Sunnis was written by Zangi during the First Crusade, and forms the basis of everything ever since.

I have a translated copy.

Shias have a slightly different set of rules, but I haven't looked into them.

Zangi was a priest or religious leader of some kind? That is to say, his rules are "binding" on Muslims?

I guess I should really start looking into whose job it is to interpret Mohammed and address unresolved issues...

If I decided to be a Muslim tomorrow, would adherence to its dictums take a majoritive portion of my personal energies?

Depends if you really take to islam.:p

If you have completely surrendered your will and love God so much that your every moment is about pleasuring God, it won't take any portion of your personal energies, because you won't realise it at all.

What gives you the right to talk about Islam while you have no knowledge about it? It is indeed possible to go to Heaven in Islam by having faith in Allah alone and by not associating anything with Him.

But could you eschew the pilgrimage, the prayers, giving to the community, etc?

If I understand LG's observation, he was implying that Islam may have a broader range of behavioural requirements than some Christian sects, and from my research, this appears to be largely correct.

Depends if you really take to islam.:p

If you have completely surrendered your will and love God so much that your every moment is about pleasuring God, it won't take any portion of your personal energies, because you won't realise it at all.

Sounds reasonable. In what way can I make God evident to me?

That is to say, what is it I do now that prevents me from being aware of God, and thus unable to submit?

Shias have a slightly different set of rules, but I haven't looked into them.

Shia rule is to take a stand and martyr yourselves. :D

Zangi was a priest or religious leader of some kind? That is to say, his rules are "binding" on Muslims?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zangi

He was a general/governour/successful warlord. Not necessarily totally binding, but I'd be very interested in hearing some details.

Sounds reasonable. In what way can I make God evident to me?

That is to say, what is it I do now that prevents me from being aware of God, and thus unable to submit?

If only I knew how to, I would be doing it and not posting here.:D

There should be a geniune need and love for God. I will stop here because I am not the right person to give advice to you, because I am nowhere near the end of my spiritual path.

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

He was a general/governour/successful warlord. Not necessarily totally binding, but I'd be very interested in hearing some details.

Many people have an odd misconception that things "aren't binding" unless it's in the Koran.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

This is a thousand years of tradition.

I've posted some of the details here before, when talking about the Crusades. I'll post more - but the book is in Virginia and I am in London - I'll be home on the night of the 24th.

There should be a geniune need and love for God. I will stop here because I am not the right person to give advice to you, because I am nowhere near the end of my spiritual path.

I don't know anything about spiritual paths, but if they include humility, you seem to have taken some kind of step.

Many people have an odd misconception that things "aren't binding" unless it's in the Koran.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

This is a thousand years of tradition.


How truly binding is tradition? If I find that a tradition is not truly reflective of the teachings of Mohammed (or whatever Prophet of whatever religion), can I discard the tradition without facing more than contention from traditionalists?

How truly binding is tradition? If I find that a tradition is not truly reflective of the teachings of Mohammed (or whatever Prophet of whatever religion), can I discard the tradition without facing more than contention from traditionalists?

Historically, it is very binding.

Amongst salafists, it is extremely binding. Osama mentions Zangi directly, and is using him as a source. He would not do this if it offended salafist thought.

In fact, he was probably taught this by salafist imams.

Trying to imagine that they are going to discard tradition in a religiously motivated war is extremely wishful thinking.

Historically, it is very binding.

Amongst salafists, it is extremely binding. Osama mentions Zangi directly, and is using him as a source. He would not do this if it offended salafist thought.

In fact, he was probably taught this by salafist imams.

Trying to imagine that they are going to discard tradition in a religiously motivated war is extremely wishful thinking.

Is this kind of canonization of tradition prevalent among contemporary Muslims?

For example, if I say to 100 different Muslims from differing areas, "I wish to be a Muslim, but I cannot follow an edict that is solely traditional and not based in Mohammed's teaching", how many of them would be likely to say that I cannot be a Muslim?

For example, if I say to 100 different Muslims from differing areas, "I wish to be a Muslim, but I cannot follow an edict that is solely traditional and not based in Mohammed's teaching", how many of them would be likely to say that I cannot be a Muslim?
Zero, I'd guess.
Usually, everything has to go back to Mohammed - but this Zengi character might have referenced various works of Mohammed himself.

Is this kind of canonization of tradition prevalent among contemporary Muslims?


Yes amongst the sunnis and no amongst the sufis. But sunnis make up 80% of muslims, so they skew the generalisations in their favor. Hadiths (narrations of the prophet's actions) play a big part in a sunni's worldview and even his daily life.

For example, if I say to 100 different Muslims from differing areas, "I wish to be a Muslim, but I cannot follow an edict that is solely traditional and not based in Mohammed's teaching", how many of them would be likely to say that I cannot be a Muslim?

Usually those traditions are based on hadiths so you cannot get an OK from many muslims if you say you want to disregard it. You can argue with a shia because they have something called ijtehad (creative interpretation) which allows some latitude in interpretaions of scriptures. But your typical 100 muslims would have 80 sunnis who take hadiths as THE truth and not to be disputed at all.

Yes amongst the sunnis and no amongst the sufis. But sunnis make up 80% of muslims, so they skew the generalisations in their favor. Hadiths (narrations of the prophet's actions) play a big part in a sunni's worldview and even his daily life.



Usually those traditions are based on hadiths so you cannot get an OK from many muslims if you say you want to disregard it. You can argue with a shia because they have something called ijtehad (creative interpretation) which allows some latitude in interpretaions of scriptures. But your typical 100 muslims would have 80 sunnis who take hadiths as THE truth and not to be disputed at all.

Is a Hadith narrative based on some kind of oral tradition, or written records from the time of Mohammed?

Were they penned (or thought to be penned) by followers of Mohammed, akin to the Christian gospels according to Mathew, Mark, Luke, etc?

Is a Hadith narrative based on some kind of oral tradition, or written records from the time of Mohammed?

Were they penned (or thought to be penned) by followers of Mohammed, akin to the Christian gospels according to Mathew, Mark, Luke, etc?

Everything were oral at the beginning. They were not written down like in a personal diary or something. Only after Mohammed's death and when quarrels and disputes were rife, did the caliph (Uthman the 3rd caliph, I think) decided to write it and make it final and official. So yeah it is kinda the gospels thing. There were many people (sahaba - companions of Mohammed) who contributed towards the hadiths. This place is an excellent neutral source on hadiths.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/

For example, if I say to 100 different Muslims from differing areas, "I wish to be a Muslim, but I cannot follow an edict that is solely traditional and not based in Mohammed's teaching", how many of them would be likely to say that I cannot be a Muslim?

None. I say it all the time. I spend a lot of time in Mosque arguing the merits of various hadith and even proclaiming some of them to be false hadith because they contradict the Prophet(pbuh).

Nobody has denied that I am Muslim. The unexamined faith is not worth believing.

What gives you the right to talk about Islam while you have no knowledge about it? It is indeed possible to go to Heaven in Islam by having faith in Allah alone and by not associating anything with Him.

My NationStates General Forum certification specifically gives me the right to discuss anything I want, even if it's something I know nothing about. It also grants me the authority to lie, heckle and annoy. :)

Does anybody know if the link below reflects the majority of Muslim thought on the way war should be fought (including if/when it should be fought)?

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1123996016516&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

I realize not everyone follows all interpretations of a religion, and this link presumably represents the author's view, but would most Muslims on this board describe the link as reasonably accurate?
Sounds a lot like the ideals most religions profess, but which most have great difficulty following.

The unexamined faith is not worth believing.
I go even further and say that the unexamined faith is actually no faith at all.

What gives you the right to talk about Islam while you have no knowledge about it?

And what gives you the right to question what someone does, and does not, talk about? :p

None. I say it all the time. I spend a lot of time in Mosque arguing the merits of various hadith and even proclaiming some of them to be false hadith because they contradict the Prophet(pbuh).

Nobody has denied that I am Muslim. The unexamined faith is not worth believing.

You are in the US. You can do that here.

Try that in ME, Pak, even deobandi parts of India and you will be branded a munafiq very quick.

My NationStates General Forum certification specifically gives me the right to discuss anything I want, even if it's something I know nothing about. It also grants me the authority to lie, heckle and annoy. :)

God only knows how dull this place would be if you weren't allowed to lie, heckle, and annoy LG. :)

Try that in ME, Pak, even deobandi parts of India and you will be branded a munafiq very quick.

Oh I don't know ... many of the brothers at Mosque are older men who just came here recently from places like Pakistan and they've never said anything harsh to me about it.

Yes, I am aware there are those in the world who would silence me, but education is of utmost importance in Islam. Remaining ignorant is practically a sin. I pity those who would deny educated debate.

Sounds reasonable. In what way can I make God evident to me?

Send him chocolates, that usually goes over pretty well with the deities.

Oh I don't know ... many of the brothers at Mosque are older men who just came here recently from places like Pakistan and they've never said anything harsh to me about it.

Ask them about anti-ahmediya riots.

Ofcourse there would be wise men who are beyond these things from everywhere. But my point is that you cannot go into a sunni mosque in those places and debate on Bukhari's hadiths.

I think it would do well for you to do a tour in those parts or atleast please read "Amongst the believers" by V.S.Naipaul. IMHO of course.

None. I say it all the time. I spend a lot of time in Mosque arguing the merits of various hadith and even proclaiming some of them to be false hadith because they contradict the Prophet(pbuh).

Nobody has denied that I am Muslim. The unexamined faith is not worth believing.

If one is understood to be a sincere Muslim, it is permissible to analytically examine the practice of the religion, then?

That is to say, if one stipulates that "There is no God but..." and so forth, can one politely compare a living religious leader's stance to what is said in the Koran (sic?)?

Send him chocolates, that usually goes over pretty well with the deities.

See, to me, chocolates don't say "Oh Great God of the Universe, reveal yourself unto my humble eyes that I may know you and worship you".

Chocolates say "You look hot. I want to plow you."

Yes, I'd say that's a pretty accurate description of how Muslims are supposed to engage in war.

So the terrorists are not acting acording to the dictates of their faith?

My NationStates General Forum certification specifically gives me the right to discuss anything I want, even if it's something I know nothing about. It also grants me the authority to lie, heckle and annoy. :)

And the right to make a complete ass of yourself. :(

So the terrorists are not acting acording to the dictates of their faith?

Not if they're Muslim, no. However, they seem to have some bizzaro world version of Islam that the rest of us don't get.

Not if they're Muslim, no. However, they seem to have some bizzaro world version of Islam that the rest of us don't get.

Bizzaro World would seem to be multi-denominational, though. Look at the Christians of Westboro Baptist Church, or the Aum Shinrikyo folks in Japan.

So the terrorists are not acting acording to the dictates of their faith?

You would have to read more about modern salafist thinkings of Maududi, Qutb etc to get a handle on that.

They think that the muslim ummah is now in jahilya (the period of darkness before the coming of Muhammed) and rules are changed and it is imperative to bring the muslims out of the new jahilya.

They certainly think that they are acting according to the dictates of their faith.

It's strange, but I think the middle ages were the golden age of Islam. I wish the modern mujahadeen emulated Saladin, in this age of media they could stop their enemies by merely making them ashamed.

You would have to read more about modern salafist thinkings of Maududi, Qutb etc to get a handle on that.

They think that the muslim ummah is now in jahilya (the period of darkness before the coming of Muhammed) and rules are changed and it is imperative to bring the muslims out of the new jahilya.


A Second Coming of Mohammed? Is this a widely held expectation among Muslims? Did Mohammed say he was going to come back after his death?

Seems like if you ask enough religions, every Tuesday heralds a new "period of darkness"...

A Second Coming of Mohammed? Is this a widely held expectation among Muslims? Did Mohammed say he was going to come back after his death?


:eek: NO. You misread me.

I meant that the modern salafist movement is intended to bring muslims out of the new jahilya. It does not mean that Muhammed has to come to do that.

It's the shias who wait for the hidden 12th Imam (he is in occultation for some 1000 years now) to reveal himself and establish the rule of righteousness and all that stuff.

:eek: NO. You misread me.

I meant that the modern salafist movement is intended to bring muslims out of the new jahilya. It does not mean that Muhammed has to come to do that.

It's the shias who wait for the hidden 12th Imam (he is in occultation for some 1000 years now) to reveal himself and establish the rule of righteousness and all that stuff.

I'm sorry if I misread you. I guess its this part that confuses me:

They think that the muslim ummah is now in jahilya (the period of darkness before the coming of Muhammed) and rules are changed and it is imperative to bring the muslims out of the new jahilya.

Does this refer to the original coming of Muhammed, or does this hidden "12th Imam" refer to a "coming of Muhammed"?

I'm interested in how this impacts their "endtime" scenario (if any), and how that may affect their wars/politics.

God only knows how dull this place would be if you weren't allowed to lie, heckle, and annoy LG. :)

I really enjoy the heckling. :)

They certainly think that they are acting according to the dictates of their faith.

What one thinks are the dictates of their faith are often not the dictates of their faith. :(

You would have to read more about modern salafist thinkings of Maududi, Qutb etc to get a handle on that.

They think that the muslim ummah is now in jahilya (the period of darkness before the coming of Muhammed) and rules are changed and it is imperative to bring the muslims out of the new jahilya.

They certainly think that they are acting according to the dictates of their faith.

:confused: Not being a Muslim or an Islamic scholar, I will ask the question again: Are the terrorist acting according to their faith? The answer should not be complex. If the Muslim religion prohibits the killing of innocent people, children, and women and the terrorist carry out bombings that kill those people on their way to school or in the market place then the answer is simple. If the Muslim religion calls for the humane treatment of prisoners and the terrorists cut off their heads then the answer is simple.

So I ask you again, are the terrorists going against the dictates of their religion or does the Muslim religion condone what they are doing?

Kreuvalia had no problem answering this question and I very much respect his answer. I want to know what your stance is on this Aryavartha.