Can You Handle the Truth?

See how far others have gone, and compare that to your own faith. Faith is not only a personal issue; it’s universal. It concerns humanity.
And if Christianity which was based on Judaism is a copy-paste myth, where does Islam, which is based on the other two monotheistic religions stand? Do Moslems dare to do the same? I mean analyze their faith critically?
Awaken The Sheeple

76 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. timbob
    Jan 05, 2007 @ 10:18:05

    Just browsing the tag surfer and thought to stop and say hello.

    Reply

  2. error
    Jan 05, 2007 @ 14:04:56

    http://www.neelwafurat.com/itempage.aspx?id=lbb97546-57779&search=books

    i havent read the book yet but i’m planning on it!!

    Reply

  3. Purgatory
    Jan 05, 2007 @ 17:02:40

    Its not Ramadan, this post is premature, go back to your hibernation mode and write poetry.

    Reply

  4. ummel3yal
    Jan 05, 2007 @ 23:23:28

    Nice documentary. I am sure you read (مغامرة العقل الأولى) It basically follows the origin of most stories/myths in ALL religious books to its origins in Egypt and China😉 The documentary is a “visual” represntation of that book!

    Reply

  5. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 02:23:38

    You are not but another group of many groups whom claim to posses a truth in one way or another,,, you can say that through out history there were thousands of religions and they all claim truth,, all religions were a minority to the majority of humanity,, well you too like the guy derik are a minority to humanity so that doesn’t justify your thought either,, you claim that there is no specific truth(if you do) then to you that is a truth and again a minority,,, so say we have shi3a and sunna and 20 christians in Kuwait and they talk about their truths,,, so you come and say,, oh wait a minute there is this idea am coming up with called skepticism,, so what have you done? You have created a new group, created more disunity and generated more tension that doesn’t solve anything..

    Religious convictions are not universal and so as A-religious

    So the same line of argument you use against religions can be also used against you,,

    Does the world all have to be in perfect virtue so that what is truth prevails?
    How do we even point out whats wrong if it doesn’t exist?
    All this cheap sociology and primitive anthropology of symbolism and other theories do not explain everything about human behavior and quests for ‘truth’,,, and how can we learn from previous human experience if we all have to depend purely and solely on ouir selves to attain this spirituality,, without learning from other human experience,, indeed this will be only stagnating religious quest..

    Reply

  6. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 03:44:07

    Timbob
    Hi there, and welcome to my humble quarters🙂

    Error
    I haven’t read that book either, but it sounds interesting, so I’ll add it to my reading list, thanks.

    Purgy
    I think 2007 has its major impact on my personality; so may be you’ll see more of that soon. As for poetry; I lack inspiration. May be I need a new lover😉

    Ummel3yal
    Unfortunately I’m not too familiar with Arabic books, but I have done a lot of readings for others on the same subject, glad you liked the documentary. I’m preparing to add more documentary on a somewhat related subject for my next post and I’m sure you’d find them interesting.

    Al-Hanbali
    Your logic does not make any sense, the definition of skepticism (from the dictionary) is: The doctrine that absolute knowledge is impossible, either in a particular domain or in general. And accordingly; I neither form a group, nor believe in absolute truths. And hence; being a minority or a majority is irrelevant since I do not belong to a specific organized, ethnic group.
    I find the quest for truth in science, which does not provide me with absolute truths as organized, conventional religions do, yet it builds a building block on which I base my beliefs, and that would be the issue of my next post🙂

    Reply

  7. Hadji
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 04:14:34

    Derek Partridge over generalizes a few points. He states that if there is no life after death, then people that follow religions are wasting their time. He also states that to faith followers, everyone else is a sinner.

    Now, I can’t speak for all the other religions out there, but I think it’s safe to say that according to Islam that all the children of Adam are sinners. Also, religions are more than a link to a better afterlife. Without the proper guidelines, or moral codes, that we find in religion, we wouldn’t be able to live our current lives at the fullest.

    “And if Christianity which was based on Judaism is a copy-paste myth, where does Islam, which is based on the other two monotheistic religions stand?”

    I must admit that there are similarities, but I don’t see how anyone can say that Islam is based on today’s Christianity/Judaism. I’m also have a problem with your choice of words. How can one call a faith based on a three-person godhead a monothiestic religion? Now, I’m not saying that “Christianity” has always been that way. I do believe that Eisa/Jesus (pbuh), a Jew, did preach the true word of Allah.

    “Do Moslems dare to do the same? I mean analyze their faith critically?”

    You are obviously over generalizing here. Lots of Muslims do just that. Well, at least converts/reverts do, which brings them to the choice of making a life changing decision. I, for one, am always open hard questions against Islam, the Qur’an, and the sunnah. I’ve had some trouble with a few, but none have gone unanswered, alhamdulillah.

    Reply

  8. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 04:42:33

    my logic makes perfect sense
    aight let me be more clear.

    you say there is no absolute truth,,,
    right? right

    to me,, to anyone else that is your own absolute truth,, that there is no truth,,,
    again

    your own truth, is that there is no truth
    (thus you fall in the no truth category)

    so by saying what you say,, you have made a new group that says there is no truth,, and you encourage us all to be like you,,, on the no truth doctrine..and you can continue my the line of argument..
    that you are a minority,,
    more tension etc,,

    again this is from an outsiders perspective,, you may be an ‘extremist’ even if you dont call yourself one.

    absolute truth does exist,,, and the correct belief is that which confrims the reality,,
    if the belief does not confrim reality then it is false,,

    unless you want to go as far as saying that there is no absolute reality,,,
    perhaps the reality we precive is not reality itself then that would make our beliefs false but if reality is what we believe in then our beliefs are safe,,

    Reply

  9. Muhammad Aladdin
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 07:45:18

    تذكرت مبدأ مارتن بوبر الرائق في الفارق ما بين المطلق و النسبية، و هو أن النسبية لابد من وجودها خارج اطارنا الانساني الخاص جدا، بمعني اقييمنا للأمور و غير ذلك، و لكن علي الصعيد الفردي، لابد من وجود مطلق، اعتقاد، ايمان بشئ
    ما.. و لا يفترض أن يكون هذا الايمان خلقيا أو قيميا.. المطلق الذي هو “السرقة حلال” و المطلق الذي هو “السرقة حرام” يستويان هنا.و لا ينكن بشكل منطقي تخيل أن يعيش انسان دون تلك الحزمة من اليقينيات الحاسمة، بدون ايمان أو اعتقاد مطلق
    فردي تجاه كل ما يمس شخصانيته
    (مع الاستيعاب الكامل أن ذلك اليقين الشخصي يجب التسليم انه “وجهة نظر” في الاطار العام النسبي)
    و إذا تخيلنا أن لديك يقين فردي مطلق بشيء ما، فسيحدث ألتقاء زمني|مكاني بينك و بين اقرانك و مشاطريك ذات الوعي –بالطبع كلُ له طعمه الخاص في وصف الامور–في جماعة أو تنظيم أو حتي من باب المنتمين إلي ذات التيار. و قد يحدث أن تلتقوا تاريخيا بمعني “المنتمين للتيار العلماني” مثلا أو من يصنفونهم في خانة المدارس و الاتجاهات الادبية، و أيضًا تكونين عضوا في تقسيم ما، حتي و أن لم تطلبي ذلك
    و يتبادر إلى ذهني هنا مبدأ هام جدا لبورديو، و هو “أن المتحدث باسم الجماعة، في لحظة مخايلة مخادعة غير قابلة للتفادي– يصير هو الجماعة” أي أن من يتحدث باسم الاسلام يصير في لحظة هو الاسلام، و من يتحدث باسم الله يصير في لحظة هو الله، و من يتحدث باسم الدولة يصير هو الدولة..
    أظن أن هذا هو المبدأ المعيب الاساسي في ميكانيزم التفكير الانساني ذاته كبناء، و ليس في الفارق ما بين الاسلام و المسيحية و اليهودية كتقسيمات فرعية (مع تفهمنا للإختلافات الثقافية و المجتمعية التي تتأثر بحركة التاريخ و وجود سقف للحرية من عدمه) ، الانسان يميل بطبعه إلى تعميم يقينه الفردي–حقيقته المطلقة علي جماعته ، و الجماعة تميل لتعميم يقينها المشترك–حقيقتها المشتركة الجمعية علي مجتمعها و ما وراء مجتمعها.. الميل إلي التعميم يمكن احتماله، و لكن كثيرا ما ينقلب هذا التعميم إلي قهر و تطرف باسم الحقيقة المطلقة. يحدث هذا في كل التجمعات علي اختلاف ألوانها: دينية أو لا ادرية أو علمانية أو..أو.. أو
    هذا هو الخطر الحقيقي الذي لا يمكن تفاديه للأسف، و لكننا نسعى دائمًا إلى مقاومته و تخفيف اثاره المدمرة في احيان كثيرة

    Reply

  10. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 09:08:38

    Al-Hanbali
    Let me here present the Dawkins’ mathematical line to explain the difference between faith and atheism. The line goes from “+infinity” where absolute truths lie, and “–infinity” where atheism lie.
    Now; if you are talking about minorities and majorities; there is no doubt many occupy the “+infinity” where religion provides them with absolute truths, since faith is belief without evidence, or regardless of the evidence. But if you look at the opposite side there is hardly anyone on “–infinity”; most would be spread along the mathematical line, so being a minority here is irrelevant since there is no grouping, unless you want to group all the ones along the line, and here you would be making a big mistake since no two people along this line share the same thoughts as you see with the faithful.
    Not only that; but a person’s belief system along that line is also not constant since it does not depend on a set doctrine, rather on how advance science gets, and how that contradicts with the religious beliefs. For example; an agnostic could change to a skeptic or may be to an atheist, but a faithful does not have the freedom to budge.

    MA
    Thanks for the input, and I do agree with الميل إلي التعميم يمكن احتماله، و لكن كثيرا ما ينقلب هذا التعميم إلي قهر و تطرف باسم الحقيقة المطلقة. يحدث هذا في كل التجمعات علي اختلاف ألوانها: دينية أو لا ادرية أو علمانية أو..أو.. أو
    هذا هو الخطر الحقيقي الذي لا يمكن تفاديه للأسف، و لكننا نسعى دائمًا إلى مقاومته و تخفيف اثاره المدمرة في احيان كثيرة

    Reply

  11. Muhammad Aladdin
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 09:37:41

    اشكرك و أسف علي التايبوز🙂

    Reply

  12. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 09:39:11

    Hadji
    “Without the proper guidelines, or moral codes, that we find in religion, we wouldn’t be able to live our current lives at the fullest”
    I have to disagree with you on that; morals are part of human civilization and it had nothing to do with religion, although religion used it throughout history.

    “Now, I’m not saying that “Christianity” has always been that way. I do believe that Eisa/Jesus (pbuh), a Jew, did preach the true word of Allah.”
    This statement is strictly a preaching of Islam, do you have any evidences to prove it outside your religious books? If you do then I would be interested to see it.

    “I, for one, am always open hard questions against Islam, the Qur’an, and the sunnah. I’ve had some trouble with a few, but none have gone unanswered, alhamdulillah”
    Are you sure you are not biased with that statement? I doubt it. Quran and sunnah are full of contradictories, you either have no clear understanding of those contradictions, or you chose to be ignorant and choosy about what you want to take and what you don’t, and in that case there is something wrong with your faith, because Islam is a totalitarian belief; you have to take it all without questioning.

    Reply

  13. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 09:43:37

    MA
    No problem bro🙂

    Reply

  14. Muhammad Aladdin
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 10:18:06

    thanks A, but I’d comment on yr reply:
    “I have to disagree with you on that; morals are part of human civilization and it had nothing to do with religion, although religion used it throughout history.”
    but don’t forget a very good viewpoint by Josiah Royce, which argued that only religion can relay secracy on morals, and for me, without that religious covering morals are nothing but unprotected cheep in a face of a wolf. I do believe he’s right.🙂

    Reply

  15. Muhammad Aladdin
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 10:37:43

    and about this very matter, here’s a piece I wrote long time ago, and I think it may have some crossroads with that matter of ‘ morals’
    http://alaaeldin.blogspot.com/2005/09/blog-post_112696579462852103.html
    that’s if ayone would like to review for sure🙂

    Reply

  16. Hadji
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 10:59:02

    “I have to disagree with you on that; morals are part of human civilization and it had nothing to do with religion, although religion used it throughout history.”

    Heh… “Civilization” hasn’t been too successful with setting values and morals. What was immoral ten years ago, is perfectly fine now. Civilizations has been extremely fickle when it came to setting morals.

    “This statement is strictly a preaching of Islam, do you have any evidences to prove it outside your religious books? If you do then I would be interested to see it.”

    Even Christians admit that Jesus was a Jew. Jesus never stated that he was God, he also never mentions the Trinity. You can go through the New Testament without finding anything like that:

    “Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:”

    There’s a lot more if you still want.

    “Quran and sunnah are full of contradictories, you either have no clear understanding of those contradictions, or you chose to be ignorant and choosy about what you want to take and what you don’t”

    You sound pretty confident, I think I’ll stick with the first choice of “no clear understanding of those (so-called) contradictions”. If it’s not so much to ask, can you please share one or two for me to examine?

    Reply

  17. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 11:22:10

    Morality is defined in Wikipedia as:
    Morality refers to the concept of human ethics which pertains to matters of good and evil —also referred to as “right or wrong”, used within three contexts: individual conscience; systems of principles and judgments — sometimes called moral values —shared within a cultural, religious, secular, Humanist, or philosophical community; and codes of behavior or conduct morality.

    Personal morality defines and distinguishes among right and wrong intentions, motivations or actions, as these have been learned, engendered, or otherwise developed within each individual.

    Now according to that definition morality changes according to culture, religion, environment, as well as personal beliefs. So what one society considers as morals, other society may consider immoral. And the same is also true on a personal level. For example; Islam preaches that if I see something wrong “according to Islamic perspective”, say; a lady not wearing 7ijab for example, then, it’s my duty as a Moslem to offer advice (some other wrongs are asked to be stop by force, if not, then by words). Now others may consider this as a violation of personal rights, and consider it an unethical act. And in this case we can’t generalize that religion is the beholder of morals, although I do agree that it coats ethics with sacredness.
    And I also agree with your article that religious people used morality to cover for other agendas. But I do not see how Josiah Royce can generalize by saying, “without that religious covering morals are nothing but unprotected cheep in a face of a wolf”. And the evidences are clear in life experiences; a religious person is not necessarily a person of high ethics and vise versa. It all depends on how civilized a person considers himself, and accordingly conducts his life.

    Reply

  18. Hadji
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 12:09:37

    “For example; Islam preaches that if I see something wrong “according to Islamic perspective”, say; a lady not wearing 7ijab for example, then, it’s my duty as a Moslem to offer advice (some other wrongs are asked to be stop by force, if not, then by words).”

    Right, but you see, even small varying points of views as the ones you’ve brought up wouldn’t be an issue if everyone followed the specific laws of a religion.

    Various scholars with different points of views wasn’t something that was common at the time of Mohammed (pbuh), but it is now since issues that have been brought up today weren’t brought up in the past. Nonetheless, through “ijtihad” fatwa groups, like Al Lajna Al Da’ima in the KSA, sort out the right from the wrong which makes the process even easier for the followers. Now, after all that, it shouldn’t really matter what just one single random scholar says, since he’s just one single extremist scholar. This scholar’s opinions doesn’t weigh as much as Al Lajna Al Da’ima.

    So, as far as the even-Muslims-can’t-agree-about-anything-within-themselves argument goes, it really isn’t the case. A true understanding and open mindedness to the teachings of Islam doesn’t really allow too much space for confusing and a thousand and one varying points of views.

    By the way, I’ve also commented above. I’m not sure if you noticed the post, but I’m just mentioning it since I noticed that my points weren’t replied to.

    Reply

  19. AyyA
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 12:34:40

    “Civilizations has been extremely fickle when it came to setting morals”
    Now what morals are we talking about? And according to who?

    “Even Christians admit that Jesus was a Jew. Jesus never stated that he was God, he also never mentions the Trinity”
    I did not question the Judaism of Jesus; I questioned other parts of your statement, and according to the verse you submitted Christianity is a monotheist religion and that’s what I said in the beginning of my argument, which no two Christians disagree on. Yet the one God you talked about, according to Christianity, takes three forms, here are some verses:
    “When he had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. And suddenly a voice came from heavens, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:16-17)
    And
    [Jesus said] “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:10-20)
    Now according to Quran Christians made Jesus one of the three Gods, and according to Christianity; the one God takes the form of three, and there is a big difference.
    Now I’m not trying to defend one, or express apologies to the other, to me; men wrote them both. And both have their misgivings.
    As for the contradictions; there are many and I previously wrote about some of them, but I would refer you one now, and would have to reply on your other comments tomorrow since over here is past my bedtime.
    Check
    https://3asal.wordpress.com/2006/10/07/ramadaniyat-vii/#comments

    Reply

  20. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 18:01:26

    well its enough that you are on the negative infinity side which we can group,,
    you dont have to be identical,, but what your beliefs entail would pretty much be the same, within sub categories like marxists or liberalists. you basically say no religion and keep it open,, and you folks tend to hang out with each other as your blog and other blogs show, cohesion doesnt occur necessarily ONLY with perfect identicals..

    Society is more dynamic than to be placed on a one dimensional mathematical line!

    again this idea of religion conflicting with science, doesnt stand with Islam, Renaissance the Euro-Centric phenomenon came only as a response to the decaying Christian thought and contradiction to science and logic. Muslimeen don’t have the same problem rather it is cultural and militaristic imperialism that was forced on the Muslim Nations that they use secular doctrine to rule their Lands.

    Nonetheless this could take a lot of debate,
    More importantly what do you say about Absolute Reality,,

    “absolute truth does exist,,, and the correct belief is that which confirms The Reality,,
    if the belief does not confirm Reality then it is false.

    unless you want to go as far as saying that there is no Absolute Reality,,,
    perhaps the reality we perceive is not Reality itself then that would make our beliefs false but if Reality is what we believe in then our beliefs are safe.”

    Reply

  21. Hadji
    Jan 06, 2007 @ 19:05:04

    “I questioned other parts of your statement, and according to the verse you submitted Christianity is a monotheist religion and that’s what I said in the beginning of my argument, which no two Christians disagree on.”

    Heh, wrong. What I said was that Christians worship three gods and that the Bible teaches that we should only worship One. You see, even though certain practices in a religion are popular, it sometimes conflicts with the original teachings.

    Alright, now for your arguments of Jesus being God through the Bible:

    “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:16-17)”

    Now, I don’t know about you, but I thought we were debating the divinity of Jesus. The “sonship” of Christ and of pretty much everyone else in the Bible doesn’t really mean much since “son of God” is used like it’s going out of style.

    “Kenan was the son of Enosh. Enosh was the son of Seth. Seth was the son of Adam. Adam was the son of God.” Luke 3:38

    “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” 1 John 3:2

    As I’ve stated before, Jesus being called the “Son of God” doesn’t make him God. That logic doesn’t really work well if you’re using the Bible as reference. Unless, of course, if you were to say that God has more than three forms.

    “[Jesus said] “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:10-20)”

    Eh? What about it? I don’t see Jesus claiming divinity here either. The fact that the “Father”, “Son”, and the Holy Ghost are found in the same verse doesn’t make them one.

    “Now according to Quran Christians made Jesus one of the three Gods, and according to Christianity; the one God takes the form of three, and there is a big difference.”

    There is no difference at all if you’d look through an Islamic perspective, which you should be doing in order to understand the Qur’an’s accusation against the Christians.

    “As for the contradictions; there are many and I previously wrote about some of them, but I would refer you one now, and would have to reply on your other comments tomorrow since over here is past my bedtime.
    Check
    https://3asal.wordpress.com/2006/10/07/ramadaniyat-vii/#comments

    I’ve watched half of the videos and read most of the comments. I was expecting a lot more when you mentioned “many contradictions”. Ok… So, how is wife-beating with a siwak/toothpick, under ten times, and not on the face a “contradiction”? What does it contradict with exactly? Did you even watch the videos that you posted? I don’t see what the big fuss is.

    [004:034] Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For God is Most High, great (above you all).

    The beating of women, with siwak, not in the face, under ten times is ONLY to women that show disloyalty and ill-conduct. I don’t even see how you can consider this as proper old-fashioned wife beating.

    Peace.

    Reply

  22. AyyA
    Jan 07, 2007 @ 07:49:05

    Al-Hanbali
    My reality tells me that Islam failed to comply with modern time.

    Hadji
    I wouldn’t have expected you to see any contradictories since your God is male chauvinist, barbaric, and your book was written by man to serve man.

    Reply

  23. Hadji
    Jan 07, 2007 @ 18:55:44

    Aha! I’ve finally found a few contradictions:

    1- Your purpose is a contradiction. I’ve read it a few times that you want to expose Islam to make the world a better place, or some sort of rubbish like that. Yet, when you are given an opportunity and you’re approached by a Muslim, you’re not even bothered to explain what is wrong with the religion.

    2- In your “One World, Many Cultures” post, you state that people need to be open minded towards the beliefs of others, at least everyone but you. I’m afraid you’re not going to win hearts by saying, “your God is male chauvinist, barbaric…”

    Anyways, I appreciate the ten to fifteen seconds of thought that you’ve put into that last comment… and for even bothering to put that much thought into it.

    I’m going to go hunt down a wild deer now… with my bare hands.

    Peace.

    Reply

  24. AyyA
    Jan 07, 2007 @ 21:14:07

    Al-Hanbali
    I’m not posting this to change your mind or anyone’s mind for that matter, when a mind is rusted with years of brainwashing, there is little hope for it to be open. There is no point in debating when it only becomes a matter of showing off muscles and diverts from the essence; which is always the case with Islamists. If you want to see the contradictions in your religion, you’d have to do that on your own; I will not do your homework for you. And you have proved to me that tolerance when it comes to Islam is a wishy-washy dream, so I will not waste my time on that. My post is directed to the ones who are open minded, not the ones who think that their religion is perfect.
    Take care

    Reply

  25. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 07, 2007 @ 22:49:58

    Ah, too bad, you lost your patience so easily..

    Not even a good philosopher will respond in your manner. The words you typed are neither intrinsic to knowledge nor wisdom, without a doubt there is still much more for both of us to learn!

    Brainwash huh? The easy dismisser, I pretty much come from a similar educational background if I am not mistaken, nor I have spent many years in this way to rust in it,, and inshaAllah I stay on this deen. I do know some of these philosophies and I do know where you coming from, and I ll have to say its not just a matter of a logical crises. And perhaps that I can speak the same tone you speak, and can jumble up similar jargon, that indeed some one like you could have been sitting next to me in my English literature class makes you insecure. It is just assumed that people who maintain my beliefs and convictions can never come about from such a westernized environment.

    Showing muscles ? what muscles? or is it just superior intellect that makes me come to my convictions, No it just takes a pure heart, an objective heart to know that this deen is truly great. Logic can be there but without an open heart it is more difficult to accept, to be humble before Allah, indeed Absolute Reality exists, Allah is The 7aq.

    Islam is a religion of tolerance there is no doubt, إذهبوا فأنتم الطلقاء
    And after all what He salla Allahu 3alayhi wa sallam suffered on their hands, and in a position of power and the upper hand, after the Fat7,,
    و الكاظمين الغيظ و العافين عن الناس و الله يحب المحسنين

    Open mindedness if there is such an Absolute thing, its contrary is not intrinsic to belief of in infaliability of my religion,,, indeed my religion is based on certian fundamentals, destroy those fundamentals you destory all the religion, something i dont believe you or any one can do, but let it before the eyes of people to judge.

    I direct away from essence? I did not, I addressed the essence of your post, and thats wheather Absolute Reality exists or not?,, and if it does then it is only our views towards it that makes our own realities relative.

    Absolute Reality does exist whatever it may be for the one who does not posses knowledge of it,,, yet again

    Can you handle Reality? Can you really handle The Truth?

    Reply

  26. Hadji
    Jan 07, 2007 @ 23:23:31

    “I’m not posting this to change your mind or anyone’s mind for that matter, when a mind is rusted with years of brainwashing, there is little hope for it to be open.”

    Eh? I thought you had hope for us lost and brainwashed souls:

    “I don’t try to convince them of my beliefs; yet, I care for them to open their brains after being brainwashed for centuries.”

    ——–

    “My post is directed to the ones who are open minded, not the ones who think that their religion is perfect.”

    Well, people that are filled with doubts about their religion don’t really qualify as “Islamists” now do they? According to my criteria, anyone that willingly lends an open ear to opinions that he/she doesn’t agree with is open minded. This is what I am honestly trying to do.

    You won’t get far making the world a better place by getting Muslims pissed off by insulting Allah. Scroll upwards to our discussion about morals. The only reason that I’m not insulting your loved ones is because it goes against the guidelines of my religion.

    That and that the fact that your blog hasn’t been touched by “Islamist hackers” is proof of the tolerance of the religion.

    Deciding even before debating that your opponent is going to be a brainwashed jerk who’s soul purpose in life depends on wasting your time isn’t the most open minded thing.

    Peace.

    Reply

  27. Rekaby
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 02:10:40

    greetings one and all,

    i was invited by a friend to check out this debate. i think this topic should be opened more often, cuz i think no topic is of much relevance.

    i can say that i learned alot reading what all of you have posted. and till a certain point i was convinced by what Ayya was saying, about morals and civilization. but Ayya.. u really lost a whole lot of credibility when u insulted Allah… i mean… werent u speaking about morals and how we should be tollerant towards others and all?… but from what i see, its your opponents who have tollerated ur transgretion upon their God… i dont think there is a greater form of tolerance. and one more thing… Hadji owned u

    Reply

  28. AyyA
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 02:24:49

    Rekaby
    I have not insulted Allah as much as Allah insulted me as a woman, treating me as a second citizen or some inferior being. Owned and disowned by men. My father and my brother own me since I’m born, then they sell me off to men for a price. I can’t even get my freedom from the man that I chose, or in most cases, chosen for me. Such God is not worthy of my respect. And I’m not here in a competition dear; the blog is open to all, and all can state their opinions.

    Reply

  29. Hadji
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 04:23:26

    “I can’t even get my freedom from the man that I chose, or in most cases, chosen for me.”

    Ibn Hanbal:

    “Ibn Abbas reported that a girl came to the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad* and she reported that her father had forced her to marry without her consent. The Messenger of Allah* gave her the choice … (between accepting the marriage and invalidating it.)”

    In sunan Ibn Majah the same girl states:

    “`Actually, I accept this marriage but I wanted to let women know that parents have no right (to force a husband on them).”

    Jamila, the sister of Abdullah Ibn Ubayy, came to Mohammed (pbuh) wanting to divorce Thabit Ibn Qais:

    “By Allah! I do not dislike him for any blemish in his faith or his morals, it is his ugliness that I dislike. Had the fear of Allah not stood in my way, I must have spat on him when he came to me. … I am afraid my desperation might drive my Islam closer to disbelief.”

    Needless to say, the divorce was granted.

    The only difference between men and women when it came to work was that women didn’t have to do it. Yes, they can if they wish, and I’m sure that you know that Khadijah, the first wife of the Prophet (pbuh) was a businesswoman.

    So, I’m really confused about where you got all that information about Islam and women. I’m sure that to you, the days of the companions were the most primitive. Yet, I don’t see anything that you have stated to have existed within their time.

    “And I’m not here in a competition dear; the blog is open to all, and all can state their opinions.”

    This is pretty much the only thing I agree with in the post.

    Reply

  30. AyyA
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 04:51:57

    Hadji
    And did Mohammad ask what did the nine years old 3aisha think about marrying someone fifty years older than her? Now don’t tell me that this was normal during their time. This is child abuse, no matter what excuses you give it.
    Look, I do not have the will to go through all the 7adeaths and verses of Quran to show you how Islam has unjustly treated women, so don’t throw at me one 7adeath, ignoring all the others. And I’m sure you know where to find those if you wanted to be fair. If not then google them.

    Reply

  31. Rekaby
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 11:23:11

    Ayya my “dear”

    i know that this isnt a competition, but its the truth. anyway,

    i believe that when one wishes to analyze a subject he/she…(she/he, to avoid hurting anyone’s feelings :s ) should free his/herself from all forms of bias. be it political, cultural or merely personal judgment. now, u said “I have not insulted Allah as much as Allah insulted me as a woman”. dont blame the unjustice of a culture on religion. whatever the culture or the religion might be. this is a cultural thing, simply cuz the rest of the muslim countries dont “own” their girls and force them into marriages “for a price” and by price i believe u mean, Mahar, which is, in islamic teachings, a right for the woman, not a price by which she is sold for.. i dont know where u come from and i dont know ur culture, but if these things exist in ur culture dont take it out on the religion. i believe this is fair enough.

    stop and take a step back, free urself from Prejudice, and then look at your post again sis, you will see that you wrote it in anger and filled it with emotionally loaded words.

    Hadji has responded to the points u’ve raised before your last post. now, about your last post, the fact that um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, married the prophet AT, and i repeat.. AT the age of nine is false. she was engaged to the prophet at that age and married him later. now, how can i prove this? simple, follow history and perform some calculations. here is how it goes. um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, had an older sister called Asma2 bint abu bakr, right? well, it is a well known fact that Asma2 embraced Islam at the age of fifteen, that means that she must’ve been born before the Prophet Muhammad (PBOH) was given the message by fifteen years atleast. now, Asma2 is older than Um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, by ten years. this implies that when Prophet Muhammad (PBOH) was given he message, Um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, was atleast five years old. and since she was wed to Prophet Muhammad (PBOH) in medina, this adds the thirteen years he (PBOH) stayed in Mecca.. the period is also known as “Al bi3tha”. what does this mean? this means that when they were actually wed, um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, was atleast eighteen years old if not older. atleast five at the time he (PBOH) was given the message plus the thirteen years he spent in Mecca before moving to medina.

    i know that when someone takes a stance and finds opposition, that person sticks to his/her position and defends it fiercly. no one like to admit defeat. but as u siad “And I’m not here in a competition dear” =p. and i respect that, so let there be no winner nor loser. and let none admit defeat, should they wish it so. the most important thing is that, in the end, when one finds himself wrong, that he/she admits it to him/herslef. cuz frankly, nothing else matters.

    Salam

    Reply

  32. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 15:03:10

    Since you speak of tolerance, many cultures and one world and such flashy nice themes, you might consider cultural relativism when you deal with Arabia 1400 years ago, and what was generally accepted to both women and men many not be so in this day and age to all peoples and especially the westernized lot like ourselves whether we like it or not.

    You among others speak of tolerance and that those among Muslim/Arabs are ‘culturally challenged’ (as I read from Uzf once) now you tolerate others but not your own people, the bias is clear now.

    As rekaby said you have lost your credibility.
    You really owe us an apology, not that we need one, but for your own sake.

    It is now obvious that you are the one who is swaying the debate, yet I don’t mind ya Ayya if you direct it again towards the essence and keep it on track.

    A good philosopher can radically change his/her views once met with new realities and can apologise in harming others while defending any position.

    فماذا بعد الحق إلا الضلال المبين

    اللهم إفتح بيننا و بين قومنا بالحق و أنت خير الفاتحين

    Reply

  33. Hadji
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 18:17:23

    Ayya:

    “Now don’t tell me that this was normal during their time. This is child abuse, no matter what excuses you give it.”

    Actually, at the time it was extremely normal for people to get engaged that young. Something you may not know is that A’isha was previously engaged to someone else before Mohammed (pbuh).

    If everyone else saw it as something sick the same way you do, then the message of Mohammed (pbuh) wouldn’t have made it too far now would it?

    The only reason that you see it as child abuse is because you have been affected by today’s society’s standards. Remember what we talked about with society defining moral standards? Society is unable to because it’s too fickle in determining them.

    So, according to today’s society, I agree, it is seen as child abuse. Yet, two males holding each other’s hands is seen as an act of homosexuality. A paranoid society like this one is only the cause of the messed up word we live in. Besides, most of the people I ask, perhaps 9.5/10 will agree with me that society is regressing.

    Once again, it was normal for people to get engaged young a thousand and four hundred years ago and it wasn’t considered to be child abuse.

    “Look, I do not have the will to go through all the 7adeaths and verses”

    Alright, how about one then? From you’re tone you apparently know thousands. It shouldn’t be a problem to present one, should it?

    Al-Hanbali:

    “A good philosopher can radically change his/her views once met with new realities and can apologise in harming others while defending any position.”

    Did you come up with that? I like it.

    Reply

  34. AyyA
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 19:32:50

    Rekaby
    First of all thanks for being modest in your reply. And I do respect others who do respect me, regardless of our differences.
    Second; I do not see any difference between culture and religion; religion stems from the culture and is part of it. Look at the religions of the world and compare for yourself.
    As for 3aisha getting married at nine, I did not get this information off the air; 3aysha was engaged at the age six and got married at the age of nine according to her own declaration in Sa7i7 Albukhari:

    Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

    Narrated Aisha:

    The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

    As per woman being bought and sold in Islam; this does not convey the dowry alone; the whole system of dealing with the genders is based on money. Take the qiwama for example; “alrijal qawamoon 3ala alnisa2 bima fathala allaho ba3thahom ala ba3th, wa bima anfaqo”.

    And since man was the sole provider for the family, then he has alafthaliya; first in the law of inheritance, then in social structure where man can marry four if he wishes and can keep as much slaves as he can afford, and of course he can have sex with his female slaves. The agreement to marry a woman is done with her family with set dowry, and divorce decision is his sole right. And if she wishes to divorce him, she has to pay a price.

    Now this did not change since then, when the sole provider of the family is not the man anymore; today men and women HAVE TO (I stress on have to) work hand in hand to provide for the family, unless the man has inherited a bundle, so the whole system of Quwama lost its base, yet the laws did not change. And this is the biggest folly in the Islamic structure, and it proves that this religion was intended for a period of time, under certain circumstances, which is not applicable to modern age.

    And another thing; when I criticize Islam; I do that because it’s closer to home, that does not mean, in any way, that other religions are better. But the problem with others is that they take my criticism as an insult. You could look at it as criticizing my own parents because of their closeness to me.

    Now talking about tolerance; to me, religion is part of our history, tradition and culture, we can’t ignore it all together, we have to live with it, but only as part of our history. Once we try to glaze it with being infallible, here we would be making the comparison to other religions, and this is arrogance. We have to realize that there is no religion better than the other so that we all can tolerate each other.

    Reply

  35. Rekaby
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 19:54:42

    greatings one and all,

    im afraid i made a mistake in my last post. the calculation i did would be true in an abstract sense. but i came across historical evidences that invalidate the theory. u see, the mistake i made was assuming that prophet Muhammad (PBOH) married non other than um al mo2mineen, Khadeeja, when he was in Mecca. although they lived all their lives in Mecca, Um al mo2mineen, khadeeja, died ten years after he (PBOH) was given the message. this implies that um al mo2mineen, 3aisha, was only five to six years old. when um al mo2mineen, Khadeeja, died, the Prophet (PBOH) was so sadend that the companions noticed that it was not mere sorrow, so one of the companions, particularly khawla bint hakim Al-salmiyya (a woman😉 ) came to the prophet (PBOH) and said: ” oh messenger of Allah, i see that ur sorrow is of extreme magnitude forthe loss of Khaddeja” he replied: ” yes, she was the mother of the children and the raiser of the children”. so she said: ” oh messenger of Allah, should i look for a bride for u? ” so he said:” After khadeeja ?!” so she mentioned um al mo2mineen, 3aisha. then he said: ” but she is still young !” so she said: ” get engaged today, then wait until she matures”.

    so my theory is false. and they did get married when she was nine.

    now, i was upset that the theory turned out to be wrong… so i did some research as to find out y she got married at such a young age. and this is what i found. now if u go back to the dialouge. khawla said: “wait until she matures” this implies that girls back then matured i.e. were phisically ready for marriage at that age. now y is that? the answer is clear. it is due to the desert climate the inhabiitants of the Arabian peninsula lived in, and ofcourse it is a well known scientific fact that heat stimulates the process of maturing. and that is the reason from a scientific prospective.

    now the moral part (about society, norms, da da da) , i believe, was adressed by both hadji and Hanbali.

    im just correcting my mistake. my apologies.

    salam

    Reply

  36. AyyA
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 21:25:11

    Hadji
    Not only at that time this practice was normal, even in our time, in some places it is still considered normal, but that does not make it less harmful to women’s psychology. And the message of Mohammad was spread far with a sward, so please don’t mix the two.

    As per Quran and 7adeath degrading women here is just one example of Quran:

    ‏{‏يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لاَ تَقْرَبُوا الصَّلاَةَ وَأَنْتُمْ سُكَارَى حَتَّى تَعْلَمُوا مَا تَقُولُونَ وَلاَ جُنُبًا إِلاَّ عَابِرِي سَبِيلٍ حَتَّى تَغْتَسِلُوا وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا‏}‏‏.

    In this verse Quran considers women to be najisat (just like a dog), that even if a man touches her he should wash up, or immerse his hand in sand if he did not find water. Now how more degrading that could be!

    Another from 7adeath:
    Sa7i7 Albukhari

    305 ـ حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ أَبِي مَرْيَمَ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي زَيْدٌ ـ هُوَ ابْنُ أَسْلَمَ ـ عَنْ عِيَاضِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، قَالَ خَرَجَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي أَضْحًى ـ أَوْ فِطْرٍ ـ إِلَى الْمُصَلَّى، فَمَرَّ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ فَقَالَ ‏”‏ يَا مَعْشَرَ النِّسَاءِ تَصَدَّقْنَ، فَإِنِّي أُرِيتُكُنَّ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ ‏”‏‏.‏ فَقُلْنَ وَبِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏”‏ تُكْثِرْنَ اللَّعْنَ، وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ، مَا رَأَيْتُ مِنْ نَاقِصَاتِ عَقْلٍ وَدِينٍ أَذْهَبَ لِلُبِّ الرَّجُلِ الْحَازِمِ مِنْ إِحْدَاكُنَّ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ وَمَا نُقْصَانُ دِينِنَا وَعَقْلِنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏”‏ أَلَيْسَ شَهَادَةُ الْمَرْأَةِ مِثْلَ نِصْفِ شَهَادَةِ الرَّجُلِ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ بَلَى‏.‏ قَالَ ‏”‏ فَذَلِكَ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ عَقْلِهَا، أَلَيْسَ إِذَا حَاضَتْ لَمْ تُصَلِّ وَلَمْ تَصُمْ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ بَلَى‏.‏ قَالَ ‏”‏ فَذَلِكَ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ دِينِهَا ‏”‏‏.

    This 7adeath considers women to be less intelligent than men and less complete in their religion. And that’s because of something, which is completely natural? What kid of logic is this? If your mind can accept it, my mind can’t and will not.

    Now the above was just examples, Quran and 7adeath is filled with this type and worse. If I were a man, I would surely embrace Islam because it would be tailor fit to suit me.

    Reply

  37. Rekaby
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 22:18:18

    Ayya:

    You’re most welcome

    That’s a pretty good post u got there. I read it well and here is my reply. U said “I do not see any difference between culture and religion” … “Look at the religions of the world and compare for yourself.” Well, first of all, there is a great deal of difference between culture and religion! Let’s take Christianity for example. Drinking is a sin in Christianity… yet many Christians drink. So is fornication yet almost all of them fornicate… Or what some would call it… have pre-marital sex. Does this mean that we can conclude that because Christians drink and fornicate and that it is part of their culture that their religion supports it? I believe not. So with Islam, the example of drinking and fornication applies, and so does the issue of suicide bombings, the killing of innocent men, women and children. Islam doesn’t support that, in fact, it firmly stands against it. We can see that from the 7adeeth about the rules of engagement. Where he (PBOH) said: don’t kill an old man, don’t kill a woman, don’t kill a child, don’t kill an unarmed man, don’t cut down a tree” Islam is very strict when it comes to life. Even that of plants! Now many people perform acts of violence and in the name of Islam, probably to cover up some hidden agenda. But does that make Islam liable for them? No. it is exactly as if someone did something to harm another person and when asked he said: “Well, Ayya told me to do it!” While u never told that person such a thing! So my point is, religion should not be blamed for the cultural mistakes of its followers. Enough said, I believe, on that topic.

    Moving on, the part about women and their choice in marriage was previously addressed by hadji. And about the part where u said: “And if she wishes to divorce him, she has to pay a price.” I believe it’s the other way around. It is known as Mo2akhar al saddaq. A sum of money negotiated between the man and the woman before marriage. That sum the HUSBAND pays TO the wife in the case they got a divorce.

    Furthermore, u said:” today men and women HAVE TO (I stress on have to) work hand in hand to provide for the family, unless the man has inherited a bundle” im afraid that’s inaccurate. In fact, I’m sure it isn’t. and me myself am a proof to that. I come from a family where my mother is a housewife. My father does all the working. And we are doing pretty good… and my father’s relatives are simple people… he didn’t inherit anything. He built himself from scratch. And out of all the married women of my family (both mother and father’s side) only five to six work. And I have many friends who r just like that. And they too are doing great. Al7amdolilah. And by that, ur claim that “the whole system of Quwama lost its base” has itself lost its base.

    As for “and it proves that this religion was intended for a period of time, under certain circumstances, which is not applicable to modern age.” I have to talk a bit, so bear with me. First of all, it is inevitable that as time advances new discoveries and inventions come along. Had u asked any of the companions (after a brief explanation) if he knew where u could get some batteries for your walkman, he’d think u were crazy. And for that reason (human progress), and since Islam is more than just a set of does and donts, but rather a way of life, Islam developed the science of Fiqh as to walk hand in hand with futuristic breakthroughs and see what the religion has to say about them. So u cannot claim that Islam is only intended for a specific period of time.
    Secondly, every age has a superior people whom shape, according to their, culture, religion or politics, the way the rest of the world sees things. For example, back in the days where the Islamic empire was the lighthouse of the world, where everything was taught, from Art, to literature, to chemistry, biology, Medicine, Astronomy! Back in those days it was the morals and ideas that Islam brought about that prevailed. For example, a woman seen on the street without a veil (Hijab) was considered a barbarian that knows not the basics of decency! But as time passed by and tables turned, most of the western hemisphere, who r now in power, sees the Middle East and Islam in particular, as the enemy. Therefore, they automatically reject anything coming from their side. This is sad, since they always preach open mindedness. Many westernized minds here, sadly, follow that path too. Yet those minds, despite their brightness, have been deceived by emotionally loaded words.

    Now a very important question raises itself in the light of discourse… that is, is society progressive or regressive? And I’m not speaking about the scientific breakthroughs like nuclear energy or the telephone! Cuz no two can argue that they r for the good. But I mean society in its manners, values, style of life… is it progressive or regressive? Do people still respect each other the same way they used to 50 years ago? Is something as disgusting and demeaning to women as the porn industry, freer or less free than it was 20 years ago? which opens another door, which is the exploitation of women in the fashion and porn industries… know tell me, who is using the woman, who is demeaning her, who is using her to maximize his profits “Sex sells”… I really don’t think its Islam… but rather the “free” cultures of the west. They hide behind their little fingers as they recite lies about freedom… and if this is what freedom leads to… then I think I can do without it… but al7amdolilah… we know the true meaning of freedom. And in the end, no game can be enjoyed without rules, right?

    Reply

  38. AyyA
    Jan 08, 2007 @ 23:26:28

    Rekaby
    “great deal of difference between culture and religion”

    Do you see Chinese worshiping a Hindu Buddha, or Indians worshiping a Chinese Buddha?

    As for jihad in Islam; know sis that it is a farth on all Moslems. “kutiba 3alaikom aljihad”, what kind of jihad? And against who?
    And if you compare what you wrote and what I wrote, you’d see clearly the contradiction, and that’s why this is left open to ijtihad, which means human intervention. And in this case the law became a matter of man intervention and not Godly, so what is the difference between it and the laws of man?
    This is precisely why you see different schools of though in one religion. Suicide bomber consider it a must against the infidels, and you don’t, it all depends on whom you are following; in a nutshell; a man.

    “back in the days where the Islamic empire was the lighthouse of the world, where everything was taught, from Art, to literature, to chemistry, biology, Medicine, Astronomy! Back in those days it was the morals and ideas that Islam brought about that prevailed”

    If you go back to history; those were the days of Umayyad and Abbasid era, at the time when new comers in the religion (mostly by force) translated Greek Mythology and philosophy. They did this as a comparative study to understand Islam better, and in their quest for knowledge they prospered in many discoveries that Andalusia became the Mecca for many western knowledge seekers.
    Yet; it is also true that in this period of time; nothing was Islamic about the empire. For example; drinking was legal, and controlled prostitution was permitted under the name of Aljawari Alragisat. But mind you; they were the most tolerant to others that at one period (I don’t remember under which khalifat, but it was in Andalucia) the khalifat had a Jewish minister (wazeer).

    Before that Moslems were a bunch of Arab tribes conquering other nations by force and fighting in between themselves on who should take control ( not that this has changed much today). And after that period; as Moslems tried to hold on to the dogmas of religion, and the fight between them, the whole empire collapsed and it kept declining to this day. In my opinion; we are closer today to the original preaching of Islam than it ever was. It takes time for a religion to sink and become part of everyday life, if it survives.

    Now; is society progressive or regressive? In my opinion; that depends on “which society”? And comparing it to what era?
    Here; we won’t be accurate in our judgment simply because we are lacking statistics.
    Even if we are comparing Islamic societies to those of the western’s, more open societies; then we are making a big mistake, since in the closed societies statistics are not so much available as in a more open society.

    Reply

  39. Hadji
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 00:10:24

    Rekaby:

    “I come from a family where my mother is a housewife. My father does all the working. And we are doing pretty good… and my father’s relatives are simple people… he didn’t inherit anything.”

    Same deal here. My dad worked in a grocery store for a good chunck of his youth.
    —————-
    Ayya:

    1)”As per Quran and 7adeath degrading women here is just one example of Quran:

    ‏{‏يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لاَ تَقْرَبُوا الصَّلاَةَ وَأَنْتُمْ سُكَارَى حَتَّى تَعْلَمُوا مَا تَقُولُونَ وَلاَ جُنُبًا إِلاَّ عَابِرِي سَبِيلٍ حَتَّى تَغْتَسِلُوا وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَى أَوْ عَلَى سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًا‏}‏‏.

    In this verse Quran considers women to be najisat (just like a dog), that even if a man touches her he should wash up, or immerse his hand in sand if he did not find water. Now how more degrading that could be!”

    1)I think the problem here is the definition of the word “Lamastum”. Tafseers of the Qur’an narrate that Ibn Abbas believes it to mean “Al Jima’a” or sexual intercourse and not plain physical contact.

    I believe the same ruling applies to women. They cannot pray until they wash up as well.

    2)”Another from 7adeath:
    Sa7i7 Albukhari

    305 ـ حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدُ بْنُ أَبِي مَرْيَمَ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي زَيْدٌ ـ هُوَ ابْنُ أَسْلَمَ ـ عَنْ عِيَاضِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، قَالَ خَرَجَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي أَضْحًى ـ أَوْ فِطْرٍ ـ إِلَى الْمُصَلَّى، فَمَرَّ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ فَقَالَ ‏”‏ يَا مَعْشَرَ النِّسَاءِ تَصَدَّقْنَ، فَإِنِّي أُرِيتُكُنَّ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ ‏”‏‏.‏ فَقُلْنَ وَبِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏”‏ تُكْثِرْنَ اللَّعْنَ، وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ، مَا رَأَيْتُ مِنْ نَاقِصَاتِ عَقْلٍ وَدِينٍ أَذْهَبَ لِلُبِّ الرَّجُلِ الْحَازِمِ مِنْ إِحْدَاكُنَّ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ وَمَا نُقْصَانُ دِينِنَا وَعَقْلِنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏”‏ أَلَيْسَ شَهَادَةُ الْمَرْأَةِ مِثْلَ نِصْفِ شَهَادَةِ الرَّجُلِ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ بَلَى‏.‏ قَالَ ‏”‏ فَذَلِكَ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ عَقْلِهَا، أَلَيْسَ إِذَا حَاضَتْ لَمْ تُصَلِّ وَلَمْ تَصُمْ ‏”‏‏.‏ قُلْنَ بَلَى‏.‏ قَالَ ‏”‏ فَذَلِكَ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ دِينِهَا ‏”‏‏.

    This 7adeath considers women to be less intelligent than men and less complete in their religion. And that’s because of something, which is completely natural? What kid of logic is this?”

    2)The reason that two women are called for testimony instead of one isn’t because of lesser intellect. Let’s see what science has to say:

    ‘The Pre-menstrual Syndrome’, C. Shreeves writes: “Reduced powers of concentration and memory are familiar aspects of the pre-menstrual syndrome and can only be remedied by treating the underlying complaint.” This does not mean, of course, that women are mentally deficient absolutely. It just means that their mental faculties can become affected at certain times in the biological cycle. Shreeves also writes: “As many as 80 percent of women are aware of some degree of pre-menstrual changes, 40 percent are substantially disturbed by them, and between 10 and 20 percent are seriously disabled as a result of the syndrome.”

    On the phenomenon of menopause in an article in Newsweek International, May 25th 1992, Dr. Jennifer al-Knopf, Director of the Sex and Marital Therapy Programme of Northwestern University writes: “…Women never know what their body is doing to them… some reporting debilitating symptoms from hot flashes to night sweat, sleeplessness, irritability, mood swings, short term memory loss, migraine, headaches, urinary inconsistence and weight gain. Most such problems can be traced to the drop-off in the female hormones oestrogen and progesterone, both of which govern the ovarian cycle. But every woman starts with a different level of hormones and loses them at different rates.”

    So you see, as C. Sheeves says, this is not some sort of mental deficiency. Yet, with a female testimony with short time memory loss could be a problem.

    The verse states: “And get two witnesses of your own men, and if there are not two men then a man and two women such as you choose for witnesses – so that if one “of them errs, the other can remind her…” Baqarah 2:182

    3)”Now the above was just examples, Quran and 7adeath is filled with this type and worse.”

    Thanks for all that, but I’m afraid it wasn’t convincing enough, for me at least. Could you bare with me for a while longer and get me the worst that you could find, since I’m sure that you wouldn’t have any trouble at all in doing so?

    4)”If I were a man, I would surely embrace Islam because it would be tailor fit to suit me.”

    I am a man, but if I believed that Islam treated women the same way believe it to, then I honestly would not embrace it.

    Peace.

    Reply

  40. AyyA
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 00:38:27

    As for the first part of your comment, let’s have all the female doctors and women astronomers stay home since they are all wackos.
    As for your second part; I am traveling now and I do not have my books with me. But, never mind since you insist, here is some more :

    ‏(1)
    ‏قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا صلى الرجل وليس بين يديه كآخرة ‏ ‏الرحل ‏ ‏أو كواسطة ‏ ‏الرحل ‏ ‏قطع صلاته الكلب الأسود والمرأة والحمار فقلت ‏ ‏لأبي ذر ‏ ‏ما بال الأسود من الأحمر من الأبيض فقال يا ابن أخي سألتني كما سألت رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فقال الكلب الأسود شيطان ‏

    (2)
    ‏عن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏قال ‏ ‏لو كنت آمرا أحدا أن يسجد لأحد لأمرت المرأة أن تسجد لزوجها ‏

    (3)
    ‏ ‏قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏والذي نفسي بيده ‏ ‏ما من رجل يدعو امرأته إلى فراشها ‏ ‏فتأبى عليه إلا كان الذي في السماء ساخطا عليها حتى ‏ ‏يرضى عنها
    أو
    ‏‏قال رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏إذا دعا الرجل امرأته إلى فراشه فلم تأته فبات غضبان عليها لعنتها الملائكة حتى تصبح

    Reply

  41. Hadji
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 01:06:17

    “As for the first part of your comment, let’s have all the female doctors and women astronomers stay home since they are all wackos.”

    Alright then, I’ll take your word over the words of paid professionals. As we’ve stated, a woman’s mind isn’t inferior, but there are special times where her brain is less efficient. Now, I don’t know about you, but testimonies sometimes include matters that deal with life and death. I’m sure that most will agree with me, that as a precaution, you’d rather be safe than sorry and have two people there.

    Your next three points are missing their sources. I’m not going to be able to reply to them without that.

    By the way, were you convinced by my “Laamastum” argument? Just curious, since you haven’t brought it up. There’s nothing to be ashamed off by the way if you were to admit that.

    Reply

  42. AyyA
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 01:34:38

    Sorry I do not agree that a natural thing like a period can affect women judgment, if that is relevant, then how could a man trust his wife for bringing up his children.
    And about the part concerning your father and mother doing OK with the islamic system, pay attention that I’m talking about our times where the demands on life is much more than it was at their times. And nowadays you hardly see women staying home and not helping out with man to provide for family. Again this is not a specific case here; I’m talking generally.
    About lamastum; I have to look that up and I do not have tafseer Aljalalain with me, so I can’t take your word for it.

    Reply

  43. Hadji
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 02:25:15

    “Sorry I do not agree that a natural thing like a period can affect women judgment, if that is relevant, then how could a man trust his wife for bringing up his children.”

    Now you’re just being difficult. Women are natural in bringing up children. People with short term memory loss or with reduced powers of concentration and memory don’t make the best witnesses. Now, it just so happens to be that during PMS, women SOMETIMES suffer from those symptoms. For that reason, a second woman is a safer bet, in case one of them forgot something, so that the second one would remind her.

    “And get two witnesses of your own men, and if there are not two men then a man and two women such as you choose for witnesses – so that if one “of them errs, the other can remind her…” Baqarah 2:182

    “And about the part concerning your father and mother doing OK with the islamic system, pay attention that I’m talking about our times where the demands on life is much more than it was at their times.”

    Oh, so Islam fit just fine with times just twenty years ago, but don’t at all right now? Did you know that there would be no world hunger TODAY if every person was a Muslim that paid Zakat? I disagree with you in this point and Islam still works today.

    “About lamastum; I have to look that up and I do not have tafseer Aljalalain with me, so I can’t take your word for it.”

    I never expected you to. http://altafsir.com

    Peace.

    Reply

  44. AyyA
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 03:25:11

    “Did you know that there would be no world hunger TODAY if every person was a Muslim that paid Zakat?”

    Ah, now you’ve stroked a nerve, how can you make such a statement? Alms are a devious scheme used by Islam to force more people into the realm of the Islamic religion. I do believe you know that Zakat is not for a non-Moslem. And where does our zakat go if not to give more power to Islamic leaders and to support terrorism?? roo7 3ami roo7.

    Reply

  45. AyyA
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 03:28:17

    And btw
    If our mothers were contented with their lives, they wouldn’t have educated their daughters and encouraged them to be independent. The best thing my parents did for me is education, so I would not be at the mercy of man.

    Reply

  46. Rekaby
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 15:21:52

    Ayya:

    u know, the past two comments of urs put a smile on my face. there is a huge gap in ur understanding of Islam. and u r not being objective one bit. u only state the opinions of the opponents of Islam. im still going to respond to ur reply, but this is a quick reply to ur past two posts.

    know about zaka. and stroking “a nerve”, u said: “Alms are a devious scheme used by Islam to force more people into the realm of the Islamic religion.” this doesnt make any sense… u FORCE ppl into a religion by telling them.. u gotta pay up! secondly, ” I do believe you know that Zakat is not for a non-Moslem.” thats right, non-muslims dont pay zakat. they pay something called jizzya. which is not even 1/10 of zakat.. which by the way isnt much either, on an individual basis that is. now back in the days of the Islamic state, the money of zakat represented what is now known as taxes. but unlike taxes (that rip us off) zakat has very very very lenient rules. and i believe any state needs tax income to finance its expenditures for the under-previliged, public services, construction, health services and security services. now, who benefits from the zakat? the answer is everyone in the Islamic state. weather Muslim or non-Muslim, cuz the later as the earlier, benefits from the services offered by the state. and did u hear about the story of one of the Islamic cities that fell under siege, and when the Muslims there realized they were going to lose the city, they assembled their army and what did they do next?? they gave back every dinar of jizzya to the non-Muslims that were there! now get me another example from history as fair as this! plus u said zaka is used to finance Terrorism… huh?!… where did u get that from? zaka is given to the needy of people, and is used for state expenditures. not to finance terrorists. and anyway, the system of zaka doesnt exist as it used to back in the Islamic empire. now its barley keeping the wolf away from the doors of poor ppl.

    “roo7 3ami roo7″… that wasnt necessary btw =)

    “If our mothers were contented with their lives, they wouldn’t have educated their daughters and encouraged them to be independent.” Knowledge is a fard on every Muslim be it a man or a woman. and that was from the days of the prophet. and about independece, um al mo2mineen khadeeja was an independant business woman. um al mo2mineen,
    3aisha and umSalama, were scholars that the companions learned from, and lets not mention the number of women in the seera that were mentioned running their own little sotres or working here or there “independant”ly. so they were independant since back then..

    oh heck, while am at it, i might as well respond to everything.

    ok. about the culture and religion thing, please re-read what i wrote about drinking and fornication in my last post. my point is explained clearly there.

    and about ijtihad, before ijtihad is applied, the research is carried out in both the book and the sunna for an answer. now, in the case no clear answer can be reached the process of ijtihad starts. what does this mean? this means that the matter at hand doesnt have a rule by which allah wants it to be carried out. i.e. it doesnt violate any rules or guidelines. therefore, it is left for people to decide how they want to adress that matter. simple as that.

    now about the different schools of thought, it doesnt have anything to do with terrorism. y? simply because the Imams of these schools might have not reached to places where there are “rowwa” (ppl who know 7adeeth and preach it) that other Imams of other schools of thought have reached by travel. y? well, some of them might have died before they could reach there, or they didnt hear of the 7adeeth, they didnt have google back then =p, or it was merely impossible to travel to some places due to the distance and geography barriers. thats y Muslims take from all the schools of thought. and when a scholar preaches now, he mentions all of the opinions and chooses one that he thinks is right for him, but in the end the choice is left for the listner to choose. thats more of a mercy than a curse. and about terrorism, please re-read the 7adeeth about the rules of engagment.

    and about Musims taking the greek philosophy and translating it, well what did u expect? they come up with science? what the Muslims did is that they took these philosophies and those sciences and developed upon them and eliminated the falacies in them. or else all the science of today would be filled with mistakes and the books of great Muslim scietists like Ibn sina and jabbir bin 7ayyan and ibn Majid wont be translated and tought in colleges all over the world now would they? and about the issue of Islam spreading by sword, this is a very over used statment and has been responded to excessivley too. Islam, to muslims, is a message from god. and as Muslims we r obligated to make this message known. now y did conflicts that lead to battles occur, firstly as we r obligated to diliver the message of Allah, messengers were sent to the great empires of that time. Rome, Persia and Egypt. Rome and Egypt responded with gifts, Persia killed the messenger. this i believe is enough of a reson to give battle to the persians, the emperor of Persia at that time, Kisra, was the one being invited to Islam, and when he refused, permission was taken to preach in his lands, which he also refused. and to show his power he killed the messenger, at that time the capital of the Persian empire was in Iraq. the Romans, having their capital in syria, later realized that Islam is rapidly growing and is now the religion of the arabian peninsula, which in the past was considered a roman province. alarmed by that, they sent an army to a place called
    mo2ta. the prophet was alive back then and he raised an army to face the roman invasion. the place was a month’s teravel away from medina. but when the Muslim army arrived at the field of battle, they were surprised to find no one there, and when they asked the locals, they said that the roman army was forced to retreat because when its soldiers heard u were coming got scared and unorganized. it was then that the prophet said: ” i was given victory by fear, when i was a month away” (the size of the army raised for that battle was 30,000 men. like nothing the arabs have witnessed before, and an army with that size can put up quite a fight, so i guess thats what scared off the romans cuz they werent expecting opposition this fierce from what they thought to be mere desert wanderers.) this is a clear declaration of war on the Romans’ behalf. but the real reason that ignited the flames of war was that the king of basra, (which was a Roman province at the time) also killed the messenger the prophet (PBOH). and in retaliation an army of 3000 men was sent. this is called the battle of Mo2ta. now the feuds continued until the Muslims prevailed in the end although in every single battle they were out numbered and out equiped. now the only people killed were those who raised arms against the Muslims, specificly the soldiers of the opposing armies. when ever a city was conqured, no innocent life has been taken, no house looted, and no one forced into Islam unwillingly. so ur claim that it was by force is false.

    now concerning the Abbasid period, it is in the last 500 years of that period did the true cause of Islam start to fade away, and corruption started sprouting within the empire. i frankly believe that it was there that the end started. slowly the teachings of Islam, that were once the reason of this nation’s greatness, started getting ignored and little by little, as u said the empire started losing its Islamic identity, first by allowing drinking and prostitution until the end of the final state, which i prefer to call the ottaman empire rather than the final Islamic Empire. so u see, it is because of Islam that they were the wonder of the ages. but once they left it, down the drain they went. and as u said : “the whole empire collapsed and it kept declining to this day”.

    now about society being progressive or regressive, i didnt ask for statistics. and such a thing cant be measured by statistics. go back to my post and see what i wrote concerning that topic, to understand what i mean.

    and about the whole issue of the The Pre-menstrual Syndrome, i believe hadji prooved it with suffecient evidence. through, statistics and proffesional testimony. compared to that ur argument has no base. this is something scientific. unless u believe science is bullshit. its like someone telling another, if u smoke alot alot u’ll get lung cancer, and then the other guy say: i dont believe u. he says: a doctor told me that. and here is his name, and here r statiscs, this is true it happened to ppl.. then the other guy say: i still dont believe u, i dont care.

    dont argue just for the sake of argument. when something has solid proof dont argue it unless u have another piece of solid proof to counter it with. without that u’ll only make urself look childish sis.

    btw, i have two sisters. both of them r in the best of schools where im living. both of them r very well educated and infact one of them will soon to follow me into college. and my father is a very very religous man. =)

    ur just pissed off at something, and Islam has nothing to do with it. come on, we’re just going in circles here.

    peace

    Reply

  47. Rekaby
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 15:32:21

    i made a mistake here. “alarmed by that, they sent an army to a place called
    mo2ta”… the romans did send an army but not to Mo2ta. Mo2ta was the second time.

    my appologies

    Reply

  48. AyyA
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 20:13:33

    Sis
    If you want to know the real story behind Islam, don’t take it from Islamic books, cause they’re BIASED. I have nothing more to say.

    Reply

  49. Hadji
    Jan 09, 2007 @ 23:07:38

    Ayya, I’m still waiting for those sources behind the hadeeths.

    “I do believe you know that Zakat is not for a non-Moslem.”

    That’s why I said, there would be no more world hunger if EVERYONE was a Muslim. I think it was 5% of the money of the richest twenty people in the world or something. I’m not too hot at math, but I think that if everyone was a zakat-paying Muslim, there would be no more starvation.

    “And where does our zakat go if not to give more power to Islamic leaders and to support terrorism??”

    Heh. I don’t recall ever seeing anyone personally going up to an “Islamic leader” or Bin Ladin and saying something like, “Here’s my zakat money, please take care of it.”

    “roo7 3ami roo7.”

    That’s the last thing you should want me to do. The amount of activity on your blog has tripled ever since I started posting. =)

    I’m still waiting for your proof as to how the religion that’s accepted by a billion is an absurd prank pulled by an illiterate. In other words, I await for the sources of the hadeeths you quoted.

    Thanks.

    Reply

  50. The Extreme Moderate
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 01:28:08

    Ayya—you’ve just been proven to the whole world to be one whose lack of knowledge of Islam and misguided resentment are your only two truths. You and anyone else can never win against Islam, no matter how smart you may think you are, and no matter which athiest scientists you quote.

    {And say: “Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.”}—Surat Al-Isra’

    Do yourself a favor, and bow down in prostration to Him, The Almighty, ask Him for forgiveness, and ask Him to guide you to His Straight Path.

    Reply

  51. Asif R.
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 02:18:29

    I find this whole debate very intriguing. It was going rather well until the author let her emotions take hold of her and is now apparently no longer interested in pursuing a healthy debate backed up by facts. I sincerely hope that changes very soon.

    I’d love to comment on a lot of things but this is such a long thread, so I guess I’ll just comment on random points here and there.

    “Ah, now you’ve stroked a nerve, how can you make such a statement? Alms are a devious scheme used by Islam to force more people into the realm of the Islamic religion. I do believe you know that Zakat is not for a non-Moslem. And where does our zakat go if not to give more power to Islamic leaders and to support terrorism?? roo7 3ami roo7.”

    I fail to understand how Zakat is a “devious scheme” to “force” people into Islam? Pray explain.

    And, I sincerely and honestly doubt the Muslim masses are giving their money to terrorist organizations and/or elements. There might be a few fringe elements (and such people can be found in every society, culture, and religion) that advocate the killing of innocent individuals and thus fund such “causes”, but that doesn’t mean Islam advocates it or that the Muslim people do.

    Clearly, this is slander against Islam and Muslims.

    Reply

  52. Hadji
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 03:44:50

    Asif R.: “It was going rather well until the author let her emotions take hold of her and is now apparently no longer interested in pursuing a healthy debate backed up by facts.”

    Yeah, I’ve been feeling some of that as well. I still have high hopes for her to make a good comeback though. I mean, just a couple of days ago she seemed like she was ready enough to take on the whole Islamic world. It’s hard to believe that a few posts were able to slow her down.

    I also owe Al-Hanbali and Rekaby for being there as well. Thanks.

    This isn’t over though. I now that you have those sources with you somewhere. I know you still have some fight left in you.

    Peace.

    Reply

  53. Hadji
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 04:20:04

    Sorry, I overlooked this part.

    Ayya: “If you want to know the real story behind Islam, don’t take it from Islamic books, cause they’re BIASED. I have nothing more to say.”

    Alright, let’s take that theory to the test. According to Ayya, Islamic books are biased. What better book to test than the Qur’an?

    (1)(The Prophet) frowned and turned away, (2)Because there came to him the blind man (interrupting). (3)But what could tell thee but that perchance he might grow (in spiritual understanding)?- (4)Or that he might receive admonition, and the teaching might profit him?
    (5) As to one who regards Himself as self-sufficient, (6) To him dost thou attend;
    (7) Though it is no blame to thee if he grow not (in spiritual understanding).
    (8) But as to him who came to thee striving earnestly, (9) And with fear (in his heart),
    (10) Of him wast thou unmindful.

    Alright. I’m sure that you are aware of the story of Mohammed (pbuh) and the blind man.

    Now, if you were to write a biased book, in which you’d include yourself claiming to be a prophet from the Lord, would you really include that passage?

    No, obviously not.

    Furthermore, even if one were unbiased, suppressing information this delicate doesn’t necessarily lead people to be accused of being biased.

    Even a guilty criminal usually bursts into tears after being found guilty by a court. A criminal doesn’t give it away during the hearing though, since there is always a chance of getting away. This criminal is supressing information and will not really been seen as someone who is biased. This criminal acted upon instincts and only did what was natural.

    Now, this story that I just shared with you goes way beyond that. Mohammed (pbuh) wasn’t on trial. He never had to say those words. Yet, this is proof that he was more than just with himself.

    I don’t think that anyone could win if they were arguing that the Qur’an is biased.

    Yet, I’m sure that anyone with half a mind could argue that books written by orientalists or feminists are extremely biased.

    Reply

  54. The Extreme Moderate
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 06:41:03

    Oh! but orientalists and feminists seem to be her main sources of inspiration in her quest to disparage Islam (the success of which will never be realized).

    And I don’t mean to throw this now very one-sided discourse off track, but to claim the Holy Qur’an is a Book made up by man is completely ludicrous. I know Ayya mentioned this in one of her posts somewhere.

    Why don’t you think rationally about this, dear Ayya. You haven’t done so in any of your previous posts, so why not do so now? It’s not like you would have anything to lose. In fact, you would only gain.

    To start, you do realize that the Noble Prophet (SAWS), towards the very end of his life, was in debt to a Jew? Throughout his entire life as Prophet, he lived quite modestly, in what could only be described as ‘poor’ by today’s standards. He rarely ate meat, and his diet consisted of dates, water and maybe even a little bread.

    He (SAWS)could have had virtually any woman he wanted. during one of his expiditions, he was offered the daufhters of the people living in the new lands he ventured to by their own parents. He refused their offers despite his love for women (and honey!).

    Possibly before that happened, though, powerful members of the Quraish approached him (SAWS) in an attempt to get him to stop his quest to spread Islam. He was offered wealth, women, power, rulership, EVERYTHING. He refused.

    So you see, Ayya, the Prophet (SAWS) wasn’t doing this for his own personal gain. He suffered extensively at the hands of the kuffaar that opposed him.

    What need would he have to go through all this, while denying the excessive pleasures of this life that were seemingly offered to him at every turn, if it weren’t for the fact that the Glorious Qur’an was indeed a Book sent down from the heavens, and that he (SAWS) was indeed the Messenger of Allah, The Most Great?

    I don’t expect a coherent answer from you, so let this be a lesson for you and all those others who attempt to serve as opposers to the Truth. I’ll let Hadji & Co. get back to demolishing the rest of your argument step-by-step.

    Reply

  55. The Extreme Moderate
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 06:44:00

    I forgot to mention he (SAWS) already had respect and prestige before he became the Prophet, so that theory is also out.

    Reply

  56. Rekaby
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 10:42:52

    dear “The extreme moderate”, i know that u want to defend Islam with all your power, so do we. this religion means the world to us Muslims, be it men or women. and i understand too that u want to refute every point raised against it and throw the ball back to the opposition’s court, this is what we r all trying to do as well. but, please accept this comment from me bro =), your style is a bit too aggressive. we’re not really fighting here, we’re just debating points as they arise, this msg goes to u too Ayya, its because of the aggressive method u’ve adopted that u’ve lost ur focus, lets all just calm down when we’re doing this.

    no offense intended to the extreme moderate, nor anyone else for that matter. =)

    peace

    Reply

  57. AyyA
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 12:28:40

    Offfff.. What in the hell is this? An Islamic tsunami? LOL
    I only left the blog for one day, take it easy guys, I’m on a vacation, not on the Net 24/7 LOL
    Off course I did not have time to read all your comments, and only came to find the sources of the 7adeath I submitted to hadji, which was not easy considering my situation, so give me a break, I will be back soon.

    hadji
    click here

    and click here

    and click here

    Reply

  58. Rekaby
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 14:21:21

    hmm.. im not a qualified interpreter of 7adeeth. but by reasoning this is what i was able to conclude.

    clearly the 7adeeth about sojood has no insult what so ever to women. firslty, cuz there was never an order, and firstly the qura’an never said it, and the prophet (PBOH) said, Laww, which means “if”, and the phrase “Laww” in arabic has the following interpertation.. or what we arabs know as i3rab. its i3rab is ” Laww: 7arf ya8tadi imtina3 ma yaleeh” or in otherwords, a phrase that denotes the prohibition of what is to follow. i.e. there is nothing that obliges the woman to do so, neither from far nor from near… infact if she does it she’s no longer a Muslim, cuz sojood is only for Allah. this implies that this is figuritive speach, i.e. nothing more than to show the value of the wife’s obedience to her husband, cuz of all the smoothness it causes in their lives. now this means obedience when it comes to major issues, not like … where should we go for vacation =p… im talking big things that affect the very essence of the house hold. some might say, so y is the woman included only in such minor decisions?.. i didnt say that she doesnt have a say in the big decissions, infact the husband is obliged to consult his wife in big matters. cuz its both of them on the same ship. and as our Egyptian brothers say: “Markib bi rayyisain ti3’ra2”.. or, a ship with two captains always sinks. this obedience is only wanted from the woman as long as it doesnt go against any of Allah’s orders. and as long as the husband isnt being an insensible jerk =p. its a mutual benifit, the husband is obliged to make his wife feel safe, provide for her (even if she can provide for herself, its still his duty in the eyes of Allah) and strive to make her happy as much as he can. and in return she too makes him feel at peace and obeyes him =). “wa ja3alna bainakom mawadatan wa ra7ma” Surat al Room, ayya 21 (chapter of the Romans, verse 21) and in the end women r well known for their great ability of “Persuading” their husbands. so i say, make him believe its his decision, when infact its actually urs, hehe =)

    now about the other 7adeeth with the black dog.
    this is what i can conclude.
    the reason a woman cuts a man’s prayer (and ya8ta3 doesnt mean yobtil, it means distract) is because as i said she may distract a man. its pretty obvious if u think about it. now the reason y the black dog and the donkey r mentioned isnt becasue of a corelation with the woman, but merely because the subject, which is things that can distract from prayer, came up and the prophet (PBOH) said what does. so it in no way means that the woman is najissa, cuz then if she was then one would find teachings that prohibitted touching women.

    and about the “lamastom al nisa2” issue, it does mean nika7 or sexual intercourse. exactly like when Mariam said “أنا يكون لي غلام و لم يمسسني بشر” Surat mariam verse 20. therefore, the verse “أو لامستم النساء فلم تجدوا ماء فتيمموا صعيدا طيبا” adressed the case that intercourse occured in a place where water is scarce, and as a solution, the use of clean earth was an alternative. the case being adressed here isnt the najasa of women. but rather the issue of “Janaba” or the state of uncleanliness for worship after sexual intercourse. and as hadji mentioned before, both men and women r supposed to wash up after sexual intercourse before engaging in any form of worship. i.e. this refutes the claim that women are najisat cuz they too wash up after sexual intercourse as do men.

    peace

    Reply

  59. AyyA
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 21:07:37

    Hadji
    “That’s why I said, there would be no more world hunger if EVERYONE was a Muslim”

    1st, you have to accept the fact that NOT EVERYONE is a Muslim, and that will never be.

    2nd, by making an impossible assumption, you can’t draw a conclusion off the air. Zakat is left to MAN for distribution, in the old days it was accumulated in Bait Elmal, under the khalefat. Part of it was spent on state affairs, another part on jihad, and another part on poor people.
    Now in a new conquered areas; people were not Muslims, they either had to pay jizyah to be able to keep their faiths while living under the control of the invaders, or to embrace Islam to avoid paying jizya, the wealthy had no problem, but the poor; which were the majority, had no other option. Not only they did not have to pay jizya, they were receiving money as zakat and sadaga. This is called BRIBERY.

    Now; In our time; we have state laws that can take care of citizen’s affairs. Then where does our zakat money go?
    Off course you know that Shiite have khums(goes to the descendants of Bani Hashim specially the mujtahids) in addition to zakat which is calculated differently from Sunni.
    I bet you 90% of Muslims don’t know where that money goes to.
    But here is some reading if you are interested to know more:
    click here

    But then again I’m sure you’ll find other excuses as you always do.

    “That’s the last thing you should want me to do. The amount of activity on your blog has tripled ever since I started posting. =)”

    You mean the Islamic tsunami? :p

    “’m still waiting for your proof as to how the religion that’s accepted by a billion is an absurd prank pulled by an illiterate”

    you mean illiterate as an ommi, who could not write or read as I presume.
    Writing and reading was not an issue in the old Arabian Peninsula; most people couldn’t read or write, but they were not all without knowledge, or learned. Knowledge was transferred by the word of mouth through stories and fairytales. And no one said that Mohammad was ignorant, he sure was a great philosopher, a good trader and was exposed to knowledge since Mecca was a center of trade at those days, as well as a hub for idol worshipping. And he also was exposed to other civilizations through trade. Mind you; Quran was not written at his time, but it surely survived, at least part of it.

    Reply

  60. AyyA
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 21:11:54

    The EM
    “Ayya—you’ve just been proven to the whole world to be one whose lack of knowledge of Islam and misguided resentment are your only two truths.”
    Oh, so I’m famous now, lucky me :p
    Go get a life, will you

    Reply

  61. AyyA
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 21:24:05

    Asif R
    “I’d love to comment on a lot of things but this is such a long thread”

    That’s why a lot of people avoid discussion with Islamists, because as you said it’s a long thread. And at the end each is raising his sward saying intasarna, we beat you infidel. As if we are at war. They don’t accept the fact that some people can have different point of view than theirs, and they would have to respect them if they expect any in return. They want all the world to be devout Muslims.

    “I fail to understand how Zakat is a “devious scheme” to “force” people into Islam? Pray explain.”
    I think I already did that in my reply to Hadji, and if you do not agree with me, fine, I respect that.

    “There might be a few fringe elements (and such people can be found in every society, culture, and religion) that advocate the killing of innocent individuals and thus fund such “causes”, but that doesn’t mean Islam advocates it or that the Muslim people do.”
    True; but in our days, unfortunately; ikhtala6 el7abil bil nabil

    Reply

  62. AyyA
    Jan 10, 2007 @ 21:55:55

    Hadji
    “I also owe Al-Hanbali and Rekaby for being there as well. Thanks.”

    Were they your knights in the shining armors?
    Notice, I did not call on others to come to my rescue, nor other did. Because simply; each one of us have different point of view. And I’m sure there are a lot of them out there reading this stuff, I can tell from my stats :p
    Now that is an answer to Al-Hambali who grouped me with others.

    “I know you still have some fight left in you.”
    Again, I’m not in a fight, I have my own point of view, I may have answers to some comments or may not, and you don’t have to accept them, but I do expect you to respect them.

    “Now, if you were to write a biased book, in which you’d include yourself claiming to be a prophet from the Lord, would you really include that passage?”

    To me; Quran is full of contradictories; if you examine the Mecci verses, they are so full of harmony and high morals, same with the prophet’s searah. Now, check the Madani verses, you’d see it full of intolerance and harsh verses, and again the same goes to Mohammad’s seara in Madina. I asked a cleric once about the contradictions and he answered that the type of life and jihad fi sabeel allah and spreading of Islam faith when it assumed power in Madina differed from that in Mecca where Islam was just born. Now that to me does not make any sense.

    And btw
    Have you checked if Islam or mohammad was mentioned in any other books, or other civilizations that were written AT THE TIME OF THE PROPHET?
    As I mentioned before, Mecca was not exactly isolated at his time, how come there is no mention of him anywhere else but the Islamic books, or the history books that were based on Islamic history.

    Reply

  63. Hadji
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 01:23:05

    “Now; In our time; we have state laws that can take care of citizen’s affairs. Then where does our zakat money go?”

    Heh, just because it can doesn’t make it the only way. Many people do it by themselves, you know. It is more preferrable for one to take care of it by themselves.

    “They don’t accept the fact that some people can have different point of view than theirs, and they would have to respect them if they expect any in return.”

    You’re over generalizing again. I haven’t been barking at anything you said. All I’ve been doing is correcting some points that you’ve misinterpretted.

    “You mean the Islamic tsunami? :p”

    Yes.

    “Notice, I did not call on others to come to my rescue, nor other did. Because simply; each one of us have different point of view. And I’m sure there are a lot of them out there reading this stuff, I can tell from my stats :p”

    I don’t recall needing any help. I don’t recall asking anyone to post anything in my aid either.

    “Again, I’m not in a fight, I have my own point of view, I may have answers to some comments or may not, and you don’t have to accept them, but I do expect you to respect them.”

    Pshhh, I didn’t mean “fight” literally.

    “Now, check the Madani verses, you’d see it full of intolerance and harsh verses, and again the same goes to Mohammad’s seara in Madina.”

    I disagree. Even after Mohammed (pbuh) was metaphorically, on top of the world, he still avoided abusing his power. The verses speak for themselves:

    [002:256] Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in God hath grasped the most trustworthy hand- hold, that never breaks. And God heareth and knoweth all things.

    [002:182] But if anyone fears partiality or wrong-doing on the part of the testator, and makes peace between (The parties concerned), there is no wrong in him: For God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

    [004:090] Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If God had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then God Hath opened no way for you (to war against them).

    [008:061] But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).

    “Now that to me does not make any sense.”

    Let me try to make it simpler. In Makkah, Mohammed’s (pbuh) followers included the old, the poor, the women, and the children, and of course, some exceptions. They weren’t in a state of war at all. If anything, they were terrorized, for having their own beliefs. Now, the verses that have a context of war weren’t revealed because there never was a war. If they were to fight back when they were being terrorized then they’d be squashed.

    “As I mentioned before, Mecca was not exactly isolated at his time, how come there is no mention of him anywhere else but the Islamic books, or the history books that were based on Islamic history.”

    What are you suggesting?

    “And the message of Mohammad was spread far with a sward, so please don’t mix the two.”

    You mentioned this a few posts up. Let’s try Indonesia, the most populated Islamic country. What was the name of the Islamic army sent there again?

    Reply

  64. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 01:45:17

    The EM
    I sure don’t find you being moderate at all, extreme? Sure

    “but to claim the Holy Qur’an is a Book made up by man is completely ludicrous.”

    I wanted to write in response to that, but knew beforehand that my reply would raise other points. So I googled it to save time and I found the perfect reply to your claim. I took the time to read it all, and most of it is in the context of what I wanted to say, so please before replying to my comment, read the whole article.
    click this

    “It’s not like you would have anything to lose. In fact, you would only gain.”

    Gain what? being a sheep in a herd, bowing my head without questioning, is not exactly a gain.

    “He (SAWS)could have had virtually any woman he wanted”

    And mind you he did enjoy women; he had twelve wives for sure and fourteen as said by others. And did you hear about Zainab Bint Ja7sh; the wife of his fostered son Zaid Bin 7aritha. The one he saw and liked, and Zaid had to divorse so that mohammad would marry her. And as was said an aya in Quran was dedicated to this “ { وإذ تقول للذي أنعم الله عليه وأنعمت عليه أمسك عليك زوجك واتق الله ، و تخفي في نفسك ما الله مبديه ، و تخشى الناس والله أحق أن تخشاه ، فلما قضى زيد منها وطراً زوجناكها لي لا يكون على المؤمنين حرج في أزواج أدعيائهم إذا قضوا منهن وطراً وكان أمر الله مفعولاً } [الأحزاب/37]”

    Now I wonder what poor Zaid must have felt about that!

    “What need would he have to go through all this, while denying the excessive pleasures of this life that were seemingly offered to him at every turn”

    It’s all about power and control my friend, it has always been, as it is now, and as it will always be.

    Reply

  65. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 02:55:58

    Rekaby
    I know dear what the 7adeath is implying; off course there is no order. But you have to see to what level women are considered below men. Why wasn’t it the other way around? Aren’t women dedicating their lives to their families? Aren’t they, at least publicly, more loyal to their husbands? And deserve at least an equal treatment?
    Even in the verse; why didn’t God say “aw kontom 3ala janaba” and instead said “wa lamastum alnisa”. This verse as it states is directed to men.
    And let’s forget about all that jargon for a while. I can see from your tone how lenient and resilient you are when it comes to Islamic relationship between man and woman. If I’m not mistaken, you also accept the fact that a woman should be obedient to her husband. As if husbands have no faults. Now if you are married and your husband married another women, would you say, “I will be obedient to your wishes dear husband and whatever you do so long as it’s 7alal, I will accept it”? NEVER, you heard me? NEVER
    Most of us Muslim women grew up hating ourselves because we were not treated fairly, as were our brothers. But just like a dog who is potty trained, we were trained to accept it, and accept the excuses given to us by our parents and grandparents. And also we were trained to be devious; as you said; get what we want and make the man believe that this was his wish. Wi ba3dain they say; wa kaydahona 3athyeem?
    Sis; if you believe in the creator, you have to believe that this creator did not create brains so that we repeat what others spoon-fed us. He created this brain for a reason. And it’s about time to make some use of it.

    Reply

  66. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 02:58:43

    u havent responded to my post ayya, does this mean that u r convinced? i really hope so =) (i just want this to be over ASAP hehe)…

    this was ur response to Asif’s comment about advocated killings and the fact that Islam has nothing to do with it, u said: “True; but in our days, unfortunately; ikhtala6 el7abil bil nabil”… so u do agree that Islam doesnt advocate such atrosities, but its ” in our days ” that ppl have misunderstood its teachings. which makes u contradict urself when u said earlier :” In my opinion; we are closer today to the original preaching of Islam than it ever was.”… decide where u stand sis. and i do agree, today ” ikhtala6 el7abil bil nabil”, i.e. it aint Islam’s fault, but rather those who interpret it in their own ways to achieve hidden agendas in it’s name. cuz as the prophet (PBOH) said: “al7alal bayyin wal 7aram bayyin”. enough said, i believe, about this subject.

    u said: ” you have to accept the fact that NOT EVERYONE is a Muslim, and that will never be.” i agree with u on that 100%.

    u also said: ” people were not Muslims, they either had to pay jizyah to be able to keep their faiths while living under the control of the invaders, or to embrace Islam to avoid paying jizya, the wealthy had no problem, but the poor; which were the majority, had no other option. Not only they did not have to pay jizya, they were receiving money as zakat and sadaga. This is called BRIBERY.” forgive me if i say that this made me giggle. first of all, jizzya as i said before is much more less than zaka. in arabic, mablagh ramzi. and the non-Muslim poor recieved the zaka just as the Muslim poor did… so by this one can draw the conclusion that also poor Muslims were being bribed ?!.. this is absolutley absured.

    now about the shittes… i really dont know much about their ways, so i wont go into that. now where do u think those citizen affair budgets get financed? atleast in Muslim countries? ever heard of wizarat al awkaf? PART of their budget comes from zaka, which, i repeat, isnt much. thats y when the state collects the zaka money from them, they need to add alot of money to that to make it do its job. trust me, i have relatives working in the financial sector, both private and public. so this is dinner table talk to me.

    “Oh, so I’m famous now, lucky me :p” =)
    “Go get a life, will you” not necessary =( is this what u call ” I’m not in a fight” ?… if thats how u r when ur calm… id really hate to provoke u hehe. careful

    “I may have answers to some comments or may not, and you don’t have to accept them, but I do expect you to respect them.” again, i have to agree with u on that one… but how do u expect to get respect when u dont offer it? .. read some of ur comments… im sorry to say some of them r very disrespectful.

    hadji: “I fail to understand how Zakat is a “devious scheme” to “force” people into Islam? Pray explain.”
    ayya: “I think I already did that in my reply to Hadji, and if you do not agree with me, fine, I respect that.”
    Same goes for u Ayya =)

    “That’s why a lot of people avoid discussion with Islamists, because as you said it’s a long thread. And at the end each is raising his sward saying intasarna, we beat you infidel.”… come on. what did u expect? ur complaining cuz the thread is too long?… i dont see any swords in the air.. atleast mine is still in its holster😉 hehe.

    “Were they your knights in the shining armors?”… ….

    “To me; Quran is full of contradictories; if you examine the Mecci verses, they are so full of harmony and high morals, same with the prophet’s searah . Now, check the Madani verses, you’d see it full of intolerance and harsh verses, and again the same goes to Mohammad’s seara in Madina.” simple reasons. in mecca, the prophet was just starting out, i.e there were no Muslims to give rules to as in the Medini verses. thats y no verses of law were revealed, for exapmle, the rules of financial transactions, or the rules of engagment. now when the prophet (PBOH) moved to Medina, the Islamic state was born. them Muslims were now ready and willing to live by the Islamic code of conduct. thats y all Mecci verses start with “ya ayoha la nas” or “Oh people”.. while Medini verses start with ” ya ayoha llatheena amanoo”.. or “oh ye who believe”. now about the intolerance issue that u claim exists in the Medini verses, this was adressed previously by orientalists. and yet again, they only look at the verses without looking at the reasons they were revealed (as they always do). and im not “find other excuses as you always do” to me thats exactly what ur doing… yet u claim to be very open minded and open to everyone’s beliefs even if u dont accept them… well it doesnt really show from the way ur talking. anyway, the reason of the change in the style of the verses (particularly the shift towards speaking about battle) is because as an only Islamic state, Medina was surrounded by enemies from every direction. and they were constantly under threat. as proven from the constant attempts of Invasion, assasination and betrayal. look through history, never was the prophet (PBOH)the aggressor. thats for the part about “intolerance” u raised.

    “And btw
    Have you checked if Islam or mohammad was mentioned in any other books, or other civilizations that were written AT THE TIME OF THE PROPHET?”…. werent u the one who said: “Writing and reading was not an issue in the old Arabian Peninsula; most people couldn’t read or write” so how would u expect ppl to keep record of him except through “word of mouth”… now about the other civilizations living around him, they only got to know he even existed when he sent them messages telling them about Islam. like the Romans and the Persians and the Egyptians. the people of 7abasha were already Muslims. so thats about everyone surrounding the Arabian peninsula. thats y u dont find record of him in their history books. yet the wars that happened between the Muslims and those ppl have surley gotten Islam into their history books, maybe not in the most objective manner, simply cuz they were enemies. and enemies dont really speak well of each other except on rare occasions.

    “how come there is no mention of him anywhere else but the Islamic books, or the history books that were based on Islamic history.”…well, who else do u expect to keep the history of Islam except the Muslims them selves? its like telling a dude from madagascar, how come the history books of korea dont mention u ! :s

    well thats that for now =)

    peace

    Reply

  67. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 03:02:08

    OK THIS IS VERY VERY FUNNY

    AYYA, IM A GUY SIS

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!

    will respond to u

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!!!

    Reply

  68. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 03:03:12

    now watch ayya take the piss at me cuz she found out i’m a guy😉

    have mercy Ayya😀

    Reply

  69. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 03:20:34

    Sorry guys, it seems as if I’m wasting my time here with a bunch of kids. so do not expect any more response from me, I did not go to you asking you to change your beliefs. You came here and asked me for my opinion and I stated it, I’d have to stop here.

    Reply

  70. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 04:38:37

    ok Ayya,

    first of all, many of the teachings of Islam are stated in a masculine nature. for example. “ya ayoha llatheen amanoo kotiba 3alaikum al siyam”… the nature of the verse is Masculine. but all muslims, being men or women, are included in this verse. and to proove it, the women companions once asked the prophet the same thing? y aren’t we included in the verses? r we of lower class? Allah replied to that by the following verse : “ان المسلمين و المسلمات و المؤمنين و المؤمنات و القانتين و القانتات و الصادقين و الصادقات و الصابرين و الصابرات و الخاشعين و الخاشعات و المتصدقين و المتصدقات و الصائمين و الصائمات و الحافظين فروجهم و الحافظات و الذاكرين الله كثيراً والذاكرات اعد الله لهم مغفرة و اجرا عظيماً” .
    so u see, its only the general style of the verses to be in masculine form, cuz its simply the standard form of adressing a group of ppl with its men and women.

    “Even in the verse; why didn’t God say “aw kontom 3ala janaba” and instead said “wa lamastum alnisa”. This verse as it states is directed to men.” rule applies to women too. no argument about that.

    i made a mistake, forgive me if i failed to mention this in my last post. this is something biological about the male body. most males, when slighlty excited (i mean sexually) they secrete a clear fluid from their sexual organ known in Arabic as mathiyy or “مذي”. now this fluid is not tahir. i.e when one needs to pray one needs to clean off that fluid then obolute, before engaging in prayer. now females dont secrete such a fluid. therefore, i believe this is a much more accurate explanation of the verse and as to why it is directed to men. i admit that i made a mistake in my first conclusion, since IN THIS CASE, lamastom actually meanse touch. although in Arabic language it also means sexual intercourse as proven from the verse about Maryyam.

    “And let’s forget about all that jargon for a while” its the misinterpertation of “jargon” that causes all the missunderstandings. orientalists attack the qura’an while they dont understand what its verses r actually saying. Arabic is a semitic language, this family of languages is of a rich nature and its “jargon” plays a supreme role in understanding it.. which is what most orientalists fail to achieve.

    “Now if you are married and your husband married another women, would you say, “I will be obedient to your wishes dear husband and whatever you do so long as it’s 7alal, I will accept it” ” i understand clearly that this is a very touchy issue for women, the whole ta3adod and all. but hey the choice is always there for the woman should she choose to leave her husband because of that. “fa imsakon bi ma3roof aw tasree7on bi2i7san”. i have relatives whom r first wives and others who r second wives. some chose to walk out of the marriage and others r still with their husbands and doing just fine. i do admit though that it is a touchy issue.

    “I can see from your tone how lenient and resilient you are when it comes to Islamic relationship between man and woman.” yes i am, al7amdolilah =)

    “But just like a dog who is potty trained, we were trained to accept it,” i wouldnt really like to compare it to that image. but isnt that how humans come about believing anything? they r “trained to accept it” ?!

    “He created this brain for a reason. And it’s about time to make some use of it.” Allah said that in the qura’an, use ur minds, “ya 2olly al albab” we r using them sis =). very effeciently for that matter.

    peace

    Reply

  71. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 04:43:32

    Oh boy..

    Ayya, i dont see any reason for ur last comment. i believe that since we arent fighting, that there is nothing wrong with cracking a joke every now and then. just to smoothen the atmosphere.

    anyway, if i have offended u in any way, please accept my apology.

    come on now, dont make us miss ur posts =)

    Reply

  72. Al-Hanbali
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 11:18:17

    rekababy, you say bader is aggressive
    لا تجدن قوما يؤمنون بالله و اليوم الاخر يوادون من حاد الله و رسوله

    And Aisha was nine years old and what you quote is what apologists say.

    as for Ayya, she let her whims and desires control her, and she knows this is the truth from Allah, but she hated what Allah has revealed,
    ذلك بأنهم كرهوا ما أنزل الله فأحبط أعمالهم

    she keeps on directing the debate to what she hates about Islam,
    she once quoted Hassan al turabi ages ago, and talked to me about him as a muslima,, yet the nifaq was in her, and she did not reveal it instead she relied on a another misguided kaffer to suppot her ill views.

    you can read as many books of philosophy as you want, but know for sure that muslimeen aren’t stupid like you think, and the fact is that many of these philosophic books would have not existed if they weren’t preserved by Arabs.
    That’s if you even read philosophy and understand what you read, because really it doesn’t seem you posses any philosophic knowledge either.

    There is no cover from this, and the day you die you will face what you have been running from your whole life, then you will know what Truth means and if wont help you your belief in it. Yet as long as you live you will have infinite chances to return to Allah, and Allah will accept you no doubt.

    Reply

  73. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 17:48:47

    Al-Hmbali
    “and talked to me about him as a muslima,,”

    Please do not give the impression that you know me personally, or me you, I never talked to you, not even chatted with you through the Net. I wrote Alturabi’s post on my old blog (the link is on the sidebar), and it’s still there. You commented and I replied. Now don’t categorize me as monafiqeen, and all the cabbage you filled your head with, nor worry about what Allah will do to me, because you are not Allah, nor Allah assigned you as his substitute on earth; mind your own business.

    Reply

  74. Rekaby
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 20:12:50

    al hambali: its Rekaby bro =p hehe.

    i do agree, she was nine. and when i said she was older, it was only a theory of abstract calculation. but i came back and apologized in one of my later posts and admited that she was nine and stated evidences and support. i agree with u one hundred percent. she was nine when she married him (PBOH).

    “لا تجدن قوما يؤمنون بالله و اليوم الاخر يوادون من حاد الله و رسوله”

    yes. and he also said “و جادلهم بالتي هي أحسن” =)

    it is true, Ayya has directed the debate towards what she hates about Islam, and our job is to refute any false claims… isnt that what we’ve been doing all along?

    listen everyone, I really dont want the debate to end like this. but if this is gonna be the end then let me say my final words:

    الله نور السماوات و الأرض مثل نوره كمشكاة فيها مصباح المصباح في زجاجة الزجاجة كأنها كوكب دري

    _______________

    قل يا أيها الكافرون لا أعبد ما تعبدون ولا أنتم
    ابدون ما أعبد ولا أنا عابد ما عبدتم ولا أنتم عابدون ما أعبد لكم دينكم ولي دين
    _______________

    if this debate stops being personal, and starts going somewhere again, i will post

    till then,

    السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته و على من اتبع الهدى

    =)

    Reply

  75. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 21:26:47

    Rekaby
    “and our job is to refute any false claims”
    I don’t see that you have refuted any claims; I only saw a repetition of the ready-made answers. In other wards; copy-paste answers, which was expected.

    The tsunami bunch
    And I am surprised at you guys; if you are so sure about your beliefs, you have your blogs to state them, and the Net is full of your likes, why would you come to a disbeliever’s blog? Are you trying to change my beliefs? Or do you have doubts about yours?

    For someone who was born a Muslim, and was dedicated to religion for quite sometime, and reached my beliefs after years of struggle and research, not to say that this research has ended though, but I don’t think that a mere comment, most of which is still fresh in memory from years of directed education, and repetition, will change my mind. Nor, this is the right place for me to question my beliefs.
    As I said; you asked my opinion and I stated it, you don’t accept it? Fine. And I also gave you the full freedom to state yours. Remember that blogs are open to the public, and they have their own mind to decide which argument to accept or reject; whether it’s yours or mine. So no need to get personal.
    And when I criticize Islam or religion in general, I convey a personal point of view, why would you take that as a personal insult? I do not believe that religion; so long it’s affecting my life and is a part of it, is beyond criticism. And mind you; I will not stop doing that in the future.

    Reply

  76. AyyA
    Jan 11, 2007 @ 22:11:05

    And btw Rekaby

    The statement I made in” and divorce decision is his sole right. And if she wishes to divorce him, she has to pay a price.”

    I meant khul3; where a woman has to pay to get her freedom, if the man refuses the divorce. If you haven’s heard about that before, please ask the ones who know about sharee3a.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: