How Shariah, an Intended Compass for Peace, Became a Tool of Oppression

reply to post by babloyi


Read the poster who also replied. He does not seem to embrace Hadith. And yes, many reject Hadith.

Those new converts to Islam are not well-versed in Shariah, who carries the book with them always? The Hadiths are the same, who carries it around with them?

But you have two ways of looking at Hadiths, either they really are true and do expose Mohammed, or they are a collection of second hand and third hand information passed down. But even they say that it follows the chain of authority and that's how they judge it to be true.

Even though the Sunni say they don't follow temporary marriage, which I am glad you brought up, some do. They say it's frowned upon, their imams say it is not good, however, they do. Shi'a and Sunni were separated because of the war to determine who was the rightful successor to Mohammed. Aisha was then sent to live in a house and never got out of it until she died. And yet everything we know about Aisha comes from the Hadiths.

So they can't give credence to Aisha being real, and being called "Mother of the Muslims" if they are Qu'ran only. Either she was real or she was not. Was Aisha really a wife of Mohammed or not?

She is not mentioned in the Qu'ran. Therefore, Hadiths apply to her existence, then the Hadiths are what to use.

The poster who replied to me did not want the Hadiths used a source because they know the negative impact in the Hadiths, the poster also calls Mohammed "the prophet", so to me, that kind of leans toward Islam.
Before we go further, did Aisha exist or not? She is not in the Qu'ran.

reply to post by FlyersFan


try and address the part about Kedar and Sela and the wilderness.

No Israelite prophet operated in that part of the world.
No Israelite prophet "shamed" the idolaters of that part of the world.

Only Mohammad fits the bill. But doesn't matter since you don't believe the OT/

reply to post by wildtimes

If you disagree with the premise of the article (which I found doing a random surf), then please state WHY

You seem to be implying that "shariah" is synonymous with "terrorism".

sk0rpi0n
reply to post by wildtimes

 

If you disagree with the premise of the article (which I found doing a random surf), then please state WHY

You seem to be implying that "shariah" is synonymous with "terrorism".

Would you like to see all of Sharia law?

Yes, it is legal terrorism for them.

Yes, they have a legal right under Sharia to kill non-Muslims and apostates. Simply put, Sharia tells them so.

reply to post by WarminIndy


I have to say, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Is your entire post a response to this?

babloyi

WarminIndy
There are Muslims who are Quran only and there are Muslims who believe the Hadiths. If you really want to hear a tragic story, read the Hadiths, it talks about Aisha's feelings about being sexually abused from Mohammed. And she had very clear doubts about Mohammed and Allah.

I'd be interested in seeing these. I assume they're from authenticated Hadith?

I was simply asking WHERE you got this information from. You responded with telling me that some people don't accept the Hadith? What has that got to do with it?
"Mother of the Muslims" was a title used for all of the Muhammad's wives. After the Battle of the Camel, Aisha retired from politics, but she was certainly not under house arrest, nor never left her house. There is record of her debating and discussing with others, and having noted down specific opinions and religious matters.

I was simply asking WHERE you got this information from (that you posted in that post that I responded to). I made no judgement on any source you provided, because you didn't provide any source.

sk0rpi0n
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

try and address the part about Kedar and Sela and the wilderness.

No Israelite prophet operated in that part of the world.
No Israelite prophet "shamed" the idolaters of that part of the world.

Only Mohammad fits the bill. But doesn't matter since you don't believe the OT/

Have you taken the Shahada?

Do you bear witness there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger?

If you believe Allah is the same as Yaweh or Ahura Mazda, since they all have to be the same, right? Then I would reasonably assume you could say "I bear witness there is no god but Yaweh"? Or you could say "there is no god but Ahura Mazda".

Can you do that?

babloyi
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

I have to say, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Is your entire post a response to this?

WarminIndy
There are Muslims who are Quran only and there are Muslims who believe the Hadiths. If you really want to hear a tragic story, read the Hadiths, it talks about Aisha's feelings about being sexually abused from Mohammed. And she had very clear doubts about Mohammed and Allah.

I'd be interested in seeing these. I assume they're from authenticated Hadith?

I was simply asking WHERE you got this information from. You responded with telling me that some people don't accept the Hadith? What has that got to do with it?
"Mother of the Muslims" was a title used for all of the Muhammad's wives. After the Battle of the Camel, Aisha retired from politics, but she was certainly not under house arrest, or never left her house. There is record of her debating and discussing with others, and having noted down specific opinions and religious matters.

I was simply asking WHERE you got this information from (that you posted in that post that I responded to). I made no judgement on any source you provided, because you didn't provide any source.

I referred you to the poster before. Read his post.

Islamic Forum

Oh, there ARE those who claim Muslim and reject Hadith. Interesting.

reply to post by WarminIndy

Which poster? This is a large thread, and I see no one who responded to or asked about that same section of post that I did.
Yes, there are muslims that wholesale reject the Hadith. What has that got to do with anything? You made a statement (in some very authoritative definitive way) about Aisha's feelings and so on. I simply asked you to provide the source you got these from. You seem to be over-complicating it all.

Also, just a point in response to your last post to sk0rpi0n. The Quran says what is translated as
"Say: 'Call upon Allah, or call upon Al-Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names.'"

As long as the intended meaning behind the name you use is the same, then it is the same.

reply to post by WarminIndy


When I entered this thread - I was hoping (based on a few words that I'd read) that it wasn't actually going to devolve into another childish (f only it were only childish) Muslim bashing thread

Again I see - Christian nations have never waged an unrighteous war

Contriving only happens in the other camp

Looking at ourselves in the mirror can only mean one thing - Christian bashing

And I had so much hope

Funny thing about hope.....

:-)

Spiramirabilis
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

When I entered this thread - I was hoping (based on a few words that I'd read) that it wasn't actually going to devolve into another childish (f only it were only childish) Muslim bashing thread

Again I see - Christian nations have never waged an unrighteous war

Contriving only happens in the other camp

Looking at ourselves in the mirror can only mean one thing - Christian bashing

And I had so much hope

Funny thing about hope.....

:-)

The thing about that is this, when we mention Hadith, there is a rejection to it, when we mention Qu'ran, we are told either we don't understand the context or we don't speak Arabic. But when Qu'ranic verse are used and the different translations applied, then we are told that the sources are wrong.

But if Muslims would be objective about their faith, then we would not have to descend to such levels. But the core faith within Muslims is that they cannot be objective about their faith. So, you have to directly challenge their subjectivity.

Do you understand that there can be no objectivity for them to approach the Qu'ran, the Hadiths, the Sunna or Shariah law? They aren't permitted to take the objective view. If they could, this would be a better world.

That's the heart of the matter, how they are to respond to the Qu'ran and the Hadiths. Can I therefore suggest an objective question and receive an objective answer? Certainly not. So how is that fair in a forum that is supposed to be objective?

Because they have to follow the subjective view, then they can't answer outside of it, so it seems they can insulate themselves from criticism. The Shahada is the first step in identification, you know that and I know that. And that's where it begins for Muslims because they are no longer allowed to take an objective view of Mohammed.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Best you save this for someone who's going to read it

My days of trying to have a rational conversation with the Red Queen are over

I was lured into this thread not by you - but by one single, thoughtful, intelligent line by the OP

My fault for not keeping my eye on the ball

:-)

carry on

sk0rpi0n
try and address the part about Kedar and Sela and the wilderness.

Irrelevant because THIS PART doesn't fit. You can't take a bible passage of 20 or 30 lines and say it fits someone because 3 or 4 of the lines MIGHT fit. (and even that's debatable). Muhammad is the exact opposite of these lines ... Isaiah 42 clearly isn't Muhammad.

42 “Here is my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen one in whom I delight;
I will put my Spirit on him,
and he will bring justice to the nations.
2 He will not shout or cry out,
or raise his voice in the streets.
3 A bruised reed he will not break,
and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out.

... think whatever you want .

Spiramirabilis
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Best you save this for someone who's going to read it

My days of trying to have a rational conversation with the Red Queen are over

I was lured into this thread not by you - but by one single, thoughtful, intelligent line in the OP

My fault for not keeping my eye on the ball

:-)

carry on

Already, three came on here to challenge Hadiths. And now one has applied Mohammed to the Bible. Do you see the problem now? Not only must they take Islam as subjective, they then have to take a subjective view of Mohammed everywhere they think Mohammed is at, even where Mohammed is not at.

So how does one then address that problem?

reply to post by WarminIndy

So how does one then address that problem?

Your best hope is to try and even spot the problem

Good luck with that

I'm out

Have yourself a lovely day

reply to post by FlyersFan


FlyersFan

They even claim Mohammed was in the Baghavad Gita. I wonder how that can be, seeing as how the Baghavad Gita is a polytheistic book.

Their imams have really stretched a lot in the last few years, this concept of Mohammed in the Bible in recent.

reply to post by WarminIndy

There are references to Muhammad being in previous scriptures in the Quran and Hadith, as well as distinct from muslim scholars all the way back to the 8th century. It is hardly recent.

babloyi
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

There are references to Muhammad being in previous scriptures in the Quran and Hadith, as well as distinct from muslim scholars all the way back to the 8th century. It is hardly recent.

Ok, let's see if it really was Mohammed and not just Mohammed saying that to support his prophethood in his own eyes. Why didn't the Quraysh say so, and yet they were Jewish?

But then again, Mohammed was accused of being a Sabean. What do you think, could Mohammed have been a Sabean?

Erbad [Al Erbad son of Saria] said that the Prophet Muhammad said, “Indeed I was with Allah as the Seal of the Prophets when Adam lay in his clay shape before the soul was breathed into him.”

Hmm, interesting, isn't it. God said "Let Us make man in our image and after our likeness". So was Mohammed a god? Because the Elohim were there. Is Mohammed part of the Elohim?

ETA, any source I post comes from the Noble Qu'ran, Bukhari Hadiths (and various others depending in question) and Imam Shafi Jurisprundce Shariah law.

The above quote is from Imam Shafi

It is available as a free download from Allah.com

reply to post by WarminIndy

I'm still curious to see the original source of your claims about Aisha. Could you please tell me where you got those from?

WarminIndy
Ok, let's see if it really was Mohammed and not just Mohammed saying that to support his prophethood in his own eyes. Why didn't the Quraysh say so, and yet they were Jewish?

Eh?
The Quraish were not jewish (neither religiously, nor culturally).

WarminIndy
ETA, any source I post comes from the Noble Qu'ran, Bukhari Hadiths (and various others depending in question) and Imam Shafi Jurisprundce Shariah law.

The above quote is from Imam Shafi

Again, in case you missed it, Reliance of the Traveller was not written by Imam Shafi, neither is it part of the scripture. Al-Shafi wrote 3 books (A Musnad, Al-Risala, and Kitab al-Um), neither of which are considered scripture by anyone.

babloyi
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

I'm still curious to see the original source of your claims about Aisha. Could you please tell me where you got those from?

WarminIndy
Ok, let's see if it really was Mohammed and not just Mohammed saying that to support his prophethood in his own eyes. Why didn't the Quraysh say so, and yet they were Jewish?

Eh?
The Quraish were not jewish (neither religiously, nor culturally).

WarminIndy
ETA, any source I post comes from the Noble Qu'ran, Bukhari Hadiths (and various others depending in question) and Imam Shafi Jurisprundce Shariah law.

The above quote is from Imam Shafi

Again, in case you missed it, Reliance of the Traveller was not written by Imam Shafi, neither is it part of the scripture. Al-Shafi wrote 3 books (A Musnad, Al-Risala, and Kitab al-Um), neither of which are considered scripture by anyone.

This proved my point. No matter what source you use, they object to it if it questions Mohammed. I gave you think link source, it was formerly called Reliance of the Traveler, which you can buy for $30 anywhere, but this one was free.

Do you object to Allah.com as being a fairly reliable Islamic source?

Hadiths

Just so you know I am not pulling punches, there's the Hadiths offered from one site.

Sahih Buhkari

Narrated 'Aisha: (the mother of the faithful believers) The commencement of the Divine Inspiration to Allah's Apostle was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright day light, and then the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship (Allah alone) continuously for many days before his desire to see his family. He used to take with him the journey food for the stay and then come back to (his wife) Khadija to take his food like-wise again till suddenly the Truth descended upon him while he was in the cave of Hira. The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read. The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?' Thereupon he caught me for the third time and pressed me, and then released me and said, 'Read in the name of your Lord, who has created (all that exists) has created man from a clot. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous." (96.1, 96.2, 96.3) Then Allah's Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, "Cover me! Cover me!" They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, "I fear that something may happen to me." Khadija replied, "Never! By Allah, Allah will never disgrace you.

reply to post by WarminIndy

You haven't proven any point. You haven't provided any sources yet, so I can't "not accept" them. "Reliance of the Traveller" is not a hadith book. It is a fiqh manual written in the 13th century- it holds no supreme authority for muslims in general, or even followers of the shafi school of thought. It gives no details about Aisha or her feelings.
I do not know anything about Allah.com, but it provided no hadith that mentioned what you said either.

It really is starting to feel like you're dodging my question now, or we're both operating on different wavelengths and you're answering questions I didn't ask.
For reference, here it is again:

WarminIndy
If you really want to hear a tragic story, read the Hadiths, it talks about Aisha's feelings about being sexually abused from Mohammed. And she had very clear doubts about Mohammed and Allah.

babloyi
I'd be interested in seeing these. I assume they're from authenticated Hadith?