Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Life of Muhammad - BBC2 : 9.00pm
Options
Comments
-
-
See, like i said the verses, which wibbs has posted, have some context and you are applying that verse out of context..... Here is another verse in exchange of your claim....Thats not what that verse is about according to any searches I've done. It actually is saying that the best way to be safe from Muslims is to convert, otherwise you run the risk of being attacked by them.
http://quran.com/60/8
if you learn quran from twisted brain they won't tell you the truth...
The Quran also says that, in their capacity of being human, every person is worthy of respect:
here is another verse..
http://quran.com/17/70
what violent passages? Do you know the violence of non-believers against Prophet of Islam...... These passages were revealed in response of non-believer's violence against muslims... If someone slap on your face without any reason then you are allowed to slap his face.... Is it violence?That is just what Muslim apologists have come up with to try and explain away the more violent passages of the quaran. If they were being attacked, why would they need to be inspired to go to war?
“violent behavior is defined as intentional physically aggressive behavior against another person." So Muslims didn't start violence, it's the non believer who were aggressive against Muslims and Prophet Islam.... Clearly you don't know the situation/society in which quran was revealed.... Because you are living on bed of roses.... When you will burn you will learn....
reference please.according to some studies of the quaran, Muhammad was attempting to redefine persecution in order to convince the Muslims that they were under it.
Is there any other book which could refinde the course of history... See, history, how Prophet muhammad refine the course of history....We could make the same point that someone who uses just one book to define their world view also hasn't switched on the brain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad
please provide reference, don't pick verses of quran to make your own context...the same Allah that promised to send Muslims to hell if they didn't pick up the sword against the infidels?
No, women aren't corrupting humanity, it's the ideology i.e "sex symbols" which can corrupt hearts and minds of innocents---- displaying parts of women to attract customers ----in the movies/daramas---- to trade her in the name of freedom----again with the "women are corrupting humanity" nonsense?
There is difference between control and responsibility. It is your responsibility to guide what is best for your family.......... In this sense you are charge of your family/your sons/your daughter/your wife.... So what is problem with it.... It is your responsibility to provide best environment.... is there any problem with this charge/So men have to control women because islam views men as unable to treat women as equals? If you tell men (as islam seems do by the content of your posts) that they control women, how do you expect them to treat them as equals?
In westren socieites the corruption of the family system is one of the worst consequences of the misuse of this charge...... Men are careless about this charge.....
No, i aint contradicting.....Islam favors education of both men and women.... but islam doesn't favor free mixing of men and women... Freedom isn't a woman should work open with men... The gravity that a man feels towards a woman, and a woman towards a man, is a natural phenomenon...It is fact and beautiful phrases and notions cannot cover up the basic truth. The mixing of women and men and the situation delivers the desire in them to draw closer...... It gives them chances to meet and counters on a regular basis. There are no hurdle in their path and their relationship progresses to the next level. Sooner they succumb to their desires.It happens all the time, and all around us. You see it,koth, every day with yours very eyes. .In the USA and other western societies , any person can choose to satisfy his or her sexual desires through illegitimate means.....It break no laws..... The society as whole will not flinch. The windows to evil are all wide open.Nobody can do anything against this evil. This all result of the free minglingYou're contradicting yourself now. You're not against education of women, as long as they don't break the orders of god. That's not freedom to pursue any education they like, it's just a very long leash.0 -
ok, don't address the point I made, just post up some "isn't Islam lovely" passages.See, like i said the verses, which wibbs has posted, have some context and you are applying that verse out of context..... Here is another verse in exchange of your claim....
http://quran.com/60/8
if you learn quran from twisted brain they won't tell you the truth...
The Quran also says that, in their capacity of being human, every person is worthy of respect:
here is another verse..
http://quran.com/17/70
Yes it is violence, and you agree based on the definition you provided.what violent passages? Do you know the violence of non-believers against Prophet of Islam...... These passages were revealed in response of non-believer's violence against muslims... If someone slap on your face without any reason then you are allowed to slap his face.... Is it violence?
“violent behavior is defined as intentional physically aggressive behavior against another person." So Muslims didn't start violence, it's the non believer who were aggressive against Muslims and Prophet Islam.... Clearly you don't know the situation/society in which quran was revealed.... Because you are living on bed of roses.... When you will burn you will learn....reference please.The only reason that this myth arose is the need for Muslim apologists to justify the more violent passages of the Qur’an’s second chapter, which was “revealed” shortly after Muhammad arrived in Medina. Passages from this chapter encourage believers to violence within the context of ending “tumult,” “oppression,” and “persecution.” Because of this, contemporary Muslim readers usually apply their personal definitions to these terms and assume that the Muslims in Medina must have been under attack at the time.
Unfortunately, what Muhammad meant by “persecution” is well-defined within the historical record, and it is quite different from the popular modern-day view. In fact, it was the Meccans who were acting in their own defense during this time.
It is an established fact that the Muslims in Medina were not under attack from Mecca when the second sura was written (following the hijra). There were no armies marching against them, nor any plans for such. The Meccans had no influence in this far-away town, and no Muslims were under persecution at the time by any stretch of the term as it is popularly understood today. According to the Sira (biography), the Meccans were quite content with leaving Muhammad alone following his eviction (even though he had made a pledge of war against them).
Common sense tells us that had the Muslims been under actual attack then it would not have been necessary to inspire them to war. If someone has broken into your home and is in the process of savaging your family, you do really need a formal command from Allah telling you to act in self-defense?
Muhammad was attempting to redefine persecution in order to convince the Muslims that they were under it. He wanted them to believe that the mere fact that the Meccans had evicted them to Medina and prevented their return was grounds for marching back with a vengeful army (ie. 2:193 – “persecution is worse than slaughter”).
SourceIs there any other book which could refinde the course of history... See, history, how Prophet muhammad refine the course of history....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad
pesky media putting women in front of a camera :rolleyes::rolleyes:No, women aren't corrupting humanity, it's the ideology i.e "sex symbols" which can corrupt hearts and minds of innocents---- displaying parts of women to attract customers ----in the movies/daramas---- to trade her in the name of freedom----
That doesn't explain the difference between control and responsibility. and based on your example, "responsibility" is control by another label.There is difference between control and responsibility. It is your responsibility to guide what is best for your family.......... In this sense you are charge of your family/your sons/your daughter/your wife.... So what is problem with it.... It is your responsibility to provide best environment.... is there any problem with this charge/
See? Men aren't controlling their women, downfall of society etc. etc. :rolleyes::rolleyes:In westren socieites the corruption of the family system is one of the worst consequences of the misuse of this charge...... Men are careless about this charge.....No, i aint contradicting.....Islam favors education of both men and women.... but islam doesn't favor free mixing of men and women... Freedom isn't a woman should work open with men... The gravity that a man feels towards a woman, and a woman towards a man, is a natural phenomenon...It is fact and beautiful phrases and notions cannot cover up the basic truth. The mixing of women and men and the situation delivers the desire in them to draw closer...... It gives them chances to meet and counters on a regular basis. There are no hurdle in their path and their relationship progresses to the next level. Sooner they succumb to their desires.It happens all the time, and all around us. You see it,koth, every day with yours very eyes. .In the USA and other western societies , any person can choose to satisfy his or her sexual desires through illegitimate means.....It break no laws..... The society as whole will not flinch. The windows to evil are all wide open.Nobody can do anything against this evil. This all result of the free mingling
Yes freedom is exactly that. The alternative is that we lock up the women because men, according to your posts, men will sexually assault otherwise.
yeah, you really view men and women as equals. :rolleyes::rolleyes:If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Ahhhh you gave me link of site which is highly critical of IslamMuslim historians don't agree with you on that.
describing muslim historian..... See, it is your wish to prefer twisted minds .... You can learn only bias from such sites not truth..... Can a orthodox christian or jew tell you thethe truth about Islam.... use your own brain while using the brain of others....
What illustrated above and who is illustrating, have your ever wonder?.... I guess, you don't!!!! can a dishonest person will give you the real of definition of honesty.... Make some sense comrade or you will lose the battle.... The sole purpose of such sites is to spread hatred/lies for which they are being paid......Not so, as illustrated above, muhammad ordered raids in which many people were killed. Now he may not have killed them by his own hand, but he did order the raiding parties to attack.
Islam doesn't support rape, islam is against rape--- that is very clearly written in quran.... Western societies have damaged their ideology that is based purely on wishful thinking and false assumption.... Now..... the tactic is old which you have been using to blame islam/muslim.... I give you the clear proof.....And yet, in Norway almost 100% of sexual attacks between 2005-2010 were carried out by Muslim men, 83 out of 86 reported cases.
So it seems that Muslim men in Norway are the "bold" ones.
Friday night on Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, guest host Laura Ingraham said the terror attacks in Norway that killed of at least 92 people appeared “to be the work, once again, of Muslim extremists.”
Although it was reported by one terrorism analyst that a jihadist group claimed responsibility for the attack, it was later revealed that the attack was carried out by a 32-year-old conservative Christian who was strongly opposed to multiculturalism and Islam.
Why you don't look around----It really is shocking that your faith teaches you that men are sex-crazed creatures that women need to be protected from. Maybe one day you'll cast of the shackles of that medieval way of thinking.
must i remind what lies media is spreading against muslims and islam..... This is pure racist bigotry ......Your media love quoting muslim. So therefore anyone not white is muslim coz you all love to hate muslims. That's how media is brainwashing you against Islam and muslims......Must I remind you of the sex crime stats from Norway again? The country where it's almost exclusively Muslim men attacking women.
Muslim faith is guarantee if you truly believe in muslim faith.....True, it's because of rapists that women feel unsafe. But following the Muslim faith is no guarantee that a man won't sexually assault a woman.
Anyone who is not white is muslim.... right!!!--In fact, in Norway as I mentioned earlier, the odds are extremely high that a woman will be sexually assaulted by a Muslim man.0 -
-
sorry, I forgot you only accept the quran as evidence in this discussion:rolleyes:Ahhhh you gave me link of site which is highly critical of Islam
describing muslim historian..... See, it is your wish to prefer twisted minds .... You can learn only bias from such sites not truth..... Can a orthodox christian or jew tell you thethe truth about Islam.... use your own brain while using the brain of others....
I'm just browsing the web and posting stuff that contradicts your points. Using the excuse that everyone hates muslims isn't doing anything to disprove what I post.What illustrated above and who is illustrating, have your ever wonder?.... I guess, you don't!!!! can a dishonest person will give you the real of definition of honesty.... Make some sense comrade or you will lose the battle.... The sole purpose of such sites is to spread hatred/lies for which they are being paid......
This may shock you, but when people started blaming muslims for the violence, I actually questioned where was the evidence for such a claim.Islam doesn't support rape, islam is against rape--- that is very clearly written in quran.... Western societies have damaged their ideology that is based purely on wishful thinking and false assumption.... Now..... the tactic is old which you have been using to blame islam/muslim.... I give you the clear proof.....
Friday night on Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, guest host Laura Ingraham said the terror attacks in Norway that killed of at least 92 people appeared “to be the work, once again, of Muslim extremists.”
Although it was reported by one terrorism analyst that a jihadist group claimed responsibility for the attack, it was later revealed that the attack was carried out by a 32-year-old conservative Christian who was strongly opposed to multiculturalism and Islam.
I don't deny that there are people who are quite hostile to islam but that doesn't mean you can dismiss everyone who doesn't agree with your perspective.
who mentioned anything about non-white people being muslim??Why you don't look around----
must i remind what lies media is spreading against muslims and islam..... This is pure racist bigotry ......Your media love quoting muslim. So therefore anyone not white is muslim coz you all love to hate muslims. That's how media is brainwashing you against Islam and muslims......Muslim faith is guarantee if you truly believe in muslim faith.....Anyone who is not white is muslim.... right!!!--
that's a very racist attitude you have there. You're the only one who mentioned skin colour, I mentioned religion, not race as being a common trait amongst the sex assault cases.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59041
No I hope notNow you can show me quotes from Hadeeths which contradict this, but PERSONALLY I hold the word of the Quran above the word of man.
I hope I haven't lost you and that this answer is acceptable.
and thank you for the time and effort J. My answer? I could go through it with a fine tooth comb and suggest it's a bit of semantic sleight of hand to make it appear more acceptable to the morals of today(which BTW is a good thing IMHO). But I'd compare the idea to a similar "remake" suggested by liberal Muslim scholars concerning Muhammad's so called child bride Aisha(sp) where they seek to make her older with some dodgy maths.
1) if faced with two options, one simple, one overly complex in interpretation, I'd go for the simple every time. Or one has to come to the obvious conclusion that something so open to said interpretations must not be at all clear in the first place. Hardly the output of a deity, more likely the work of man(or men) and not an especially subtle one. Or a deity whose prime purpose it to confuse.
2) Context. Oh yes the C word. In this case historical context. In the case of Aisha, the very earliest Muslims and Muslims scholars show no issue with her age. If they did think it odd, then they would likely have quietly dropped it out of the stories, or would have changed dates etc to make it more acceptable. To be fair to early Islamic scholars and sources and unlike Christians before them, they were not afraid to leave in some unflattering parts. To their credit they were "warts and all". Indeed though I find Muhammed a confusing figure, sometimes very sound, sometimes very unpredictable and sometimes downright dangerous, I do admire him for one thing, his honesty, both in good and bad. I'm not surprised he was considered and lauded as an honest businessman before he got religion.
But it clearly was acceptable and not in need of explanation and not just among the people of Islam. Child brides were going on until very recently in the west among some cultures and very common in centuries past. Like I said earlier in the thread Jerry Lee Lewis at 23 saw nothing wrong in his staunchly religious cultural background* with marrying his barely 13 year old cousin. He railed against others "prejudice" in fact. Neither did the families nor the minister who married them nor the state in which they were married see anything wrong. That's in America in the late 1950's. So I personally believe Aisha was a 12 year old when he married her. And believe it or not I woudn't condemn him for it. I most certainly would not do him the insult of calling him a paedophile as so many do. He wasn't. Plus if the stories are to beleived there was a lot of love between them. We're applying modern knowledge and cultural mores on a very different level of knowledge and very different cultural mores. Hindsight is 20/20. Of course this does beg the question how a God, prophet, faith and book for all times and all peoples got that part wrong for all times and peoples. Not just that part either.
On the context and slave girl part? Like I said if this was considered a bad thing and against Islam then the Hadeeth would have quite clearly stated it was against it. It doesn't. These are among the texts that give Muslims the Sunnah(life) of the prophet. The only ones I would quote are Bukhari and Muslim, not the obscure ones. Now if something in Hadeeth is considered against the Quran it is considered weak in transmission and likely incorrect. This has always been the case in Islamic theology and theological criticism. Since they were first collated indeed. So why do the Hadeeth clearly say what your quote considers the opposite and has done since they were written down and considered to be the strongest in transmission? It's not as if it's mentioned once, nor twice in one obscure passage. It's repeated more than a few times in both the top hadeeths and all the other ones. It's got a very consistent line. So how come the very earliest Muslims, indeed followers who had known the man personally, had not put their hands up and said "eh no, that's not what he said/did?". Cultural memory alone would remain even a century later. The Quran is supposed to have been memorised by 1000's before it was collated, yet the two most reliable hadeeth with the best cases for strong transmission get this point wrong? Repeatedly?
I would suggest that the Quranic verses say what they say and mean what they mean and the hadeeth backs this up and the Quran backs the hadeeth up. And the very earliest Muslims and for centuries afterward saw no issue with this or any of the other stuff surrounding women. slaves, war booty etc.
*his cousin was Jerry Falwell(sp) nuff said....Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
-
-
-
I forgive you for your childish thinking, but don't think you deserve to be forgiven for your childish behavior, ... being so rude, unintelligent, childish, selfish---- See, you picked a paragraph from my reply by neglecting the whole reply---- after that you made your own logic to mislead people
And people appreciated wow!!!!!, the kid had done a great job for being dishonest--- ---- don't made your own logic to torch your own desires--- The desires which are growing stronger and stronger with the passage of time.... actually i am saying, The free mixing of men and women creates environment to feeds the desire in them to draw closer and that is what is happening in majority of Western or Eastern societies--- Islamic countries are no excuse because they are too under the influences of western civilizations/media--- .... I often recommend people to watch movies---- Perhaps by watching this movies you will better understand what i saying--- Movies reflect culture /behavior and thoughts--- Not too old just ---50 years
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053604/
you tell Zillah that he's wrong with his accusation and then essentially go on to prove his point
You've constantly said that the western world is suffering due to the freedoms that women have. And because of that freedom, women are viewed as sex objects by the men who have no control over themselves.:rolleyes:
Just so you know, Pakistan has 97% of the population made up by Muslims, so your claim that 30% of the population is islamaic is way off.Majority of Pakistanis are uneducated-- and Pakistani culture isn't Islamic culture who told you that, Pakistan is mixed society, half inspired by Indian culture---half by Western culture---Half by Islamic culture---.
Illiterate people can practice a religion. They can attend temple/church and listen to the sermons. The only problem is that they can't read the holy books and therefore see if the message being preached is in keeping with the holy book.Now tell, is it problem with Islam or the uneducated person living in that society--- You gave the link--- A country with 45.5% litracy rate can't be your excuse--- See 45.5% means if you are matric pass or you can read your and write your name you literate person..... and 55.5% percent are ill irate-- it means they are just passing their days and life and even they don't know how women should be treated as per islamic ways---
you are given a story of how a woman was badly treated by Muslim men and your response is, "well she wasn't a real muslim because she left her religion"?The story of women, is posted on anti islamic site--- So, doesn't make sense, a women has quit her faith due to ignorance of ignorant people--- It is actually making her case doubt full..... SO, should i also post stories/ideas from anti atheist/agnostic sites to make my points--- If i do then what is difference between you me...... Please be honest in believing what you believe
You will see such type of stories/ideas/site throughout the history to malign name of justice---- It is demand of honesty!!!--- A true muslim women who truly believes in Allah and the last day, won't quit her faith due to ignorance or bad behavior of ignorant people
You don't even respond to the sexual molestation she experienced, you just point the finger at the women. Now you make it sound like muslim have to shut up and endure sexual molestation as part of their faith.
And you're continually saying that Muslims can't commit crimes because they're muslim, even when articles are given proving that to be wrong. They're human, just like the rest of us.No, this isn't because of Islam, don't blame islam for ignorance--- This is because they are ignorant about islam, living under a mix culture, A culture which is heavily inspired by western culture/unislamic culture--- --- please be honest, do you really think a man who doesn't know about islam and he is illirate/uneducated---- Can you blame islam for crimes of that person---that's what you are doing----
Nice little "get out of jail" situation you've created there. So how do you balance islam being a religion of peace and justice, when you have repeatedly called for women not to be allowed work in the company of men?This is because you have understood islam by watching tv programs---by chatting on internet-- by looking into ignorant people's mind who legally call themselves mulisms..... Because your media love to quote islam as religion of hatred..... Islam is religion of peace and justice, if people aren't following islam then problem is with people not with islam---That's true, western world has made women an object of advertisement/sex and the same notion is corrupting muslims and other societies.... be honest in looking into your own collar---- I am honest into looking my --- What you pointed about muslims countries--- I agree with it why because i am looking the world as general but it seems you are favoring your culture --- Majority of muslims countries aren't islamic at all--the reason for this is simple---due to Bristh invasion into these countries---these countries have lost their true link with islam---- Now majority of these countries are under the rules, which are supported by Wesren/American government .... I give the example of Pakistan---- Each Pakistani government always follow and obey American government---- If you don't believe me then you should look into river of history--- So don't blame islam, Blame tyrants of the world who don't want justice---who are greedy / hungry and thirsty to occupy Muslims lands--- Open your eyes and see who is going to pay for these mistakes---
'Nato admits that deaths of 8 boys were a mistake’, The Times, February 'Assault force killed family by mistake in raid, claims Afghan father’, The Times, February 25, 2010. URL="http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/03/natos-fire-sale-one-dead-afghan-child-2000/#identifier_1_15171"]↩[/URL
Amazing, so even when a government and nation is almost 100% muslim, they are led astray all too easily by western influences. I find it extremely hard to believe that all muslims are devoid of any backbone.
You really need to stop pointing the finger at everyone else, it's not going to address any problems within the muslim world.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,112 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59041
+1you tell Zillah that he's wrong with his accusation and then essentially go on to prove his point
To be fair to Dead One he has a point here. 97% may be Muslims, but the overall cultural influences vary. Kinda like I dunno, say a French Catholic and an Irish Catholic. Both Catholic, but different culture. I think Dead One is saying only a third are middle eastern Arabic Islamic in culture.Just so you know, Pakistan has 97% of the population made up by Muslims, so your claim that 30% of the population is islamaic is way off.
Which brings an interesting aside. To some Muslims the only Islam is an Arabic one. Of course the Saudi sect pushes this notion with a lot of cash behind it. Malay Muslims would be different in culture to Saudi Muslims. Less "arabic".
Yea and we know how well that went with Christianity, especially Catholicism in this very country. Not good.Illiterate people can practice a religion. They can attend temple/church and listen to the sermons. The only problem is that they can't read the holy books and therefore see if the message being preached is in keeping with the holy book.
Pretty much. This I've also found common among some Muslim men. It's so built in they just don't see it. It's all they've known. Again the more "arabic/Saudi" IslamYou don't even respond to the sexual molestation she experienced, you just point the finger at the women. Now you make it sound like muslim have to shut up and endure sexual molestation as part of their faith.
This is one of the commonest lines you will hear from Muslims on this point and they do have some points. EG suicide bombing is NOT Islamic. Neither is targeting civilians in war. But it is also an excuse in other ways. There has never been a perfect Islamic state. Even under Muhammed. It's an impossibility. Look at teh history of Islamic states before the west got involved. Beyond an all too brief flowering of science and culture(when they weren't particularly religious surprise surprise) they've been left behind by the rest of the world.Islam is religion of peace and justice, if people aren't following islam then problem is with people not with islam---
IE Arabic Islam.Majority of muslims countries aren't islamic at all--the reason for this is simple---due to Bristh invasion into these countries---these countries have lost their true link with islam----
In this I do agree with Dead One or at least see his point. The Muslim lands all across the middle east to Pakistan and beyond have been royally screwed over by European and later American and Soviet powerplays. The Middle east in particular, but now with this "war on terror" Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. They're looking at Iran now. Never mind the headfcuk that is Israeli/Arab relations. The west most definitely sowed the seeds of "Islamic" reaction. The area was carved up by western superpowers for their own ends for well over a century. Few readers of this thread would feel differently to Dead One if they were Arab/Muslims. Hell I've heard Arab Christians and Jews say damn near the same thing.Now majority of these countries are under the rules, which are supported by Wesren/American government .... I give the example of Pakistan---- Each Pakistani government always follow and obey American government---- If you don't believe me then you should look into river of history--- So don't blame islam, Blame tyrants of the world who don't want justice---who are greedy / hungry and thirsty to occupy Muslims lands---
Even this Islamic tag is quite recent. I'm old enough to remember the 70's with the PLO and Egypt/Israel/Jordan stuff going on and Islam(or any religion) was pretty much never mentioned. The PLO even self identified as marxist in many ways. The yanks weren't mentioning "Gawd" too often either. For me I'd point to the Satanic Verses/Iran revolution as the first point I clearly heard Islam being pushed as a reason for this. Then add in the USSR occupation of Afghanistan and the Mujahideen, who the west ploughed billions at while supporting the most fundamentalist form of Islam through the Saudis who were only to happy to play along with. Again some western powers sowed the seeds of the return of medieval Islam. Hell they bought the fields, dug them, planted the seeds and added fertiliser. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran were all once many times more progressive and Muslim than today.
When western culture has screwed you over, has betrayed your trust, has supported your enemies, has killed members of your family and looks like it's starting another crusade, I'm not surprised many Muslims regard it as the great satan and while doing so get rid of all the really good stuff that western civilisation has come up with.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Sorry Wibbs forgot about this until now. Anyhoo....
1.Ok get ya now. I think my answer to part 2 will answer this too. If not let me know.
2. I'll answer for this and the part later on when you mention something in the same vein. (BTW how do I multi quote?
)
The difference as I see it is that the hadeeths are a collection of many stories from many sources. The Quran in its entirety has only one source, the Prophet (PBUH). Therefore during the time of the prophet I as a Muslim believe that he taught this single version to his followers and by the time of his death there must have been thousands who knew it (Albeit orally). If someone had an argument as to what was said in certain part of the Quran they need only go to the Prophet or one of his close followers to rectify it.
Contrast this to the Hadeeths. Like I said many stories from many sources. For someone to rectify a mistake in one of these he/she would have to locate and travel to the only sources. A task I think which would be very difficult if the source happened to be some farmer on top of a mountain that the prophet once met.
So as people failed to address these errors they became established 'facts'.
Now to the specific point of Ma malakat aymanukum this one is different I believe.
The reason it has not been altered on such pages like Wikipedia as you said is because it does mean 'right hand' and it means 'your oaths'. (in fact it can also mean; 'what you rightfully have', 'what you already have' and 'what is rightfully yours')
Right hands is the accepted meaning by many in this case. However as shown by my previous post it should be translated 'as your oaths'. Its a bit tricky to explain if you don't speak Arabic but I hope you get what I mean here.
So again for that Wikipedia page for every person who comes along and has done his research and changes the meaning 2/3 others will change it back honestly thinking it means right hand. And also for any debate the same thing will happen. Now I don't why or since when this became the 'official narrative' but perhaps you can tell me?
Anyway I hope I have answered all you wanted answered please let me know if not. Also I have not proof read this so forgive any spelling or grammatical errors.0
Advertisement