Let me get this straight: are traditionalists disbelievers or not?
-
So far, no one has answered my inquiry. Everybody has beaten around the bush. -(
Because you answered it yourself (the second question thus far)
I was surprised to see many didnt consider traditionalists as disbelievers.
-
Peace,
A "kafir" is a person that is not trustworthy, a person that is aggressive and hurting people knowingly. This kind of people don't trust anyone neither, even the one that created them when it is him that is keeping their heart beating and their mind working, they are always scheming and planning to have more riches, be more powerful... They are selfish and abusive. They know the laws of this reality but only use them for their own profit or to hurt others, thus rejecting a part of these very laws, the laws of the god. Their behaviour is very well described in the scripture. Certainly, them adoring their ego more than anything else makes them from "al-mushkrine".
A "mushrik" is a person that has a blurred view of the reality. When one focuses on only one object in a scene, he is unable to see clearly the whole picture; this is the problem of ?al-mushrikeen?. They take objects, things, people, ideas from this creation and focus on them too much that they would kill for them. They are driven by desires and fantasies, be it theirs or someone else?s; fantasies detached from reality. They might trust the god, they might trust some of his laws, but they are led astray by the first group ?al-kuffar?. One who is dealing with such kind of people should be careful as his cannot expect their reactions, since they don?t fully follow the laws of this reality and might hurt him even unknowingly. It is like going to some places in India where they venerate cows, and try to slaughter your own cow for food; you cannot expect their reactions whilst some of them might be learned.
These 2 attributes gives a classification of people around, they might live under the same roof, in the same community, but still are different. You can find also those inclined to the peace and the trustworthy, to complete the spectrum of the human?s psyche.
This classification can be made besides any ?religious? affiliations; it works for every kind of people, for different regions and times.
So, people that you term as traditionalists (which may induce the idea of ?sacred? objects) are ?mushrikeen?, some of them are ?kafireen?. But remember that, not that long ago, many of us were (and might still are) one of them (mushrikeen), with all our good intentions, but the good washes away the bad fortunately, which is one of the laws of the god the creator.
This is but my understanding from the scripture, please feel free to correct if necessary.
-
Peace
it's not at all about sects. It's about believers and disbelievers. If you follow sources other than quran, are you a disbeliever or not?I believe that knowingly twisting the words of the Quran. Being aware of the contradictions between Quran and Hadith, yet still following the Hadith would make you a disbeliever.
Al
-
Do you mean to say that traditionalists are a sect and quranaloners are another?
This is precisley what I am saying. You can take the quran as your only source of knowledge of Deen, but you don't have to take on an unnecessary adjective (quranaloner), stick to your prefered group (quranaloners) and completely shun and have rivalry with the other groups (traditional muslims). If one does all of these things, then he/she is guilty of sectarianism and 'Kufr' no matter which sect they incline themselves to.
I dont get it. So according to yr logic, we must consider traditionalists and quranaloners as followin the same religion but divided into sect.
Well for starters, Deen is not religion. Shi'ah and Madhhab are more suitable to be understood as religion. But to answer your question, yes, they both say that they follow the Deen yet each of them goes his own seperate way to do his own thing while saying that his way is THE way and that the others got it totally wrong.
So far, no one has answered my inquiry. Everybody has beaten around the bush. -(
Your question has been answered, you're just not satisfied with the answer that was given to you.
More importantly, the very answer that you seek is all throughout the quran. It is our responsibility to read it and seek this answer ourselves.
Peace be with you,
Damon. -
This is precisley what I am saying. You can take the quran as your only source of knowledge of Deen, but you don't have to take on an unnecessary adjective (quranaloner), stick to your prefered group (quranaloners) and completely shun and have rivalry with the other groups (traditional muslims). If one does all of these things, then he/she is guilty of sectarianism and 'Kufr' no matter which sect they incline themselves to.
Well for starters, Deen is not religion. Shi'ah and Madhhab are more suitable to be understood as religion. But to answer your question, yes, they both say that they follow the Deen yet each of them goes his own seperate way to do his own thing while saying that his way is THE way and that the others got it totally wrong.
Your question has been answered, you're just not satisfied with the answer that was given to you.
More importantly, the very answer that you seek is all throughout the quran. It is our responsibility to read it and seek this answer ourselves.
Peace be with you,
Damon.I will second that.
Takfir stems from the inability to accept pluralism and limiting God's mercy only to those that follow a certain path.
The traditionalist problem is they each used the prophet as their spokesman and thus are incapable of accepting anybody else. We here have various differences and we debate them all the time. The difference is none of us can come up and say the prophet was asked about this question and he said so and so, or Umar was asked about this and he said so and so. We don't have those answers except what the Koran says. These arguments we have were held during the end of the Ummayids time but then each produced a hadith to thump the other opinion.
If there was all these hadiths and if the prophet talked about all these issues they claim he did then they would not be all these differences in the first place. But we know how these differences came about because these hadiths never existed prior to these differences or, at best, were not known by the vast majority including the religious debaters. They would not have been sects and madhabs if the prophet and his companions had and passed along all this clarification.
Anyways that is what they have know and therefore they are not able to accept an alternative opinion.
How can you accept an alternative opinion about Salat if you believe Gabriel asked the prophet about salat and the prophet said 5 tims and Gabriel confirmed its correctness. Of course if you believe both the prophet and Gabriel said Salat is 5 times a day then you are not going to be able to accept an alternative opinion. We are not talking about disagreeing, we are talking about not being able to accept.
But its wrong to say traditionalist are disbelievers or mushrikoon since the believe in God and judgement day. They are just like the Jews and the Talmud, gone astray.
-
Who are we to judge wheter a group of people labeled traditionalist should be labeled disbelievers or not...
You guys more and more becaming the Sunni's or Shia's scholar..
To them judging other people is a basic needs, a daily hobby.To me; judging other people is a bad habit..
With the standard you're applying to judge other people, the same standard will also be applied upon you, on the day of judgement.Peace
-
Who are we to judge wheter a group of people labeled traditionalist should be labeled disbelievers or not...
You guys more and more becaming the Sunni's or Shia's scholar..
To them judging other people is a basic needs, a daily hobby.To me; judging other people is a bad habit..
With the standard you're applying to judge other people, the same standard will also be applied upon you, on the day of judgement.Peace
Read the thread.
-
A "mushrik" is a person that has a blurred view of the reality. When one focuses on only one object in a scene, he is unable to see clearly the whole picture; this is the problem of ?al-mushrikeen?. They take objects, things, people, ideas from this creation and focus on them too much that they would kill for them. They are driven by desires and fantasies, be it theirs or someone else?s; fantasies detached from reality. They might trust the god, they might trust some of his laws, but they are led astray by the first group ?al-kuffar?. One who is dealing with such kind of people should be careful as his cannot expect their reactions, since they don?t fully follow the laws of this reality and might hurt him even unknowingly. It is like going to some places in India where they venerate cows, and try to slaughter your own cow for food; you cannot expect their reactions whilst some of them might be learned.
These 2 attributes gives a classification of people around, they might live under the same roof, in the same community, but still are different. You can find also those inclined to the peace and the trustworthy, to complete the spectrum of the human?s psyche.
This classification can be made besides any ?religious? affiliations; it works for every kind of people, for different regions and times.
So, people that you term as traditionalists (which may induce the idea of ?sacred? objects) are ?mushrikeen?, some of them are ?kafireen?. But remember that, not that long ago, many of us were (and might still are) one of them (mushrikeen), with all our good intentions, but the good washes away the bad fortunately, which is one of the laws of the god the creator.
This is but my understanding from the scripture, please feel free to correct if necessary.
Peace, is not a mushrik one who associates? Otherwise, I would agree with your comment.
Roshan
-
Who are we to judge wheter a group of people labeled traditionalist should be labeled disbelievers or not...
You guys more and more becaming the Sunni's or Shia's scholar..
To them judging other people is a basic needs, a daily hobby.To me; judging other people is a bad habit..
With the standard you're applying to judge other people, the same standard will also be applied upon you, on the day of judgement.Peace
Dear Jafar
Tarikh is not without point.There is such a difference of emaan between traditionalists and Quran aloners that either one of them is definitely out of Islam.Both cannot be 'muslim' at one time. -
I was surprised to see many didnt consider traditionalists as disbelievers. Some confessed they go to trad mosques and pray there, others say they participate in eid, some get offended by the fact that i mentioned from chapter 63, traditionalists are amongst hypocrites who utter a false shahada.
So guys, finally, what is yr real position concerning traditionalists? Bear in mind that this site itself has articles such as 'why do muslims lose?' or 'warning to our loved ones'Salam.
Traditionalists are not disbelievers, they are wrong believers, they have faith, they believe but they don't believe right, that's all and also scary, for them at least.
Peace.
-
Peace Roshan,
To "associate" is not bad by itself; I am now associating concepts with words, and associating these words to make sentences, and associating sentences with ideas... Association is one of the strongest capacities of humans, which helped us develop over the ages.
Now, for associating a thing with the god the creator, like me considering a chair as divine and praying to it hoping that it will help me in some situation would be stupid, I will not use it to sit on it if I am tired and it would hurt my feelings seeing others sitting on their chairs, which could result in an unexpected reaction from me towards people using their chair, and would cause me much trouble for nothing, just a false belief, and my life would be a living hell.
You can see that I would be acting out of the laws of this reality because a chair cannot be the creator. It is really as simple as that. You can see it in whatever religion you take all have some divine things, be it an object, a person, an idea. It is like considering the washing machine and its inventor as the same, it is indeed the worst misconception one can have, which prevents any further spiritual and material developement.
Many people know or believe there is a creator, but they go on further associating a thing from the creation with the creator, and that is the problem. And the worst are the people inventing such ideas of divinity of things and dragging the others with them into hell. One has to get his associations straight or straighten his relations, so to have a clearer view of this reality and elevate himself.
So YES a "mushrik billah" in the context of "al-quran" is one who associates a thing with the god.
-
So far, no one has answered my inquiry. Everybody has beaten around the bush. -(
Peace Tarikh,
I believe people here are trying to avoid being judgmental and divisive which is perhaps a respectable stance, but can lead to permanent vascillation. I'm not sure it's the attitude God intended for the believers, but each to his own. I will tell you this; I consider myself to have been a Mushriq before; following Hadeeth and the opininions of Imams which is precicely Shirk. Hamd'Ullah I was saved from that!! hail