The problem with Islam
-
Shall I answer mquran Riz?
Shall I wipe the floor with him?You couldn't wipe the floor with a mop
i ask nothing but simple straightfoward questions and you simply ignore them. Wait till you meet people with REAL knowledge. THEY'LL wipe the floor with YOU.
-
Shall I answer mquran Riz?
Shall I wipe the floor with him?You couldn't wipe the floor with a mop )
You are right there chap! I will get my servant to do it for me!!!
-)[
i ask nothing but simple straightfoward questions and you simply ignore them. Wait till you meet people with REAL knowledge. THEY'LL wipe the floor with YOU.OOOO I am really really scared!!!
It's like being in the school playground!!!
As the kids will say, just wait till my big brother gets hold of you for using me to wipe the floor!!!But hey, I thought you WERE THE PERSON with REAL KNOWLEDGE, oh Sorry I forgot YOU DON'T TRUST YOUR REASON DO YOU?
Please RESPECT RIZ'S wishes and aswer HIS QUESTIONS ok?
If you want verbal jousting with me then lets open a thread, yeah?
-) -) chill chap tranceRegards,
-
wow
Don't worry Elke, mquran and I are old "friends" -)
He is just recovering from wounds from our last battle under a different thread... -)
As for wipping floor with him don't worry
I was joking!
I don't think I will be able to lift him because I am such weakling... -)Regards,
-
Peace Riz, all,
Try to address the following if possible
-Reconstruction of the kaba
-Bringing back the stone (assuming Muhammad would have detroyed/discarded it)
-Why did the Muslims become so divided and fight so bitterly when the Quran says that God was happy with them and that their hearts were united. I read an article denying that these civil wars happened, but these are recorded even by non-muslims.
-Traditional way of prayer. Main issues being 5 times a day and bowing to Kaba. Why would the unbelievers impose 2 extra prayers on themselves?
-Why was there such little resistance?
-Not even Muhammads own family remained to the Quran. Why/how what possible motive?
Looks like the post in which I tried to answer all this has been completely ignored. I will post the link to that post, so you can read it again
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=49406&highlight=#49406
WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, HOW WILL THAT AFFECT HOW YOU WILL BE JUDGED ON THE LAST DAY ?. Who cares what the past people, including Muhammad's family did, and how and why they did it. All that you need is in Al-Qur'aan, and all the historical and personal examples needed for our guidance are in it.
It looks like brother Zenje's posts are indeed going unread.
3936 Is God not enough for His servant? And they frighten you with others beside Him. And whomever God sends astray, then for him there will be no guide. And whomever God guides, then there will be none that can mislead him. Is God not Noble, with Vengeance?
-
Hey guys.
Tanveermd your earlier posts did not go unnoticed or unread and the same with zenje. Its not like I haven't ever seen those verses, but they don't address the issue.
You ask why it matters what happened in the past, so let me explain my view. What Muhammad and his followers did was and still is very important to know and understand. If Muhammad considered the Shrine in Mecca to have some significance, then there is no reason we should not do the same. You can't simply discard history just because it is hard to understand or doesn't fit with you interpretation of the Quran. Muhammad was an excellent example whom we should try to follow as the Quran itself states. To me the question of the Sunna has never been if we should follow it, rather how do we know what tradition tells is us true? If one is to discard all rituals and practices in Islam not directly found in the Quran, then there is much to explain regarding the events after Muhammads death. Some of which I posed above. If Muhammad did infact perform some sort of Pilgrimage, then why should we pretend it never happened and walk away blindly? Does the Quran not ask us to perform the pilgrimage to the ancient shrine? It doesn't say Abrahams shrine, it is simply the ancient shrine. God has made this shrine a shrine for the people it says. Whether or not it was once a pagan shrine doesn't matter, it has been made a shrine for the people and rededicated to God. Looking at it like that it is certainly possible that we are to perform a pilgrimage to Mecca. Muhammad, his closest disciples, and his family are all recorded to have done so. If anyone is to simply disregard all of these accounts simplly because his/her interpretation doesn't fit with such events, then the person has to explain where/how/when these practices came in. You can't simply point to verses in the Quran that say rely on the Quran alone because relying on the Quran alone I can also see there being a pilgrimage to Mecca.
The point of this all is to practice Islam like or similar to the way Muhammad practiced it, because as the Quran says, he was an excellent example. You might say that he practiced it just like the Quran says, but the Quran is so vague in many areas and therefore Muhammad himself obviously had his own interpretation which God never objected to. If this included a pilgrimage, then there is no reason no to perform a pilgrimage. Now people here claim that all of this pilgrimage stuff was invented after Muhammads death. This would not be hard to believe if the accusations weren't against Muhammad closest disciples and family. At this point these accusations need some serious explanations. Did Israel betray Moses? Did Judas betray Jesus? Yea, sure, but there Prophets still had very close disciples and certain family members who never betrayed them. Muhammad is no exception. To say that Muhammads daughters, wives, best friends all betrayed him is quite a big accusation and without any clear evidence backing it, why should anyone believe these accusations? Once again, the Quran is not clear evidence against the pilgrimage. Sure certain foriegn and pagan practices might have been added to it, but to say the pilgrimage to Mecca was invented by Muhammads closest believers who stuck by him through good and bad, fought many battles by his side, never betrayed him, and whose hearts were unified as the Quran states, you have some serious explaining to do.
-
Dear Riz,
You are right, what Muhammad and his followers did and said is very important to us. However, where does it say that Muhammad was ever in Mecca? And what he did there?
If you look closer at the basis for your perception, you will see that most of this is from the Hadith-collections, or history-books based on tell-tales.Concerning shrines, do you remember the story about Moses and his people building a physical shrine because they did not have any tangible symbol to pray to?
Why do you think God says that suddenly, now it is OK to have a physical shrine to pray in front of?
Has God changed His mind? ?I do not see pilgrimage as a bad thing, but all for the right reason. To go somewhere in order to perform rituals in front of a shrine, well, could there be a better reason to assemble then to copy the straying people of Moses?
Best regds
Ali Omar
-
Now this is exactly what I'm talking about. If you are going to throw out such claims then you better have some evidence backing it up. A lack of evidence is not evidence either. Where does it say Muhammad was in Mecca? Besides the Muslim tradition and history, it fits with the Quran. The Quraysh, the shrine, the pilgrims, and probably other elements which I am missing. Quraysh were in Mecca and no one will deny this, Arab pilgrims used to go to the Kaba for ages and this is accounted for by non arab sources predating Islam such as Ptolemy. Besides, Islam spread outwards from Mecca and no where else. Also if you are to believe Muhammad was foretold in previous scriptures, then you must accept he was in Mecca because these prophecies not only describe Muhammad in Arabia, but mention Mecca. It can be found in Hindu prophecies, Biblical prophecies, and others. Here is one such example http//www.mostmerciful.com/twin-events.htm
So if you want to disregard muslims historians, non muslim historians, other scriptures, thats fine but present some evidence or explanation. The Quran is not a history book, it is a confirmation of the old books, a news of the coming judgment, and a guide. It assumes the audience knows what it refers to an many instances. Why would God say, 'and Muhammad was in Mecca'? Once again, just because the Quran doesn't say Muhammad was in Mecca doesn't mean he wasn't there. It proves nothing and it is highly illogical to throw out so much based on the absense of the Mecca in the Quran.
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Riz So if you want to disregard muslims historians, non muslim historians, other scriptures, thats fine but present some evidence or explanation. The Quran is not a history book, it is a confirmation of the old books, a news of the coming judgment, and a guide. It assumes the audience knows what it refers to an many instances. Why would God say, 'and Muhammad was in Mecca'? Once again, just because the Quran doesn't say Muhammad was in Mecca doesn't mean he wasn't there. It proves nothing and it is highly illogical to throw out so much based on the absense of the Mecca in the Quran.
Where Muhammad was doesn't matter. What matters is where WE are. Al-Quraan is all-consuming prophecy of HUMANITY. Our lives, our being and our existence. Look at your own life and look at the book. Does your life concord with that is right according to the book? You're not going to be asked about where Muhammad was, don't worry.
-
You mean to tell me, if he was in Jerusalem, he would have inclined to the kuffar (17/73-75) ? Would he have retreated in Badr ? Or perhaps been harsh to the companions ?
Would anything in the Quran change if Muhammad was somewhere other than Mecca, Riz ?
If so, what?
-
Dear Riz,
Correct me if I?m wrong, but as far as I am aware, there is only one single place in the whole of Qur?an where ?Quraish? is mentioned, in 106.1.
What sources can we find telling more about these people? They must be very important as much of the history depends on their existence in a certain place at a certain time, although the Qur?an doesn?t seem to put much emphasis on it.
Not even the important place, Mecca itself, is mentioned, so again, where does it all come from?Prophesies are all fine and dandy, problem is, there are so many of them that searching long and hard enough, there is no problem finding prophesies to fit almost any situation. It only takes slight adjustments here and there.
Maybe you get the notion that I am a skeptic?
Not thereby saying there is no truth in any prophesies, mind you, but I believe a little skepticism may be good.It is correct as you say, the Qur?an is not a history book, and it confirms what came earlier. I.e. the Qur?an can not confirm what is not in it.
It does mention Moses, and it does mention that the people he was leading went astray and built a shrine to pray towards. And this was not good.
Was the form of the shrine wrong and therefore it is OK to pray to a shrine formed differently? A different form and/or a different place makes it into something else than an idol?Best regds
Ali Omar
-
Ok lets just for some reason pretend that Jerusalem wasn't under Byzantine control during Muhammads life but rather under the control of some pagans who had enough authority to chase out this man and his followers.
Muhammad flees from Jerusalem after being persecuted. According to the 'fake' history, Muhammad was persecuated by idol worshippers in his hometown. Not Christians, not Jews, but those who worship idols. Not just any idolators, but Arab idolators namely the Quraysh. Were their Arab idolators in Jerusalem at this point? Were the Quraysh ever in Jerusalem? Why did they alone harass Muhammad at this point and not the Christians or Jews who later were a problem in Yathrib? What about the shrine? It wasn't the temple mount because that was not there at this point, it was destroyed by the Romans. So where is this "constructed Shrine", the Shrine whose Lord the Quraysh were to serve? (524, 1063)
Did Muhammad not take back his original city from the idolaters? Or will you deny this also simply because it is not mentioned in the Quran? If you want to write your own history, thats fine, but assuming he did take back the city, the city could not have been Jerusalem. Jerusalem was captured after Muhammads death.
Ok so lets just assume that Muhammad was infact born and lived in Jerusalem. Besides the fact that at this point he would not have been an unlettered Prophet anymore, his native langauge would have been Aramaic . So the Quran would have been revealed in Aramaic. Is this Quran in Aramaic? Is there a single verse that is not in Arabic? His original location was clearly in Arabia and therefore the Quran came down in Arabic.
-
Salam everybody,
I think the Quraish who we are told in Qur'an belonged to Petra or Madain Saleh or one of those important centres of the Caravan Route. Actually, Mecca was not one of them. Taif was, but less important. It must be one of the north.
Because Riz, the Bible says that the new prophet would come from the tribes of Kedar, and these tribes settled on what we call now Jordan. Anybody knows something about Qurayza??? Have they anything to do with Quraish?
Anyway, we dont have much info from Saudi Arabia because of obvious reasons (they have so much to hide) and we know just from written words (that they wrote) that Kaaba was a temple dedicated to Allat, al Uzza and Manat. What happens if it's not like that? Petra and MAdain Saleh are clearly signs that they hosted shrines to these goddesses but I beliebe the Kaaba in Mecca is an hindu temple and Shiva the main god. God and not goddesses...
I don't have any doubt about Muhammad having migrated to Medina but I still doubt that he iniciated all the conquests of Arabia. A prophet is not a conqueror. He was not a king neither as Daud and Sulaiman were.
Anyway, we could spend all life discussing this. If it was important, Allah would have tell us. Probably we'll now what is wrong in the Sunni way but it will be difficult to know the truth about the beginning of Islam.
Peace,
nur
-
I think Riz that he was sent to the people who rejected Moses before him. It's just a different generation,but probably the same place. And this place should be
- near Mount Sin were Musa got the Torah
- near the cities of Lut
- near the cities of the people of Nuh, Ad and Zamud
- near (or in) an important road (the Silk Route)
I remind you that Arabic came from the Nabatean language, beside Petra is Jebel Harun as well as Wadi Musa. And it was the main capital of Arabia Petrae (so still is Arabia). The second capital was Madain Saleh, that's why it makes sense the ayat which tells about the "2 important cities".
And when Allah talks about the "umm al-qura" It should be a real amazing city, a capital, a metropolis from an area more os less organized, an state. There should be jews, christians and idolaters. Monks as well, so there should be a Church. There was a Church in Petra, was there in Mecca?? I have no idea.I'm not saying that prophet Muhammad (sas) was from Petra but probably he was preaching there. Musa was born in Egypt, it doesn't matter. But he was preaching in and outside Egypt.
Just keep looking for the truth but don't accept something just because is a Lie so well built, but still is a lie and it cannot last forever.
May Allah guide us to the good path and follow not the liers,
nur
-
Correction, the Jews didn't build a shrine which they worshipped. They built a calf and other graven images which they then worshipped. No Muslim worships the Kabah. Would bowing down infront of it count as idolatry, logically it would. However, I never said Muhammad bowed to the Kabah, what I have argued is that it was significant to him in some way and the pilgrimage is made to it.
You are right, not much of the Quraysh is mentioned. Why would it though? It rarely refers to any living person at the time by name including Muhammad.
Nevertheless, here is something. Surah 541 says "The hour has come and split is the moon." Now, do you believe the moon literally split? Thats what the traditionists believe and say it was a sign of Muhammad. Well, I don't think you believe it split, neither do I. This was a metaphor in the Quran referring to the Quraysh. The moon was their symbol. At this point the Quraysh were literally split. Some with Muhammad, some against him.
There is also some mention of the Quraysh from pre-Islamic sources. Mu'allaqat who was a pre-Islamic poetsays "So I swear, by the holy house about which circumambulate men of Quraysh and Jurhum, whose hands constructed it..."
Unfortunatly archaelogical scholarship about Arabia before Islam is in its infancy right now. A good book to start with is "Arabia and the Arabs From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam" by Hoyland. There are pre-Islamic mentions of Quraysh in there, but they are rather trivial and not something significant besides the one I have quoted above.
Nur-
Read the quote above as it talks about the Quraysh circling the Kaba. Also the following
"Different deities seem to have been represented by different sizes and shapes 'Allat... was a cubic stone', 'Sad...was a long stone'. And it is noticeable that where god-stones of al-Ussa and Dshara(Lord of the House) appear together the former is always bigger" (Hoyland 185)You are right, Petra is a possible location of Muhammand besides Mecca if there is one.
You mention Muhammad being close to the land of Lot and others. Well unfortunately the location of Lot and much of Biblical locations haven't been exactly discovered. There are theories of where the places are, but nothing for sure. In Salibis book "The Bible Came from Arabia", he discusses his theory that much of Biblical history happened in Arabia, not the Palestinian area. He basis this mostly on names of towns, cities, and how well their geography fits with the Biblicle discription. It is interesting, but ofcourse there have been no archaelogical digs to confirm his theories or otherwise. If he is at all correct, then it is certainly possible that Abraham, Lot and many others were infact in and around where Muhammad is said to have been.
What you said about the location of Kedar is interesting, I will look into it. Thanks.
-
Dear Riz,
Maybe the Jews did not build a shrine; maybe it was just a physical form of some kind, calf for instance.
Is there a significant difference whether the object one prays toward is a calf (Jews with Moses), stonewall (present Jews), cross (Christians), statue of a woman and /or man (Christians), statue half man/half elephant (Hindu), small stone building (Muslims) etc. etc.?
And numerous rituals like ?Muslims? throwing stones at stone pillars, circumambulating a stone building, believing the water from a certain well is magic etc. etc.
What is the difference between all these ritualistic religions and the pagans of old?rollWhether Mu?allaqat came before the Qur?an and/or Hadiths, or after, is a question open for discussion.
It is not a poet by that name it is a collection of poetry, written by many.
And just to mention it, some of the poems are almost word by word the same as verses of the Qur?an, and they have many similarities with some Hadiths as well.
So, were the poems the source of the Qur?an and/or Hadiths or vice versa? scaredBest regards
Ali Omar
-
Peace all,
Let us see what the facts are. Al-Qur'aan does mention the first house being in Bakkah, and Makkah was never known as Bakkah. So Bakkah has to be some place other than Makkah.
Al-Qur'aan mentions olives and Mount Sinai in relation to The City. Olives are not produced in the desert of Arabia.
Archeological evidence from Negev (southern Israel) and Umm Al-Rasas (Jordan) from the time of Muhammad shows inscriptions in Arabic language, proving that Arabic was spoken in those areas in those times.
There is ZERO archeological evidence of a pre-Qur'aanic city by the name of Makkah or a pre-Qur'aanic shrine by the name of Kaaba. Also there is ZERO archeological evidence of pre-Qur'aanic so called Jahiliya poetry. Please see the following links for further details.
http//free-minds.org/articles/quranic/hajj.htm
http//free-minds.org/articles/science/language.htmAlso the following ayaat
37134 And Lot was one of the messengers.
37135 When We saved him and all his family.
37136 Except an old woman who remained.
37137 Then, We destroyed the rest.
37138 And you pass by their ruins in the morning;
37139 And in the night. Do you not understand?Are there any places in the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula, which have been destroyed by a divine intervention? No!
Finally
3328 And He inherited you their land, their homes, their money, and land you had never stepped on. God is able to do all things.
Which land is this?
3328 follows the verses dealing with the ?battle of the ditch,?. Makkans and their allies could not take Medina, so they lifted the siege and went back to their hometown. If this story is true then the land that the ?Messenger? hasn?t yet stepped on was Makkah. The verses of Qur'aan make that clear. He was from a different land. Make note, Muhammad was in Medina, and it was the fifth year of the Hijra, and the ?Messenger? was yet to step on other lands including the Makkan soil!
3328 makes sense only if Muhammad had begun his life not in Makkah but somewhere else.
-
Well, more land did come under control of Muhammad besides just Mecca. Either way, you are correct in saying there is no evidence that Mecca was an ancient city, infact it was probably built only 2 or 3 centuries before Muhammad. Bekkah was obviously somewhere else. This doesn't mean the Muhammad was not from Mecca. What changes if he was? You mention the cities of Lot and other destroyed people. As I mentioned earlier, we don't know where these places are. Doesn't mean they aren't in that general area.
It should also be noted that the Petra area was not captured by Muslims until after Muhammads death.
Why/how/when did everyone betray Muhammad? Any theories what happened at th early stages of Islam which led to the break down of Muhammads Islam?
Here is somewhat of an explanation I have come up with
-Muhammad came from some city to Yathrib after being persecuted. Could have come from Mecca or somewhere else.
-Preached Monothiesm. Meccans might have felt threatened so they attacked but failed. Muhammad retaliated and took the town. However, unlike the traditional claim, there weren't any idols there besides the Kabah. Because if Muhammad is supposed to have smashed all the idols, he would have destroyed the Kabah and the stone. Obviously he didn't. Rather he left the people and allowed them to keep their religion. The chiefs/generals of the town were forced to either convert or be killed. One such person being Abu Sufyan, father of the first Ummayad Caliph. The rest of the people were left alone as was their shrine. Nevertheless, Islam was preached there. "Serve the Lord of this Shrine." The Lord being Allah. The town adopted Islam for the most part by not associating with Allah or giving Him daughters such as Al-Uzza and Al-Lat.
-Muhammad dies eventually.
-Leaves behind wives, daughters, possibly sons(?), disciples and believers who God was earlier happy with and whose hearts were united as the Quran mentions.
-Assumingly Muhammads own family held onto his teachings as did most or all of his close friends/disciples.
-Disciples are said to have taken over, but this might not have been the case. The people who historically took over Islam helped spread Islam but were extremly divided and killed each other.
-What happened to these so called disciples? Why did they kill each other? Or were these people who took power after Muhammads death not reallly the close disciples tradition records? If so then what happened to the disciples who were warriors themselves just like Muhammad? Were they all killed along with Muhammads sons who might have been the heirs to power. This is an unlikely scenerio however. If these people had the power to kill the closest followers of Muhammad, they would have done so earlier and killed Muhammad as well.
-Discovered archaeological evidence is silent for about 28 years about Islam in general.
-28 years after Muhammad supposedly died, there is a well established Islamic cult that reverences the stone at kabah, performs pilgrimage there, so on. This is what the religion will look like for the next 1400 years.
-So what happened to the believers who God was happy with? Such a large scale betrayal from among the family, disciples, and believers is not likely. Something else seemed to have happened.
-Through all of this chaos who/how was the Quran preserved? God says he will preserve it, but ofcourse He didn't personally come down here and protect it from individual people.