Fighting in the cause of God
-
Peace be upon you,
To fight in the cause of the God is to continually work to purify your spirit(nafs), which is to command the emotions rather than follow them and to program the divine attributes in your spirit. jedi
-
Fight is not a confusing word. Fighting literally means fighting. There is no other explanation. If this were open to interpretation there would be 1.4 billion different Islams. Some things are just not up for debate. Yes, i understand if it conflicts with someone's present values or with someone's idea of what is right/normal. That does not mean that the meaning should be stretched to mean "not fighting" when it clearly describes an atmosphere of killing, war and raiding. In what context and to what extent are these tools to be used is another issue entirely i.e for offense or defense etc. Fighting in the way of God certainly can mean struggling against your nafs. There is no reason why this can't be a part of it. But the major portion of it involves fighting and killing those who attack you, would hamper God's religion, persecute believers, who attacked you etc. We all need to stop trying to make the Qur'an politically correct. God does not care about 21st century western values, although some of his values may be similar to theirs. He has given us the values to hold and we don't need to try and make those values more acceptable. Without putting the religion into practice (i.e establishing both rituals AND law) the religion is useless. To establish law you need military might. Part of our requirement is fighting. Actually fighting...
-
'Fighting' as a stupid idea did not have its origins in 'modern Western philosophy'. I can assure you that many people throughout the ages have independently figured out that "fighting" is fundementally and ultimately, for the lack of a better term, stupid. What's worse is when people justify violence as "fighting in the cause of god". What the hell? How do one know what the "cause of god" is? God came down and told you, out of all people, what the cause is? If it was so important why didn't god write it out in the sky for everyone to see? Sure, if you're being attacked you have the right to defend yourself - but let's not use that to justify some extremist's idea of a pre-emptive self-defense manoeuver (e.g. OMG IRAQ HAS WMDS LETS KILL THEM). 99% wars are not fought in 'self defense'; they are not fought to 'escape persecution' - they are to secure the power of the ruling class. You're deluding yourself if you sincerely believe otherwise. When you're a soldier, you're just cannon-fodder for someone else's grand scheme to secure their vaults - you're not fighting some epic holy war between right and wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not some pacifist that thinks all attacks should be met with the other cheek, but fighting IS a terrible thing, and to justify it as anything more than economical struggles is spitting in the face of divinity. It's always funny when people say they are fighting for the cause of god. Why? Because their enemy is always someone else who also believe they are fighting for the cause of god. But hey, of course we're right about everything and them damn 21st century westerners are always wrong.
As for the political correctness of the Qur'an - I don't think anyone here was doing that, but rather giving a thorough exposition of what 'fighting' may entail. Having said that, I don't think Islam is as militant as you're trying to portray it as. It may condone fighting, but it only condones it when the war is brought to you - not otherwise. It also does not give us the authority to presume what the 'cause of God' is.
-
salam all .
"fighting" includes physical fighting .
2190 You may fight in the cause of GOD against those who attack you, but do not aggress. GOD does not love the aggressors.
475 And why do you not fight in the cause of God, when the weak amongst the men and women and children say "Our Lord, bring us out of this town whose people are wicked, and grant us from Yourself a Supporter, and grant us from Yourself a Victor!"
-
"fighting" includes physical fighting .
I don't think that was in doubt. What is in doubt is how does one decide which type is a 'major' part of the verses or not. I don't see it as one or the other and to presume that 'physical' (war/raiding) fighting is what is mentioned majorly is a bit much, they are what they are and applicable to different era's and the way one chooses to fight and as neo put it quite aptly, 'it only condones it when the war is brought to you - not otherwise'. After that, fighting obviously can/is physical but also not ur standard fisticuffs or guns. It can be on different levels but yes, it's still physical because you are doing something.
2190 and 475 can be interpreted on many levels and does not mean that it is old fashioned man to man or tank to gun fighting only. Peace.
-
Physical fighting is very clearly defined in Qur'an to defend our homes and the land. Iraqi Resistance is fighting against the illegal occupation of their land which according to me is what Allah (SWT) has prescribed in Qur'an. All middle eastern countries including whole world who labeled Iraqi Resistance as insurgents and terrorists are wrong including Ayatollah Shaitani.
-
To fiercely defend your freedom and God given rights. With violence if it can be in no other way. By submitting or accepting to any system that denies you any rights, ANY rights granted by God. you are submitting to other than God.
peace
-
Physical fighting is very clearly defined in Qur'an to defend our homes and the land. Iraqi Resistance is fighting against the illegal occupation of their land which according to me is what Allah (SWT) has prescribed in Qur'an. All middle eastern countries including whole world who labeled Iraqi Resistance as insurgents and terrorists are wrong including Ayatollah Shaitani.
Yeah the insurgents killing both Iraqi citizens and US are doing a great job of liberating Islam and Iraq from the clutches of the fascist west.
-
You want to convert this topic into Iraq war? Yes Iraqis are getting killed mostly by occupation army and some get killed by Iraqi Resistance which is the part of war. The illegal Iraq invasion has to be blamed for this not the Iraqi Resistance. All the blame goes on this Iraq illegal invasion.
-
You want to convert this topic into Iraq war? Yes Iraqis are getting killed mostly by occupation army and some get killed by Iraqi Resistance which is the part of war. The illegal Iraq invasion has to be blamed for this not the Iraqi Resistance. All the blame goes on this Iraq illegal invasion.
Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).
And yeah, it's okay if Iraqi civilians get killed as long as that number is less than the numbers the invaders kill right? Brilliant logic. Oh no, don't tell me - they are "collateral".
So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bullshit like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down.
-
Peace,
I would like other people's opinion on this too...
Especially Bro layths I am under the impression he somehow thinks it's okay to crucify and amputate the feet off anyone who opposes god and his messenger... but bro we oppose them everytime we sin, which is everyday on a regular basis....
I like your version of Islam...It entails upholding the verses you probably think are
cooland simply ignoring or rejecting the verses you may see asunpopular.You are trying to please people while it was God all along you should have cared about pleasing.
The Scripture has a complete
take-it or leave-itapproach...We either accept it all from God and try to uphold it, or we simply walk away rejecting the entire book because we disagree with some of its content.Mufsidoon are to be treated as the words of God described...You and I may argue what the definition of a
mufsidis based on the teachings of the Scripture, but never can you dispute that the punishment (including amputation of hand/foot) exist in the laws of the Almighty unless you are willing to forfit the entire Scripture.What is your say...Do you uphold all or nothing?
-
Peace,
Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).
Show me in the book of the Amighty how the invasion was legal (that is your claim after all?).
So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bulls*** like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down
Asking for numbers is simply avoiding the key questions that need to be asked/adressed...
-
Peace layth
sorry to interfere, ur post is not directed at me but ...could have been
The Scripture has a complete
take-it or leave-itapproach...We either accept it all from God and try to uphold it, or we simply walk away rejecting the entire book because we disagree with some of its content.What is your say...Do you uphold all or nothing?
everything is not all black and white in life and you may not be TOTALLY right in your understanding
i used to accept the scripture totally, with a lot of false interpretation and there were homeric fights within myself trying to accept things that were unaccceptable to me...
most of these things have become clearer with time, thanks a lot also to eye opening posts right here at FM
and i'm (we're) far from finished...
so why scare off people with this take it or leave it attitude ?elke
-
Peace,
Illegal Iraq Invasion, hehe. Call it I? from now. Anyway, strictly speaking the war wasn't 'illegal'. It may have been based on extremely questionable motives but to call it 'illegal' is quite naive (it would be quaint too, if "ILLEGAL-IRAQ-INVASION" wasn't such an annoying internet buzzword).
Show me in the book of the Amighty how the invasion was legal (that is your claim after all?).
So do you have any data backing up your claims? As in statistical data detailing how many people were killed by the insurgent as opposed to the invasion? Also, the blame for a death goes to the killer, not the 'original cause' or some haphazard bulls*** like that. Fact of the matter is people are dying and you're there justifying it while waving your pompoms and jumping up and down
Asking for numbers is simply avoiding the key questions that need to be asked/adressed...
I was referring to 'the law of the land', not Qur'anic law.
Also, asking for numbers is perfectly acceptable when a person says "it's okay because the invaders killed more".
KGB, I'm afraid you don't understand politics.
-
Peace,
everything is not all black and white in life and you may not be TOTALLY right in your understanding
i used to accept the scripture totally, with a lot of false interpretation and there were homeric fights within myself trying to accept things that were unaccceptable to me...What understanding? This is not a discussion on interpretation (God knows how many people here have different interpretations and how we all get along as brothers and sisters because we all believe in the Scripture fully and respect that its interpretation in some aspects - such as the non-muhkam verses - is left to the Almighty).
What I can
t entertain and put my smily face on is people who reject certain verses or certain laws so that they can be concideredcoolandcivilized` by the standards of the people whose opinoins are the last thing we should care about..Please read the quote carefully which sparked my reply
Especially Bro layths I am under the impression he somehow thinks it`s okay to crucify and amputate the feet off anyone who opposes god and his messenger... but bro we oppose them everytime we sin, which is everyday on a regular basis....
Now, read the verse where this issue is based on
The recompense of those who fight God and His messenger, and seek to make corruption in the land, is that they will be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off on alternate sides or that they be banished from the land; that is a disgrace for them in this world and in the Hereafter they will have a great retribution. (533)
God says that those who fight Him and His messenger, as well as the mufsidoon, are to be killed or crucified or banished...This is a fact in the Scripture, which we as muslims simply
hear & obey; we may discuss its meanings and implementation, but we are not allowed tohear & disobeyunless we wish to become hypocrates or rejectors. The question of the poster did not care to read the verse, verify its applications, define its meanings...Rather, it was a simplylayth thinks its ok to blah blah blah..so why scare off people with this take it or leave it attitude ?
Perhaps I am getting less patient with age...Or, perhaps its because I am dissapointed that this forum is being used as a place where people come to chit chat while the last thing being done is people quoting or researching the Scripture...On this thread alone I can see one poster who seems to give legitmacy to the UN when discussing the issue of invasion while the Book of the Almighty seems irrelevant to research or quote!
What happened to God Alone?
