Quran's shariah and it's applicability

mquran

Salaamun alaikum,

And I take it you don't do that?

I definitely try not to. Further, I've yet to publish a translation of my own

Rashad being Arab means nothing to you? Why not? The man speaks the language of the scripture! It is like saying that guy speaks Hebrew and therefore he does not mean anything but the English translation of the Torah that is important.

Being arab or non-arab doesn't help with one's UNDERSTANDING of the message. Rashad clearly had a problem with marrying orphan women so he interjected 'thier mothers' (i.e..marry thier mothers). He was another victim of this disease of modernity-worship, probably.

If you had read history then you would have known that Victors in a war in the ancient times usually killed all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves. That was a common practice. But this is not a common practice anymore. So again I tell you morality evolves.

Does a common practice make it RIGHT ? Will you please address this question. I'm not asking about what people do. I'm asking if something can be RIGHT at point in time 'a' and WRONG at point in time 'b'.

Read politics for that. What I am saying to you that in the ancient times Vicotors would have killed off all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves. This was a common practice in the ancient times but not now! thats why Americans did not make slaves out of the women and children and killed off all the males. So human morality has evolved.

Sorry to say this, but I think you're very deluded. Iraqis have lost sovereignity over thier national assets. They ARE slaves now and worse , they are slaves to an invader under the GUISE of democracy and justice.

So did the Nazies. But world has brought Nazies to Justice. And World is bringing Serbians to justice too. But the process is slow. The World has made a start. Evolution of Morality is very slow like evolution of lifeforms on this planet. Evolution takes time. But we as human beings have come very far from our violent beginings. There will be many more set backs but we are on the path of evolution...

The 'world' you speak of doesn't exist for one simple reason there's no governing body which adheres to al-hukm, the permanent laws embedded in the universe by Allah. That is why Iraq was invaded. That's why the Bosnians suffered. That's why Kuwait was saved relatively quickly. Firaun hasnt changed. His magicians still use illusions to make ppl think things are all right. But they never will be all right unless Al-islaam is established.

Why mquran are you scared that you might Truth in the Baghavad Gita or in the Poetry of Khalil Gibran? God is just mquran. He allows every individual the same opportunity to discover God himself, to attain the same certainty that was granted to the Prophets of past. If you say it is pointless to discuss other paths to God then I think you are limiting yourself. But that is your choice and I respect your views...

Let me rephrase. If Al-Quraan isn't your criteria, then THIS discussion is pointless. You tell me 'morality evolves'. Now, there's no thing in the world called morality which u can touch, is there ? So 'morality' depends on our definitions. To you, a change of terminology signals a change of morality. Fine. If that's how you judge, that's nothing to do with me. But this discussion is pointless because you don't accept the Quran and its internal criteria of reading.

As for 'scared of finding truth...', the answer is no. I have read most major texts of major religion and I have not found the same conceptual power as I saw in al-quraan. I am not saying al-quraan is necessary for salvation but I believe it's the perfectly detailed map of the human condition. Other maps do exist, but to me they are fragmented. Of course, you don't need any map to walk the path. You can just walk blindly according to your internal compass.

unknownuser

Rashad being Arab means nothing to you? Why not? The man speaks the language of the scripture! It is like saying that guy speaks Hebrew and therefore he does not mean anything but the English translation of the Torah that is important.

Being arab or non-arab doesn't help with one's UNDERSTANDING of the message. Rashad clearly had a problem with marrying orphan women so he interjected 'thier mothers' (i.e..marry thier mothers). He was another victim of this disease of modernity-worship, probably.

I don't understand you there. How can you understand the message if you do not understand the Language? This is silly! The message is delivered through a human language. This language needs to be understood for the message to be understood. I think Rashad had no choice of translating it in any other way. So did the other translators!

If you had read history then you would have known that Victors in a war in the ancient times usually killed all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves. That was a common practice. But this is not a common practice anymore. So again I tell you morality evolves.

Does a common practice make it RIGHT ? Will you please address this question. I'm not asking about what people do. I'm asking if something can be RIGHT at point in time 'a' and WRONG at point in time 'b'.

That is what history tells us. Right or Wrong? By our standards it is wrong. But humanity have evolved to view it as wrong.

Read politics for that. What I am saying to you that in the ancient times Vicotors would have killed off all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves. This was a common practice in the ancient times but not now! thats why Americans did not make slaves out of the women and children and killed off all the males. So human morality has evolved.

Sorry to say this, but I think you're very deluded. Iraqis have lost sovereignity over thier national assets. They ARE slaves now and worse , they are slaves to an invader under the GUISE of democracy and justice.

All the male inhabitants did not get their head chopped off did they? So I say that is a progress.

So did the Nazies. But world has brought Nazies to Justice. And World is bringing Serbians to justice too. But the process is slow. The World has made a start. Evolution of Morality is very slow like evolution of lifeforms on this planet. Evolution takes time. But we as human beings have come very far from our violent beginings. There will be many more set backs but we are on the path of evolution...

The 'world' you speak of doesn't exist for one simple reason there's no governing body which adheres to al-hukm, the permanent laws embedded in the universe by Allah. That is why Iraq was invaded. That's why the Bosnians suffered. That's why Kuwait was saved relatively quickly. Firaun hasnt changed. His magicians still use illusions to make ppl think things are all right. But they never will be all right unless Al-islaam is established.

No govering body yet but only matter of time. Techonology is uniting the world and in due course it will unite all nations and we all be called citizens of planet Earth. But I am sure there will be many more set backs before any of this comes to any fruition. But we have no choice but we are evolving towards that end...

You can just walk blindly according to your internal compass.

This better than lead blind by someone's else's compass is it not? Does God not stress over and over again in the Quran that those who use their reason will find truth of God? So why should you use someone's else's reasoning and their Compass?

Regards,

mquran

Salaamun alaikum,

I don't understand you there. How can you understand the message if you do not understand the Language? This is silly! The message is delivered through a human language. This language needs to be understood for the message to be understood. I think Rashad had no choice of translating it in any other way. So did the other translators!

Had no choice but to distort the message ? Or do you think he translated 4/3 correctly ? If so, I ask you to bring forward the evidence. I have both editions of his translations and both have the interpolation.

Please read
http//www.submission.org/suras/sura4.htm

to see Rashad's interpolation for yourself.

I assert my point once again in case you forget. Just because the major translators agree on something, that doesn't make it right. Al-Quraan has its own internal methodology and verification system.

That is what history tells us. Right or Wrong? By our standards it is wrong. But humanity have evolved to view it as wrong.

Earlier in your post, you said
"Morality" evolves. For example in the past "MIGHT IS RIGHT" was a form of morality. That is if you are strong enough then you can steal your brothers land. And that was OK

So in the past, it was ok to rape, pillage and plunder if you were mighty ? Back then, people weren't human enough (by today's oh-so-fantastic standards anyway) to warrant being saved.

I opine that it is YOU who needs to evolve TOWARDS the standards set by Al-Quraan. Al-Quraan has already stated

On that account We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land (5/32)

All the male inhabitants did not get their head chopped off did they? So I say that is a progress.

Correct. YOU say it is progress. This is why I asked a question you keep evading Who are you to set standards as to what is civilised and what isn't. Where is your authority to do so ?

I ask again does the fact that humans do all sorts of evil things make something RIGHT even at the time ? Who sets standards, humans or God?

No govering body yet but only matter of time. Techonology is uniting the world and in due course it will unite all nations and we all be called citizens of planet Earth. But I am sure there will be many more set backs before any of this comes to any fruition. But we have no choice but we are evolving towards that end...

Believe it or not, I am working towards that vision because I see it emanating from al-quraan , that the being of humanity is one single umma. Our difference is, I question everything and not take any definition for granted.

This better than lead blind by someone's else's compass is it not? Does God not stress over and over again in the Quran that those who use their reason will find truth of God? So why should you use someone's else's reasoning and their Compass?

Are you saying that using Al-Quraan is using someone else's compass ? Please be clear on this.

unknownuser

I assert my point once again in case you forget. Just because the major translators agree on something, that doesn't make it right. Al-Quraan has its own internal methodology and verification system.

I say if lot of translators are saying the same thing then this has more weight than yours.

So in the past, it was ok to rape, pillage and plunder if you were mighty ? Back then, people weren't human enough (by today's oh-so-fantastic standards anyway) to warrant being saved.

Thats what happened in the past. You cant change the past mquran but you can make future better. But human beings have evolved from our dark past. And yes most human beings have advanced in their standards. If you can't see that then I can't do anything about that apart from to suggest that you read history.

I opine that it is YOU who needs to evolve TOWARDS the standards set by Al-Quraan. Al-Quraan has already stated

So that I can have my share of spoils of war? and make the women into slaves and concubine? Mark or chop thief's hands for stealing? No mquran it is you who needs do the the evolving.
Do you know why European countries are more succesful? It is because they can think outside of the scripture. They use their reason and not make scripture their reason.

On that account We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land (5/32)

and this is the verse that comes after above verse

Y.Ali The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

R.Khalifa The just retribution for those who fight GOD and His messenger, and commit horrendous crimes, is to be killed, or crucified, or to have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or to be banished from the land. This is to humiliate them in this life, then they suffer a far worse retribution in the Hereafter.

Pickthal The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;

Shakir The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,

Literal But (the) reward (of) those who embattle/fight God and His messenger, and they strive/endeavor in the earth/Planet Earth corruption/disorder , that they be killed or they be crucified , or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposites, or they be expelled/exiled from the land, that (is) for them shame/scandal/disgrace in the present world, and for them in the end (other life is) a great torture.

Do you think we could apply cutting off hands and crucifying in our present day? I don't think so.

All the male inhabitants did not get their head chopped off did they? So I say that is a progress.

Correct. YOU say it is progress. This is why I asked a question you keep evading Who are you to set standards as to what is civilised and what isn't. Where is your authority to do so ?

The evolving humanity sets standards. The more we evolve the better standards we will set...

No govering body yet but only matter of time. Techonology is uniting the world and in due course it will unite all nations and we all be called citizens of planet Earth. But I am sure there will be many more set backs before any of this comes to any fruition. But we have no choice but we are evolving towards that end...

This better than lead blind by someone's else's compass is it not? Does God not stress over and over again in the Quran that those who use their reason will find truth of God? So why should you use someone's else's reasoning and their Compass?

Are you saying that using Al-Quraan is using someone else's compass ? Please be clear on this.

Ok let make my position clearScripture is only a GUIDE to me. I don't take it as whole truth or absolute truth. So you are right. Our debate has ended.

Thanks.

Regards,

mquran

I say if lot of translators are saying the same thing then this has more weight than yours
.

What are you doing here then ? Go haunt some Christian or Sunni forum where you can get more 'the more who say it, the more correct it is' mentality.

Only one post ago you were telling us
'Does God not stress over and over again in the Quran that those who use their reason will find truth of God?'
and now, because the translators you quoted agree on something, you find that agreeable even though you dare not even analyse the verse itself word by word. So much for 'use thier reason', huh ?

Thats what happened in the past. You cant change the past mquran but you can make future better. But human beings have evolved from our dark past. And yes most human beings have advanced in their standards. If you can't see that then I can't do anything about that apart from to suggest that you read history

The question was IS THIS MORAL OR NOT ? Are you afraid to answer this? Up in the thread, you asserted that 'this was ok' remember ? Now you're telling us 'thats whats happened in the past' . This is quite typical of human inconsistency in judgement, yet too arrogant to accept God's judgement.

So that I can have my share of spoils of war? and make the women into slaves and concubine? Mark or chop thief's hands for stealing? No mquran it is you who needs do the the evolving.

Lets assume for a second that the above interpretations of yours are correct. ok ?

Can you please tell me what is YOUR CRITERIA of determining that these punishments are 'less evolved'. Please don't shy away from answering this. You are an evolved human being, far more evolved than the monkeys who lived before you. Evolved human beings should use thier reasoning and be able to answer questions, correct ? Or does evolving mean that you grow less able to conduct a meaningful discussion.

As for your interpretations above , i ask again Bring forward your evidence. Don't hide behind translators. Being evolved should mean that before you judge a text, you should at least see for yourself what it says.

Do you know why European countries are more succesful? It is because they can think outside of the scripture. They use their reason and not make scripture their reason.

Really ? It had nothing to do with the fact that they , with thier might, plundered the entire world before this ? I know entire third world nations who would disagree with you. Eurocentrism worshippers forget that that the rest of the world have a right to live and prosper too.

Sorry, but the only reason you say this is, in my opinion, that you've never looked at the Quran thoroughly, BY ITS OWN INTERNAL PRINCIPLES. From your application of the Quran, I opine that you have never gone beyond the translators paradigm.

If you read the Quran for yourself, you will see that it captures the condition of present day European nations and what thier ultimate fate is if they refuse to accept God's laws.

And as for the deification of human reasoning, that is your choice. I don't trust human reasoning, I trust Allah.

Do you think we could apply cutting off hands and crucifying in our present day? I don't think so

And for the third time, I will ask you ON WHAT CRITERIA DO YOU THINK NOT ? It seems you will never face this question and I can guess why. Once you tell us your criteria, it will be open for deconstruction.

In the UK, burglars weren't even given a custodial sentence due to liberals like yourself. As a result, decent human beings who work hard for a living had to just sit back and wait for the police while witnessing thier houses being burgled! Now, they have returned to the Quranic mizaan or balance by saying its ok to use 'reasonable force' to incapacitate a burglar.

So as for cutting hands and crucifiction, for those people who cause such mischief, I say they should get equivalent to thier dues. Why should society pay for thier acts?

Now, please tell us BASED ON WHAT CRITERIA CAN YOU SAY AM I WRONG ?

The evolving humanity sets standards. The more we evolve the better standards we will set...

Ah, its good to SET standards. Funnily no one actually ever FOLLOWS those standards. Why wont Bush sign the kyoto act ? You see, what you propagate is something nonsensical because 'humanity' as a controlling polity DOESN'T EXIST. There is no gandhi sitting on the throne. Humanity is strangely very biased when it comes to setting standards.

Ok let make my position clearScripture is only a GUIDE to me. I don't take it as whole truth or absolute truth. So you are right. Our debate has ended.

If you don't take the scripture as whole truth, why are you quoting it ? You assume to force your interpretations when you don't even believe in it nor even, I imagine, know its language. Quite strange for an evolved human being of the 21st century.

Ok, lets move on from the scripture. Lets talk about YOUR CRITERIA for determining what is 'morality'. I have some questions for you

What does it mean to be moral?
Does morality have any cultural bearings ?
You mentioned HUMANITY sets standards ? Who was consulted in this standard setting ?
Is there a linnear progression to morality? What are the conditions and exceptions if there is?

Lets be evolved human beings and face these questions. We don't need any 7th Century book to tell us because the book is time bound and can't give us all the answers since we've evolved so much.

unknownuser

I say if lot of translators are saying the same thing then this has more weight than yours
.

What are you doing here then ? Go haunt some Christian or Sunni forum where you can get more 'the more who say it, the more correct it is' mentality.

I don't seem to understand you. All I said if more people translate the same thing in the same way then this has more weight than your own translation does it not? So how did Christian or sunni come into this...?

Thats what happened in the past. You cant change the past mquran but you can make future better. But human beings have evolved from our dark past. And yes most human beings have advanced in their standards. If you can't see that then I can't do anything about that apart from to suggest that you read history

The question was IS THIS MORAL OR NOT ? Are you afraid to answer this? Up in the thread, you asserted that 'this was ok' remember ? Now you're telling us 'thats whats happened in the past' . This is quite typical of human inconsistency in judgement, yet too arrogant to accept God's judgement.

I again I am failing to understand you. I have already said by OUR PRESENT STANDARDS what happened in the past is WRONG and yes immoral. But we have evolved since then. The MIGHT IS RIGHT morality was accepted norm in the past but not anymore - do you understand? (please don't bring Iraq and Bosnia - we are not talking about politics) but evolution of morality).

So that I can have my share of spoils of war? and make the women into slaves and concubine? Mark or chop thief's hands for stealing? No mquran it is you who needs do the the evolving.

Lets assume for a second that the above interpretations of yours are correct. ok ?

Can you please tell me what is YOUR CRITERIA of determining that these punishments are 'less evolved'. Please don't shy away from answering this. You are an evolved human being, far more evolved than the monkeys who lived before you. Evolved human beings should use thier reasoning and be able to answer questions, correct ? Or does evolving mean that you grow less able to conduct a meaningful discussion.

Again I don't understand you. The CRITERIA is our EVOLVED COLLECTIVE HUMAN CONSCIOUS.

Do you know why European countries are more succesful? It is because they can think outside of the scripture. They use their reason and not make scripture their reason.

Really ? It had nothing to do with the fact that they , with thier might, plundered the entire world before this ? I know entire third world nations who would disagree with you. Eurocentrism worshippers forget that that the rest of the world have a right to live and prosper too.

So did the Romans, so did the Islamic Empires, so did the many Empires come and gone in the past. Read History mquran! Japan was conquered. Hey now they are most successful nations on Earth. India was ruled by the British, hey now they are becoming one of the fastest IT Technology centres in the world compared to neigbouring Pakistan. Being successful is looking forward to the future and not in the past!

Sorry, but the only reason you say this is, in my opinion, that you've never looked at the Quran thoroughly, BY ITS OWN INTERNAL PRINCIPLES. From your application of the Quran, I opine that you have never gone beyond the translators paradigm.

Though I do not speak Arabic but I have studied Quran for two years.

If you read the Quran for yourself, you will see that it captures the condition of present day European nations and what thier ultimate fate is if they refuse to accept God's laws.

Hey did I not say that already that European nations already applied the Quranic Principles to their society? And did they use Quran? No! they relied on their Reason and thats what Quran tells you to do. Use your reason and use Quran as a guide and not absolute Truth or whole truth and not make quran as your REASON.

And as for the deification of human reasoning, that is your choice. I don't trust human reasoning, I trust Allah.

Now you have come to the mentality of the "Islamic mind"! Now can you so why European and other western nations are so succesful in everything? So mquran I have no hope for you...

In the UK, burglars weren't even given a custodial sentence due to liberals like yourself.

Hey I am so glad that I live in a liberal society and not some country where you get your head lopped off for speaking your mind!

So as for cutting hands and crucifiction, for those people who cause such mischief, I say they should get equivalent to thier dues. Why should society pay for thier acts?

I don't understand this - are you saying it is ok to chop peoples hands off for stealing? Can you clarify this too me?

Ah, its good to SET standards. Funnily no one actually ever FOLLOWS those standards. Why wont Bush sign the kyoto act ? You see, what you propagate is something nonsensical because 'humanity' as a controlling polity DOESN'T EXIST. There is no gandhi sitting on the throne. Humanity is strangely very biased when it comes to setting standards.

Hey I am not Bush. Argue with him for not signing upto kyoto!

Ok let make my position clearScripture is only a GUIDE to me. I don't take it as whole truth or absolute truth. So you are right. Our debate has ended.

If you don't take the scripture as whole truth, why are you quoting it ? You assume to force your interpretations when you don't even believe in it nor even, I imagine, know its language. Quite strange for an evolved human being of the 21st century.

I did not quote scripture to start with. I merely extended what you quoted.

Ok, lets move on from the scripture. Lets talk about YOUR CRITERIA for determining what is 'morality'. I have some questions for you

Lets not do such a thing at all. The person who does not trust his own reason it will be pointless to continue this argument.

I have noted your points. Thank you.

Adios.

Regards,

zenje

Peace LT,

All I said if more people translate the same thing in the same way then this has more weight than your own translation does it not? So how did Christian or sunni come into this...?
Do you seriously believe that?.. or just trying to kick up a debate? ? The reason mquran is talking about sunni, etc... is that they believe in the majority of the translators who used hadith to get the interpretation of quran. More doesn't mean correct, you of all people, know this. Right?

I don't trust human reasoning, I trust Allah.

Now you have come to the mentality of the "Islamic mind"! Now can you so why European and other western nations are so succesful in everything?
And why not trust in Allah? What does mentality of Islamic mind mean? Are you talking about the majority of the sects that like to call themselves muslims? Europeans and western nations successful in everything?... again, are you serious? Or maybe I should ask you what you mean by success.

The person who does not trust his own reason it will be pointless to continue this argument.
You trust your own reason more than you trust in GOD ?

savage_carrot

Peace all,

Been following this thread for quite some time, am with mquran on this one, well balanced logical posts...

What does it mean to be moral?
Does morality have any cultural bearings ?
You mentioned HUMANITY sets standards ? Who was consulted in this standard setting ?
Is there a linnear progression to morality? What are the conditions and exceptions if there is?

I too would like to see someone take a stab at these...

Nadia

Fahad1

If you had read history then you would have known that Victors in a war in the ancient times usually killed all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves. That was a common practice. But this is not a common practice anymore. So again I tell you morality evolves.

salam Lotetree.
if u had read history then u would have known that around the time when Victors in a war in the ancient times usually killed all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves , Salahuddin Ayyubi also entered Jerusalem . and he didnt spill blood , killed males or raped women . that was true morality . that was the morality of the ancient scripture of 6th centuy arabia . what the disbeleivers did , i.e killing people and raping women was immoral , and it is and always has been immoral .

unknownuser

Peace LT,

All I said if more people translate the same thing in the same way then this has more weight than your own translation does it not? So how did Christian or sunni come into this...?
Do you seriously believe that?.. or just trying to kick up a debate? ? The reason mquran is talking about sunni, etc... is that they believe in the majority of the translators who used hadith to get the interpretation of quran. More doesn't mean correct, you of all people, know this. Right?

Come zenje - I don't speak Arabic and even those that speak Arabic I have been informed do not speak Quranic Arabic and therefore they have to rely on some sort of translations too. And majority of forum members here also use translations. My point was if all translators translate the same words in same way then this has more weight than mquran self translations of this word, does it not? Can you not see this zenje? This is not about more but translation of the same words. Are telling me that if every translators translate the same words in the same way then they must be wrong because mquran has translated it differently?

I don't trust human reasoning, I trust Allah.

What can I say to above zenje? mquran seem to have forgotten that Araham himself, the first monotheist, came to the notion of monotheistic God using his Reason Alone!

Now you have come to the mentality of the "Islamic mind"! Now can you so why European and other western nations are so succesful in everything?

What I meant by "Islamic Mind" is making SCRIPTURE as REASON, instead of a GUIDE. A "Islamic Mind" is unable to think outside of the Scritpure. And yes European and Western nations are sucessful in every way - economically and intellectually but also in democracy and personal liberty.

And why not trust in Allah?

I do Zenje and thats why I have no FEAR of death! -)

The person who does not trust his own reason it will be pointless to continue this argument.
You trust your own reason more than you trust in GOD ?

I have my trust in God but I rely on my Reason, intuitions and imaginations to develop an understanding of my God (I know I have said this millions times over... -)

Regards,

unknownuser

if u had read history then u would have known that around the time when Victors in a war in the ancient times usually killed all the males of the city and made women and children into slaves , Salahuddin Ayyubi also entered Jerusalem . and he didnt spill blood , killed males or raped women . that was true morality . that was the morality of the ancient scripture of 6th centuy arabia . what the disbeleivers did , i.e killing people and raping women was immoral , and it is and always has been immoral .

Yes, Saladin, there have some exception people in history too like Saladin. But they were rare. But look further back in history and you will realise what a bloody history it has been for humanity!

Regards,

unknownuser

Peace mquran,

The verses before and after including 841 (from 839 - 845) talk about war/fighting, hence the booty or "spoils of war" or loosely "profits". My question is how does one share/assign 20% (1/5th) with/to Allah and HIS messenger???

I agree that the passage deals with warfare, but 8/41 specifically deals with 'ghanim' or benefits/profits from ANYTHING (min shain) is to be channeled to the cause.

If you agree with the passage/verses that deals with warfare, then that's what I believe its talking about in reference to benefits/profits/booty/spoils-of-war, not just ANYTHING. If you still think otherwise, then please elaborate in context.

Allah and his messenger represent the deen. Whatever we make in life, we need to give 1/5th to the cause.

What "cause" are you talking about, mquran? The verse clearly states that whatever booty/profits/spoils-of-war is left behind by the BELIEVERS, must be given/shared amongst Allah, His messenger and ....

I can understand the and ... part, but again, the question proposed by me was "how does one share/assign 20% (1/5th) with/to Allah and HIS messenger???"

In other words, how does Allah, being Most Merciful, would want HIS believers to 'kill' HIS non-believers in a war/fight and have 20% attributed/shared/given to HIM and HIS Messenger and others? Besides, what if the case is reversed??? This sounds pretty bizzare.

Personally, I believe this verse is misconstrued. What say you, my friend?

Wakas

peace LT, b_a, all,

I'm a little surprised by some of the content in this thread, but anyways...

And majority of forum members here also use translations. My point was if all translators translate the same words in same way then this has more weight than mquran self translations of this word, does it not?

It is not only mquran who thinks this. I also think "spoils of war" is highly debateable. Unfortunately 'anfal' is not used elswhere in al quran to thoroughly refute the 'spoils of war' claim but its core meaning is gain/gift/addition. And clearly the words 'of war' are not there. Thus, you must admit, at the very least, it is an interpretation/extrapolation. Unless of course one can provide evidence from classical Arabic dictionaries to say that 'anfal' never means anything else other than 'spoils of war'. Then you may have a point.
I think its the superlative (e.g. hassan / ahsan), thus it may have a stronger connotation.

Now we have medical tests to prove whether there's been some kind of cheating. Let's say hypothetically a man is suspicious of his wife and he got some proofs that he is being cheated on. What would he do? Wait to catch his wife with four witnesses or get help from mainstream medicine or something? If you choose the latter then you're not living in accordance of the Quran.

I asked for an example. This is the first example you gave. Firstly, what is the specific test you are talking about? Does it work on male & female? Is it widely available so all people can use it?

If your answer to any of the above is deficient then your solution has failed. Unless, you are talking about adapting/updating... then perhaps we may want to consider what are the principles of the law and can these principles be kept intact and carried over to the present day.

Wakas

mquran

Salaamun alaikum,

LoteTree I don't seem to understand you. All I said if more people translate the same thing in the same way then this has more weight than your own translation does it not? So how did Christian or sunni come into this...?

So your criteria is numbers, i.e 'if MORE PEOPLE'. My criteria is the Quran, not numbers. Thats why its better for u to be a sunni or christian. Plenty of numbers there for you to hide behind.

LoteTree I again I am failing to understand you. I have already said by OUR PRESENT STANDARDS what happened in the past is WRONG and yes immoral. But we have evolved since then. The MIGHT IS RIGHT morality was accepted norm in the past but not anymore - do you understand? (please don't bring Iraq and Bosnia - we are not talking about politics) but evolution of morality).

So accepted 'norms' makes things correct or wrong ? For 5 years, torturing and killing Jews in Germany and Poland was 'the norm'. Did that make it 'right' ?

Political decisions MAKE history so please don't level artificial epistemologies here, ok ?

LoteTreeAgain I don't understand you. The CRITERIA is our EVOLVED COLLECTIVE HUMAN CONSCIOUS.

Ah, beautiful. Now please tell me, is there a tangible body of ethos which human beings COLLECTIVELY agree to ?

In some parts of Pakistan, honor killing are THE NORM. Can you please tell us why this is wrong, assuming you think so ?

LoteTreeSo did the Romans, so did the Islamic Empires, so did the many Empires come and gone in the past. Read History mquran! Japan was conquered. Hey now they are most successful nations on Earth. India was ruled by the British, hey now they are becoming one of the fastest IT Technology centres in the world compared to neigbouring Pakistan. Being successful is looking forward to the future and not in the past!

Sorry but what is your point here? You told us about European success and its non-relationship to scripture. I'm telling you that European success came from merciless colonialism, i.e. murder and pillaging. I'm not saying no one else did it but since you mentioned Europeans, I just think you should know the full history. The people of the third world havent forgotten.

Lote Tree Hey did I not say that already that European nations already applied the Quranic Principles to their society? And did they use Quran? No! they relied on their Reason and thats what Quran tells you to do. Use your reason and use Quran as a guide and not absolute Truth or whole truth and not make quran as your REASON

I agree that its possible to evolve without any scripture. Its like walking without any map, you can still get there.

However, European/American hegemony isn't an example of this. They achieved material success on the basis of exploitation. They used reason without guidance and thus came to the conclusion that the rest of the world must be fodder for them. So lets not worship them but worship Allah.

Now you have come to the mentality of the "Islamic mind"! Now can you so why European and other western nations are so succesful in everything? So mquran I have no hope for you...

Succesful in EVERYTHING ? oh boy...even western thinkers themselves bemoan the decline of the west and u claim success in everything ? Look up the word 'delusional', pal.

Lote TreeHey I am so glad that I live in a liberal society and not some country where you get your head lopped off for speaking your mind!

Agreed. So am I. But unfortunately, ultra-liberalism leads to loss of COLLECTIVE rights to the errant individual. Mercy can't be forced.

Lote Tree I don't understand this - are you saying it is ok to chop peoples hands off for stealing? Can you clarify this too me?

No, Im asking you, if you think it's barbaric, WHY DO YOU THINK SO ? Point me to this 'collective human ethos' you keep going on about. I want to see it.

Lote TreeHey I am not Bush. Argue with him for not signing upto kyoto

You claim moral evolution has been achieved. This is all rubbish, sadly. Nothing but arrogance and haughtiness simply by looking 'universal declarations'. You can declare world hunger to be abolished, will that make food magically appear to starving ethiopians.

the language has changed, the situation remains.

I did not quote scripture to start with. I merely extended what you quoted.

Here's what you saidIn my view the language of the scripture is that of the 6th Arabia, the Morality of the scripture is the morality of the 6th century Arabia. That is why you get "spoils of war" being distributed amongst the victors. That is why the victims of war becomes your "Right Hand" possesion that can be made into slaves and concubines.

So you're right, you didn't quote it, you didn't even quote the translations. You just paraphased your own opinion about it. Quite an evolved thing to do, a true act for man of the 21st century.

ZenjeAnd why not trust in Allah? What does mentality of Islamic mind mean? Are you talking about the majority of the sects that like to call themselves muslims? Europeans and western nations successful in everything?... again, are you serious? Or maybe I should ask you what you mean by success.

That's a very good question. What does 'success' entail here ? Is conducting colonialist and post-colonialist projects leading to situations where 9 year old kids work for peanuts a 'success' , I wonder ?

Al-Quraan provides a criteria which transcends human subjectivity. This is why the very antithesis of 'ribaa' is the establishment of others in the world. But of course, being a 7th century text, it must be barbaric in thinking so (sic)

Nadia
Quote

What does it mean to be moral?
Does morality have any cultural bearings ?
You mentioned HUMANITY sets standards ? Who was consulted in this standard setting ?
Is there a linnear progression to morality? What are the conditions and exceptions if there is?

I too would like to see someone take a stab at these...

I opine that the reason Lote Tree refused to engage these questions is because they expose the cultural imperialism of morality if its humanly formulated.

Take the tradition of polygamy. If one were to say that it is uncivilised, one would need a valuation system to judge it so. Therefore, one would be saying that one culture has the superiority to judge another culture. There is no 'collective human ethos' except in Lote Tree's imagination.

LoteTree What can I say to above zenje? mquran seem to have forgotten that Araham himself, the first monotheist, came to the notion of monotheistic God using his Reason Alone!

How is Abraham the first monothiest ? Nuh came before him and Ibrahim was called 'shiatun nuh' (nuh's party)

As for him using reason ALONE, the Quran saysHis people disputed with him. He said "(Come) ye to dispute with me, about Allah, WHEN HE HAS GUIDED ME? I fear not (the beings) ye associate with Allah Unless my Lord willeth, (nothing can happen). My Lord comprehendeth in His knowledge all things. Will ye not (yourselves) be admonished?

How does Allah guide ?
2/38-39We said "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you GUIDANCE from me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve
"But those who reject Faith and BELIE OUR SIGNS, they shall be companions of the Fire; they shall abide therein."

Lets not be so arrogant as to deify our reason. Musa used his reason too, in the story mentioned in 18/60-82 but it failed in light of KNOWLEDGE FROM THE PRESENCE OF ALLAH.

Yes, Saladin, there have some exception people in history too like Saladin. But they were rare. But look further back in history and you will realise what a bloody history it has been for humanity!

So where's the 'collective human ethos' in this, I wonder ? When someone of the past does it, its an exception. When Bush contravenes it, its politics. Lol..what a character.

DanishIf you agree with the passage/verses that deals with warfare, then that's what I believe its talking about in reference to benefits/profits/booty/spoils-of-war, not just ANYTHING. If you still think otherwise, then please elaborate in context.

The phrase 'min shain' (from anything) appears. Now the Quran is a book which uses similarities in repetition (39/23 - kitaaban mutashabihan mathany). The word 'enemy' 'defeated' 'take' 'wealth' 'weapons' DOES NOT appear in 8/41 although they do appear elsewhere. Thats because the 'war spoils' concept is an INTERPOLATION.

In other words, how does Allah, being Most Merciful, would want HIS believers to 'kill' HIS non-believers in a war/fight and have 20% attributed/shared/given to HIM and HIS Messenger and others? Besides, what if the case is reversed??? This sounds pretty bizzare.

Yes, there's no such thing as killing disbelievers for wealth to give away. This is not sherwood forest.

Please see 20/18 for word 'ghanim'. This is best, most defining occurence of the word. It means 'sheep' which to me is metaphorical.

To give to Allah and his messenger is simply contributing to the qiblah, i.e, establishing masjid al-haraam.

thanks and peace

savage_carrot

Peace mq, all

I opine that the reason Lote Tree refused to engage these questions is because they expose the cultural imperialism of morality if its humanly formulated.

Take the tradition of polygamy. If one were to say that it is uncivilised, one would need a valuation system to judge it so. Therefore, one would be saying that one culture has the superiority to judge another culture. There is no 'collective human ethos' except in Lote Tree's imagination.

Agree, thats why i raised it up again to be discussed

Yes, there's no such thing as killing disbelievers for wealth to give away. This is not sherwood forest.

lol

Regards,
Nadia

mquran

Salaamun alaikum Nadia,

I am trying my best to fashion my thoughts in the Quranic mold. The Quran very surprisingly to me, does not have a word for 'moral' (in Arabic it's 'akhlaaq'). The Quran uses 'khalq' to mean 'creation' and doesn't imply a moralistic sense.

The closest corresponding word I find in the Quraan is 'salih' (usually translated as 'righteous'. To be 'salih' means to act in such a way that God's laws are preserved . Its opposite is 'fasad' which is used to signify mischief or chaos.

A fuller definition can be found here

http//www.toluislam.com/pub_online/exposition/glossary_s_to_t.htm#_Toc428590314

thanks and peace

unknownuser

LoteTree I don't seem to understand you. All I said if more people translate the same thing in the same way then this has more weight than your own translation does it not? So how did Christian
or sunni come into this...?

So your criteria is numbers, i.e 'if MORE PEOPLE'. My criteria is the Quran, not numbers. Thats why its better for u to be a sunni or christian. Plenty of numbers there for you to hide behind.

I don't seem to get this through to you at all can I!
Let me ask you differently - Are you saying your translation is the only valid one and every other translations that have ever been done are WRONG? Even translations done by Native Arabic speakers like Rashad Khalifa? OK, understood! - only your translation is
perfect others are invalid. Lets leave it at that... -)

LoteTree I again I am failing to understand you. I have already said by OUR PRESENT STANDARDS what happened in the past is WRONG and yes immoral. But we have evolved since then. The MIGHT IS RIGHT morality was accepted norm in the past but not anymore - do you understand? (please don't bring Iraq and Bosnia - we are not talking about politics) but evolution of morality).

So accepted 'norms' makes things correct or wrong ? For 5 years, torturing and killing Jews in

Germany and Poland was 'the norm'. Did that make it 'right' ?

Again. I can't seem to make you understand! So I repeat

I have already said by OUR PRESENT STANDARDS what happened in the past is WRONG and yes immoral. But we have evolved since then. The MIGHT IS RIGHT morality was accepted "norm" in the past but not anymore - do you understand?

LoteTreeAgain I don't understand you. The CRITERIA is our EVOLVED COLLECTIVE HUMAN CONSCIOUS.

Ah, beautiful. Now please tell me, is there a tangible body of ethos which human beings COLLECTIVELY agree to ?

Yes we have some. But we are at early days yet. There is Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Principles of Democracy, The Geneva Convention. But these in turn will evolve further to meet new
challenges of the future.

In some parts of Pakistan, honor killing are THE NORM. Can you please tell us why this is wrong,

assuming you think so ?

How can that be norm of "collective" conscious. It only happens in Pakistan, Duh?

I'm telling you that European success came from merciless colonialism, i.e. murder and pillaging.

I'm not saying no one else did it but since you mentioned Europeans, I just think you should know

the full history. The people of the third world havent forgotten.

Yes, some have, India for instances. India, does not look back to its colonial past but to its future and as result it is becoming one of the fastest growing IT hub in the world. You gain nothing by looking to the past mquran! Japan was obliterated with two Atomics Bombs but did they
wallow in their misfortune? No. They looked to the future and abandoned their imperial past and incoporated many of the Principles of Democracy and Personal liberty into their own society. And that has allowed them to become one of the most economically and techonologically advanced
countries in the world.

I agree that its possible to evolve without any scripture. Its like walking without any map, you can still get there.

So why do you make scripture your REASON?

Succesful in EVERYTHING ? oh boy...even western thinkers themselves bemoan the decline of the west and u claim success in everything ? Look up the word 'delusional', pal.

Yes they are. They are successful in terms economic sucess, personal liberty, democracy, science, techonolgy etc. etc. and the list goes on... But Eurpean Model is not Utopia. It does not claimed to be Utopia. It is not perfect and it will never will be. But what is available so far is much
much better than what was available in the past. And having lived under a Oppressive government where I was denied my personal liberty and the freedom to speak my mind, I find European democracy
a Paradise! -) If I am delusional then you must be BLIND.

No, Im asking you, if you think it's barbaric, WHY DO YOU THINK SO ? Point me to this 'collective

human ethos' you keep going on about. I want to see it.

Let me ask you this question DO YOU THINK ITS BARBARIC AND WHY?

You claim moral evolution has been achieved. This is all rubbish, sadly. Nothing but arrogance and haughtiness simply by looking 'universal declarations'. You can declare world hunger to be abolished, will that make food magically appear to starving ethiopians.

Ha ha -) Do you think telling people to make Quran as their REASON the WORLD HUNGER WILL DISSAPPEAR OVERNIGHT? I don't think so! You are living in "Scritpure-cukoo Land"!

That's a very good question. What does 'success' entail here? Is conducting colonialist and post-colonialist projects leading to situations where 9 year old kids work for peanuts a 'success'
,I wonder?

Yep, typical "Islamic" thinking. Blame it someone else! Japan and Germany mquran came from devastation of war and conquest to become leading nations of this world. Looking to the future achieves success. Looking to the past will make people just like you blaming others for their
failures. Grow up. Take charge of your destiny. Don't live in the past, get out of the 6th century Arabia of chopping limbs etc.

Al-Quraan provides a criteria which transcends human subjectivity. This is why the very antithesis of 'ribaa' is the establishment of others in the world. But of course, being a 7th century text,
it must be barbaric in thinking so (sic)

How does chopping limbs trascending human subjectivity?

There is no 'collective human ethos' except in Lote Tree's imagination.

Perhaps if take your head of scripture then you can see that we are on a evolutionary path...We have come very far from our violent beginings but there is very far far to go yet. There will be many more set backs on the way. But humanity will proceed in the evolutionary path as God intended...

Regards,

mquran

I don't seem to get this through to you at all can I!
Let me ask you differently - Are you saying your translation is the only valid one and every other translations that have ever been done are WRONG? Even translations done by Native Arabic speakers like Rashad Khalifa? OK, understood! - only your translation is
perfect others are invalid. Lets leave it at that...

Look, you're a civilised person of the modern age. You need to exercise some REASON. The Question which zenje and i posed to you is simple does the fact that there are many translations saying 'x' make it so ? Can you possibly verify it if you don't know the language ?

Whether or not my translation is correct is something you cannot measure by simply looking at popular translations. Unless of course, you worship the populous.

Again. I can't seem to make you understand! So I repeat

Quote

I have already said by OUR PRESENT STANDARDS what happened in the past is WRONG and yes immoral. But we have evolved since then. The MIGHT IS RIGHT morality was accepted "norm" in the past but not anymore - do you understand?

So its wrong now. Was it ok BACK THEN (please note this operative phrase) ? IF it was ok back then , by what criteria do you say so ?

Yes we have some. But we are at early days yet. There is Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Principles of Democracy, The Geneva Convention. But these in turn will evolve further to meet new
challenges of the future.

Right, so your criteria is simply the conceptual declaration. Whether or not people actually follow it is immaterial.

According to history, in the enlightenment,Paine, Locke, Voltaire and co already declared these 'rights of man'. Yet even after this evolutionary act in which man progressed, the world witnessed acts like

aparthied
the elimination of the native abrogines in australia
the holocaust

so funnily, declarations don't really mean much.

How can that be norm of "collective" conscious. It only happens in Pakistan, Duh?

That's what I'm saying. YOU claim the criteria is the 'collective human conscious'. If there are sections of humanity still practising aberrant acts, you must not consider them human enough. You have been intoxicated by modernism so much, I imagine, that you forget other cultures do exist and are in fact, human.

Yes, some have, India for instances. India, does not look back to its colonial past but to its future and as result it is becoming one of the fastest growing IT hub in the world.
You gain nothing by looking to the past mquran!
Japan was obliterated with two Atomics Bombs but did they
wallow in their misfortune? No. They looked to the future and abandoned their imperial past and incoporated many of the Principles of Democracy and Personal liberty into their own society. And that has allowed them to become one of the most economically and techonologically advanced
countries in the world.

Notice your underlined phrase above 'you gain nothing by looking at the past'. Can I ask you then what you're looking at history for ? And I quote

With due respects to you, please read history...

I think what you wish to do is to exalt your worship of the present dominant culture. The dominant culture does enshrine some Quranic values but reject others. The dominant culture also built thier culture by merciless exploitation, the consequences of which still reverberates in the world today.

As I said, what kind of a culture allows 9 year old kids to work for peanuts to produce items which they sell for tens of pounds ? That's a crime and a half but funnily your morally advanced self missed that.

So why do you make scripture your REASON?

Because it works. Far better than anything i've read from human beings. It really captures the human condition for me. Also, I've been fortunate enough not to be inflicted with modern-tosis.

Yes they are. They are successful in terms economic sucess, personal liberty, democracy, science, techonolgy etc. etc. and the list goes on... But Eurpean Model is not Utopia. It does not claimed to be Utopia. It is not perfect and it will never will be. But what is available so far is much
much better than what was available in the past. And having lived under a Oppressive government where I was denied my personal liberty and the freedom to speak my mind, I find European democracy
a Paradise! If I am delusional then you must be BLIND.

LOL..it never claimed to be utopia ? Life must be very hunky-dory in Mars, huh ?

Ever read Fukuyama's The end of history and the last man ? Or Huntingdons 'the clash of civilisations...' ? That's EXACTLY what they're saying..that this present dominant civilisation is IT.

Funnily, Marx asserted that the communist state would be the end of history as well by misappropriating Hegel's dialectic theory.

Before that, the French Encylopaedists thought the fall of French monarch would lead to the fall of all monarchies and the rise of the nation state, thus leading to the ideal world.

We humans have always been arrogant enough to think we know more than Allah, but we are nothing but tiny specks.

You find European Democracy a paradise? Wonderful, I hope you never get to drink the blood on which it was built.

Let me ask you this question DO YOU THINK ITS BARBARIC AND WHY?

Why are you afraid to answer this question ? Afraid that your inherent racism will manifest itself ?

I think it would be barbaric because al-quraan never mandated so. It mandates the equivalency law not hand-amputation for thieves.

Yep, typical "Islamic" thinking. Blame it someone else! Japan and Germany mquran came from devastation of war and conquest to become leading nations of this world. Looking to the future achieves success. Looking to the past will make people just like you blaming others for their
failures. Grow up. Take charge of your destiny. Don't live in the past, get out of the 6th century Arabia of chopping limbs etc.

Quite the racist, aren't you? 'Islamic thinking' is a phrase you don't seem to understand yet you don't mind plugging 1.2 billion people with a label. Do you guys still wear the hoods and burn the cross these days or do you use more liberal and enlightening language?

Ha ha Do you think telling people to make Quran as their REASON the WORLD HUNGER WILL DISSAPPEAR OVERNIGHT? I don't think so! You are living in "Scritpure-cukoo Land"!

A quranic order would eradicate these industries which are part of the European civilisation you worship so much. That would be a good start, but I have the feeling that workers of certain ethnic groups don't matter to you so long as you languish in the paradise you claim to abide in.

At least now, your true colours are coming out. You claim admiration for the dominant European culture yet refuse to decry the bloody, exploitative foundations on which this culture is built. Those people must be less than human for you, right ? 'Collective human conscious' ? ...LOL.

born_again

salaam wakas

Firstly, what is the specific test you are talking about? Does it work on male & female? Is it widely available so all people can use it?

There are infidelity tests like "Check Mate Semen Detection Kit" e.g. and it works on both sexes. Probably there are more I don't know of. I'm not sure if it's available all over the world.

Let me ask a few questions as well

A woman KNOWS that she's being cheated on. Her husband is on "business trips" again and she finds out somehow which hotel he will spend the night. She calls three more witness ready to catch him red-handed but they fail to catch him in action her hunch was right he's with another woman. They know for sure that the two had an affair but they have no witness. Now is the flogging applicable?

Let's just imagine a new case. A man is suspicious of his wife and decides to get a paternity test done. You know they have 99.9 % accuracy rate. He learns that his child is not from him. But he hasn't got four witnesses. What's the Quranic law in these cases?

Peace...

unknownuser

Whether or not my translation is correct is something you cannot measure by simply looking at popular translations. Unless of course, you worship the populous.

Yes I can. I can say to you why is your translation different from the rest? When everyone else translated apples into apples but you have translated as oranges - do you not understand this?

So its wrong now. Was it ok BACK THEN (please note this operative phrase) ? IF it was ok back then , by what criteria do you say so ?

Let say this in few words Back then we were not evolved enough to see it as "wrong". But human consciouness has evolved to see it as wrong.

According to history, in the enlightenment,Paine, Locke, Voltaire and co already declared these 'rights of man'. Yet even after this evolutionary act in which man progressed, the world witnessed acts like

aparthied
the elimination of the native abrogines in australia
the holocaust

The Quran appeared 1400 years ago. Why did it not stop all the above happening?

How can that be norm of "collective" conscious. It only happens in Pakistan, Duh?

That's what I'm saying. YOU claim the criteria is the 'collective human conscious'.

Yes. The word is "COLLECTIVE" consciousness. Can you not see that human beings as a whole are slowly letting go of their violent past? But still the acts of savagery goes on. But on a evolutionary level we are striving to become more civilised...

Notice your underlined phrase above 'you gain nothing by looking at the past'. Can I ask you then what you're looking at history for ? And I quote

I look at history to see where we have been before. It is looking at history that we can gleam the evolutinary path of humanity...

I think what you wish to do is to exalt your worship of the present dominant culture. The dominant culture does enshrine some Quranic values but reject others. The dominant culture also built thier culture by merciless exploitation, the consequences of which still reverberates in the world today.

I worship no such culture. I look at what is best. Democracy and Principles of Personal Liberty best serves Humanity. It is nothing to do with Dominancy.

As I said, what kind of a culture allows 9 year old kids to work for peanuts to produce items which they sell for tens of pounds ? That's a crime and a half but funnily your morally advanced self missed that.

Children aged 9 worked in the coal mines in the past and died inhaling coal dust. This rarely happens now. So this is an IMPROVEMENT.

So why do you make scripture your REASON?

Because it works. Far better than anything i've read from human beings. It really captures the human condition for me.

Thats good I am happy for you. But I will stick to democracy and principles of personal liberty.

Also, I've been fortunate enough not to be inflicted with modern-tosis.

Thats good for you. Democracy and Personal Liberty allows people to live in dark caves of past history. That is the beauty of Democracy and Personal Liberty -)

Ever read Fukuyama's The end of history and the last man ? Or Huntingdons 'the clash of civilisations...' ? That's EXACTLY what they're saying..that this present dominant civilisation is IT.

Caveman like how did you manage to read their works -)
Just kidding -) ...thats how humanity evolves mquran, continually questioning the very basis of its existence...

Funnily, Marx asserted that the communist state would be the end of history as well by misappropriating Hegel's dialectic theory.

Before that, the French Encylopaedists thought the fall of French monarch would lead to the fall of all monarchies and the rise of the nation state, thus leading to the ideal world.

Can you not see the evolution in above. First we had tyrannical rulers, these rulers gave away to monarchy and the monarchy is giving away to democracy and democracy will give away to? who knows...

You find European Democracy a paradise? Wonderful, I hope you never get to drink the blood on which it was built.

Well at least my head will not be chopped off for speaking my mind! And think that is important too...

I think it would be barbaric because al-quraan never mandated so.

So because of Quran did not mandated that is why for you it is BARBARIC? Does not your INDIVIDUAL CONSCIOUS tells you it is BARBARIC? Can you see the difference between you and me? I understand it to be barbaric you are merely following what scripture tells you. You have abdicated your REASON, your individual conscious to SCRIPTURE. Why do you despise your own reason?

Quite the racist, aren't you? 'Islamic thinking' is a phrase you don't seem to understand yet you don't mind plugging 1.2 billion people with a label. Do you guys still wear the hoods and burn the cross these days or do you use more liberal and enlightening language?

No mquran I am no racist. You called me liberal. How can I be racist then? And I told you what mean by "Islamic Thinking". Islamic thinking is when you make SCRIPTURE your REASON.

A quranic order would eradicate these industries which are part of the European civilisation you worship so much. That would be a good start, but I have the feeling that workers of certain ethnic groups don't matter to you so long as you languish in the paradise you claim to abide in.

The fact that Quran has been here for 1400 has helped has it? A quranic order will eradicate these industries? Pipe dreams mquran! Scripture-Cukoo-Land" Pipe dreams.

At least now, your true colours are coming out. You claim admiration for the dominant European culture yet refuse to decry the bloody, exploitative foundations on which this culture is built.

Islamic Empires where built on Bloody exploitative foundations! Every empire has been like this. You can't single out any one of them. You can look how far we have come from our bloody past to the present. But human's bloody history is not over. There will be many more bloody things happening in the future. But kicking and screaming will follow God's intenteded evolutionary path...

Those people must be less than human for you, right ? 'Collective human conscious' ? ...LOL.

Appealing to human emotions now mquran? But you are wrong.
I have embraced humanity from Shaine Indians of North America to the aboriginals of Australia. I celebrate the best of humanity and also try to come to terms with worst of humanity. But humanity will evolve according to God's plan and I have no doubt about it...

Regards,