Hi

Hi

Don't they have their own language?

https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_language
They don't have an arbitrary language like we humans do.
Every single word above this sentence is arbitrary, except for maybe "hi". Many animals do have a language system but as explained before with de saussure's "sign" theory, these languages do not result into what's necessary to develop (simple) philosophical ideas.

RED I do not believe this.
Having no numbers does not mean they can not count.
If one of them has 10 apples then I am very sure he/she will notice if you steal one.
You can test it with little children who do not know numbers yet.

Actually, this was something a professor of mine told me, I didn't believe it at first neither. However it is true.
https//www.newscientist.com/article/dn6303-language-may-shape-human-thought/

Language shapes thought.
They don't have the concept of quantity.

"For one, two and three objects, members of the tribe consistently matched Gordon?s pile correctly. But for four and five and up to ten, they could only match it approximately, deviating more from the correct number as the row got longer.

The Pirah? also failed to remember whether a box they had been shown seconds ago had four or five fish drawn on the top. When Gordon?s colleagues tapped on the floor three times, the Pirah? were able to imitate this precisely, but failed to mimic strings of four or five taps."

red Translating the behavior of animals to our human standards is simply nonsense.
We humans kill animals and then we eat them. So according to herbivores we are murders.

Pinguins are monogamous animals, they live in relationships like humans.
And they do have prostitution.
Animal prostitution is what it's called. https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_among_animals
Many animals have behavior similar to humans, we are social animals.

Many herbivores are murderers themselves. The hippopoptamus alongside other herbivores would destroy you
And afterwards they'll just leave your corpse and feel no remorse.

@Man in Faith, I'll answer you later.

People please let's not get off topic, I have created another topic to continue this discussion, let's get back on track.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608288.0 - for animals.
Does God dwell in us?

Yes, it is a correct statement. The word 'Allah' also linguistically means (the) 'Who Is ', being a third-person form similar to what was told to Moses in the Torah "I am who am I". The problem for us humans is to truly have the Spirit of God in us rather than no spirit at all (lifelessness) and part of the "automation" of the "Flesh", i.e. the instinct and its enticing force to do things like a slave.

And for your information, Satan is a word misinterpreted and it refers to the instinct, i.e. there is no one named Satan. Also, in Arabic Satan is always referred to as Al-Shaytaan and this form cannot be used as a proper noun (just as Al-lah cannot be a name due to the same argument). You will not see a true proper noun in Quran used with the AL prefix. See for yourself.

In Torah is said that man was created in His image and this is a correct statement although it is slightly mistranslated and it is supposed to be "created TO BE in His image" which means unless you become 'Who Is' (which is metaphorical for "to exist for real" basically) and that you do when you dwell in the Rabb and the Rabb in you, i.e. you have the Spirit of God in you and developed.

The summary is that God is a symbiotic phenomenon where one is 'Who Is' depending on the self-realization. This collective is historically referred to as 'Ellohim' which is a plural of the singular Allah. The double 'Lam' (&#1604 is just a feature of the updated (A)Rabbical language and does not really mean anything differently other than being an emphasized form, i.e. THE 'Who Is' or Such Who Is. The phrase "la Elah ila Ellah" simply means "To be 'Who Is' is to be "Such (as) Who Is'".

The above is the true account, the other more official one is just from clerics and scholars who were not particularly insightful but boasted they were. Like Jesus said, the Kingdom is at hand and can be joined right away and one has no reason to wait until a non-existent (non-happening) resurrection. The only resurrection that happens is a failure which is rebirth in the Flesh and in Gehennom and a fate that is recurring. These same clerics and scholars misunderstood the word of fire too as it does not refer to some kind of burning in Hell but being destined/"fated" and the word Nur/Nar refers to energy/force and implies compulsion in the literature.

With this information it is quite easy to reconcile the Abrahamic lore with such as Buddhism and Hinduism too even though they also have been exposed to perverted teachings to some extent mainly involving superstitious elements.

The faith denominations have always taught abstention from the world and this is all they use to have in common on the surface excluding all perversions. What they fail to convey is WHY do you abstain from the world? Not to please a deity for some show of obedience, no. You abstain from the world because Rabb made in the world a contradiction which is all that you see including your own body and this body will entice you to things in a slavish manner unless you are wary. The concept of rejecting the world and choosing the ethereal beginning in this world is a working remedy and solution to escape the bondage. You are forcefully bonded with the Flesh and this entrapment does not have to be permanent but you were to grow up in this environment and in a contradiction as I told, an illusion.

The most important first thing one has to do in life is to find their selves and strengthen their own self-realization and defeat themselves and their accompanying body. This is then when they will find the Creator (abbu) as well and the One Who is your Foundation-Giver (Rabb), the One you shall be merged with in unity. And you are a share of Rabb, a part which has been called Ebn in the SEMITIC languages and means "Be With Integrity (of)". The question is whether you grow your share or if it remains undeveloped and you remain dependent and lifeless rather than independent which is the goal.

Wellness to you (El-selam alaikam)

I always find it interesting to read your comments, not that I agree (or disagree).

I've read you once said that humans cease to exist when they stay undeveloped (lose to their ego?).
What about animals? Do they cease to exist when they die?

okay so i was watched this video (ahttps//m.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf5I9ZF-bW4nd )around the 50th-54th minute part he said Allah dwell in us and I just want to ask you guys what you guys think of what he said. Because I am afraid of jumping to conclusion since I am afraid to commit shirk. Thanks.

I can not give you an answer to your question, for I also don't know. However I just want to say that rushing into taking positions is, as you already know, the wrong thing to do. However as little as I have the needed proof to believe God dwelling in us, I also do not have the proof that it is completely (or partially) wrong. So I do not position myself. Just try to be the best I can, and hope it suffices.
Take care.

I have nothing, absolutely nothing against any member of this forum.

Oh that's nice to read D I've got nothing against you neither.

But when I see an arrow and see where it is going to hit and see it hitting, I am not going to shut up not for the sake of "good maners" do as if I hadn't seen where it was going to hit and where it hit.

What I am trying to tell you is that, I am not shooting my arrow towards that target. It may look so from your perspective, but it really isn't.

The fact is that such a simple thing as acting lead in prayers, has been turned into a gate for a greater purpose forget about prayers and women' espirituality or spirituality and comunion with God in general and let us return to the important thing in this world which is MALES and their requirements, exigences, perquisies, stattu quo...

I don't get the point of having a "person" or "group" lead a prayer in the first place.

Where did I ever say anything about males requirements, exigences, perquisies, stattu quo etc. etc.?
If you were to make a topic about that I'd probably position myself with you, however in this particular scenario, I have to , because of my personal understanding, take the opposite position.

To start with
stand in front of men.

Requirement number one for males to claim that leading prayers by a woman cannot be because she would stand in front of men.

Several times I have said that that is not necessary, she could be standing in front of women. If we have raws for men and raws for women, then she could stand in front of the women raws.

I admit that I haven't read all 23 pages of this thread. Never saw such a suggestion.
In that scenario, I have no problem with a woman leading the prayer, however the topic of this thread was a woman leading both men and women mixed behind her. different scenarios.

It is simple enough, but it has been overlooked sysematically in the thread because, we do know, even if we won't accept that we know, we do know that the question of prayers is not the question, the question is the perquisites and the rest is just excuse.

Stalling...

Some people also try always to turn these kinds of questions into a battle of the sexes that the feminists are pushing for. And that tey are men haters and so on. As soon as the going gets rough "some" males resort to that kind of stalling.

I'm a feminist myself
I at the moment am not of the opinion that a group/mass prayer is in any way more beneficial than praying in solitude.
However when forced into the situation/scenario that this thread requires, I'd be against it.

We are full of those tricks.

Do not play the tricks and nobody will call them out.

But if you (whoever) play them you have to stick with as much calling outs as come along and from my point of view too few tricks are called out. Most go by unchallenged.

Salaam

That's what I'm trying to get at!! I am not playing those tricks that you accuse me of.

How would you feel if I said that you're simply trying to have men be submissive?
Not saying you are, but you'd probably react the way I am doing right now. NOT TRUE.

If only we would consider what Allah has instructed us to do
and that is to lower the gaze and dress modestly hmm

bravo

Not the prayer one though, it's actually giving time for all these connections to take place...it may even be like one knows that female butts would be rising and falling in a submissive position there and maybe one of them is even hot and it could be in front of me, mustnotlookmustnotlook.can'thelpit.ilooked.imustlook type of situation where the scenario is already halfway there in someone's mind before they even start the activity...

My point, knowing that the activity is happening in front of you. It's like saying don't think of a pink elephant, and all of a sudden you start visualizing.

The solution isn't to minimize distractions. The solution is to train ourselves because reality is not going to conform to our comfort zones and those trying to control it and make it a certain way which is beneficial for themselves is only treading on other people's comfort zones or rights as they may be in this case or others. The same issue raised in praying together is used in many different places, like co-ed education for example.

I do not see any problem with having sexual "desires" towards others. It's natural, it's ok, it's even good up to some degree. However one should be capable of saying no to these desires, one should be capable of lowering the ego.
If a woman were to offer me sex, as a man I've got nothing to lose, not even society is going to think low of me, worst case scenario she's going to get pregnant, why should I care. However that's where lowering the ego is important, learn to reduce the desire to maximize one's own profit (whether it be materialistic or non-materialistic).

I'm against trying to train ourselves like dogs (which I love).
I am of the honest opinion that unconscious thoughts are not controllable. Instead one should work on controlling one's lust.
For example, some people who are doing this are pedophiles, many pedophiles are victims of their sexual orientation, if one could simply train away one's own lust, they'd be the first ones to do so. Many of them get castrated and probably even hormone therapy so that they can control themselves. With them, it's a different case, their sexual desires are not "ok", and many of them know it and are trying their best to live normal lives.

Why is only a sexual diversion the big issue here. A guy/girl could fart in front of you via their buttocks which I readily admit causes more than a couple minutes of actual consternation. I think that's a serious issue that we should be talking about way more than a woman's butt in front of a man since it happens often enough to cause entire ranks of the prayerful to lose focus rather than a couple horny guys.

rotfl
It isn't a "big" issue. It's the question of the topic.
The idea of someone "leading" a prayer in and of itself is weird. In my opinion!

I don't get what the connection to praying is. Please explain how it relates?
I'm sure that this deserves a thread of its own.

I'm not the one who started talking about clothes -X
But since clothes became such a big topic, and I got categorized as one who " a spiritual question concerning women into a clothes show".
I thought why not mention my ideas regarding clothes.
You're right though, it does deserve a thread of it's own.

Sexiness is subjective. What may be sexy to you can be run of the mill to another guy or girl.

I meant the desire to be attractive should be left for the bedroom.
Many women are seeing other women as a threat, as rivals, the less clothes one starts wearing, the more other women will do the same, eventually the "norm" will change.
Imagine a woman walking around in leggings and a belly top in the year 1920. She'd immediately feel uncomfortable, because the people of back then would have reacted with a "wtf" expression.
Nowadays people start wearing more and more provocative clothes, so that they too can be considered "attractive". That's what I was getting at.
I agree that beauty is subjective.

In either case, we need to work on ourselves since we can't heal the world and make it all alright but we do what little we can where we can.

Oh actually, I do plan on starting a fourth wave feminism, and even if I should fail, I hope to at least give birth to some sparks which may lead into a flame. I just need to put my hypotheses into a scientific work and I've got ideas for experiments.
I think we can partially influence other people.
Though this deserves another topic as well, and I don't plan on revealing my ideas.

sexual thoughts arising from women's movements other than a strippers pole and that sort of stuff is solely to be blamed on whoever has these thoughts.

I never meant having sexual thoughts, I meant sexual stimuli, two very different things.
If a person starts imagining scenarios then he is being perverse, however if all he did was see a women wearing tight jeans and gets aroused (without having any kind of thoughts, fantasies, visualisations) then it's a very normal and in my opinion a good thing, otherwise we wouldn't have been born.

The way I see it, sex is a gift to us humans, it's nothing bad, it's a very natural, healthy (when in an engagement/only one partner) and enriching activity. Anyone who is sexualy healthy is going to have sexual stimuli which is, as said above, not perverse, not a visualisation of thoughts or anything alike.
Put a person to sleep and play with the body and s/he will get an erection or swelling of the inside of the vagina, it is nothing to be ashamed of, it's the way our body has been constructed. The person sleeping may not even be dreaming of anything sexual, however the body will react, that is a sexual stimuli.
Of course such a stimuli can also occur through thoughts, but those are not the ones I'm talking about.

And if seeing a buttock (is it single or plural? buttocks?) rising and falling for an adult causes impaired functioning of the sort that causes them to lose focus to the extent of forgetting what they're doing then they need to take themselves in hand or book an appointment to see a professional. No pun intended.

Buttock is one of the two parts, buttocks refers to the butt.
If they start fantasizing, then yes, they're at fault. Losing focus, that's even way over the top.

What I meant was simply getting a sexual stimuli, which I've explained before as being something very natural and even (In my opinion) healthy. I wouldn't even for one second want to be sexually stimulated when praying, getting into contact with God. I would even prefer to have all of my surrounding disappear and be left in soltitude inside of my mind with nothing around me besides God. The least thing I'd like in such a moment is hunger/thirst/excitement for something (wether it be a movie or a date) and definitely not a sexual stimuli.

There is a real danger in such which can be readily seen in the world today. Policing people especially women (which is a hard fact) due to imagined sexual perversions and controlling situations just because they may cause men to lose their tops and 'get excited'. It is ridiculous, but a reality sadly.

People adapt to their surroundings, if we live in a state in which women walk around half nude, changes are high one's own female family members are going to walk around just like that.
Wearing push-up underwear and bra. Unaware that wearing push-ups or even just tight shirts which lift the breasts leads into loose and weak upperchest muscles which in turns results into the breasts hanging even more. The desire to fake good looks results into looking even worse than one did before.
No problem though, nowadays people use silicon as a countermeasurement........
If one has had a breast removal duo to breast cancer, then that'd be understandable, however the mere desire to be more attractive is ridiculous.
The porn industry is ruining the world.
One should be attracted to the face, the smell, the voice and all those innocent yet deciding factors. People wearing make-up with the desire to look nice, unkowing that these products contain chemical poison which ruin their skin, again getting even further away from the desired results, ruining what one has by nature.
I see 12 year old girls wearing jeans wich're eating their butts. Just so that they don't lose to the "competition". Sick sick mentality.
I don't see women and think slut. How could I think such a thing of a 12 year old girl?? What if I get a daughter and when she turns 18 starts wearing the same clothes that I despise? I think poor victim of society.
It's no sign of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. And we have many sick societies(plural? I don't know).
Not saying that the major muslim countries are better, in many places women are being suppressed.

The least thing that I'd accept is for people to say that I a suppress female rights, I am a feminist. Not an egalitarianist, I fight for female rights, and it is a right for the women of all societies to not be a victim. In most of the middle east they're being seen as possession in most of the west they're going through ridiculous cultural struggles caused by big corporations.
I'm not saying that women need to wear a hijab, nor am I against jeans.
However sexiness should be left in the bedroom. That way other women won't feel challenged.

And this is addressed to huruf, I do not blame women for anything. I do not see women as wicked or evil or as my possession. Nor do I wish to overpower them or something like that, if anything at all, and I already know that it will happen I will probably have more disadvantages than my wife because of my sex, I'm not complaining nor do I have any problems with that. So for God's sake, stop saying nonsensical stuff such as "For the other kind of men, what you say is completely useless, someof them even in fact want to be enticed, only if it is to their advantage."
My future wife is not going to be my tool. She's going to be my partner, one with whom I will share my deepest wounds and scars and whom I can entrust parts of my burden.
And guess what, she won't win me through sexiness, I am not a monkey who is a victim of his sexual desires. However, I do have a huge weakness for women with intellect and genuine femininity.

. You are sick, definitely sick. Turn the question of prayers into a question of sex. Yu are definitely sick. And don't tell that men this or that. Do not run that rick on me.

More likely that you are delusional, at least at this very moment.

Take a look at our comments.
Throughout the whole conversation you had a belittling attitude, being sarcastic, attacking my comments with sarcasm, making fun of what I said, instead of actually attacking the argues I've presented.

And all of a sudden, even though you are the one who had an attitude,
comes a reaction like this in which you explode.
Yes I must be very sick.

I suppose that now that we are getting into the question of men, it is much more to your liking to have you buttocks wide in front of some man interested in men. That is also scientific, insn't it? that men interested in men get aroused by seeing nice men buttocks. You know how men are... It is not mental it is physical. That should be much better than getting those automatical women buttocks that automatically switch any scientifical man on. We all love science. And buttocks science tops it all. Every man who goe to pray in a mosque should get previously a real good lecture on buttocks science. Tht should make everything so much more intereting.

I thought you didn't want me to lecture you.

I never mystified the buttocks like you are doing right now.
I even explained why we are attracted to the buttocks, it's nothing mystic.
I've said this on another thread. The gluteus is simply a muscle. Just like every other muscle it has a purpose (movement of the pelvix, straightening our body). We choose our partners based on their physiques. A heterosexual man is never going to be attracted towards another man, no matter how awesome his physique may be. Why should he? It's not like he can get him pregnant.

I was gong to request the moderators to change the subject of this thread into a thread on the sexual arousal of the males, but having founf out that it is a subjct that promotes science so much I am doubtful. it might be good to get a real dose of buttocks science.

The very subject itself was suggesting this theme.
It was obvious the moment the question was asked. We never drifted off-topic.
Can women lead a prayer?
Yes, why not, equal rights for all!
No way, men will get arroused.
A sane muslim will argue why he chooses his position, the Quran wants us to be open-minded and not simply follow the decision of a crowd, as it tells us not to rush in taking positions, we will be responsible for ourselves.

Oops, did I lecture you again? Nope, this is called a conversation.

Science and miracles. It is a real miracle that some men produce the feat of turning anything concerning women into a a debate of women's clothing and libido of the men. And not just once, but many times, over and over and over, and ?it is so unbelievable! they do not tire of it. Science! Let science explain that. Real miracle are they!

If it is concerning women, well it's pretty obvious it's going to turn sexual.
We are talking about a SEX after all.
Women are a sex, men are a sex. We are willingly differentiating, what did you expect? What kind of conversation where you expecting?
The topic itself was sexual/sexist.

?Scientific my foot!

Don't lecture me. You, the kind of men who do that, turn a mere question of worshipping into a full bloown discussion on libido. You are sick, definitely sick. Turn the question of prayers into a question of sex. Yu are definitely sick. And don't tell that men this or that. Do not run that rick on me. I know men, better than you it seems.

"Don't lecture me?"
So you want people to simply say yes you are right?
Everyone who disapproves of your opinion has to remain silent?
Ever heard of the word communication?
Or the word debate? One in which you actually try to take the perspective of the other person into consideration and reply with the intend to provoke thought?

"I know better than you"?
Amazing argument, well I'm done writing with you, I'm not going to lower my level to such childish "conversation is war" mentality.
I even offered you references so that the structure of my understanding becomes a bit more clear. Giving insight into my mind.
You never did the same, never tried holding up a conversation.

Take care of yourself.

However you ee women or men does not bind anybody. It is you particular poit of view. To me it is pure nonsense.

Listen to all arguments with an open mind, pick the best of available options/ideas. I'm not telling anyone that my perspective is the best, it's up to the reader to decide. If you disagree, that's fine as well.

Not in the sense that women could not stand men's buttocks but in the sense that men can perfectly stand women's buttocks unless it is convenient for them not to do so. It is amazing how men that are so vulnerable to comen's attractivenss get sbsolutley cold if they are likely to endanger some interest of them.

All individuals have a different libido. Their sexual drive which is mostly genetics, is aroused by sexual stimuli. In almost all males the responsiveness is highest during puberty. After puberty it decreases, for some it decreases a lot, for others a bit less.
It can be raised trough intake of testosterone or through a healthy livestyle in general.

Vulnerable to women's attractiveness?
It seems like you misunderstood what I said. Being sexualy aroused does not mean that you want to have sex with someone. It means that the body is lusting for sex. The mind however can simply say no. I am not a victim of my bodily desires, however that does not mean that I do not have these desires.

It's like when fasting, when you see food, your desire to bite into an apple, or your desire to drink water increases.
And when I say desire to eat/drink, I do not mean having thoughts like "Oh boy! I would love to have a sip of that water!"
I mean your mouth instinctively salivates. Your body reacts to the sight of food/water. Your mind however ignores it at best as you can, this is known as freedom of will.

Same goes for sexual desires, the mind says no, the body says yes(which is a good thing and should be accepted by oneself, I will never think badly of myself because my body gets aroused by women).
Did you know that women who get raped get aroused physically? Saying no is an insult towards all the women who have openly spoken about this. They are mentally experiencing great fear, however the body does react. Swelling of certain parts of the body (not getting too graphic, I'll stop here) and getting wet so that the "tool" is slippery and not rough. It's not because they are enjoying it, it's a bodily reacting to a penetration. If you get touched, whether you like it or not, your body is going to react. Same thing happens to a guys body when being confronted with sexual stimuli, which does not need to be mental, just the sight of buttocks can be more than enough for some men.

Spare us the theater please. We know men, we know women and we also know that there are not men and women but individuals each with his or her own characteristics. Please do not come here with a collective alibi for anything. One is old enough to know betterthna that.

You're dissing quite a field of science.
I can give some references if you're interested.

But if it so, just get out of the way and do not make people dissapppear that are in your way to impose your wants. Do not make wome dessappear, dissappear yourselves, those male, only those males that seem to find women's presence so dangerous.

I'm not forcing anyone to leave. If a woman insists on praying in front of me, then so be it, I can't force her not to, I will take my leave, however, if it turns out that I was right and she was wrong, and she was fighting for her "ego".
Well, God is ruler of all things, we will be judged for all the things we've done/intended.
However, why feel offended when saying that I am sexually attracted to you? At most you can simply say that you do not have an interest in me(which I probably wouldn't care about anyway, why care about the interest of a woman whom I won't engage with?) however you can not tell me to not find you attractive, that is like telling a homosexual to stop having an interest in their own sex.

That nonsense gets boring and does not enhance the respect for those who parade it.

Again, dissing a whole field of science, nobody's forcing you to believe it.

The Qur'a does not support that nonsense. See sura Yusuf and foster self respect for men instead of maken of them such a pitiful picture. Do you think that you are the only one that knows men and women. We know thousands of them too.It is not that you are making us learn about martians.

The Quran doesn't support a lot of things, however it does order us to enrichen ourselves in wisdom. So it indirectly does order us to delve into this realm as well. Or are you going to legislate smoking and say the Quran never tells you not to smoke?

You're being very unscientific, dissing ideas simply because you dislike them.
If you want to honestly critizice this field of science, then at least confront yourslef with it, I've hinted that this field exists, my knowledge is limited, there are many people out there who could argue for this position far better than I can. Let us at least be respectful towards those who spend their days/weeks/months researching this on a scholarly level by not resorting to sarcasm.

You just want to keep your perks.

I don't even know how to reply to this. It's just so wrong and you just keep insisting it to be the case.
Do you by chance have some sort of mental wall? An inferiority complex by chance? No offence, simply asking.
I do NOT see women as lower beings, how often do I have to repeat this? My dedication in life is to music, I play the piano, I love art and poetry.
Many of the people whom's works I admire are female. The most beautiful intellectual in my opinion the pinacle of mankind artistic works are sometimes by women. I have full respect towards them as human beings.

And that great, great fiding about women having faat there in order to emphasize those parts o that men find them attractive? That is really diagnostic. For what other reson would women have bigger buttocks inn general than for the realking of the universe the cnetre of everything, the male. It could not possibly be for any other reason, so what those buttocks did not think that they would spoil the males' prayers.

No actually, it was so that they could get a bigger field of men who are interested in them, and choose the best partner/husband out of that field of men who desire to have intercourse with them.
It was at most an egoistical evolvement, just as all of evolution was.

And the fat of pigs, is it also to make themselves attractive? And the lac k of fat on some mens buttocks would make them less attractive? What would have Yusuf tosay to that?

I don't know.
I don't know.

The humn male the centre of the universe around whom all turns and women must suvbordinate any dinity they may have.

I never said that, nor do I think so.
I see women as intellectual individuals who can archieve just as much as men. However, in order to not be blinded by my own bodily desires, I prefer them to wear modest clothes and be polarizing in their attributes, the same way that I am trying my best to be do so myself.

When attracted towards a person, one unwillingly/unconsciously changes oneself's behaviour, speaking in a higher pitched voice is just one of many examples.

If most men were the way you are depicting mny women would dispair, it is so pitiful... Thank God, you are saying what some men's minds are not what men's mind are. You keep speaking. I know many men do not like that kind of nonsense any more than I do.

Good for them, however you misunderstood most of what I said.
I never said that men want to have intercourse with women. It's their body that wants to do so.
Do you see human beings as mere shells? Don't you see the soul behind humans? That's what I try to see when speaking with women, therefore I don't want our shells to be interracting. I have a certain feeling of dignity and respect towards her soul and therefore ask of her to lower sexuality, so that we can heighten our rationality.

A little secret between you and me.
If you ever get married, your husband will not magically lose his sexual desire towards other women.
Does this mean that he wants to have sex with other women? No, it does not!

Same goes for my future wife, just because she's married to me does not mean that she won't be sexually attracted to other men.
However I plan on marrying a human beeing, not a monkey who has sex with everything that they find attractive, therefore it doesn't bother me all too much.

I would suggest that men would just propose to buttocks and forget about the woman. That would set clearly things from the strt and avoid a lot of confusion and divorces and problems.

No comment.

But at any rate, if SOME men feel they are not comfortable with women and them praying in the ame place, let them pray by themselves in place that are called male only. Women forbidden and charge only to themselves whatever cost that entails.

Well then, let me ask you a serious question.
What difference does it make if women are praying behind men?
Is their prayer any less valid?

If I were to kindly ask you to pray behind me, because I find you attractive and I do not want to waver in my thoughts, would you say no and directly afterwards get into contact with God?
Let's say that I am, as you imply, a weak pathetic human being incapable of controlling my own desires. Does that mean that I no longer have the right to pray in a mosque or any other congregational gathering? What if I believe that to be more desirable by God and I want to do the right thing?
Do I lose my right to get into contact with God in the way that I consider to be right, would you strip me of those rights and afterwards calmly get into contact with whom you consider the most mercifull, who can see all our intents?

Take care.

I can't see what it is that makes buttocks of men les arising or troublesome than buttocks of women, are they made of gold or what?

The reason why women (estrogen) have so much fat around their buttocks and thighs is in order to emphasize those parts.
Because men are attracted to big buttocks.
Potential partner selection by women however is not only limited by physical attractiveness, but is a complex system containing multiple factors (such as socioeconomic status).
https//books.google.de/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SxX4gRzOS6oC&oi=fnd&pg=PA267&dq=female+partner+selection+evolution&ots=Bh2q4D2LxN&sig=N_mVNTwNKemQshk8eHBBxseglFk#v=onepage&q=female%20partner%20selection%20evolution&f=false
Amazing book explaining it in a clear way.

Men (Testosterone) focus almost only on physical attractiveness.

Derivig this thread to provocative clothes does nothign to clear theinitial question but it clear a lot concerning some males minds. And they pretend that they speak in the name of all men. That is a manifest lie. They always want a perk over the women, finally they ar made of fire while women a made of dut, so they cannot be at the same leve, right? They get aroued because they need to keep their perks and that is the tool that enables to prohibit the women to do what they want to do only themselves. It is not that sommon prayer is not possible becaue of women bodie but it is that that the women bodie makes it possible for them to keep their perks when the women bodies do ot helpthem to that they can be around women bodie wll right with no trouble.

Interesting how you interpret the devil is fire men are clay verse. I interpret it in a similar way. However I do not see gender in it, I see nationality in it. I am turkish, you are kurdish, I am better than you. I am german, you are turkish, I am better than you. The reason many people build mental walls between themselves, nationalism (or simply put arrogance).

However, I do not see men and women as the same, as explained above, even the way that we choose our partners clearly differ, that doesn't mean that I see men as superior, I just see them as something different. Different sexual organs, different responsibilities. Men can get women pregnant and leave, what is a woman who is left pregnant in a third world country without any outside/financial help going to do?
Leaving a woman like that is a bad thing to do, no questions there, however he can do it. A woman has different responsibilities towards herself.

I fear that we may be drifting off topic here.
However at the same time these arguments presented indirectly answer the question asked at the beginning.

I agree that men are responsible for their own thoughts, if they imagine anything sexual when they see women, then they're the ones at fault.
However, what's wrong with doing so?
I do not see any problem with having a sexual desire, especially not if the women whom I desire to make love with is appealing.
Her wearing provocative clothing only strengthens my desires. Even if not meant provocative (which I doubt, how do you define provocation?) they know that the sex drive in most of the men will be triggered.

The following is simply a medical exlpanation, in now way pronographic
Just because I get an errection because a women raises my sexual drive, doesn't mean that I'm going to have intercourse with her.
Controlling desires does not mean not having them at all, and I don't want to be accused of being primitive or wrong in any way just because I get these desires.
However, I also don't want these desires to be provocated when dealing with God, worshipping God.

This is the wrong thread for that.

I disagree.
The question of this topic was "Can a women lead a congregational prayer with men and women mixed behind her?"
in order to answer this question we need a common definition of the word "prayer". How do you answer a question if the very question itself is subjective?

Hi,

It looks to me that you implemented the answers you want to hear in your questions
I agree with the answers you like to hear

No no, I'm preferring a position, but that doesn't mean that people have to agree with me ;D
And who knows I might change my opinion/position depending on how the arguments are.

Pigs eating living humans sounds pretty brutal to me.
Makes me rethink this whole thing, though I'm still unpositioned/unsure.
Thanks for all the replies.
peace

Salaam,

Praise to God that He reveals more and more signs per the day through human science discoveries that only confirm His existence. Strange those who conduct the research are mainly atheists considered how awesome it is. They find signs of God's existence and still continue their disbelief. I was convinced through science maybe 15 years ago that God exists and I did not become a believer through traditional religion.

God bless you

Scientists are not synonymous to atheists.
The idea that the majority of scientists are atheistic is a myth. (Or simply a lie, according to a 17 year old unreliable article from Nature which claims that 93% of scientists are atheists).

According to Elaine Ecklund's survey of over 1600 faculty members at research universities only
38% of natural scientists are atheists.
and only
31% of social scientists are atheists.

Be well.

Edit
Just noticed how old your post was -X

A Kafir is an atheist. I do not have to reference the quran u all have a copy. You sound like hadithers stuck in mob mentality. I will not reference a versee because there are so many. To the person who said a kaffir is anyone who is not a muslim you have clearly not read the quran and are just going by what hadithers say....

So the devil became an atheist?
3874 Except Satan; he turned arrogant, and became one of al-k?fir?na.

So the devil knows that God exists and at the same time is an atheist. Kind of schizophrenic. Are all Kuffar schizophrenic?

Peace Study

They are not Muslims.

That's not for you to decide.

But, for you to be it too, you question too much the commandment of the Most Merciful.

I question your interpretations.
You're saying your interpretations (or at least the translations you've read) are what the most merciful intended.
"stating that you know what God shows who is the ignorant." - your words

Muslim=Submitted-one, One who is submitted
to a master does not question his commandments.

Your personifying God. I don't know what God is, nothing in my understanding (or anyone elses) can explain God. I submitt my life into seaking good, as I've been ordered by the Quran.

You are wrong because you judge things trough the glass of your own life experience, and not by the word of God.

Of course I'm going to judge through the glass of my own experience, that's what we are responsible for. You willingly ignore other people's experiences saying that even "thinking" about them is bad/wrong.
Our task is to widen our knowledge/horizon.
1736 Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that.

If I were my own God/follow my desires, I will give death penalty to all those who dare to abuse a believing woman, with evidence and witnesses. Because if they are capable of doing that to their own flesh, which they are supposed to love, what is this kind of people capable of doing to those they do not love? having the opportunity, rape, murder, God knows. But I am not my own God you ignorant people. I only obey what descended from The Knowing, The Wise, The Only God.

What makes you think you know what God wants?
You've read the Quran? So what?
You didn't even understand what I meant, why do you believe you'll understand what God wrote when you can't comprehend simple statements like mine?

stating that you know what God will answer shows who is the ignorant.

I've never said that that's how God would respond, what I wrote was a hypothetical scenario.
However your literary understanding is so limited that you're having trouble comprehending it.
How do you plan on understanding the Quran if you couldn't even understand my intentions?

those who defend violent relationships have a decease in their heart, just as those who stay in one. They are masochist.

Did God tell you so?
Why play God?

Just in case if you didn't understand This statement was pulled out of your life experiences.

May God increase our knowledge and give us wisdom.

God is giving you more than enough opporunities to increase your own knowledge, you're just not using them.
scholar.google.com/
Everything you could ever want to learn is probably already documented. You're living in the golden age of knowledge.
Linguistics, Medicine, Astronomy, Mathematics, any type of Sciences.
You could start reading introductory works and get familiar with the terminologies used in each and every single field of expertise.
Yes may God help you/me/everyone else, help us in beating the laziness inside ourselves, help us not be deluded by the devil into not researching and enrichening ourselves in knowledge.

Well, even if it had nothing to do with ramadan, in my opinion everyone who's healthy should fast.
And when I speak of fasting I mean for a whole month, not 3 to 10 days.

30 days straight in a row, 18 hours of no eating 6 hours for eating.
The intake during these 6 hours should be healthy. No cola/fanta or candy. Instead make sure to intake your fats/proteins/calories.
In my opinion subjective theories should be dismissed when talking about religion or about science. When one has a thesis one should try
to test this very thesis and be open-minded when coming to a conclusion. The Quran after all does order us to inform ourselves and choose only the best of options.

Intermittent fasting is actually being researched and is a current topic in science/medicine.
just search on scholar google for intermittent fasting and inform yourselves about the benefits, after all this is a task given to all of us. We are blessed with the opportunity to inform ourselves in a way that no other generation has EVER had, and yet we don't confront this knowledge even though it interests us. I'm not saying that this is an easy thing to do, you may end up spending hundreds of hours and still not come to a conclusion, however that's all the more reason to do so.

I personally came to the conclusions that fasting results in better insulin levels, higher levels of human growth hormone, better hearth health, prevention against cancer, longevity, and health of brain (alzheimer prevention).
These however, are my personal conclusions.

Note that when reading scholarly work, depending on the field, different types of terminology may be required, however I see no reasons as in to why one shouldn't be able to read some introductory work into the fields one is interested about.

Lots of love. peace
Let's delve into the realm of knowledge all together.

Peace studyawe?some (?sm)
adj. inspiring awean awesome sight.
showing or characterized by awe.
Slang Termsvery impressive
Synonyms
Sense Inspiring awe awe-inspiring,formidable,imposing,exalted,grand,impressive,astonishing,amazing,redoubtable,huge,massive,mighty,overwhelming
Sense Outstanding, wonderful,remarkable,impressive,outstanding,excellent,great,cool (slang) .

However, none of the words in the verses are my translation, but if you think you know more arabic/english than the translators I used, Mohamad Asad, Sahid international, monoteist group, Julio Cortez, etc. knew, then change it

So you are saying that the Quran contradicts itself by stating that

1. To be oppressed/to oppress is awesome
   2)Oppression is worse than death?

Aside from that, what I was trying to imply is that a word for word translation will change the meaning. Different languages have different syntax and semantics.

So you can not just simply translate each and every word, you have to translate the meaning of sentences, which in turn makes all translations subjective (interpretations), that's why caution is always needed when working with translations.

oppression is oppression if you but understand the meaning of words.

Yes oppression is oppression, forcing a woman psychologically to staying with you trough violence is oppression as well.
4242 The error is upon those who oppress the people...
No need to tell me that you aren't going to beat her like in a "beating as a man fights a man".
You do not even need to punch, slaps alone can suffice in order to psychologically corner a person in such a way as for them to not dare to run away.
I'd know because I've lived in an abusive relationship, never got "beat up physically" only mentally.
Try talking with experts (psychologists) but hey, they're not muslim according to your definition of being muslim, so they're of the ignorant folk, right?

I do not follow my own desires like you.
You are not even Muslim. Peace Study, I am warned about arguing with the ignorant folk.

May God increase our knowledge and give us wisdom.

We all follow our own desires, it's important to not deny that we have certain desires, then recognize them and then try to counter them.
Only by understanding your errors can you change them.
To state that you don't follow you desires simply suggests that you are blocking out the fact that you do.

If being Muslim means being one of those who stone women to death and blindly following religious leaders, then I'm glad to not be one.

"ignorant folk"? I'm not part of any folk, my folk is humanity.
I believe in One God, The God.
And I hope to achieve more good, then that I do evil. So that I will have nothing to fear in the afterlife.
Peace upon you as well, I wish you only good.

BTW, simply saying May God increase our knowledge and give us wisdom.
Will not widen your chest. You need to be more open minded and allow communication (listening without prejudice) to other people with differing opinions. Otherwise you may wonder through life with the same knowledge that you have right now.

Wouldn't it be sad if you died and asked God "God, why did you leave me wandering through life, an ignorant man who believes in lies?"
And God's answer would be that he (God) had confronted you with ideas to develop yourself (hence, perhaps these comments) and you simply decided to ignore them.

Peace, nobody knows how Allah creates. We all have our hypothesis and speculation, we are limited by our faculties, we don't even know what makes atoms cling to one another.

But of course, however that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to understand. I think God created human beings in order for us to think for ourselves, hence, try and find a solution to all we can. Having "God knows best" as an answer is very unscientific.

I have never read a scholarly work in which a theory is claimed to be correct. Such claims often come from unscientific reports.

Peace Study,

Thank you for your post, it was interesting to read your thoughts.

Peace uq,

why, thank you.

We must remember that procreational urges are a composite of many different biochemical and psychological factors. It would be an overtly simplified proposition to state that procreational urges in men rest solely on the shape of a woman's posterior.

I agree that our sexual desires are influenced by many a things.
I never meant to imply that the glutes are the only factor. However, I do consider it to be the most significant aspect in regard to (sexual) stimuli.
It's not simply male interest in female glutes.
But also female interest in male glutes. Although I believe this desire to be often left secret.
I totally agree on cultural influence in regard to how our expectations/desires form. For example the idea of a man having big powerfull glutes is considered weird.
What's actually weird though, is that such a crucial muscle (let alone for the sake of health) is expected to stay small in men, and the rest of their body is expected to be muscular.
I could even imagine that culture plays a role in not letting women understand their own desire in physique in which men have powerfull glutes. This idea stems from me having read many comments regarding how women do NOT want their partners to have big glutes, although inbetween these comments were many women who expressed a desire for men with big glutes. (a very subjective hypothesis for which I have absolutely zero reliability or validity)

Furthermore, notwithstanding our male-dominated social structure, would it be right to say that female humans are propelled into procreational urges on account of the shape of a male's posterior?

The selection of partners from a female point of view is much more complex than vice-versa.
Not only today (which is not all too different from how it used to be in a natural environment) but all throughout the existence of humankind.
This is actually a field which's being highly researched https//scholar.google.de/scholar?q=female+partner+selection&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwil_uOSyvPKAhXwbZoKHXwQAbAQgQMIHTAA

Most powerfull arguments in my opinion are
"The willingness and ability of a man to provide for a woman and her children."
Nowadays that means being rich.
"The willingness and ability of a man to protect a woman and her children."
Nowadays that means being rich.
"The willingness and ability of a man to engage in direct parenting activities such as teaching, nurturing and providing social support and opportunities."
https//books.google.de/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SxX4gRzOS6oC&oi=fnd&pg=PA267&dq=female+partner+selection+evolution&ots=Bh2q4D2LxN&sig=N_mVNTwNKemQshk8eHBBxseglFk#v=onepage&q=female%20partner%20selection%20evolution&f=false

It's often been argued that the selection of men and women are different.
Men are more physical, they want flesh.
Women have developed a more empathical mind in order to understand what men are going to be like after marriage, they're more complex.
This doesn't mean that a men can not be empathical, nor does it mean that women don't have a desire for well build men.

We must also remember that the shape of a woman's posterior as a desirable feature of her body, can be, in many cases, a social construct. There is no evidence to suggest that there exists a code of DNA in our genome which causes all human beings in all cultures to respond sexually to the shape of a woman's posterior. In Medieval Europe, women with a plump frame were considered to be the highest ideal of beauty, whereas, in today's Western culture, women with a slender frame are considered to be so. Beauty and desirability are subjective.

Most of the DNA is left unexplained.
Junk DNA is most likely not Junk DNA. Meaning that over 85% of our DNA is unknown.
And let's be fair, I've never heard of DNA sequences explaining human behaviour, have you?

The sole reason why females have bigger buttocks (not saying glutes(=muscle)) is because of estrogen. Estrogen causes fat to be stored in the buttocks, hips and thighs.
Throughout the later stages of evolution of humankind there have probably been more women than men, reasons why
Health complications are more likey to occur in male babies.
Men were hunters, them dying was a more likely thing to happen.
Which means that men could choose which women they wanted to mate with. Bigger rivalry between women then there is today.
If I have been correct in my statements before than that would make it very likely that women with bigger buttocks to have been the winners, in the sense of them being the one who had gotten children who were raised/nurtured/taught by their fathers, or simply, survived so that they too (with their big bottoms) could reproduce.

Plump women have big buttocks as well.
This argument does not deny what I said. On the contrary (Estrogen), the "attractive" areas will look even bigger.
All throughout history women with big buttocks were considered attractive. Oldest known statue Venus of Willendorf, https//lh5.googleusercontent.com/-zfF5rtsq4JA/TXhn7ZWjK6I/AAAAAAAAAX8/g9zMkGc2Q_w/s1600/venus-of-willendorf-back-view-.jpg
Overemphasized buttocks and breasts, as well as the belly area.

Venus Callipyge
known as the "beautiful buttocks"
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_Callipyge

Finally, we must also remember that explaining human procreational urges in biochemical and psychological terms makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development. However, today's humans are less-governed by primal instincts, and we are more-able to override those urges because of the influence of social norms and practices. I'm sure most people will agree that we now place a greater emphasis on social and behavioural factors when seeking a mate, such as a person's character, their compatibility, their position in social hierarchy, etc. That's not to say that we completely overlook our ideas of physical beauty, but that it is no longer the sole determinant in procreational behaviour.

When seeking a mate, yes. Other factors play a huge role.
Allow me to rephrase what I had said.
I never meant as a means of searching a partner for marriage. What I meant was a sexual partner.
Mate was the wrong word. What I meant was "wanting to have sex".

" makes sense only when we are talking about humans in their early stages of development"
I couldn't disagree more. No offence intended.
I believe all evolutionary biologists would disagree.
https//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_biology

Women want a men with, the aspects which I listed above.
Men want women with an attractive body.
Of course this doesn't apply to all individuals, but in general I believe it does.

Peace. peace

Hello and welcome )

It hurts me to know that things are so bad over there. I hope you'll get refugee in a land where your personal beliefs can stay personal. I feel like "escaping" is a correct decision.

I honestly wish there could be some sort of revolution in egypt and that damn government overthrown.
However that would at the same time leave a power vacuum and there is no point in celebrating a change, without knowing if that change'll be better or worse.
Many evil corrupt people would try and fill that power vacuum. -\

I hope you'll enjoy your stay here.
Peace and stay strong my friend peace

Yes Study, classic, and I got plenty more too. My younger brother is studying to be a film director/producer/writer so maybe one day...

I agree with you Study; I am actually a teacher by profession, and my philosophy is this We are all teachers and students for life, we all have things to teach others, and we all have things to learn from others.

Peace brother.

Ah yeah, I want to be a film director, screenwriter, producer myself D
However I prefer a job that is a bit more secure so I decided to study education.
The study in Germany is ridiculous though,
If I manage to absolve, then I will become an English and Music teacher.
English in and of itself is already ridiculous.
Linguitics, phonetics & phonlogy, Literary studies, history, cultural studies and much more.
Many of my professors believe that ministry is making it difficult on purpose so that the students fail.

Peace Study,

I know there are muslims in my area as well, but like you I feel like a lot of us haven't met many others who only use the Qur'an for guidance.
Interesting that your attraction is towards western women only. ) I think a lot of people don't want to develop a relationship with someone who won't fit their lifestyle, especially on this forum. I have to figure that one out myself.

Well, only was an exaggeration, mostly, I actually have a distaste regarding people from my origin. There are some exceptions though.
That's just the supperficial aspect, I feel like I need to lower my expectations. -X

Anyway
to all of you
thanks for the warm welcome peace