You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 10:32:06 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.  (Read 35540 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #450 on: July 29, 2015, 05:14:48 PM »
At first it is important to correct one notion , Skynet.

Muslim Women can marry to a Christian or a Jewish man.

Now regarding inter-faith marriages , religiously speaking , it isn't allowed. Simply because a Muslim man or woman must marry with ' God ' as the witness to their marriage. Islam states that God does not approve of other religions aside from the Abrahamic ones ( The holy ones as they're called in Islam ) , thus forbidding any matrimonial bond with anyone who believes in anything other than god.

Now bare in mind , this only means they cannot marry in an ' Islamic ' manner. One can pursue their matrimony with one they share a bond with outside Islamic boundaries. However , the afterlife won't be so kind to them ... based on what the Qur'an states.

Inter-sect Marriages in Saudi Arabia Happens ( I cannot speak for other countries since its more of a social matter than a religious one ). Not often though , and sometimes frowned upon. Its mostly situational , since the families need to be on good terms for marriage to happen. So it really varies.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #451 on: July 29, 2015, 05:49:41 PM »
At first it is important to correct one notion , Skynet.

Muslim Women can marry to a Christian or a Jewish man.

Apologies for my presumption.

Anyway, thank you for your answers.  They were informative as usual.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 05:51:09 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #452 on: July 29, 2015, 06:14:22 PM »
Apologies for my presumption.

No no , Skynet. You're not at fault. Its just a common misunderstanding that I hear often , so I wanted to correct it.

Apologize for my poor rephrasing.

Offline Thumper

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #453 on: July 31, 2015, 08:24:34 PM »
I have to admit that I am largely ignorant on Islam. I've read on it some. But not so much that I can speak intelligently on it. So I won't try to do so.

I understand that every organized religion has different sects with varying beliefs. My question is simple, and keep in mind that I'm not Christian. Why is it that when you hear about radical Islam you rarely hear about for lack of a better term moderates shutting them down?

Table the WBC for example. They are about as extreme as Christians get anymore. But when you hear about them going to start problems at a gay couples wedding you will find a wall of meat of Christians separating them. But when you hear about a draw Mohamed rally and instantly read threats of violence from radical Islam you don't hear about moderates protecting those rallys? I use this comparison because both have happened. And both religions disagree with the events listed.

Before anyone responds please know that I'm not trying to start problems. It's a question I've had for a while. But have never found a group of people respectful enough or calm enough to actually answer it.

For the record I myself am about as infidel as you can get. I believe in many gods for many different things. I'm pagan.

Offline Blythe

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #454 on: July 31, 2015, 08:50:01 PM »
I'm going to take a stab at answering your question, Thumper. Formless, if I am in any way wrong or stepping on your toes in this topic, please tell me.



I think a better question is "why don't media outlets report it more when muslims do speak out against radical terrorist groups?"

Many muslims do speak out. In 2014, Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, the grand muft in Saudi Arabia, decried organizations like Al-Quaeda and ISIS as apostates and terrorists and warned against encouraging youth to join these groups. Same year, the  Islamic Society of North America said they denounced ISIS and groups like them, that they deplored the attacks on religious minorities and destruction of historical relics. Same year, Shuja Shafi, who is a member of the Muslim Council of Great Britain, stated that violence had no place in religion and denounced ISIS and terrorism. Many muslims were outraged at the 9/11 attacks, the Paris attacks, etc.

So...moderate muslims (and heck, even not-so-moderate muslims) do denounce radicals and terrorists. The above are just a few examples I thought of that were recent-ish. It's just that this hardly gets any media coverage at all. I wish it did. There are a lot more moderate muslims than many people give the faith credit for.


But Formless's thread is more of a theological and academic thread moreso than a politics thread. Overall, this thread seems to be more about clarifications about the actual belief systems of the faith and branches thereof itself rather than a discussion of radical violent groups and their impact. It is probably better to keep it that way. There was another thread on a similar vein to your question (at some points, not all), and queries about Islam in relation to radicalization and terrorism need go in that thread rather than here, please.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2015, 09:04:50 PM by Sherlock »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #455 on: July 31, 2015, 09:09:18 PM »
Couldn't have said it any better , Sherlock. Thank you! :-)

Hopefully in time , many will start to see the extremists for the loathesome individuals that they are and see Islam in a different light ... Though I don't see that happening any time soon. The fault is on us long before its on the world.

Offline Thumper

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #456 on: July 31, 2015, 09:16:21 PM »
I'm going to take a stab at answering your question, Thumper. Formless, if I am in any way wrong or stepping on your toes in this topic, please tell me.



I think a better question is "why don't media outlets report it more when muslims do speak out against radical terrorist groups?"

Many muslims do speak out. In 2014, Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, the grand muft in Saudi Arabia, decried organizations like Al-Quaeda and ISIS as apostates and terrorists and warned against encouraging youth to join these groups. Same year, the  Islamic Society of North America said they denounced ISIS and groups like them, that they deplored the attacks on religious minorities and destruction of historical relics. Same year, Shuja Shafi, who is a member of the Muslim Council of Great Britain, stated that violence had no place in religion and denounced ISIS and terrorism. Many muslims were outraged at the 9/11 attacks, the Paris attacks, etc.

So...moderate muslims (and heck, even not-so-moderate muslims) do denounce radicals and terrorists. The above are just a few examples I thought of that were recent-ish. It's just that this hardly gets any media coverage at all. I wish it did. There are a lot more moderate muslims than many people give the faith credit for.


But Formless's thread is more of a theological and academic thread moreso than a politics thread. Overall, this thread seems to be more about clarifications about the actual belief systems of the faith and branches thereof itself rather than a discussion of radical violent groups and their impact. It is probably better to keep it that way. There was another thread on a similar vein to your question (at some points, not all), and queries about Islam in relation to radicalization and terrorism need go in that thread rather than here, please.

Oh I have seen articles of them speaking out. I've seen them take actions in other countries. I know it happens. I know there are coalitions of moderates that try to educate and what not. I was only asking about my specific question. Sorry if I derailed the thread.

Maybe it's because the WBC has been crashing funerals and what not for a long time. And there's only been anti radical Islam rallys recently.

Anyway. Thank you.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #457 on: July 31, 2015, 09:33:43 PM »
There is a picture that has been out for a while, showing Christians protecting a group of Muslims at prayer as well as a group of Muslims protecting a group of Christians at prayer.

Mainstream media these days is a whole other rant on a number of levels.  Things that should be getting press-time aren't, while things that shouldn't be news at all are put front and center.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #458 on: July 31, 2015, 10:59:02 PM »
There is a picture that has been out for a while, showing Christians protecting a group of Muslims at prayer as well as a group of Muslims protecting a group of Christians at prayer.

Mainstream media these days is a whole other rant on a number of levels.  Things that should be getting press-time aren't, while things that shouldn't be news at all are put front and center.

The biggest part of the problem is how the Mainstream Local news networks , Arabian or Muslim do not pick up such stories. Usually they just throw it in some corner of their late-night segments.

This is one of the roots of the problem , our own Journalists aren't finding any interest in that.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #459 on: July 31, 2015, 11:48:31 PM »
There is a picture that has been out for a while, showing Christians protecting a group of Muslims at prayer as well as a group of Muslims protecting a group of Christians at prayer.

Mainstream media these days is a whole other rant on a number of levels.  Things that should be getting press-time aren't, while things that shouldn't be news at all are put front and center.

Here it is incase you wanted it :P




And of course the media wont report on it. To them that wont get ratings up fast enough compared to the doom and gloom they toss out everyday. Because nothing gets people glued ot their seats watching than a constant string of bad news.

Offline Thumper

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #460 on: August 01, 2015, 12:12:10 AM »
Here it is incase you wanted it :P




And of course the media wont report on it. To them that wont get ratings up fast enough compared to the doom and gloom they toss out everyday. Because nothing gets people glued ot their seats watching than a constant string of bad news.

Awesome. Hopefully it catches on here.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #461 on: August 01, 2015, 12:42:17 AM »
The biggest part of the problem is how the Mainstream Local news networks , Arabian or Muslim do not pick up such stories. Usually they just throw it in some corner of their late-night segments.

This is one of the roots of the problem , our own Journalists aren't finding any interest in that.

And of course the media wont report on it. To them that wont get ratings up fast enough compared to the doom and gloom they toss out everyday. Because nothing gets people glued ot their seats watching than a constant string of bad news.

Exactly.  It also feeds the war machine which puts money in the pockets of the profiteers.

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #462 on: August 01, 2015, 03:07:19 AM »
I have a question about something I read recently (but I seem to recall having heard it a while ago somewhere else, too). It concerns the political / religious situation in Yemen:

Quote
...the Houthis are actually Zaydi Shiites, which is a different sect from Iranian Twelver Shiism, and closer in doctrine and tradition to Yemen's Sunni majority.
Source

How much do the Zaydi really differ from the Twelvers, and in what major points? Does that really put the Zaydi closer to some Sunni than to the Twelvers?

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #463 on: August 01, 2015, 02:34:11 PM »
Regarding news, it tends to be reported or not depending on said networks ideological biases.  There seem to be very few news organizations (cable, online, or otherwise) who simply report the facts, and even then lies of omission are still a thing even if no falsehoods are actually uttered.

For example in US news, several African-American Christian churches which got burned possibly by arsonists received funds from Muslim charities who helped raise money for them to rebuild.  It got reported in the Washington Post as well as several liberal news sites and even some Christian papers.

When it comes to the US, Islamic voices against terrorism, or Muslims doing good things, are getting their message out.  However, it's mostly reported and disseminated by leftist sources* over ninety-percent of the time.  Which isn't exactly bad in and of itself, but due to this a lot of Americans disinclined towards liberals aren't going to be paying attention to said information.

*: I should note a disclaimer that this doesn't mean that most US Muslims are politically Left necessarily, moreso that US left-wingers tend to place emphasis on listening to minority voices, be they religious, racial, or otherwise.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2015, 02:39:23 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #464 on: August 01, 2015, 04:38:24 PM »
How much do the Zaydi really differ from the Twelvers, and in what major points? Does that really put the Zaydi closer to some Sunni than to the Twelvers?

I need to confirm which ' twelvers ' you're referring to? The ones I'm acquainted with are nothing but a misinterpreted Hadith that mentions twelve rulers or Imams. But there's too many sources for this Hadith that each one has a different description. Its so confusing that I have my doubts to this Hadith.

But regarding the Zaydi. If you pronounce it thusly , you're referring to a Shi'ah sect.

But some people mistake them with ' Azaydi ' which refers to a tribe originating from Yemen.

Hope this answers your question.

Offline Thumper

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #465 on: August 01, 2015, 05:43:59 PM »
Formeless. I'm curious to know what Islam and your interpretation says about those that fall outside of the religions you've already spoken of. Say Norse paganism for example.

I admit. I haven't gotten around to reading this entire thread. But have dove into a bit of it. So if you've already answered and I missed it I'm sorry.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #466 on: August 01, 2015, 07:39:33 PM »
I admit. I haven't gotten around to reading this entire thread. But have dove into a bit of it. So if you've already answered and I missed it I'm sorry.

No worries. The thread is vast indeed , but Skynet most kindly added this to help both new and old visitors of this thread:

https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=184441.msg11325920#msg11325920

Its a great reference to many topics that's been mentioned here. ;D



Formeless. I'm curious to know what Islam and your interpretation says about those that fall outside of the religions you've already spoken of. Say Norse paganism for example.

Islam itself doesn't recognize any Pagan gods as deities.

As for me , any form of Paganism played a major part in creating the history of the world. My faith may not be with them , but I acknowledge their existence and their cultural influence. ( Plus I enjoy reading about Both Nordic and Greek history. Fascinating. )

Offline Thumper

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #467 on: August 01, 2015, 07:48:23 PM »
It iis very interesting.

So Islam basically views those that worship many gods the same as those that believe in no god?

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #468 on: August 01, 2015, 10:25:06 PM »
The way Islam views all faiths is simple.

Muslims , who believe in Islam.

People of the book , who believes in Christianity and Judaism.

Nonbelievers , which consists of atheists , pagans , and the rest of the world's religions.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #469 on: August 06, 2015, 12:46:22 AM »
Mosque Requirements: What are the minimum qualifications for a building to be considered a mosque?  All the mosques I've seen have a wide open space in the main area where Muslims perform the salat, so I assume that at the very least it needs to be large enough to house a large number of worshipers and a direction towards Mecca.

The Zulfiqar, or Ali's forked sword: It is said that one of Prophet Muhammed's companions, Ali, owned a forked sword.  I searched for images, and I saw several different possible designs.  Do historians or artisans have an accurate picture of what the Zulfiqar looked like?

Sample Pics






Did the Caliphate appoint/elect leaders? So I recently found this series of videos on Islam's history by the Caspian Report, a YouTube channel.

The first in the series covered the early history and the Rashidun Caliphate.  Around the 1:00 mark alleged that the Caliphate functioned similar to a democracy, where the most notable members of the communities got together in a council and appointed the Muslim community's leader by a majority approval.  The video explains that the disagreement between the legitimacy of Abu Bakr vs. Ali as to be a dispute due to this.

Now, I found this peculiar, in that I assumed that the Caliphate's leadership was a hereditary aristocracy, but I could be wrong.  The comments section took issue with several claims in the video, such as sympathy for Ali as well as the statement that the East Roman Empire (Byzantines) planned on conquering the Arabian peninsula.

So in regards to this, how did the Caliphate in its early years typically appoint a leader?  Was there a council/parliament/etc meant to act as a regulator or granter for the ruling Caliph?

Video in question:

« Last Edit: August 06, 2015, 12:13:15 PM by Skynet »

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #470 on: August 06, 2015, 02:33:58 AM »
1) What, if any, is the official position of Islam on gays, lesbians, and the rest of the alphabet soup? Christianity has the rather infamous Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"  - is there a similar passage in the Qur'an?


2) Does Islam grant 'People of the Book'  - Christians and Jews, specifically - any special dispensation in the afterlife, relative to either true Muslims or non-believers?

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #471 on: August 06, 2015, 01:13:50 PM »
Mosque Requirements: What are the minimum qualifications for a building to be considered a mosque?  All the mosques I've seen have a wide open space in the main area where Muslims perform the salat, so I assume that at the very least it needs to be large enough to house a large number of worshipers and a direction towards Mecca.

To simplify it , a mosque need to be open from the inside. Which means as little walls as possible. With the ' mihrab ' on the side where it points to Makkah. As for the size , enough to for a whole district's prayers to pray in. Or there should be several reasonably sized mosques to take all prayers from the same district. Since people are in more need of houses than mosques. ( Though in my own suburbs city , two mosques can be found on the same street. barely filled. So there's that. )

Some would demand the Mosque should be accompanied with a small house so the Imam of the mosque would live there. But since it became a volunteer work rather than a career , people started building mosques without houses. Yet you may find this happen in other countries. So I heard anyway.

The Zulfiqar, or Ali's forked sword: It is said that one of Prophet Muhammed's companions, Ali, owned a forked sword.  I searched for images, and I saw several different possible designs.  Do historians or artisans have an accurate picture of what the Zulfiqar looked like?

Sample Pics





The third image is the closest depiction I've seen. The name translates to ' One with pierces '. Which suggests the Blade was pierces rather than forked. But honestly , I'm not sure. Some rumors says the sword actually exists and it is found in a Turkish museum. But there's no evidence to that... just hearsay.

Did the Caliphate appoint/elect leaders? So I recently found this series of videos on Islam's history by the Caspian Report, a YouTube channel.

The first in the series covered the early history and the Rashidun Caliphate.  Around the 1:00 mark alleged that the Caliphate functioned similar to a democracy, where the most notable members of the communities got together in a council and appointed the Muslim community's leader by a majority approval.  The video explains that the disagreement between the legitimacy of Abu Bakr vs. Ali as to be a dispute due to this.

Now, I found this peculiar, in that I assumed that the Caliphate's leadership was a hereditary aristocracy, but I could be wrong.  The comments section took issue with several claims in the video, such as sympathy for Ali as well as the statement that the East Roman Empire (Byzantines) planned on conquering the Arabian peninsula.

So in regards to this, how did the Caliphate in its early years typically appoint a leader?  Was there a council/parliament/etc meant to act as a regulator or granter for the ruling Caliph?

Video in question:



I hate to do this but ... The video presented critical wrongs in the historic events. ( Regardless of the religious aspect )

Allow me to point out what was wrong with what the video stated. ( Perhaps the comments clarified them , but I want to put here for everyone at E to see.

1- Mohammad died in Madinah. Abu Bakr did not need to ride to Madinah to call for a new leader. Everyone was already there to decide the fate of Islam.

2- Abu Bakr was the first to believe in Mohammad's religion. He was the first Male Muslim. He was also the companion of Mohammad during his secret pilgrimage to escape Quraish in Makkah and arrive in Madinah. Mohammad himself considered him the ' Khalil ' which in Arabic means the true friend. Just as God named Abraham his ' Khalil '. ( That is what earned him to be the first Caliphate. It was that title )

3- Abu Bakr's rule did not last more than 2 years.

As for how Muslims back then decided on a leader? It was an election , but via house masters and not the common people. But bear in mind one important detail as to decide who was the next leader. Mohammad named 10 Muslims that they were ' promised to heaven '. The first four he named were the Caliphate who followed him. Muslims back then weighed that heavily. One who was promised heaven was more righteous than another. And taking them by order the Prophet named them , the four always had a favor to be elected by many.

Also not to dwell on old tales , but the rift between Muslims only happened after Ali took the lead. There was no internal conflict during the rule of the first three caliphates.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #472 on: August 06, 2015, 01:30:37 PM »
1) What, if any, is the official position of Islam on gays, lesbians, and the rest of the alphabet soup? Christianity has the rather infamous Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination"  - is there a similar passage in the Qur'an?

In Qur'an the Story of ' Lot ' was mentioned in several verses across many Suras. How his people preferred men over women and that was ' a grave sin '.

Verses 26 - 35 Sura 29
Verses 70 - 83 Sura 11

Its important to mention that in the Qur'an , nothing was mentioned about Lesbians.

2) Does Islam grant 'People of the Book'  - Christians and Jews, specifically - any special dispensation in the afterlife, relative to either true Muslims or non-believers?

God has the right to choose who falls into hall and who passes to heaven. A muslim might fall to hell while a christian , a jew , an atheist or a pagan ... etc wills it. Some Hadiths related to Mohammad speak of him telling a story of one righteous man who condemned a felon that ' he will rot in hill '. Mohammad followed that tale by saying ' The righteous man was righteous no more and he was thrown to hell , and the felon earned god's blessings.'

Some interpreted that Hadith that , it boils down to how one spend his life. We've seen it , men who always locked themselves praying and worshipping , only to be exposed as nothing more than vile people , while ones who spend their life without malice loved and adored. Whose to say god doesn't take that into account?

Offline Sabre

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #473 on: August 07, 2015, 09:46:47 AM »
The Zulfiqar, or Ali's forked sword: It is said that one of Prophet Muhammed's companions, Ali, owned a forked sword.  I searched for images, and I saw several different possible designs.  Do historians or artisans have an accurate picture of what the Zulfiqar looked like?

Most likely no. Most likely Ali's sword was given some poetic description, but it may have just been a normal sword originally. Swords claiming to be the original, unless this has changed with new research, are later creations for ceremonial purposes (such as the Ottoman sword).


Quote
Did the Caliphate appoint/elect leaders? So I recently found this series of videos on Islam's history by the Caspian Report, a YouTube channel.

The first in the series covered the early history and the Rashidun Caliphate.  Around the 1:00 mark alleged that the Caliphate functioned similar to a democracy, where the most notable members of the communities got together in a council and appointed the Muslim community's leader by a majority approval.  The video explains that the disagreement between the legitimacy of Abu Bakr vs. Ali as to be a dispute due to this.

Now, I found this peculiar, in that I assumed that the Caliphate's leadership was a hereditary aristocracy, but I could be wrong.  The comments section took issue with several claims in the video, such as sympathy for Ali as well as the statement that the East Roman Empire (Byzantines) planned on conquering the Arabian peninsula.

So in regards to this, how did the Caliphate in its early years typically appoint a leader?  Was there a council/parliament/etc meant to act as a regulator or granter for the ruling Caliph?

The traditional story will change depending on who you ask. As Formless explained, some details are remembered differently. The reason for this is he, I, and many Muslims are from a Sunni background, while Caspian Report is most likely from a Shia background. Both sides keep their own traditions on the matter.

Partisan debates aside, the general point is true within traditional Islamic historiography: the Rashidun Caliphs were righteous because they were chosen by a tribal election council, while the Umayyads who replaced them are evil because they turned the caliphate into a dynastic title. From then on theoretical discussions on who should be caliph and how carried on, all the while the title passed on like a monarchy anyway. Each theological tradition holds its own specifications, but generally speaking Sunni tradition asks that a caliph be elected by representation of all Muslims, either by delegation of the people or by their ulama, and that he descend from the tribe of the Prophet. Candidates should be elected based on their personal virtues.

What most likely happened historically, however, was that the first caliphs did not call themselves as such. They were the Commanders of the Faithful, and the title Caliph was likely the brainchild of the Umayyad dynasts who looked to turn the nascent Arabian Empire into a state that paralleled the Byzantines, and where the Caliph was the equivalent of the Roman Emperor. Later on the new ulama class of scholars looked to seize that title and posturing away from them, and the two concepts of Caliph and Commander of the Faithful were combined to be one and the same by the time the Abbasids entered the scene. As for the early succession disputes between Abu Bakr and Ali? I very much doubt Ali ever stood a chance at being elected before the other three. Consider the succession laws of modern Arab monarchies - Agnatic Seniority. The oldest male relative is favored above closest male relative.

Abu Bakr was born 573 AD
Umar was born 577 AD
Uthman was also born 577 AD
And Ali was born sometime around 600 AD

Then lets look at their relation to the Prophet:

Abu Bakr was Father-in-Law through Aisha
Umar was also Father-in-Law through Hafsa (married to Muhammad after Aisha)
Uthman was the first Son-in-Law through Muhammad's eldest surviving daughter
Ali was Son-in-Law through Muhammad's youngest surviving daughter

Assuming Arabian norms on tribal leadership and patriarchy haven't changed drastically, we can see the clear hierarchy that would have shut out Ali easily in the first three elections, if they were elections at all to begin with and not a succession council vetting candidates through seniority as well as absolute virtues.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #474 on: August 12, 2015, 09:44:53 PM »
New and separate Caliphates: Rashidun, Umayyad, and Abbasid are the major historical ones I know.

Wikipedia describes a Caliphate as a government which is a successor to Prophet Muhammad and an international leader of the Muslim community.  So in order to be a Caliphate it sounds like there needs to be a unanimous or near-unanimous recognition among the faithful of its legitimacy.  But even then the Umayyads were a separate Caliphate operating in Spain with the Abbasids in the Middle East and Maghreb; so might the two groups have originated as splitting up and trying to claim that they were the true successors?

As the Abbasid Caliphate's last years happened nearly five centuries ago, what qualifications is there for a government to become a Caliphate in more modern times?  Or is this more or less considered a concept relegated to the annals of history by most aside from ISIS sympathizers?

On that note, how common has it been for folk like ISIS to claim to be the next Caliphate?  Has this been a thing that's been going on since the Ottomans, or is it more modern, 20th and 21st century type of thing?
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 09:52:10 PM by Skynet »