You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 06:17:10 PM

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 35377 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #475 on: August 13, 2015, 04:42:47 AM »
The Abbasids were a rebellion. The Umayyads simply didn't gave up the title.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #476 on: August 13, 2015, 11:11:30 AM »
In regards to the separate rule of Muslims in both Spain and the middle east , the Islamic campaign that marched upon Spain was sent by the Umayyads. However , during the Muslims conquest in Spain , the Ummayads rule ended by the hands of the Abbasids. So initially it wasn't a separate rule.

However , a Caliphate is a successor. But it also means ' heir '. So if we're going for a literal explanation , the first ruler of the Abbasids cannot be called a Caliphate , since he took the rule from the Umayyads by force. But the next Abbasids ruler can be called a Caliphate which means ' and heir '.

But in a modern sense , there can't be a Caliphate. Simply because every country has its own rules , borders , constitution ... etc. So in order for a Caliphate to happen , a country has to relinquish its rule to that Caliphate , and act as a governor under the rule of the Caliphate ... You let me know when a country would agree to that.

As for ISIS , they are self-proclaimers. So whatever they say means diddly squat since they aren't recognized by most Muslims.

On a side note , ISIS in the last three months has taken the habit of sending suicide bombers to bomb mosques in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait during prayer times. So ... yeah , they're not Muslims.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #477 on: August 13, 2015, 05:07:32 PM »
On a related note, a while ago I asked Formless (via PM, not in this thread) as to why the Ottoman Empire didn't call itself a Caliphate.  Here was his answer:

Quote
The Ottomans ( Othmans ) Weren't a Caliphate simply because that title was relinquished since the Islamic rule was taken by force since the battles between the Omawy's and the Abbasy's. A Caliphate means a successor. There's no succession in ruling since that time. It was all the fruit of a victory against another Islamic ruler.

On a side note , ISIS in the last three months has taken the habit of sending suicide bombers to bomb mosques in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait during prayer times. So ... yeah , they're not Muslims.

I heard the news.  You have my condolences.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2015, 05:12:59 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #478 on: August 13, 2015, 08:41:46 PM »
I heard the news.  You have my condolences.

Thank you , Skynet. :-)

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #479 on: August 17, 2015, 11:33:26 PM »
There's a Turkish travel blog which says that in the country sinks do not have a stopper.  The reason for this is that Muslims do not wash themselves or clothes/dishes/etc in stagnant water.  Link.

Quote
If you want to help by washing the dishes, remember that Muslims do not believe in bathing or washing items in stagnant water. Therefore there will be a washing up bowl, but after they will rinse the plates and cutlery under a running tap. That is also the reason why you will not generally find plugs for the sink in hotel rooms either.

So I looked up Muslims and washing and found Wudu, which is cleansing rituals for activates such as before handling the Qu'ran or before doing formal prayers.

Wudu seems specific to self-cleaning, whereas the Turkish example seemed more broad in regards to everyday chores and the like.

So, are there washing and bathing restrictions beyond Wudu for Muslims?  For silverware, clothes, furniture, and other potential objects to regularly come into contact with on a regular basis?


On a related note, is there any corollary between Wudu and Christian Baptisms by water?
« Last Edit: August 17, 2015, 11:40:37 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #480 on: August 18, 2015, 08:36:10 PM »
I cannot comment on Turkish customs as I am not familiar with the country.

As for Wudu , it is as you described. A ritualistic cleansing process required before touching the Qur'an or attending prayer. However , Wudu's effect can expire when one of these instances occurs:

- Conducting business in the bathroom. ( #1 & #2 )
- Ejaculation from sex or Masturbation.
- Touching Genitalia. Your own or someone else's.
- Breaking Wind.
- Sleeping.
- Touching anything foul , Like Bodily wastes.
- And most surprisingly ... Eating Camel's meat. ( To this day I cannot find anyone that can explain to me why. )

So anything else wouldn't cause it to expire , so you're good to go with anything.

As for Wudu and Baptism? Perhaps. I mean they are two religions relating to the same god ... So , maybe?

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #481 on: August 20, 2015, 11:50:41 PM »
Alternate and Parallel Worlds, Other Planes of Existence:

So while perusing YouTube for videos, two jumped out at me, with two Muslim scholars, Yasir Qadhi and Bilal Philips, covering jinn and the world they live in as subject matter.  The videos in question were separate and unrelated; they weren't talking with each other.  I saw Philips' video in related searches alongside Qadhi's, so I clicked on it afterwards.

The videos discussed that Jinn live in a world apart, parallel even, to our own.  Almost nothing is known about this world aside from some limited information in the Qu'ran.  Beyond the Qu'ran, there are lots of superstitions, old wives' tales, and stories alternatively passed off as fact by folks, so there is a lot of misinformation out there.

So this isn't concerning jinn or spirits specifically, but beyond our mortal world what realms does the Qu'ran discuss?  There's Heaven, Hell, and the jinn's world (does it have a proper name?).  Are there any others, or are these the only known three?

Yasir Qadhi's video.

Bilal Philips' video.

I should note that both videos are rather long (Qadhi's approaches 2 hours, Philips is an hour and a half), so I apologize for that if it seems overwhelming.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2015, 11:52:52 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #482 on: August 21, 2015, 04:20:49 PM »
From what we're told , and what little does the Qur'an offer about the Jinn , they have an existing world within our own. I don't know how to explain this to be honest. I mean right this moment I could be living among a Jinn bazaar for example. My house could be built over a Jinn's house.

What was made certain in the Qur'an is that Mohammad was sent to deliver god's message to both Human and Jinn. So their realm is recognized. Or rather , their existence.

As for other worlds? We really don't know. As far as we know , there could be life in another galaxy , or not. We can't be sure until we reach that far for ourselves.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #483 on: August 23, 2015, 03:53:29 PM »
From what we're told , and what little does the Qur'an offer about the Jinn , they have an existing world within our own. I don't know how to explain this to be honest. I mean right this moment I could be living among a Jinn bazaar for example. My house could be built over a Jinn's house.

I'm imagining it like layers of transparent paper; technically they're separate, but sort of meld together, if that makes any sense.

History stuff and Capitals: Has Mecca ever been made the capital city of any Islamic government, be it the Caliphates, Ottomans, or Saudis?  As far as I can tell it's never been a capital, and I can imagine good reasons why for post-Ottoman times: other Muslim nations would view it as Saudi Arabia claiming the city for themselves, I imagine.  But during the centuries of relative unification in the Islamic world, why have other cities such as Baghdad, Constantinople, etc been made the capital instead?
« Last Edit: August 23, 2015, 03:55:26 PM by Skynet »

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #484 on: August 23, 2015, 04:05:46 PM »
No. Makkah was never a capital , and never will be I think.

For the Rashidun , they followed on Mohammad's habit of ruling from Madinah.

As for every era that followed , it wasn't considered a capital.

The Umayyads took Damascus as their capital , Abbasids took Baghdad you mentioned.

But Makkah remains the capital of the religion itself. Its where every year millions gather to fulfill their pilgrimage.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #485 on: August 23, 2015, 04:58:44 PM »
It has been a capital.

Mecca was over a thousand miles away from both Damascus and Ctesiphon/Baghdad. The features of Arab conquests mirror the Roman and Mongolian conquests in many ways. As Rome conquered Greece and became led by it, so to with the Mongols and China, the Arabs and Persia. The vastly superior administrations of these nations, beaten during a time of weakness, got absorbed and became the new bureaucracies for their conquerors. While Rome had its own legacy, it's a bit telling that the Greeks continued the Roman Empire for at least seven centuries after Rome fell (depending on if you consider the Fourth Crusade to be the end of the Byzantines).

The early Arabs were not ignorant of how they were viewed, either. To those they conquered, they were barbarians. Typically used as mercenaries and buffer states to the more organized Persians and Romans surrounding them.

Trying to rule from Mecca would have alienated the people they were trying to rule, and made it that much harder to react to a potentially coordinated Byzantine or Persian response.

The sack and rape of Constantinople was viewed as Muhammad's last command by Mehmed II. It was viewed as the crown jewel of the world in Muhammad's time, and was certainly one of they mightiest cities in the world for nearly a thousand years, until the Fourth Crusade. Istanbul means 'to the City' and was called that since even before the Ottomans took it.

After the Venetians sacked it, it was a shell of its former self, however - to the point where much of the city inside the walls was used for farming. Even after it was made capital of the Ottoman Empire (it was and still is an incredibly strategic location), despite the Ottomans' attempts at restoring the city, it did not recover its pre-fourth Crusade population until the 19th century - over six hundred years later.


Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #486 on: August 23, 2015, 05:12:57 PM »
It has been a capital.

The Hijaz kingdom wasn't an islamic nation. Well it was under an islamic rule , but in no way was it a leading kingdom.

They simply tried to preserve themselves from falling along with the Ottoman empire. And their rule didn't last long enough to be recognized or to enforce their kingdom upon any other region. The other regions at that time in the Arabian peninsula for example , weren't any less of Muslims than they were , but they did not take the Hijaz kingdom as their capital.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #487 on: August 25, 2015, 06:04:31 PM »
So, more on magic/sihr.

In regards to Formless' answer earlier in this thread regarding how black magic (used to bind and harm others) is one of the few unforgivable crimes in Islam, and another related answer followed up here on how magic is typically viewed as a pact with a demon/jinn for harmful magic and has been commonly used by both men and women.

Some of it repeated here:

Quote
This actually led to a controversy in my country ten years ago. Usually they say you can cure a person who bound by magic , with holy recitals from the Qur'an. But there are times when nothing of that sort worked. So Imams conflicted over the use of another Magician to lift the binds the previous magician has cast unto said person. And since the only verdict in Qur'an was to punish sorcerers who harms , people were reluctant to go through with it since that would give excuse for people to learn magic in the first place.

The greatest taboo about magic was how some Jinn required you to violate your faith. In many forms , some would go as far as to urinate on the Qur'an to prove yourself.

Funny to mention that some Magicians came out to claim that the whole ' violate your faith ' was just a lie spread by Imams to keep Magic as a taboo.

Quote
Magic in how the Qur'an interprets it , isn't gender biased. A man or a woman can use it. But as you said , it requires some form of pact with a demon. Or a Jinn in our case. Though if only it is used for harm.

Is there such a thing as non-harmful, or "white magic," from a Muslim viewpoint?  In that the earlier response indicated that a magician could use magic to disable an already-harmful effected invoked by another as a possibility.

I also ask because I was sort of confused by the earlier answers.  Punishing a "sorcerer who harms" as opposed to a sorcerer in and of itself sounds like that knowledge of magic in and of itself is not bad.  Also, black magic is often referred to as a contrast against white magic, indicating that there are multiple forms of magic.  At least, that's often the case in stories and books I've read which use the color dichotomy.

There was a book I got in the library about some medieval African kingdoms.  It mentioned that magical amulets believed to ward off curses were a commonly bought thing by Saharan traders of all faiths, including Christians and Muslims.  This seemed rather shocking to me if it is indeed true, considering that the Abrahamic religions aren't very friendly to sorcery.  Although a Byzantine Empress resorted to what she believed to be magic potions to become fertile, and English Christians often had wise women who practiced "folk magic" for villagers, so theological rule-breaking is a common trend among many people.

Regarding the denouncement by Imams, how long ago did this occur?  Was this a common thing in the history of the Muslim world, or is it more recent?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2015, 11:29:30 PM by Skynet »

Offline Vekseid

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #488 on: August 26, 2015, 06:40:30 AM »
The Hijaz kingdom wasn't an islamic nation. Well it was under an islamic rule , but in no way was it a leading kingdom.

They simply tried to preserve themselves from falling along with the Ottoman empire. And their rule didn't last long enough to be recognized or to enforce their kingdom upon any other region. The other regions at that time in the Arabian peninsula for example , weren't any less of Muslims than they were , but they did not take the Hijaz kingdom as their capital.

'Nation' in this sort of context has a very specific meaning - a group of people who share a language and culture. Whether or not the rest of Arabia agrees, the Hejazi are a distinct group of their own.

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #489 on: August 26, 2015, 08:29:41 PM »
Skynet
So, more on magic/sihr.

In regards to Formless' answer earlier in this thread regarding how black magic (used to bind and harm others) is one of the few unforgivable crimes in Islam, and another related answer followed up here on how magic is typically viewed as a pact with a demon/jinn for harmful magic and has been commonly used by both men and women.

Some of it repeated here:

Is there such a thing as non-harmful, or "white magic," from a Muslim viewpoint?  In that the earlier response indicated that a magician could use magic to disable an already-harmful effected invoked by another as a possibility.

I also ask because I was sort of confused by the earlier answers.  Punishing a "sorcerer who harms" as opposed to a sorcerer in and of itself sounds like that knowledge of magic in and of itself is not bad.  Also, black magic is often referred to as a contrast against white magic, indicating that there are multiple forms of magic.  At least, that's often the case in stories and books I've read which use the color dichotomy.

There was a book I got in the library about some medieval African kingdoms.  It mentioned that magical amulets believed to ward off curses were a commonly bought thing by Saharan traders of all faiths, including Christians and Muslims.  This seemed rather shocking to me if it is indeed true, considering that the Abrahamic religions aren't very friendly to sorcery.  Although a Byzantine Empress resorted to what she believed to be magic potions to become fertile, and English Christians often had wise women who practiced "folk magic" for villagers, so theological rule-breaking is a common trend among many people.

Regarding the denouncement by Imams, how long ago did this occur?  Was this a common thing in the history of the Muslim world, or is it more recent?

From a strict Religious perspective , magic is magic , and magic is forbidden. There is no black and white when it comes to it. Some say it is because Magic can bend someones will , and that violates go will which bestowed upon humans.

Some magic can be used to enslave someone. Make them a puppet under your command. And that is just one part of it. Some use it to bind someone's desires. Bind their knowledge.

The idea of using a magician to undo another magician's magic was an improvised act by some people. Now usually an Imam reciting the Qur'an verses while holding unto a magically bound person , is the method to undo he magic and release that person. But there has been numerous times where that never worked. And it was only undone when another magician undid it. ( Let's not discount some facts that the Imam isn't as pure as is said to be , or that the Jinn whose binding that person is more vile than to repent when he hears Qur'an. )

As to Magicians who do harm only punished. I think , and I do not know the whole truth of it , it is because a Magican who is a known magician but isn't harming no one , does not deserve any mistreatment. Or maybe they preserved them to undo another's magic when necessary. It is baffling , and more baffling when they host magic shows without patting an eye.

As for the denouncement , if you're referring to how some sorcerers claimed that becoming a sorcerer have nothing with violating the faith ... I'm not sure when it started , but the first I've ever heard was about 20 years ago , though I heard of it much later than that.

Hope this answers your question. :-)

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #490 on: August 26, 2015, 08:31:01 PM »
'Nation' in this sort of context has a very specific meaning - a group of people who share a language and culture. Whether or not the rest of Arabia agrees, the Hejazi are a distinct group of their own.

I do not disagree with that. I was just referring to how they were not an Islamic nation.

Their rule was similar to how the Umayyads ruled Spain while the Abbasid took hold of the rest of the nation. That's all.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #491 on: August 27, 2015, 11:08:07 PM »
Hope this answers your question. :-)

It certainly does.  Thank you for taking time and effort to answer this, as well as all the others throughout this thread.

I don't have anything else at the moment.

Offline Jazra

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #492 on: August 30, 2015, 05:14:26 AM »
I really appreciate this thread and have spent some time using the helpful table of contents to brush upon on certain topics. In college, I read the Qur'an and could pick my way through a news article in Arabic and badly mangle some truly beautiful examples of pre-Islamic poetry. I had a positive view of Islam and had a view of the rules laid out in the Qur'an and Hadith as being protective of women in that harsh early environment. For example, I found the Qur'an's views on inheritance,

 "From what is left by parents and those nearest related there is a share for men and a share for women, whether the property be small or large --a determinate share" (Quran 4:7).

more favorable to women than the traditional Judeo-Christian rules of inheritance such as outlined in Numbers 27:1-11 of the Bible. But as I've been hit with stories about atrocities toward women such as honor killings, the Taliban, Pakistan, and most horrifically ISIS, over time, my positive view of Islam has slowly eroded ... not intentionally, but like water wearing away a stone.

This thread reminds me of why I had such a favorable impression of Islam in college; it reminds me of the good people and professors I studied with, and it reminds me that we live in a world where people will grab onto all sorts of things to justify cruelty and insanity. I guess what I'm saying is that this thread has helped me separate Islam from the terrorists and thugs who claim justification based on a twisted interpretation of its teachings.
 

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #493 on: August 30, 2015, 03:03:00 PM »
I'm glad you enjoyed the thread , Jazra. :-)

It wouldn't turn out to be as it is if it wasn't for the wonderful community of Elliquiy.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #494 on: September 02, 2015, 08:19:45 PM »
Islamism: So in recent times I've heard about this mainly as a political ideology which advocates the use of Islam as a guider in government as well as private life.

However, many sources indicate that Islamism is more specific and modern with added stuff, such as opposition to Western influence in the Muslim world or a single global Muslim nation (Pan-Islamism).  How central are such things in Islamist groups?

So, let's take a Muslim who believes that government structure and policy should be guided by religious mores, whether as a full theocracy or a monarchy/democracy/etc which builds Islam into its framework.  Does this make him an Islamist?  Can a Muslim oppose Islamist ideologies and not be secular at the same time?

Offline FormlessTopic starter

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #495 on: September 03, 2015, 05:19:04 PM »
I think that heavily depends on what kind of Muslim we're talking about.

If you take a regular Muslim ( I dislike saying Moderate because we're the right level of Muslims ) , They wouldn't be opposed to a social and political structure that provide and sustains the Islamic norms and teachings.

But if you take an extremist , they would rather have everything stripped away from the public and build a monarchy ( not democracy ) that suits their agenda.

When I think about it , Islam itself doesn't go against the world when you remember that it is a life style and not a governing body. But that's just me.

Perhaps someone more fluent with politics can shine on this particular issue.

Offline Skynet

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #496 on: September 05, 2015, 12:54:23 AM »
This next question is more a comparative faith thing, but is asked due to its relationship with Islam at various points in history.

The Druze: So there's this religious group in the Middle East known as the Druze.  I've variously heard them described in different ways: as their own religion entirely separate from the Abrahamic faiths, as an offshoot of Islam, and as an Islamic sect.  From their Wikipedia page, they seem akin to a sort of syncretic faith, taking and combining traditions from non-Abrahamic sources (such as ancient Greek philosophers) while still being monotheist and loyal to the Abrahamic God. 

Encyclopedia Britannica mentions that the Druze religion developed out of I'smailite Muslim religious traditions.


The Wikipedia page mentions that Druze are not considered Muslims by many, and have been persecuted due to this.  The mention of their belief that God incarnated into various human forms, including a caliph in 1018 AD would seem to be the major point of contention, in regards to mainstream Muslim opposition of God being human.

So what is the Druze relationship to Islam specifically?  Are they considered People of the Book by Muslims?  Or are they grouped with the non-Abrahamic beliefs such as paganism/atheism/etc?
« Last Edit: September 05, 2015, 01:03:47 AM by Skynet »

Offline Vekseid

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #497 on: September 05, 2015, 08:40:24 AM »
Perhaps someone more fluent with politics can shine on this particular issue.

You could do worse than quoting Nassar:



I'm sure the Wahabbists/Salafists loved him.

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 #498 on: September 05, 2015, 12:01:02 PM »
*flops in with a random question*

ive checked out this thread every now and again out of curiosity so maybe this was already answered and I just missed it.


But is it possible that Djin and Nephilim are the same thing or totally different beings?

Offline Wajin

Re: Islam , A variety of discussions from a non extreme perspective.
« Reply #499 on: September 05, 2015, 01:32:20 PM »
*flops in with a random question*

ive checked out this thread every now and again out of curiosity so maybe this was already answered and I just missed it.


But is it possible that Djin and Nephilim are the same thing or totally different beings?

No, Djinn are creatures of fire created directly by Allah. Nephilim are, at least in popular theory, the off-spring of Angels (The Sons of God) and humans (The Daughters of Adam). In the Qur'an it is written that Angels cannot reproduce. There are giants though, though my memories of them are a bit vague, I remember them having a prophet called Hud, they themselves were called the Ad people. But anyway, hope Formless can elaborate.