• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

"...And your Lord is never forgetful..."

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
@Jane

LoveBeingAMuslimah dismisses the entirety of the Islamic Golden Age as spiritually corrupt? Isn't that a stance that's typically associated with Salafism - better known as Islamic fundamentalism in the West?
You wont find language as spirituallity used much with Salafis. However Lovebeing is not a salafi as she supports the brotherhood, most traditional salafis know as the Madkhali salafis view the brotherhood as heretics.

@Love
Oh, and how do you know this? I thought you didn't accept hadeeth.
You must distinguish between smaneck academic and bahai side. Thats her Bahai side speaking. You see the bahai have their origin in rafidism from Shiraz Persia. Ali Muhammad Shiraz was a rafidi before he claimed to be the 12th imam, the Bahai hold him to be a spiritual Elijah, Shaoshyant and John the Baptist. He was the founder of Babism. Just like the rafawafid she has no consistent methodology, she will accept ahadith that suits her (those that insult the ummayad dynasty), and reject those that are critical to her (such as those that say there is no rasul after me).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Supreme

British
Jul 30, 2009
11,891
490
London
✟30,185.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I would say that anyone who insists that salafis are indistinguishable from true Muslims is a salafi.

B-but- don't you know? Haven't you heard? Only Salafis are True MuslimsTM.

Salafis are the Muslim equivalent of Puritans. They truly are the nutters of the Muslim world, and they're in a very distinct minority.
 
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
B-but- don't you know? Haven't you heard? Only Salafis are True MuslimsTM.

Salafis are the Muslim equivalent of Puritans. They truly are the nutters of the Muslim world, and they're in a very distinct minority.

If you do go back in time(by looking at books obviously) and look at the book of the Salaf of the likes of Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi3i, Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Ibn al Mubarak, Bukhari and so on you and compared them with Muslims today you would see they would be most like the Salafis. Most of the Salaf did not view the rawafid([bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tes like the ismailis and 12er imamis) as muslims. Bukhari forexample declared there is no difference between a Jew and a Rafidi and he did not see it fit praying nor greeting them. They also used to write books exposing and refuting the ahlu bidah (people of innovation) the same way salafis do today. However you would find some Murjia aspects in the salafis today when it comes to the king of saudia arabia.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,190
325
✟115,271.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
@Jane
You wont find language as spirituallity used much with Salafis. However Lovebeing is not a salafi as she supports the brotherhood, most traditional salafis know as the Madkhali salafis view the brotherhood as heretics.

This is confusing, why would Salafis view brotherhood as heretics? You only need to follow the Quran to be a Muslim right?
 
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
This is confusing, why would Salafis view brotherhood as heretics? You only need to follow the Quran to be a Muslim right?

^_^

No if you follow the Quran only without the Sunnah you are not a muslim. As for why salafis view the brotherhood as heretics it is a complicated matter to tell someone who just learned what a Muslim needs to follow.

It is important to know that heretics are not viewed as disbelievers, rather they are viewed as people of innovation in religion. If they are disbelievers or not would depend on how extrem their heresy is. Kind of like how you differentiate between extrem heresy like that of Mormons and perhaps why you view as heresy in the Catholic church but not as extreme as that of the mormons.

That should give you an idea
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,190
325
✟115,271.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
^_^

No if you follow the Quran only without the Sunnah you are not a muslim. As for why salafis view the brotherhood as heretics it is a complicated matter to tell someone who just learned what a Muslim needs to follow.

It is important to know that heretics are not viewed as disbelievers, rather they are viewed as people of innovation in religion. If they are disbelievers or not would depend on how extrem their heresy is. Kind of like how you differentiate between extrem heresy like that of Mormons and perhaps why you view as heresy in the Catholic church but not as extreme as that of the mormons.

That should give you an idea

The Mormons added text to Bible, and Catholic church build idols of Jesus which is against God's second commandments, very easy to understand.

The only thing I used to judge if a person follows God is if they love their neighbors as themselves (or at least try to), since that is the foundation of Christianity (how much you love God can't be measured).

What did brother hood do that made them heretics?
 
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
The Mormons added text to Bible, and Catholic church build idols of Jesus which is against God's second commandments, very easy to understand.

The only thing I used to judge if a person follows God is if they love their neighbors as themselves (or at least try to), since that is the foundation of Christianity (how much you love God can't be measured).

What did brother hood do that made them heretics?

The Catholics would take a different take on idols and would have a huge list against why protestants are not even christian. Mormons would claim to have added revelation to the Bible. So each from ther pov however i just mentioned them as examples. In my view the Catholics are the orthodox christians while protestants are the heretics. A good number of protestants are not even christian in my view. They worship the Bible rather than God.

As for the Salafi and Ikhwan situation. Here you can read a little about it from the hands of the salafis them self
http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/
http://www.takfiris.com/
SayyidQutb.Com | The Fountain of Rafidi and Khariji Poison
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,190
325
✟115,271.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Catholics would take a different take on idols and would have a huge list against why protestants are not even christian. Mormons would claim to have added revelation to the Bible. So each from ther pov however i just mentioned them as examples. In my view the Catholics are the orthodox christians while protestants are the heretics. A good number of protestants are not even christian in my view. They worship the Bible rather than God.

As for the Salafi and Ikhwan situation. Here you can read a little about it from the hands of the salafis them self
IslamAgainstExtremism.Com | Rebuttals and Clarifications
http://www.takfiris.com/
SayyidQutb.Com | The Fountain of Rafidi and Khariji Poison

I am a bit disappointed that the difference can't be described in short concepts. The longer the list the greater the chance of confusion :)

In my view the protestants are doing a better job of studying the word of God, as they trying to understand it themselves instead of let a pope decide on that for them. Do you think it is better for a central figure to decide for you what God wants?

The protestant do not worship Bible, they follow (or try to follow) the word of God in the Bible, and the basics of that in our day to day live is to love our neighbor as ourselves.
 
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
Do you think it is better for a central figure to decide for you what God wants?
I do think a group of people with knowledge through the ages comming to similiar conclusions are a better chance of understanding what God means trough revelation than my own yes. Saying that one should always be a freethinker also and not reach extremes either way. Protestants claim of doing a better job of studying the word of God yet the Word of God was decided to be canonical by the Church itself.

As for protestants worshiping the Bible. I would not put all protestants under that category. The ones i do include are the Evangelical bible literalist who hold the view in a 6000 year old, a literal six day creation and so forth. They do worship the Bible instead of God. If they would have worshiped God they would have looked at natur and understand the Bible through observable details rather than ignoring empirical testable evidence for the text it self.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,161
3,180
Oregon
✟941,862.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
The protestant do not worship Bible, they follow (or try to follow) the word of God in the Bible, and the basics of that in our day to day live is to love our neighbor as ourselves.
Occasionally when in discussion with Christians the thought that they are worshiping the Bible has crossed my mind. I'm pretty sure that those Christians don't believe that they are, but when the conversation becomes so dis-jointed from what I actually see around me, I sometimes wonder.

.
 
Upvote 0

Supreme

British
Jul 30, 2009
11,891
490
London
✟30,185.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
If you do go back in time(by looking at books obviously) and look at the book of the Salaf of the likes of Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi3i, Ahmed ibn Hanbal, Ibn al Mubarak, Bukhari and so on you and compared them with Muslims today you would see they would be most like the Salafis. Most of the Salaf did not view the rawafid([bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tes like the ismailis and 12er imamis) as muslims. Bukhari forexample declared there is no difference between a Jew and a Rafidi and he did not see it fit praying nor greeting them. They also used to write books exposing and refuting the ahlu bidah (people of innovation) the same way salafis do today. However you would find some Murjia aspects in the salafis today when it comes to the king of saudia arabia.

The trouble with the Salafi mentality is its exclusivity. The refusal to greet Shia Muslims is a disgusting example of religious hatred, and just because a select few early Muslims were intolerant, we know better in the 21st century. Salafism would be fine, if it weren't taken seriously; they're already in charge of Saudi Arabia, which, although not a world power, is still the holiest land in Islam.
 
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
the refusal to greet Shia Muslims is a disgusting example of religious hatred
By Shia i assume you mean the 12ers which in Sunni language would be translated as rafida.

However as you would view rather a progresive view and adoptation to a 21st century situation Salafis would want to keep as much as possible from the earliest generation. Refusing to greet the 12ers is one.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,190
325
✟115,271.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
As the links i posted might be to difficult for you.

Here is a simply 6min video explaining the salafi view of the Ikhwan(the brotherhood)
Thanks, it is a bit hard to understand since there are some Arabic in it, I listened for a short time and from what I can understand the speaker is talking about all Muslim should unit since they are Muslims and of Allah.

I think the Christians extend it further that we should love our neighbors as ourselves, the neighbor can be anyone.
 
Upvote 0

dcalling

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2014
3,190
325
✟115,271.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I do think a group of people with knowledge through the ages comming to similiar conclusions are a better chance of understanding what God means trough revelation than my own yes. Saying that one should always be a freethinker also and not reach extremes either way.
It is good to have experienced people, but the relationship between you and God is always on yourself only. No one can make that decision for you.

Protestants claim of doing a better job of studying the word of God yet the Word of God was decided to be canonical by the Church itself.

I believe God preserve his own word, and I found all the books of NT does have a common message. All of it is compliment to "Love your neighbor as yourself".

As for protestants worshiping the Bible. I would not put all protestants under that category. The ones i do include are the Evangelical bible literalist who hold the view in a 6000 year old, a literal six day creation and so forth. They do worship the Bible instead of God. If they would have worshiped God they would have looked at natur and understand the Bible through observable details rather than ignoring empirical testable evidence for the text it self.

Taken bible literally is not worshiping bible. They just have a different understanding of it. No body knows the details of how God creates earth, and God has its ways of doing the impossible. None of the miracles recorded in Torah/Gospel/Quran is empirical testable do you think they are all fake? :idea:
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
@Jane


You wont find language as spirituallity used much with Salafis. However Lovebeing is not a salafi as she supports the brotherhood, most traditional salafis know as the Madkhali salafis view the brotherhood as heretics.

The Brotherhood considers themselves Salafi. But interesting to see Salafis define one another out of existence. It is as the Qur'an says of "those who have divided their religion and become sects, every faction rejoicing in what it has."(Qur'an 30:32)

You must distinguish between smaneck academic and bahai side. Thats her Bahai side speaking. You see the bahai have their origin in rafidism from Shiraz Persia. Ali Muhammad Shiraz was a rafidi before he claimed to be the 12th imam, Elijah, Shaoshyant and John the Baptist.

The only thing which is correct in that list is that the Bab claimed to be the 12th Imam. It will be later Baha'is who compare them Him to John the Baptist or Elijah. Likewise He never claim to be Sayoshant. That would be Baha'u'llah.

But I can't help but notice that you insist on referring to the Shi'ism with words of insults instead of calling them what they call themselves.

Just like the rafawafid she has no consistent methodology, she will accept ahadith that suits her (those that insult the ummayad dynasty)

Actually Shi'ites do have a methodology. The only main difference is that a hadith is considered sound if its isnad can be reliably traced back to one of the Imams. They do, of course, differ in who they consider a reliable transmitter.

I'm a historian and I quoted a historian, in fact the earliest of Sunni historians.
Love insisted that Tabari quoted a lot of narrations he didn't agree with, and I acknowledged that he was always careful to present all sides of the story. So if she has a variant account of what happened in Yazid's court from at-Tabari, I invited her to share it with us.
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Most of the Salaf did not view the rawafid([bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tes like the ismailis and 12er imamis) as muslims.

And that's why you refer to them with insulting names. Rawafid means defectors or deserters, for the unintiated.

Bukhari forexample declared there is no difference between a Jew and a Rafidi and he did not see it fit praying nor greeting them.

Did you hear that, Loammi?

They also used to write books exposing and refuting the ahlu bidah (people of innovation) the same way salafis do today.

Innovation is a bi-word for heresy in Islam, again for the uninitiated.

However you would find some Murjia aspects in the salafis today when it comes to the king of saudia arabia.

And the rest are Kharijites?
 
Upvote 0
Jan 25, 2013
3,501
476
✟66,240.00
Faith
Muslim
Marital Status
Private
I would say that anyone who insists that salafis are indistinguishable from true Muslims is a salafi.

1.) You called the Taliban "wahabi" and you said Muhsin Khan, the one who wrote the translation of the Qur'aan, is a "Pashtun Wahabi" or part of the Taliban. So I would say that your labels are not very reliable.

2.) You try to take many aspects of Islaam that are unappealing to you and attribute it to the salafis, "wahabis", Saudis, Hanbalis, etc. and try to make it seem that it has no place in Islaam except in the ideology of the extremists even if the concept is firmly embedded in our religion.

For instance, you mentioned how "wahabis" consider Christians and Jews to be disbelievers instead of People of the Book (even though the two terms are not mutually exclusive) insinuating that this is a "wahabi" belief even though the Qur'aan refers to them disbelievers. This is the view of nearly all Muslims but you're pigeonholing and ascribing it only to the "wahabis".

He does quote everyone, even giving us any contradictory accounts. That's great for us historians because we get to see the different perspectives. So if he provided an account of what happened in Yazid's court which contradicts the account I presented, please share it with us.
Why do I need to provide a narration from his book that contradicts this story? I don't know if there is or isn't, but if there isn't, does that automatically mean that this story is right? That's flawed reasoning. And if there is, you're not qualified to determine which is authentic.

You can repeat it as many times as you like, the fact he gives us multiple accounts makes him more reliable in my thinking not less.
You can't just take his book and ignore his own words He said that he gave the list of narrators so people could discern which chains were sound or not sound. He also said that if there are false narrations in there, it is not his fault; he was merely reporting it. He probably couldn't get any clearer and yet you (and many anti-Islaam websites) ignore this and spread various false or weak narrations around as fact.

So you give us a secondary account of what al-Bukhari? Don't you have the actual hadith in question?
volume 5, book 57, number 91.
Apparently you have a good deal to loose if you accept that account.
Yeah? Enlighten me, please.
And that's why I'm citing Sunni sources. ;)
A Sunni source that contains weak, very weak, or altogether fabricated narrations (and the compiler himself says that he has not sifted them out). A Sunni source that also contains narrations from lots of Shi'aas? ....Alrighty then.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
It is good to have experienced people, but the relationship between you and God is always on yourself only. No one can make that decision for you.
Yes but you know God trough a text. We are talking about an interpretation. Scholars with knowledge of the religion, text, language, history would come to better conclusion than a layman viewing the text for himself. The catholics understood this. Once the Bible was free for use Heretics started popping up (not that they didnt exist before Luther times).


I believe God preserve his own word, and I found all the books of NT does have a common message. All of it is compliment to "Love your neighbor as yourself".
This is one of my favorite argument against Protestants. They cannot account for their use of the 66 books, as they were selected by the Catholic Church. Meaning the protestants use a bible collected by Idol worshipping Catholics in their own words.

Taken bible literally is not worshiping bible.
No. Refusing to view the world around them and taking the bible literally refusing to see God in the natur around them is the same as worshiping the Bible.

Torah/Gospel/Quran is empirical testable do you think they are all fake?
What do you mean by fake?

@sma

The Brotherhood considers themselves Salafi.
In the past they considered them self Sufi. Including the founder Hasan al Banna.

Qur'an 30:32
Very good use of that verse.

The only thing which is correct in that list is that the Bab claimed to be the 12th Imam. It will be later Baha'is who compare them Him to John the Baptist or Elijah. Likewise He never claim to be Sayoshant. That would be Baha'u'llah.
Bahais do claim him to be a spiritual John or Elijah and a spiritual Saoshyant. I saw from the sentence i wrote it seemed that i indicated that he refered to himself as those three titles.

Here is were i got bahais view him as a spiritual Saoshyant.

The Báb, acclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh as the “Essence of Essences,” the “Sea of Seas,” the “Point round Whom the realities of the Prophets and Messengers revolve,” “from Whom God hath caused to proceed the knowledge of all that was and shall be,” Whose “rank excelleth that of all the Prophets,” and Whose “Revelation transcendeth the comprehension and understanding of all their chosen ones,” had delivered His Message and discharged His mission. He Who was, in the words of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, the “Morn of Truth” and “Harbinger of the Most Great Light,” Whose advent at once signalized the termination of the “Prophetic Cycle” and the inception of the “Cycle of Fulfillment,” had simultaneously through His Revelation banished the shades of night that had descended upon His country, and proclaimed the impending rise of that Incomparable Orb Whose radiance was to envelop the whole of mankind. He, as affirmed by Himself, “the Primal Point from which have been generated all created things,” “one of the sustaining pillars of the Primal Word of God,” the “Mystic Fane,” the “Great Announcement,” the “Flame of that supernal Light that glowed upon Sinai,” the “Remembrance of God” concerning Whom “a separate Covenant hath been established with each and every Prophet” had, through His advent, at once fulfilled the promise of all ages and ushered in the consummation of all Revelations. He the “Qá’im” (He Who ariseth) promised to the Shí’ahs, 58 the “Mihdí” (One Who is guided) awaited by the Sunnís, the “Return of John the Baptist” expected by the Christians, the “Ushídar-Máh” referred to in the Zoroastrian scriptures, the “Return of Elijah” anticipated by the Jews, Whose Revelation was to show forth “the signs and tokens of all the Prophets”
Refrence: Shoghi Effendi God Passes Ch4 P58

Actually Shi'ites do have a methodology.
Yes they do. Do they accept the results their methodology gives? No they dont. Majlisi proved the narration about the verse of stoning is authentic in their books even so they reject it. Majlisi proved the narrations about corruption happening in the Quran they differ about this. Majlisi proved the narration about Prophet not leaving any inheritance is Sahih yet they reject it and mention the event of fadak like there is no tomorrow. Yet they will glady accept the chainless Nahj ul Balagha as the 2nd Quran and call Majlisi Sheikh ul Islam.

The only main difference is that a hadith is considered sound if its isnad can be reliably traced back to one of the Imams.
Wrong. A hadith cannot be sahih if there is a non-imami in the Isnad, it muwathaq at best. Also their rijal evaluation differs. Also rawafid use "aql" as a critera for accepting ahadith.

I'm a historian and I quoted a historian, in fact the earliest of Sunni historians.
Who admitted in the begging of his book he was writing a Tareekh and not a work based on only authentic material. And if anyone found anything weak in his book should therfor not blame him.

As a historian you should use the work of a person the way he wanted you to use it.

And the rest are Kharijites?
Besides the ibadis. And some khariji-aspects amoung the ISIS in Syria today. I would say the term khawriji can only be used for such.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aristocles X

Ghost
Mar 3, 2014
237
2
✟22,879.00
Faith
Muslim
@love
You called the Taliban "wahabi" and you said Muhsin Khan, the one who wrote the translation of the Qur'aan, is a "Pashtun Wahabi" or part of the Taliban. So I would say that your labels are not very reliable.
Taliban are deobandi maturidi hanafis. Why she would call them Wahabi beats me. Maybe she should read what the deobandi scholars have said about Muhammad ibn abd al Wahab.

For instance, you mentioned how "wahabis" consider Christians and Jews to be disbelievers instead of People of the Book
All muslims consider the people of the book disbelievers. She might find some exceptions that she will try to take advantage of.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.