Does religion make Muslims more violent?

[45'22']

Than they are not true followers !



Can i post verses from Quran to clear the allegations against Islam?
That shouldn't provoke any one... but the satanists and atheists.... opps i can't ... where is freedom of speech?

I don't know about Quranic verses but I know one thing that non Muslims are considered as kuffars which is not a good thing

 

[asad71]

so you are saying that your so called divine book is violent?


agree. islam tells muslims not to be violent with fellow muslims.. (although that was not even followed immediately after Mr mohammad's death) Islam encourages muslims to deceive, rob, pillage, kill , rape , grab properties of non-muslims.

Nope, I never said that.All I am saying is that we follow the book more seriously than most others. We are a peace loving faith. But we don't offer the other cheek.

 

[45'22']

The post you were replying to was hypothetical, 'if you provoke..'. I'm not accusing you or saying you do or are currently provoking anyone, which is why I used the word 'would'.

Why would you say that man, even if it's sarcasm it's disturbing to even think that those swine are followers, never mind true followers, of my religion.

I know it was hypothetical
What I meant was why I should provoke only one religion
If u want to see how much tolerance people from each religion has got then you should equally provoke each religion and see the results....

 

[TankMan]

Thanks @TankMan

Au contraire you post was very educative.

What are the 4 schools of thought that Salafism does not adhere to or diverges out of the bounds of?

Is Deobandism a sub group of Salafism, like Wahabism is?

What are the basic differences, points of divergence? Especially related to the topic - i.e. propensity for violence.

What are the 4 schools of thought that Salafism does not adhere to or diverges out of the bounds of?

The 4 schools of thought most widely accepted in Sunni Islam are Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali. Salafism doesn't adhere to them, though they agree on most things that are the basics of Islam but disagree on many of the peripheral elements (a few examples are the concept of saints and the qualities of the Holy Prophet)

Is Deobandism a sub group of Salafism, like Wahabism is?

Deobandism is not a sub group of Salafism as it follows the Hanafi school of thought. It is a subgroup of the Hanafi madhab, like the Barelvi subgroup that is the majority in the subcontinent. Deobandis, however, share some beliefs with Salafis (and 'Wahabis'), specifically those regarding saints and the Prophet's qualities.

What are the basic differences, points of divergence? Especially related to the topic - i.e. propensity for violence.

Won't get into too much details, but the Barelvis believe in having saints and using them as 'intermediaries' to God while the Deobandis (and the Salafis and Wahabis) consider that to be against Islam. That's one of the main points of contention. Then come the smaller issues about whether or not the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) had knowledge of the unseen and whether he is metaphysical or omnipresent or not. Also, there are some conflicts on issues like where your hands should be while praying.

But, like I said before, there isn't anything relevant to terrorism or much that makes any sect more susceptible to terrorists than the others. For example, the most widely abused (by terrorists) concept of Jihad is practically the same among all these subdivisions.

The only difference is that Salafism is more flexible. That makes it potentially the most liberal and the most conservative of the sects, depending on individuals. I have personally interacted with both types of people (Salafis).

 

[OTTOMAN]

How would I know? ALL Islamic sects claim to be the "true" Muslims anyway

In Islam scripture is considered to be pure. Where's the problem?

Sure humans are not eligible to modify or invent in parallel new set of instructions. That would not be considered as Islam, irrespective of how much, hindu, satanist or jahils (idiots) insist a tempered scripture, to be the true Islam.
Actually, it should be considered as book of guidance and any one is free to consult, there's no compulsion to believe in it.
After all it mention of Hell, which means Allah knew many people will reject his guidance and than who are we to change what Allah is most certain of!

Do you have particular question or clarification to ask... ?

The 4 schools of thought most widely accepted in Sunni Islam are Hanafi, Shafi, Maliki and Hanbali.

Do they all have different translations of Quran? or different number of gods?

 

[TankMan]

I don't know about Quranic verses but I know one thing that non Muslims are considered as kuffars which is not a good thing

Actually, that is a huge misconception among Muslims and non-Muslims. Non-Muslims are actually not the 'kuffar' that are specifically mentioned in Quranic verses. The literal translation of the word 'Kafir' (Kuffar is the plural form) is 'someone who covers [the truth]'.

The word kāfir is the active participle of the root K-F-R "to cover". As a pre-Islamic term it described farmers burying seeds in the ground, covering them with soil while planting. Thus, the word kāfir implies the meaning a person who hides or covers.

And if you read the Quran, you'd see that many of the times when the word 'Kafir' or 'Kuffar' is used, the word 'Takkabur', meaning 'arrogance' is used along side it
But that word is deeper than just arrogance. What it implies is 'someone who denies the religion despite having no reason to', i.e out of pure arrogance and spite. The people who knew and recognized the truth but still rejected it.

Thus, the verses that talk about kuffar are specifically referring to certain people who denied the religion despite having no reason to, as they had seen the Holy Prophet and his miracles and religion with their own eyes - they did it out of pure arrogance, as many of their leaders admitted.

Some of Verses on which this idea is based on:
- [2:22]: ''Then do not set up rivals unto Allah (in worship) while you know (that He Alone has the right to be worshipped).''

- [2:42]: ''And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know [it]''

- [2:109]: ''Many of the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) wish they could turn you back to disbelief after you have believed, out of envy from themselves [even] after the truth has become clear to them.''

- [2:146]: ''But indeed, a party of them conceal the truth while they know [it].''

-[3:71]: ''O People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), why do you confuse the truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know [it]?''

Quranic verse 62 of Surah al Baqarah even says this explicitly, that Jews, Sabeans and Christians may go to heaven if they are righteous and if they honestly believed what they practiced.

Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans [before Prophet Muhammad] - those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness - will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.
- Quran [2:62]

In short, the Quranic term Kuffar or Kafir does not refer to all non-Believers. Thus, this can not be used to justify terrorism or fighting every non-Muslim on Earth for eternity. The commands to fight 'Kuffar' are specific to the Holy Prophet's era and situation and do not apply to all Muslims and Non-Muslims in all times.

Do they all have different translations of Quran? or different number of gods?

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or what this is meant to imply, since I doubt it's a legitimate question. But I'll answer it anyways - no. They worship the same God and have the same Quran.

Commentaries of the Quran (Tafseers) do differ a little, but not much.

Their differences are based on little issues that were purposely blown out of proportion by some political Mullahs for political gains and have resulted in decades of sectarian violence and division of Muslims.

 

[DrawingDead]

Muslim countries have a lot of political problems now. Today. Don't be surprised when terrorists show up after certain countries are invaded multiple times while having civil wars and general political shitfests around them.

The 'world' (west, mostly) and its victim complex can go to hell.

Don't worry, we won't be surprised if a Syrian or an Afghan shows up. But its not them attacking us, is it? Why is the guy who planned 9/11 a person of Pakistani descent (from Kuwait, no less)? Why were majority of the attackers from the KSA? What did we ever do to them? Why is the Times Square bomber Pakistani? Why are the London bombers of Pakistani descent? What did we do to Pakistan, other than not supporting you in your pissing contest with India, that would make you so hostile? There is a civil war in middle eastern countries, not because we attacked but because they don't know how to take care of themselves. They hated Saddam, we got rid of him now their fighting among themselves. How is that our fault? After the WWII, Germany and Japan went on to become successful societies. How is it that Iraq couldn't do it? We pumped in a lot of money into Iraq after Saddam. Why is it an abject failure? Why do you think Muslim countries need an autocrat just to keep them from self-destructing? Before you blame us for your failings, you need to take a good, hard look at yourself and ask yourself why among 50 odd Muslim countries, only a handful are successful, progressive states and why the rest either have to be ruled with an iron fist or are in complete chaos.

The real problem isn't terrorists. Every religion has its share of nutjobs. The real problem is people like you who make excuses and provide cover for what these people are doing. US attacks Iraq, we've got an idiot from some other country who's butthurt. What's the connection? Could it be your religion? Or are planning on living in denial for the rest of your life?

 

[OTTOMAN]

Commentaries of the Quran (Tafseers) do differ a little, but not much.

Why should any one comment on Quran?
I was born Muslim but i have never ready any commentary on Quran by any one... where does it fit me?

 

[45'22']

Actually, that is a huge misconception among Muslims and non-Muslims. Non-Muslims are actually not the 'kuffar' that are specifically mentioned in Quranic verses. The literal translation of the word 'Kafir' (Kuffar is the plural form) is 'someone who covers [the truth]'.

And if you read the Quran, you'd see that many of the times when the word 'Kafir' or 'Kuffar' is used, the word 'Takkabur', meaning 'arrogance' is used along side it
But that word is deeper than just arrogance. What it implies is 'someone who denies the religion despite having no reason to', i.e out of pure arrogance and spite. The people who knew and recognized the truth but still rejected it.

Thus, the verses that talk about kuffar are specifically referring to certain people who denied the religion despite having no reason to, as they had seen the Holy Prophet and his miracles and religion with their own eyes - they did it out of pure arrogance, as many of their leaders admitted.



Quranic verse 62 of Surah al Baqarah even says this explicitly, that Jews, Sabeans and Christians may go to heaven if they are righteous and if they honestly believed what they practiced.


In short, the Quranic term Kuffar or Kafir does not refer to all non-Believers. Thus, this can not be used to justify terrorism or fighting every non-Muslim on Earth for eternity. The commands to fight 'Kuffar' are specific to the Holy Prophet's era and situation and do not apply to all Muslims and Non-Muslims in all times.


I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or what this is meant to imply, since I doubt it's a legitimate question. But I'll answer it anyways - no. They worship the same God and have the same Quran.

Commentaries of the Quran (Tafseers) do differ a little, but not much.

Their differences are based on little issues that were purposely blown out of proportion by some political Mullahs for political gains and have resulted in decades of sectarian violence and division of Muslims.

I don't know much but as far as I know....the people who do not believe in Prophet is a kafir or maybe this is how it's interpreted
So that makes me and the rest of non Muslims a kaffir

 

[TankMan]

Why should any one comment on Quran?
I was born Muslim but i have never ready any commentary on Quran by any one... where does it fit me?

The tafseers aren't exactly commentaries, but rather used to convey contextual information i.e when was the verse revealed, what circumstances it was revealed under, where it was revealed etc. Some tafseers also include a scholar's interpretation, etymology of the vocabulary used and other relevant information.

If you haven't read a tafseer, that doesn't mean anything. I haven't full read any tafseer either, but I use some of the credible scholars' tafseers for contextual information etc. Most of it, however, is obvious in the Quran itself, so more often than not a tafseer isn't needed.

It's the same as reading hadith and fiqh for information, nothing wrong with it.

 

[OTTOMAN]

I don't know much but as far as I know....the people who do not believe in Prophet is a kafir or maybe this is how it's interpreted
So that makes me and the rest of non Muslims a kaffir

Any non believer is referred to as Kafir.... what is surprise their?
However, in India Kafir term is used for Muslims and Christians...as they don't follow hinduism... right?

 

[TankMan]

I don't know much but as far as I know....the people who do not believe in Prophet is a kafir or maybe this is how it's interpreted
So that makes me and the rest of non Muslims a kaffir

Please read the TL;DR part at the end, if you don't have the time to read the whole post. If you don't know much, I am willing to help you with that, which is why I posted all that.

In short, the Quranic term Kuffar or Kafir does not refer to all non-Believers. Thus, this can not be used to justify terrorism or fighting every non-Muslim on Earth for eternity. The commands to fight 'Kuffar' are specific to the Holy Prophet's era and situation and do not apply to all Muslims and Non-Muslims in all times.

To make it even shorter, you are not a kafir in the Quranic sense and Muslims do not have to and should not fight or hate you.

Any non believer is referred to as Kafir

No sir you are wrong. The Quranic term of Kafir does not apply to all non-believers, in fact it's remarkably specific to certain people during the Prophet's time as I have described in post #276.

 

[45'22']

Any non believer is referred to as Kafir.... what is surprise their?
However, in India Kafir term is used for Muslims and Christians...as they don't follow hinduism... right?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about???

Maybe Christians but I have never observed a Muslim being called as a kaffir
There is no kaffir word in Hinduism

 

[OTTOMAN]

The tafseers aren't exactly commentaries, but rather used to convey contextual information i.e when was the verse revealed, what circumstances it was revealed under, where it was revealed etc. Some tafseers also include a scholar's interpretation, etymology of the vocabulary used and other relevant information.

If you haven't read a tafseer, that doesn't mean anything. I haven't full read any tafseer either, but I use some of the credible scholars' tafseers for contextual information etc. Most of it, however, is obvious in the Quran itself, so more often than not a tafseer isn't needed.

It's the same as reading hadith and fiqh for information, nothing wrong with it.

Is it really matter, where the verse was revealed?
why only Pakistanis introduce/divide them self or identify each other from 'school of thought' title.
It sound silly or some conspiracy with Islam, because not every Muslim kid knows that 'school of thoughts' explain contextual meaning and hence unnecessary divide, ready to be exploited with bit of falsification.
However, i found the translations to be simple enough to understand, with or without context.
i will not venture further, as i see you have lot in plate to explain.
However, i continue to consider my self fiqless Muslim as i can't be Kafir as i believe in oneness of Allah as creator of this universe and what is within and his messengers and the lesson of peace.

No sir you are wrong. The Quranic term of Kafir does not apply to all non-believers, in fact it's remarkably specific to certain people during the Prophet's time as I have described in post #276.

sorry.. than i stand corrected, i'll try to look more into it, or you may post some link.

 

[Norwegian]

There is no kaffir word in Hinduism

True, so where is the word "Achoot" derived from?