To Those who are pro Khilafat

[DarkStar]

Indeed, Hadith are now prophesies, are they? And the Prophet is now a Nostradamus type figure?

The Prophet is no more than the postman - he was a mortal human being.

I think this conversation is taking a unpleasant turn - and I encourage you to reconsider where you are taking this - you have already suggested that hadith are prophesy, and not the sayings recorded much after the Prophet had died.

I wish this forum well = if today it is polluted by Islamists, it will be in no small measure to the fact the likes of you are left in responsible positions.

I never said the Prophet was not a mortal human being. I think you must have read my earlier post on another thread in which I objected to the Nietzshe Ubermensh type theory of hte Prophet being a semi divine figure.

That has nothing to do with God in his infinite wisdom chosing people, and imparting some knowledge unto them. Prophesising doesn't make someone divine, although it is from someone who might be closer to the divine than you and me. The history of Abrahamic religion is replete with Prophecy, I suggest you read up on that.

If you are trying to use this forum to 'invent' a new form of Islam, then you can't expect people to remain silent.

As for where the pollution is coming from, now that is a matter of opinion.

On another note, the two people who share correspondence give each other respect and attention, while the postman is seen as someone providing a service, nothing more. He might be given a 'tip' or bakshish for his work, or the door slammed unto him.

Please do not make our beloved Prophet a postman.

 

[muse]

Paighambar

What other than messenger does this mean? But for the Islamists on this forum, who attempt to lay claim on this forum, we are now expected to think that hadith are prophesies and the prophet not a mouthpiece of God, but himself a mini-divinity - this is a regrettable construct.

As for creating a new Islam, you can be sure I for one will be on the Islamists case.

 

[DarkStar]

the Quran did not come in Farsi or DAri (as Paighambar is a farsi word).

The two most commonly words are Nabi and RAsul. A Nabi is someone who Prophesises (Hence the word Prophet). It is from the root word Naba. A Rasul is a Messenger.

You keep on bringing this issue of mini-divinity, "perfection", god like, as if I or other muslims worship the Prohet rather than God.

I have told you time and again, prophesising doesn't make one God, or god like, or a demi god, or mini divine, or not mortal, etc.

Prophecy is knowledge, gifted by God, thats all. If you think that is god like, then that is your personal interpretation, nothing to do with Islam.

 

[ARSENAL6]

Keep the laws and the religion separate

Muslims practice Islam. Muslims can vote for people that secure their interest.

Still does not makes sence.
or if you are suggesting to bring together the entire Muslim people under seculaism - it wouldn't work as some would want a Khilafat like you want a secular system
Seculair and Khilafat are two things that cannot be mixed or work side-by side as one contradicts the other. One takes out God whilst the other brings in God.

 

[muse]

have told you time and again, prophesising doesn't make one God, or god like, or a demi god, or mini divine, or not mortal, etc.

Prophecy is knowledge, gifted by God, thats all. If you think that is god like, then that is your personal interpretation, nothing to do with Islam.

True to Islamist form, first you say that Hadith are prophesy.

Now you say that paighambar is farsi and therefore not the same as Rasoul, which is of course Arabic, which is also messenger, AKA postman

You thread on a dangerous road and you do not realize it - the consequence of what you are saying on Quran is something you have not considered, but you have an ideology to follow. If God has gifted the prophet with this special knowledge and the prophet has shared it with the world, what does that mean for Quran and how it was recieved and transmitted?

It will be impossible for those who want to create an Islam that is closer to the structure of the Christian religions, with companions/disciples, Khalifat/papacy and Khalifah/pope, without regard to historical context, to realize the damage they are doing to Islam - but let ordinary Muslims decide for themselves who is doing the innovating, muslims or Islamists.

 

[DarkStar]

True to Islamist form, first you say that Hadith are prophesy.

Now you say that paighambar is farsi and therefore not the same as Rasoul, which is of course Arabic, which is also messenger, AKA postman

You thread on a dangerous road and you do not realize it - the consequence of what you are saying on Quran is something you have not considered, but you have an ideology to follow. If God has gifted the prophet with this special knowledge and the prophet has shared it with the world, what does that mean for Quran and how it was recieved and transmitted?

It will be impossible for those who want to create an Islam that is closer to the structure of the Christian religions, with companions/disciples, Khalifat/papacy and Khalifah/pope, without regard to historical context, to realize the damage they are doing to Islam - but let ordinary Muslims decide for themselves who is doing the innovating, muslims or Islamists.

The KHalifa is not a Pope. I am shocked that you misunderstand the concept of the Caliphate, or are you purposefully misleading? The Caliphate is Temporal, not Ethereal.

The Caliph is not a religious, but a Political figure. He happens to emobdy the aspirations of the Ummah, but he is not an infallible, God chosen leader like the Pope is.

As for the Qur'aan, it cannot be understood without the Hadeeth. Hadeeth can be seen as the Prophet's explanation of the Qur'aan, how he lived the Qur'aan.

If we take away the Hadeeth literature as knowledge base, we would be left without knowlegde on how to pray, when to pray, how to perform hajj, what to believe regarding taking drugs, anal sex, what constitutes usury and what doesn't, the list is endless.

It seems that you have taken the way of the takfiris themselves, by asking Muslims or Islamists? First you accuse me of being an Islamist (absurd), and then claim that Islamists are not muslims, by inference.

But I will not stoop to the level of name calling, I'll leave the to your good self.

 

[muse]

the Qur'aan, it cannot be understood without the Hadeeth. Hadeeth can be seen as the Prophet's explanation of the Qur'aan, how he lived the Qur'aan

.


Ridiculous, and ofcourse in line with Islamist ideology - what they could not get out of Quran for their ideology they conjure up in hadith - first the riduclous proposition that hadith are prophesy, now the suggestion that Hadith are the lens through which we can understand Quran -- and as to how he lived, recall the age at when the prophet recieved the first revelations --indeed, Islam needs to be recued from Islamists or else the rubbish they purport to be a part of Islam will only increase the moral confusion among muslims, something Islamists promote by design.

If we take away the Hadeeth literature as knowledge base, we would be left without knowlegde on how to pray, when to pray, how to perform hajj, what to believe regarding taking drugs, anal sex, what constitutes usury and what doesn't, the list is endless.

The usual preoccupation with the peripheral at the cost of the central, faith in God - How we pray? what possible difference does it make? How we fold our hands determines our character?? our faith?? the kind of human being we are?? Well, sure, but only if we seek to divide muslims, confuse them, turn them into automatons . And ofcourse there is Anal sex -- never far from isalmists -- that's right, we need hadith to tell us whether something is repugnant and wrong or not.

This is exactly what I meant when I was talking about judging content in the "Pakistan..Faith" thread - Now our reference is not to reason and justice to judge Anal sex, but Haditgh -- tomorrow when another convenient hadith will suggest it is "dolce et decomum" will it really become OK???

A warming to Islamists, Muslims are on to you.

 

[AlpErTunga]

All these stuff is crap, pardon.

How did you learn your religion misters? Have you ever read the Holy Kur'an in your mothertongue? Have you ever read the falling of Muslims and rising of the west? Why do muslims crying always? Why? Have you ever read objective history? Have you ever read philosphy without segregating philosopher according to their religion? Sorry to ask too many questions with "read". I wondered how much muslim you are to found a caliphate. Kur'an begins with "ikrah", "read", you know...

After these questions, are you the followers of Islam, which orders to develop and read, in the 21th century?

There are always self-seeker people in political issues while religional affairs should be pure and divine. So if you mix these people and religion, how result do you expect. You would see even people, who interpret the words of Allah(cc) according to his personal benefits. Turks have experienced that. Germany ordered caliph to call jihad, not the caliph. Thousands of Muslim Turkish people, who were in command of the caliph, were killed in Suez and Hicaz by Muslim arabic brothers during that jihad.

If other Muslim people had democratic, secular and modern states; we would discuss a union among the eurasian countries, not a caliphate. So that would be more applicable and strong project.

 

[DarkStar]

Even though I am not an Islamist, per se. I think it is offensive that you are using the words Islamist and Muslim as if they are antonymous.

This is a form of takfir, since you have taken upon yourself to judge who is muslim and who not. It is also inciteful.

Muslims are orthopraxic, because of the Hadeeth literature which has meticulously presreved the way the Prophet of Islam lived and taught the Deen. Otherwise, every person would worship in their own way, with no unity of action, or intent.

It's not wether we hold our hands above or below, but wether we stand to pray 5 times at all.

These days reasoning suggests that anal sex is not wrong or repugnant. Reasoning, logic, common sense, decency can change from one generation to teh next, one person to the next.

What may seem reasonable to you, might not to another. We won't be left with a religion at all, but everyone will do as they please.

If the constraints of Islamic practice are too much, and faith in a divine deity is enough, what forces you to be a muslim anyway? Is it just a label, a garb, something to identify oneself with?

 

[muse]

Again, IsIamist ideology predisposes you to offer tripe and suggest that it is the content of Islam.

Murder has always been murder and it will always remain so, CFan murder ever be OK from a religious point of view?? But Islamist will want to tell us that their hadith which they insist is impeachable is the very heart of Islam and not the Quran, indeed they say Quran cannot be understood without hadith. tripe.

Muslim is not a label or a brand name like Islamist is - muslim means simply one who submits to the will of God. Islam is a universal religion for all humanity and no islamist should be allowed to divide humanity.

 

[DarkStar]

Again, IsIamist ideology predisposes you to offer tripe and suggest that it is the content of Islam.

Murder has always been murder and it will always remain so, CFan murder ever be OK from a religious point of view?? But Islamist will want to tell us that their hadith which they insist is impeachable is the very heart of Islam and not the Quran, indeed they say Quran cannot be understood without hadith. tripe.

Muslim is not a label or a brand name like Islamist is - muslim means simply one who submits to the will of God. Islam is a universal religion for all humanity and no islamist should be allowed to divide humanity.

If that is the case, why the need for the Qur'aan even? Since we don't need to know about murder, thieving, lying, drinking, fornicating, sodomising, drug taking, etc, from God, as our reasoning will help us out.

Yes, killing can be OK from a religious point of view. As Allah himself says in the Quran, that we should not kill, except when its Right (Illa Bil HAqq).

It is a historical fact that our Prophet led people into battles, and they weren't fighting with handbags.

But Islamist will want to tell us that their hadith which they insist is impeachable is the very heart of Islam and not the Quran, indeed they say Quran cannot be understood without hadith. tripe

Nothing in terms of an argument, just a slang insult.

You using words like tripe is just a manifestation of your frustration. I suggest that you put more effort into your post next time, instead of showing yourself up.

 

[AlpErTunga]

Even though I am not an Islamist, per se. I think it is offensive that you are using the words Islamist and Muslim as if they are antonymous.

Muslim doesn't mean Islamist.

This is a form of takfir, since you have taken upon yourself to judge who is muslim and who not. It is also inciteful.

I wouldn't judge, I would see this clear "must be" feature of a man who follows "Islam" -the last and "must be" most modern religion-.

Muslims are orthopraxic, because of the Hadeeth literature which has meticulously presreved the way the Prophet of Islam lived and taught the Deen.

Sunnet is not for example having beard, or living like an Arab of 7th century. Hz. Muhammed (S.A.V.) did not do these things in order to be Muslim these things were conditions of an Arab in 7th century. My point is that here.

Otherwise, every person would worship in their own way, with no unity of action, or intent.

And this is possible with a secular state.

These days reasoning suggests that anal sex is not wrong or repugnant. Reasoning, logic, common sense, decency can change from one generation to teh next, one person to the next.

Reasoning to regress or progress is not "logic"al.

What may seem reasonable to you, might not to another. We won't be left with a religion at all, but everyone will do as they please.

People have to unite in some points of our time, if they want to have nice place in modern world. And I wish that all oppressed countries had nice place in this world.

If the constraints of Islamic practice are too much, and faith in a divine deity is enough, what forces you to be a muslim anyway? Is it just a label, a garb, something to identify oneself with?

People should practice their religion under force of their own conscience, not the force of AK-47s.

I am sorry I have one "English", I am not able to turn it in "polite" or "offensive" mode.. Sincerely sorry.

 

[muse]

Yes, killing can be OK from a religious point of view

Here is where you reveal yourself as an islamist, I had told you to be dispassionate, but you could not help yourself The idea you express is the at the heart of terrorism that has oppressed Muslims and others around the world. Islamist kill to impose their religious convictions, Muslims know Dawa is the only way.

Indeed the beloved prophet was also a military leader, he did not engage in killing as a religious leader but as a military leader but Islamists, these are irrelevent, they imagiune that they have now a license to kill, but living by the sword is dangerous

 

[DarkStar]

This is a military forum. We are not peacniks, or sandwich munching anti war protestors.

We do not believe in killing dispassionately, or murder.

But sometimes to kill or be killed is unavoidable.

We belive in the just war, in the just fight.

Do not take my statements out of context, and leave these smear tactics.

I am an ardent supporter of the fight against militancy, and I believe they are wrong, morally, politically adn above all, Religiously.

My faith and my fundamental beliefs make me abhor the terrorism that is committed in the name of islam, wether by Alq aida, TTp, or anyone else.

I usually don't try to define myself, as those who know me, and read me posts, can decide for themselves what i stand for.

From being a believer in Quran and Hadeeth, and someone who believes that Islam is a way of life, you have made me out to be an Islamist, and then a supporter of Islamist terrorism. You misconstrue my ardent FAith with terrorist militancy, and that is a mistake.

I take offense to your smear campaign, and slandering of me in the context of this thread.

 

[muse]

Then My apology.

Any more statements like hadith are prophesy, that murder is OK and such and it's on.

Let me try again to explain - these people and their ideology is not for debate, it is not to allow them space -- they are an abomination - think of this word - these are a threat to us as muslims. We are free as muslims, these would enslave us and threaten the world.

See a union muslim majority countries, great, for what purpose? Can we begin by uniting Pakistan?? Who are an impediment in that enterprise?? And we should give them space for their proposal for the entire muslim world??

Again, my apololgy - but no apology for confronting Islamists, I hope you can see the distinction.