Wahabism in Centers of Learning

Where are krishna_abcd and mohar11????

I ask them a simple question, and now they ran away to get some more urine to digest my previous post. This clearly suggest that HINOOS or most HINDOOS in chowk.com have no idea of what they speak. They simply bull-shit a lot.

teshah, PM

Almost all of Hinduism, and Gita certainly, is centered around ``understanding`` or ``knowledge`` - brahm gyan (Understanding the nature of the Ultimate Reality) and atma gyana (Understanding the nature of self). To gain this understanding is the hightest achievement to which one can aspire.

Personally, I believe in truth and in this stuff less and less. Truth and knowledge are overrated. Faith and love (Islam and Chstianity, as you correctly surmised) can very quickly achieve wonders that no amount of truth/knowledge/understanding by itself can ever hope for.

Re: # 278

Sattar2

Thank you dear Sattar for your kind response.

You have rightly said about urstruly in your post at 287, which I quote hereunder:

“Your problem is that you look for excuses to shed blood and to force your views on others. Resulting intellectual blindness leads you to ill-thought out conclusions.”

This is not the trouble only with urstruly but is the bane of all the Rasputinish blood-thirsty Mulla who have nothing to offer but kufr and death. They forget that prophets were not sent by God to massacre people but to save them. Quran, addressing the Arabs says “You (as mushrikeen) had reached the brink of hell-fire from which you were saved (?)”.

In fact the Makky Islam was the true Islam when there were true muslims only with no munaafkeen as there was punishment then only for being a momin and none for being a kafir or mushrik.

More later on.

Regards

PM

This is the best I could do, as far as clearing the ambiguity is concerned.

Urstruly:

``As a matter of fact the two questions that you`ve asked have already been answered in my post.``

Actually, they haven`t. Your post related to the marriagability of and the rights afforded to female slaves. This, and apparently the post-Quran jurists of the four schools, do not address the issue of using the slaves for sex WITHOUT marrying them, which, as I understand, both the Quran as well as the practice of the Holy Prophet, seem to suggest is permissable.

Once you are able to answer this question unambiguously, we can proceed to the original question of the possibility of reconciling it (assuming it *is* permissable) with the prohibition on fornication.

Of course, if you choose to skirt the question, or provide more info of Shariah law on related -- but not the same -- matter, I suppose Naqsh`s answer (which is sort of funny) will have to do.

Urstruly (#286),

You have a habit of taking leaps of faith, jumping haphazardly to incorrect conclusions. Snap out of your silly, dramatic delusions, miaN.

Here are two distinct statements … A and B. Read ‘A’. Then read ‘B’. Don’t confuse A with B. Don’t confuse B with A. Don’t associate a third statement ‘C’ that I did not make, with either A or B. Ready? Here we go …

A. As a Muslim I believe that Allah’s jurisdiction exists over every aspect of life, universe … whether or not a person believes in Him.

B. Quran does not given anyone the authority to force belief in Allah or Quran or Islam on others. Matters of faith are left up to each individual.

+++

Your problem is that you look for excuses to shed blood and to force your views on others. Resulting intellectual blindness leads you to ill-thought out conclusions.

I have explained Quranic views on apostasy. Until recently you were insisting that Quran is silent on such matters. What you are smoking???

sattar

``Apostasy being ‘haram’ for a Muslim is circular argument. By rejecting Islam a person also rejects Islamic definition of ‘haram’, Islamic idea of punishment in hereafter, etc. That is, these definitions apply to a Muslim, and not to one who ’used to’ be a Muslim. Yours is an invalid point to begin with. ``

Don`t you realize that with this ``simple`` argument you are essentially saying that Allah`s jurisdiction upon man ends as soon as man stops beliving in Him.

lahol wila quawat

PM

As a matter of fact the two questions that you`ve asked have already been answered in my post.

I find it ironic that whenever its suits the accusers of Islam they accuse Muslims of being too literalists and when it doesn`t suit them the same Muslims are accused of being producing fineprint. This reeks of a prejudice that no matter what a Muslim does, it is his fault. Please keep in mind that the mindless prejudice not only hurst the victim but it also hurts its owner as well. A prejudiced person looses sense of reality and starts living in a make belief.

Urstruly (#279),

... as I was saying earlier … (cough, cough)

Click [trouble in paradise …]

... I kinda like naqsh`s answer ... let`s not ask anymore ...

PM, enough of what the right hand possesses ... has anyone ever wondered what to do with what the left hand possesses ...

Urstruly would argue that Quran is silent on this one ... so all is fair. Actually, I kinda like this one better ... takbeer ...

Urstruly:
I asked if you could simply reconcile the Qur`anic dictum to ``use what your right hand possesses`` with the decree against fornication, but you`ve given me a summary of the four fiqah. Given that those are, at the end of the day, pronouncements of mere mortals, beholden in their interpretations and expositions to the ethical climate of the day (Would you deny this?), their `conditions` and fine print -- none of which, you must admit, have any Quranic basis -- do not interest me.

But let us assume, for arguments sake, that they carry the same authority as the ultimate sources of truth, the Quran and the Sunnah...

You write:
``The only difference between a POW and free women is that of marriage rites. While a free woman has a right to choose a spouse and her marriage takes place through the marriage rite called “Nikah”; a captive woman’s marriage on the other hand is a civil union performed by a Qazi (judge). In this case only paper work is done without “Ijaab-o-qabool” and woman is handed over to her spouse.``

I was actually more interested in the question of whether a Muslim may use his slave (or temporary paid-slave) for sexual gratification without even a civil union performed by a qazi.

re. ``The owner has also a right to change ownership to another man as a laborer or as a spouse. The same legal procedure applies in the process of change of custody.``

Would this change-of-ownership be applicable to a slave who is in a `civil union` too?

Urstruly (#280):

You can call it whatever you like … it is a simple, sensible statement.

A person should be allowed to freely choose his faith. It is height of absurdity for you to kill him if he rejects your faith.

It is you who a headless chicken, a brainless monkey, an uncouth failure ...

sattar:

``Apostasy being ‘haram’ for a Muslim is circular argument. By rejecting Islam a person also rejects Islamic definition of ‘haram’, Islamic idea of punishment in hereafter, etc. That is, these definitions apply to a Muslim, and not to one who ’used to’ be a Muslim. Yours is an invalid point to begin with. ``

I call this a headless chiken syndrome. Whenever I come across a non-sense like this I feel sorry for all Quadianis, that their Jihalat (in Punjabi its called Chhohray wali aakaR) is taking them into eternel damnation. May Allah save you all.

Re: # 276 Naqshbandi

Your ``reasoning` is erroneous and gives an impression that fornication is permitted in a certain case. Please read the Muslim law first. A summary was posted in my last post. The bottom lime is that Fornication is prohibited, no ifs, ands, or buts.

teshah (#273):

Thanks for your kind comments …

I don’t think Quran prescribes any punishment for lying. There are many different types of lies: a kid may lie to his parents, a husband may lie to his spouse, a CEO may lie to shareholders, a witness may lie to the jury. Sometimes a person justifiably “lies” in order to save another person from harm … or to hide faults of another. Sometimes maintaining silence constitutes a grave lie. Sometimes telling half the truth becomes a malicious lie ...

While Quran emphasizes truthfulness, it steers clear of punishing “lies”. It prescribes punishment for theft, adultery, etc. – but not for lying (as far as I know), which is very difficult to define ...

+++

One saying I came across struck me as a profound one … “truth, without compassion, is a lie”.

It nicely sums up the essence of truth and what separates it from a lie.

+++

Hypocrisy (munafiqat) is a horrible attitude – also one that is difficult to define. Attitudes, whether good or bad, deal with matters of heart and one’s intent.

The matter of hypocrisy would become even more complicated if Quran were to vest authority in a person or institution to punish people for hypocrisy. Quran condemns hypocrisy in very harsh, strict terms. It tells believers to be mindful of Allah and that they will one day return to Him and account for what was in their hearts.

My view is that all religions in general encourage a genuine, sincere pursuit of truth, with emphasis on love and compassion for others, patience, humility, and fortitude. They aim to remove hatred, jealousy, lust from a person’s heart, and to foster a close relationship between a person and his Creator, between a person and those around him.

… don’t know if answered your questions or if I am simply rambling …

PM

``right hand``

There are five legal schools of thought in Islam – four sunnis and one Shia. So I will address the issue of female POWs i.e. concubines through the legal point of view for obvious reasons and not through someone’s opinion as you quoted in your post. Because of a pressing appointment I will not go into the details into references. However, I will provide references if needed. As a matter of fact, Imam Malik’s Muwatta, the sunni Maliki school of thought, is available on the net which addresses several issues related to concubines:

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muwatta/040.mmt.html

The issue of female concubines is discussed in detail in Chapter 4, The Women, of Qura’n l and all jurists have based their legal opinions on these verse. A summary of legal verdicts based on those verses is as follows:

1. An international (or inter-tribal in those days) treaty that stipulates some ground rules about POWs of each other precedes the verdict of God about the treatment of POWs including concubines. This injunction is again based on God’s instructions. Hence in modern times since all nations in the world are bound by an international treaty like Geneva Convention hence POWs must be treated according to that treaty and not according the prescribed procedure in Qura’n. The prescribed procedure in absence of a treaty is as follows.
2. Suppose that Muslims go on a war with a nation with which they have no treaty and they capture a large number of female POWs or enemy citizens then all of them, male and female, go into an internment camp first.
3. (From here on I will address the female POWs only.) The female prisoners are then used for two purposes. If the female prisoners is unmarried, she can either be used as a laborer or she can be taken as a spouse by a Muslim, but cannot have these two roles simultaneously.
4. The first precedence for taking such prisoners into their custody for either purpose is given to those Muslims who were at the forefront of the war effort or Jihad.
5. In case a Muslim takes a female prisoner as a laborer only then he must pay her wages for her labor. The rate of wage is set by the state.
6. In case a Muslim takes that prisoner as spouse then he must pay her dowry (Mehr) before marriage is consumed and after that she starts having all rights as a legal wife. She has same privileges of divorce, dowry, and inheritance as that of a free woman. Her offspring are given the same inheritance rights as that of children from a free woman. The children bear the name of their father. The only difference between a POW and free women is that of marriage rites. While a free woman has a right to choose a spouse and her marriage takes place through the marriage rite called “Nikah”; a captive woman’s marriage on the other hand is a civil union performed by a Qazi (judge). In this case only paper work is done without “Ijaab-o-qabool” (I don’t know how to translate it) and woman is handed over to her spouse.
7. A Muslim who is a custodian of a female POW who is a laborer only has the right to set her free. In that case she becomes a citizen of Islamic state. The owner has also a right to change ownership to another man as a laborer or as a spouse. The same legal procedure applies in the process of change of custody.
8. In case the POW was married, 3 out of 4 schools of thought, have given verdict that she cannot be taken as a spouse. Only Shaafii school of thought contends that her previous marriage is automatically annulled as she is taken in as a prisoner.

And even for the very simplistic of mind there is a great insight into the laws that Allah has established for POWs. At a glance or with prejudice they seem harsh but a greater intelligence is at work here. Only if a Muslim ponders the question “what about Muslim POWs taken by the enemy” his awareness increases many fold. The self-evident questions like: What if they take our women as concubines? What would they do to our women because then anything would be justified according to the laws of reciprocity, wouldn’t it? So the lesson here for Muslims is that that they must strive to establish an international law or treaties with all other nations addressing the issues of war and peace; thus forming a cohesive world community.