censoring Islam a good idea?

[xiin-finiin]

By this i mean making it clear that only islamic scholars are able to understand islam. no matter how "simple" the statement (could be an ayah or hadith) might seem. I ask this because it pisses me off when a non-muslim quotes a problematic ayah/hadith (like the "sword" verses) and when a muslim tries to refute them by discussing the context/real meaning of the ayah, it comes off as like they are just an apologetic. Because to the non-muslim, islam can't possibly require that much brain power, so the whole muslim argument just comes off as super convoluted and pathetic. This is mainly due to muslims themselves imo. they present islam as this thing that can be understood by almost anyone with very little knowledge (this is at least the impression i get). Can you think of any solutions for this?

 

[Yibir_]

By this i mean making it clear that only islamic scholars are able to understand islam. no matter how "simple" the statement (could be an ayah or hadith) might seem. I ask this because it pisses me off when a non-muslim quotes a problematic ayah/hadith (like the "sword" verses) and when a muslim tries to refute them by discussing the context/real meaning of the ayah, it comes off as like they are just an apologetic. Because to the non-muslim, islam can't possibly require that much brain power, so the whole muslim argument just comes off as super convoluted and pathetic. This is mainly due to muslims themselves imo. they present islam as this thing that can be understood by almost anyone with very little knowledge (this is at least the impression i get). Can you think of any solutions for this?

Whats wrong with the “sword” verses? There’s nothing wrong with self-defence, it is in fact God ordained.

Anyone can understand and apply islam. The problem with creating a clergy is stated clearly in these verses:
They take their rabbis and their monks for their lords apart from Allah, and also the Messiah, son of Mary, whereas they were commanded to worship none but the One True God. There is no god but He. Exalted be He above those whom they associate with Him in His Divinity.
Rabbinical law superseded god’s law (judaism) and sins can only be atoned for via a priest (catholicism).

The problem you highlight is due to your own lack of faith and more broadly an approval seeking personality trait. Look inwards and work on those issues instead of projecting and creating theories which will never be implemented.

 

[Omar del Sur]

a lot of the people who talk against Islam are ignorant morons.

I don't see the "moon god" thing as much but they still say ridiculous things like claiming intercourse with goats has something to do with Islam.

there are so many people against Islam who are clueless and who will try to make up their own interpretations of ayat of the Quran without even knowing what tafsir is.

I don't know of any solution to them being so clueless besides overturning secularism and putting Islamic education in the public schools.

even if you make a pamphlet or educational video teaching them something, probably tbe vast majority of them will not read or watch it.

Take what is given freely, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the ignorant.

-Surah Al-A'raf 7:199 (translation of the meaning)

I think that is the only solution.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Whats wrong with the “sword” verses? There’s nothing wrong with self-defence, it is in fact God ordained.

Anyone can understand and apply islam. The problem with creating a clergy is stated clearly in these verses:
They take their rabbis and their monks for their lords apart from Allah, and also the Messiah, son of Mary, whereas they were commanded to worship none but the One True God. There is no god but He. Exalted be He above those whom they associate with Him in His Divinity.
Rabbinical law superseded god’s law (judaism) and sins can only be atoned for via a priest (catholicism).

The problem you highlight is due to your own lack of faith and more broadly an approval seeking personality trait. Look inwards and work on those issues instead of projecting and creating theories which will never be implemented.

"problem with creating a clergy"....

well clergy is different than scholars. clergy/priests- a lot of their role is more about ritual function than about educating the people.

anyways, what's condemned is for example... if some so called Sheikh says it's okay to pray to saints... or eat pork... or commit zina... if what he says is given precedence over what Islam says.

if you put his words over what the Quran says, that's what's condemned. it's an inaccurate interpretation if we say it means there shouldn't be scholars at all and everyone should just interpret Islam however they want.

ordinary people definitely can learn about Islam. but they definitely should not try to just interpret it however they want. people have to adhere to the scholars and when it comes to the Quran and the hadith... they should learn the tafsir of the ayat and they should also learn the explanations of the hadith, they absolutely should not just interpret everything however they want.

 

[Omar del Sur]

I mean for example... if everyone can just interpret everything however they want.... if I have a store and I catch someone trying to snatch a candy bar, I can just drag him to the back and amputate his hand? people can just run around applying hadd punishments without any involvement from the authorities? people can read ayat about fighting kuffar and then just go out and start attacking random non-Muslims?

everybody can just make up their own version of Islam, make up their own version of salaat, etc...?? it would be chaos.

 

[Omar del Sur]

or what about four wives.... just meet random women.... commit zina but first agree to call each other husband and wife.... ???? everybody interpreting Islam however they want would be madness

 

[xiin-finiin]

Whats wrong with the “sword” verses? There’s nothing wrong with self-defence, it is in fact God ordained.

Anyone can understand and apply islam. The problem with creating a clergy is stated clearly in these verses:
They take their rabbis and their monks for their lords apart from Allah, and also the Messiah, son of Mary, whereas they were commanded to worship none but the One True God. There is no god but He. Exalted be He above those whom they associate with Him in His Divinity.
Rabbinical law superseded god’s law (judaism) and sins can only be atoned for via a priest (catholicism).

The problem you highlight is due to your own lack of faith and more broadly an approval seeking personality trait. Look inwards and work on those issues instead of projecting and creating theories which will never be implemented.

taken at face value, they are very very problematic. the fact you felt the need to add "self-defence" even though its mentioned nowhere in the verse just goes to show that even you are uncomfortable with taking it at face value. I understand that creating clergy/authority that claim to have a monopoly on the truth (like christian churches) is very dangerous. Thats why i asked what people thought. Also try to be a little less judgemental and try not to jump to huge conclusions too quickly in the future. Just from this post, you claimed i was "seeking approval" and "lacked faith".

 

[xiin-finiin]

a lot of the people who talk against Islam are ignorant morons.

I don't see the "moon god" thing as much but they still say ridiculous things like claiming intercourse with goats has something to do with Islam.

there are so many people against Islam who are clueless and who will try to make up their own interpretations of ayat of the Quran without even knowing what tafsir is.

I don't know of any solution to them being so clueless besides overturning secularism and putting Islamic education in the public schools.

even if you make a pamphlet or educational video teaching them something, probably tbe vast majority of them will not read or watch it.

Take what is given freely, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the ignorant.

-Surah Al-A'raf 7:199 (translation of the meaning)

I think that is the only solution.

this might work, but i feel like the reason they take islam soo lightly that they think they can understand it from just one verse is also related to how some muslims themselves view the religion. Like the religion is portrayed as this really simple thing that can be understood by anyone, which in my opinion is problematic because when you run into ayahs like the one i shared or mutashabahad ones, just being able to read arabic isn't going to cut it. I sometimes even see muslims themselves giving their "understanding" of some verses. any suggestions for this?

 

[Omar del Sur]

this might work, but i feel like the reason they take islam soo lightly that they think they can understand it from just one verse is also related to how some muslims themselves view the religion. Like the religion is portrayed as this really simple thing that can be understood by anyone, which in my opinion is problematic because when you run into ayahs like the one i shared or mutashabahad ones, just being able to read arabic isn't going to cut it. I sometimes even see muslims themselves giving their "understanding" of some verses. any suggestions for this?

I just don't think we can fix this issue of there being so much ignorance in regards to Islam when it comes to non-Muslims. many people are clueless and dumbed down. imo many of them aren't interested in learning.

 

[Yibir_]

taken at face value, they are very very problematic. the fact you felt the need to add "self-defence" even though its mentioned nowhere in the verse just goes to show that even you are uncomfortable with taking it at face value. I understand that creating clergy/authority that claim to have a monopoly on the truth (like christian churches) is very dangerous. Thats why i asked what people thought. Also try to be a little less judgemental and try not to jump to huge conclusions too quickly in the future. Just from this post, you claimed i was "seeking approval" and "lacked faith".

But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them,1 capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, nor comply with what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth from among those who were given the Scripture,1 until they pay the tax,2 willingly submitting, fully humbled.

Nothing wrong with it nor is it problematic.

Your issue with the faith is an aesthetic one, you care about how it appears to an outsider when you should be solely focused on how you can incorporate it into your being. Thats a weak position to hold and like I said is due to your lack of faith and amplified by the need to seek validation. The solution you’re proposing to this non-problem goes against the quran, you cannot have any further discussion on that topic and still consider yourself muslim.

 

[Yibir_]

this might work, but i feel like the reason they take islam soo lightly that they think they can understand it from just one verse is also related to how some muslims themselves view the religion. Like the religion is portrayed as this really simple thing that can be understood by anyone, which in my opinion is problematic because when you run into ayahs like the one i shared or mutashabahad ones, just being able to read arabic isn't going to cut it. I sometimes even see muslims themselves giving their "understanding" of some verses. any suggestions for this?

Your western enlightenment philosophy is problematic in so much as your ideals and morals are pegged to your desires which are shaped by whatever the dominant culture espouses. You cannot analyse text which propounds to transcend time with a reformist mindset, you can only critique it and move on to the next one. Reformation kills religion. Western enlightenment thinkers killed christianity.

 

[xiin-finiin]

But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them,1 capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, nor comply with what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth from among those who were given the Scripture,1 until they pay the tax,2 willingly submitting, fully humbled.

Nothing wrong with it nor is it problematic.

Your issue with the faith is an aesthetic one, you care about how it appears to an outsider when you should be solely focused on how you can incorporate it into your being. Thats a weak position to hold and like I said is due to your lack of faith and amplified by the need to seek validation. The solution you’re proposing to this non-problem goes against the quran, you cannot have any further discussion on that topic and still consider yourself muslim.

saaxiib, the fact that the bolded bit is italicized, and also has quotes around is proof enough that it isn't in the ayah. that part was added in as an explanation. if you take the ayah at face value it literally translates to "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them: seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: forGod is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.". tbh idk what your problem is. only possible explanation that comes to mind is that your either a troll, or something far worse.

 

[xiin-finiin]

Your western enlightenment philosophy is problematic in so much as your ideals and morals are pegged to your desires which are shaped by whatever the dominant culture espouses. You cannot analyse text which propounds to transcend time with a reformist mindset, you can only critique it and move on to the next one. Reformation kills religion. Western enlightenment thinkers killed christianity.

 

[sunnews27]

how is self defence bad? ofc im gona defend myself

 

[xiin-finiin]

how is self defence bad? ofc im gona defend myself

as you should. no body is denying that. What i was saying was that the ayah doesn't talk about self defence. That is a valid explanation that was given by the scholars (using probably hadith and time it was revealed, etc).

 

[sunnews27]

as you should. no body is denying that. What i was saying was that the ayah doesn't talk about self defence. That is a valid explanation that was given by the scholars (using probably hadith and time it was revealed, etc).

oh ok my bad well humans do war so maybe this is war verse?

 

[xiin-finiin]

oh ok my bad well humans do war so maybe this is war verse?

yea, it probably is. the problem i saw with it is, on first glance, the ayah doesn't refer to self defence or anything like that. it just straight up says kill them wherever you find them. Now, if you treated the quran as this simple document that could be read without much background knowledge (like how some muslims and most non-muslims treat it), then you run into problems like this verse. All i was saying was that muslims shouldn't take the quran/hadith too lightly (so, no matter how "simple" the ayah might seem, only a scholar can really understand it)

 

[Yibir_]

saaxiib, the fact that the bolded bit is italicized, and also has quotes around is proof enough that it isn't in the ayah. that part was added in as an explanation. if you take the ayah at face value it literally translates to "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them: seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: forGod is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.". tbh idk what your problem is. only possible explanation that comes to mind is that your either a troll, or something far worse.

9:4
As for the polytheists who have honoured every term of their treaty with you and have not supported an enemy against you, honour your treaty with them until the end of its term. Surely Allah loves those who are mindful ˹of Him˺.
9:5
But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them,1 capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful
9:6
And if anyone from the polytheists asks for your protection ˹O Prophet˺, grant it to them so they may hear the Word of Allah, then escort them to a place of safety, for they are a people who have no knowledge.
9:7
How can such polytheists have a treaty with Allah and His Messenger, except those you have made a treaty with at the Sacred Mosque?1 So, as long as they are true to you, be true to them. Indeed Allah loves those who are mindful ˹of Him˺.

You made a thread with a loaded question without even doing the bare minimum in due diligence on the one point you made. I have never came across the word “sword” in the quran and I had to google it to find out that you’re taking the talking points of murtards and gaals as your own. You are clearly arguing in bad faith.

The solution you propose for a non issue is to limit the access of knowledge, keeping people ignorant of what they truly believe in.

This thread along with your previous moral relativism post is enough of a reason for me to ignore you in the future. If you are genuine go and study the deen, and if you don’t like what you find leave it as there is no compulsion.

 

[xiin-finiin]

9:4
As for the polytheists who have honoured every term of their treaty with you and have not supported an enemy against you, honour your treaty with them until the end of its term. Surely Allah loves those who are mindful ˹of Him˺.
9:5
But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them,1 capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful
9:6
And if anyone from the polytheists asks for your protection ˹O Prophet˺, grant it to them so they may hear the Word of Allah, then escort them to a place of safety, for they are a people who have no knowledge.
9:7
How can such polytheists have a treaty with Allah and His Messenger, except those you have made a treaty with at the Sacred Mosque?1 So, as long as they are true to you, be true to them. Indeed Allah loves those who are mindful ˹of Him˺.

You made a thread with a loaded question without even doing the bare minimum in due diligence on the one point you made. I have never came across the word “sword” in the quran and I had to google it to find out that you’re taking the talking points of murtards and gaals as your own. You are clearly arguing in bad faith.

The solution you propose for a non issue is to limit the access of knowledge, keeping people ignorant of what they truly believe in.

This thread along with your previous moral relativism post is enough of a reason for me to ignore you in the future. If you are genuine go and study the deen, and if you don’t like what you find leave it as there is no compulsion.

maa darbi baad tahay walaal? i fear for the people that live under rulers like you. soo trigger happy and glad to takfir other muslims. don't bother responding as am gonna ignore your messages from now on so i won't even see them.

 

[Yibir_]

"problem with creating a clergy"....

well clergy is different than scholars. clergy/priests- a lot of their role is more about ritual function than about educating the people.

anyways, what's condemned is for example... if some so called Sheikh says it's okay to pray to saints... or eat pork... or commit zina... if what he says is given precedence over what Islam says.

if you put his words over what the Quran says, that's what's condemned. it's an inaccurate interpretation if we say it means there shouldn't be scholars at all and everyone should just interpret Islam however they want.

ordinary people definitely can learn about Islam. but they definitely should not try to just interpret it however they want. people have to adhere to the scholars and when it comes to the Quran and the hadith... they should learn the tafsir of the ayat and they should also learn the explanations of the hadith, they absolutely should not just interpret everything however they want.

My position is best explained in the act of correcting the sheikh when he makes a mistake leading prayer. Scholars are men, not perfect and are fallible - so its the job of other scholars and more broadly the ummah to correct them. You should, therefore, not take what they say from their pulpits at face value but instead investigate, prove and thus validate their talking points.

It is expected for the muslim layman to learn prophetic seerah, hadith and quran and for them to then apply in their own lives. The way they synthesise religious arguments in the public forum is irrelevant, the goal is to seek truth not optics.