Does Traditional Islam need to be liberalized?
- Thread starter Ayubi
- Start date
Tukraq
VIP
I don’t know about that one, americans are predominantly Protestant and have extremely low atheist numbers, in fact there Protestantism is also not really soft core in any way shape or form, especially in the Bible belt
Apollo
VIP
America isn't a ''natural society''. All the extremist Christian wackos from Europe, especially early on, moved there (Puritans, Calvinists, Quakers etc). While in Europe the process was more natural and more likely to be replicated elsewhere when you start liberalizing religion.
Tukraq
VIP
At there best
What do you mean by attitude?
What I mean is that Muslims nowadays put more emphasis on appearance rather than character. During the Golden Age of Islam, there existed a space wherein people were able to develop to their full potential and people were more so open-minded. Nowadays Muslims are so uptight and in a way don't even respect Islam on an individual level. My own mother gets scared when discussing Islam. Every time I ask her a question she quickly changes the conversation because she is afraid of thinking about it. I think it's weird and obviously the problem lay within the Muslim community. I think people should just view Islam as a personal belief, technically it already is but it's not practised.
TekNiKo
Loyal To The One True Caliph (Hafidahullah)
Yup, Ashari/Maturidi thought was dominant for centuriea, wahabism sickness is the cause of our downfall
What’s your definition of “Wahhabism”? I seen you argue against The Niqab (which is in the 4 schools and Hadiths) or you claimed “Wahhabis” are lying when they say the prophets parents are in hellfire. What’s your definition @TekNiKo?
AhmedSmelly
I am an offical nacas. too honest
Islam came as something Strange and it will go back to being Strange. The attitude @Life is talking about is something that comes from ignorance. When you are a Cult follower and cant back up your religious believes because your religious knowledge is close to 0. You only have information on what is Haram or what is Halal. How to do your Cult yoga forms on their prescribed times of the day. What to say or do as indoctrinated by everyone around you. Muslims today are no better than the blind Trinity believer.
Wait a second, is this how we gonna end up in the future?
Are you a follower of Islam, or a follower of Muslims.
Ask any Muslims today, "why are you Muslim?". They wont be able to give you a coherent and logical reason for their belief. My parents are Muslims, my community/Qabil is Muslim. I finished the Quran. I believe its the right religion. I have an emotional story for why its right. When everything is based on your cultural gut feeling and desire, how can you not be ignorant.
You dont question anything, because the answers are scripted. There is no critical thinking in Muslim families. When the Angels questioned Allah for why he was creating free willed beings. Who will shed blood and cause corruption on earth they were answered by Allah. Now its our turn to interpret, why Allah wrote this in the Quran. What was Allah trying to convey, looking at historic context, what the Saahabas had arrived at and much more. So many ways to look at it, so many answers we can arrive at. Islam answers are not always Black and White. Its ambiguous/grey.
People think Shias are worse than Sunni. Think again, Both are wrong. Both categorized themselves and both have extremist sub groups.The worst ones, are the ones that don't allow people to use their brain. The one who say "My way or the Highway". If its Wahabism or Salafism or Qabilism. Its a sickness and you are not wrong, @TekNiKo
Why do people categorize themselves, when there is nothing above Followers of Islam. Islam is a magnet for educated people, those who use common sense and not Cultural gut feeling. Quran and Hadith goes hand in hand. One is Allahs unaltered words the other needs caution and common sense and not blind faith.
Muslims are like water, if you let water stagnate it becomes undrinkable. If you let it flow, it starts meandering and some groups abandon the river to stagnate. The rest eventually takes it figuratively and starts wandering aimlessly with no destination.
Faahiye
Male Male Male Male
A wahhabi is someone who follows the methodology of Muhammad ibn Abdul wahhab.
I know but those who follow him shouldn’t be called “Wahhabis”, they don’t even call themselves that term. Also, Al-wahhab is one of the 99 names of Allah so using his name to hate on someone is stupid and may even be shirk since only Allah is Al-wahhab. It’s like a Christian or a Jew calling a Muslim a “Mohammadan.” Pick a new term if you disagree with them.
Faahiye
Male Male Male Male
you’re wrong the term in question is wahhabi (وَهَّابِيّ) which is a nisbah based on the name of Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, which refers to the movement he founded in 18th century Saudi Arabia.
This nisbah adjective is not the same as what you're referring to, which is the word وهّاب with the possessive pronoun suffix ي added to it.
Also I’m not using it as an insult, I’m simply using the term they use to identify themselves.
TekNiKo
Loyal To The One True Caliph (Hafidahullah)
I was wrong on the niqab it is part of the diin.
I dnt wanna talk about the other issue.
Exactly this is what I suspect also. It's how one reads and interprets Islam. It's actually not a bad faith(if you got high IQ and transport yourself mentally to the 7th century and conditions). The people today who reading and interpreting it are very un-educated therefore it's natural their going to have a very 'highly unsophisticated' Islam.
Some of the things produced in 'Islamic Syria/Iraq' was brilliant during the golden age. Imagine how much knowledge must be lost due to the mongols burning those libraries. The world libraries would be full of Islamic world knowledge that may change how we view the world around us. I wonder at the great knowledge that must of been in those books giving us concepts on how to view the world 'differently' then the standard 'greco model' which is quite 'faulty' for our era but impressive for it's time period though.
The concept of 'nothingness' doesn't exist. Zero isn't demonstratable since 'energy' which what all the world is made of is said to 'convert' to something else. We literally become another state, not NOTHING or ZERO. I am arguing strongly against the ZERO. There is nothing to something, there was always SOMETHING and then from Something came structure and order and laws and then elements. For example take two carrots - two carrots. Its supposed to 'zero' right? no there is still 'space'. U can say that of all 'dying stars or planets'. As long the fundamental 'laws' are present, there is no nothing. Time-Space-Gravity-Energy. The universe is clearly mathamatical structure with 'laws' at the top and then 'elements' and 'equations and relationships' between elements. It's all structured and orderly. It's like a programmer reading a 'coding application' of another 'coder' it's structured and ordered.
It's hard to picture what reality is with time-space-gravity-energy all gone. It's not presentable, since it's not observable as we are under the laws ourselves. People have theories but I dismiss it. It would mean no 'maths' cause maths is within the laws and a product of it, your speaking about an existence that you can't measure sis let alone describe. So dont ask what was before the universe, I dont know sis, i do have faith due to the strong evidences of mathamatics, laws, and links between elements in the universe that there maybe a god but nothing like we UNDERSTAND OR PRESENT IT.
Last edited:
When the universe formed there was an absence of laws and absence of laws doesn't mean nothing, it just means it was 'chaos' like Somalia is, Somalia doesn't become nothing due to no laws, it's just disorder. The universe was in chaos untill the laws were established that allowed for elements, structures, and relationships to form. Is the chaos measurable yes? cause there was at the very least 'time' cause we can't go beyond then. Where there is 'time' they space is there, bother interconnected at all times, you can't have one without the other. How energy developed is funny but they assume it's thru the chaos? chaos of what time-space is just moving 'space' there is no present element. Once we can demonstrate 'energy' without the same old 'energy' always existed when they can't demonstrate 'sequence' of order, yes maths is about sequence of orders not just saying 'it always existed'. We know with time, they all came into 'existence' at some point not 'always existed' thats a cheap way out of mathamatics.
Energy is critical to find out the first 'state' that developed in the universe because once we know that, we know eventually it will 'convert' to something else and create something else like stars, planets, etc. But we need to know the first 'state'. the first state is said to be 'eternal' NONSENSE.
Energy is critical to find out the first 'state' that developed in the universe because once we know that, we know eventually it will 'convert' to something else and create something else like stars, planets, etc. But we need to know the first 'state'. the first state is said to be 'eternal' NONSENSE.
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
Indians Celebrating Diwali Leads To Multiple House Fires In The US & Canada!- Latest: Mohamedamiin120