[Revert]

Originally Posted by SaidAbdullahofDarfur

You kinda were, you said fusha...
Which is modern arabic or rather (the collection of)arabic.
You used a word that was talking about the collections of language. Not just Clasical arabic.

Fusha or Fus7a in arabiye is Quranic Arabic. Al-3am is Modern Standard Arabic

[Arabesque]

Originally Posted by Variable

Yeh and you know what, I'm gonna say it again. To me, as far as my personal convictions are concerned the Prophet was just some guy from ancient Arabia.

Do you have a problem with the Prophet, with me personally or the people of Arabia? I'm not sure anymore. Let me tell you what I read. You said you didn't think God would send a message through a "guy from Arabia", whose prophethood you already reject, some 1400 years ago.

What are you trying to say? That people of Arabia are incapable of executing global change? Or that it is impossible that God would choose a prophet from Arabia? Or that a successful spiritual, political, military and civil leader cannot simply emerge from Arabia?

Even anti-Islam orientalists admit that he was a successful leader. Just because he lived some 1400 years ago, and preached his message then, does not mean it is invalid today. Morality and justice do not become invalid with time, and the message he preached mostly revolved around these two main concepts.

Don't insult me, please. I'm from Arabia.

I grew up with little to no contact with Islam whatsoever. Then this message comes to me, telling me that what I believe is wrong... telling me that so many of the things I hold dear are amoral, saying that this way is the right way, and mine isn't. Because that's what Abrahamic religions do... they and say that they are the right way, and every other way is the wrong way.

You're basically doing the same here. Just because in your culture, certain things are OK doesn't mean you have to impose them on others by ridiculing the practices of other cultures. You are guilty of the same things you accuse Islam of doing.

And now, I'm not allowed to make judgments on this message? This message that came to me? And made judgments on me?

Nobody has a problem with all your judgments and criticisms. Is it too much to ask of you to be respectful and considerate towards the feelings of Muslims? Would it not hurt you if I trivialised something or someone you revered and held in high esteem? Why can't we be civil towards each other?

Instead I'm told, before I do that, I have to go and learn about, yes, the culture of ancient Arabia... so I can make a judgment in context. So let's say I do, and I still have issues with it. Then I'm told, "no, you have to go to a school and learn from scholars in order to get it" ...eventually what, having to learn Arabic so I can understand the primary sources?

Did I say that? I'm not sure I did. If I did, I apologise.

So no, I've considered what I've said very carefully. If that's insulting to you, that's something you're going to have to live with. Because it may just be me and a few others on this board that feel this way, but it's also most of the planet. And it's a planet that we have to share.

If you think that offending me (and others) deliberately works well for you, then I can deal with that. You know how vindictive I am

What's more, though some may find my personal opinion on the Prophet hard to take... it's nothing compared to the things I've heard on this site about others. Blatant insults against Christians, Hindus, Jews and their religious beliefs and cultures. Disgusting things, not stated as opinions, but as mere fact. Nothing is said of that... unless it's by me and one or two others.

So because you've read insults against other religions on here, you jump on the same bandwagon, too? So much for living up to your own standards?

Further insulting still is this idea that Islam 'brought civilization to half of the world'. Absolutely untrue. Form an archeo/anthropological point of view, it may have brought civilization to much of the Arabian peninsula, but every subsequent area it moved into, by strength of force or other means, had been civilized previously. Often for many thousands of years.

Let's take India for an example ... You think widow burning (sati) is a civilised practice? From a completely subjective, female point of view, I think not. I'm not in favour of converting people by force, and I'm totally against the imposition of culture on others ... I would go further to say that I'm not exactly happy with military expansions, but that's not the point here ... What I'm trying to say is that, in today's standards, the countries you claim to have been civilised before the Islamic conquests of their lands would be backward and inhumane. Yet Islam hasn't changed much, and for Muslims, it remains more civilised than any other culture. Again India ... dowry paid by the woman, who if fails to pay it gets mistreated and burnt alive ... Is that your idea of civilisation? Maybe. You're entitled to your opinions. Just don't say it's "absolutely untrue" that Islam did bring some positive change on many people.

Your Western culture owes its renaissance to the openness of the Islamic civilisation, which supported scholars and thinkers from all over the world .. both Muslims and non-Muslims. Had it not been for the enlightening books that were translated by Muslim scholars, the West would have stayed backward. I can't say it is completely advanced today. Not morally, at least. But it didn't take long for you to tell us how you truly feel about Islam, no? Nobody provoked you here. You provoked people with that insensitive remark, which did not serve any purpose. What important point did you put across? Something we already didn't know? What you said has been said over and over by hundreds of people, the like of Daniel Pipes and others. But nevermind ...

Islamic expansion may be seen by many as a beautiful thing... to others it meant a millennia of warfare, slavery and pain. That typically goes with the expansion people who think that they hold a monopoly on the truth and righteousness, an inherent trait in Abrahamic religions. Trying to point out the fact that North America today is a product of one of the darkest periods of human history isn't going to change any of this. I agree with you. I can't atone for crimes of my ancestors, and I don't expect anyone here to atone for theirs. But it seems the ability to look at situation from someone else's perspective is an ability that escapes many here.

And you want to blame everything "Muslim" conquerers had done wrong on Islam and its Prophet? Is that what you're saying, or did I misunderstand?

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Timbit

Such as?

Girls and guys dancing together. Music in fact being portrayed, at very least, as a bad habit that one needs to do his or her best to kick. Cultural artwork. Having a girlfriend or boyfriend, or just being close to a member of the opposite gender who isn't my spouse. Italian food... the list goes on.

To who, for example?

Africans, Europeans... non-Muslim Persians... people from all over.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Arabesque

Do you have a problem with the Prophet, with me personally or the people of Arabia? I'm not sure anymore. Let me tell you what I read. You said you didn't think God would send a message through a "guy from Arabia", whose prophethood you already reject, some 1400 years ago.

What are you trying to say? That people of Arabia are incapable of executing global change? Or that it is impossible that God would choose a prophet from Arabia? Or that a successful spiritual, political, military and civil leader cannot simply emerge from Arabia?

Give me a break, how are you reading this? No I don't think that people from Arabia are incapable of executing global change, and doing great things. They did.

again, I'm speaking in terms of my own personal convictions... I hear these things like - "you can hit your wife, you can marry many, you can own slaves", and to me they sound very human, and not very enlightened, and certainly not divine.

Then people say, "oh no - to understand this religion... (which is the right one by the way, yours isn't, and you're going to burn in hell if you don't believe it) you have to steep yourself in Arabic culture until it makes sense to you. So go to a scholar, go to a school in LA, or learn Arabic, and then it'll all make sense"

You know what... no. If that's what it takes to understand a clear message from God, then no thanks. I have in fact listened to scholars in masajid, I've taken courses in school, I've read books, lots of them. That was years ago, and nothing there appealed to my senses on a spiritual level. Having said that, I'm more than happy accepting that some people take what is said in Islam, on faith, and live good lives. Like I said, some of the best people I've met owe their character to Islam. In fact, when I approach visible Muslims I'm filled with a warm feeling, because I'm subconsciously expecting them to be good people. But those who feel the need to push the point that it's the best way to the exclusions of all others, they're going to have to be ready to hear another point of view eventually.

Even anti-Islam orientalists admit that he was a successful leader. Just because he lived some 1400 years ago, and preached his message then, does not mean it is invalid today.
Morality and justice do not become invalid with time, and the message he preached mostly revolved around these two main concepts.

I never said he wasn't a successful leader. And I wouldn't argue against the idea that morality and justice become invalid with time. I'm not doing that here. I do disagree with a few of his ideas regarding morality and justice, and for me, and my own personal beliefs, it's enough to sour the whole thing. It doesn't take a lot.

You're basically doing the same here. Just because in your culture, certain things are OK doesn't mean you have to impose them on others by ridiculing the practices of other cultures. You are guilty of the same things you accuse Islam of doing. Nobody has a problem with all your judgments and criticisms. Is it too much to ask of you to be respectful and considerate towards the feelings of Muslims? Would it not hurt you if I trivialised something or someone you revered and held in high esteem? Why can't we be civil towards each other?

So because you've read insults against other religions on here, you jump on the same bandwagon, too? So much for living up to your own standards?

No, I'm not doing the same things here. At all... I'm not stating as fact that Muslims are idiots for believing what they do, or calling them disgusting for practicing things the way they do. I'm describing why I don't personally believe certain points in Islam. From my perspective.

Did I say that? I'm not sure I did. If I did, I apologise.

It wouldn't have even matter if you didn't say it. It's been said so many times.

If you think that offending me (and others) deliberately works well for you, then I can deal with that. You know how vindictive I am

why do you think that?

Let's take India for an example ... You think widow burning and sati is a civilised practice? From a completely subjective, female point of view, I think not. I'm not in favour of converting people by force, and I'm totally against the imposition of culture on others ... I would go further to say that I'm not exactly happy with military expansions, but that's not the point here ... What I'm trying to say is that, in today's standards, the countries you claim to have been civilised before the Islamic conquests of their lands would be backward and inhumane. Yet Islam hasn't changed much, and for Muslims, it remains more civilised than any other culture. Again India ... dowry paid by the woman, who if fails to pay it gets mistreated and burnt alive ... Is that your idea of civilisation? Maybe. You're entitled to your opinions. Just don't say it's "absolutely untrue" that Islam did bring some positive change on many people.

You're using the word 'civilization' very colloquially here. I'm not saying referring to it in a moralistic way. I'm saying there was civilizations, people with their own structured, complex societies, with their own cultures that had existed in those places for thousands of years. To say that there was none - that's offensive.

An interesting point, the majority of the natives who populated the Americas up to the 15th Century, also were engaged in activities that I think could be described as pretty barbaric. Ones you might describe as uncivilized (despite the fact they had major centers of civilization). Europeans moved into the area, subjugated them, and brought them Christianity. Today, millions upon millions of their descendants count Christianity as their greatest gift.

Your Western culture owes its renaissance to the openness of the Islamic civilisation, which supported scholars and thinkers from all over the world .. both Muslims and non-Muslims. Had it not been for the enlightening books that were translated by Muslim scholars, the West would have stayed backward. I can't say it is completely advanced today. Not morally, at least.

There you go again... thinking in terms of us versus you. I don't know where this is coming from, this had nothing to do with anything I said. But I'm not denying that the Islamic world was a center of knowledge and that the Western world didn't benefit from it. The Islamic civilization as well... inherited it's knowledge from the Greco-Roman, Persian and Africa worlds, worked with it, improved on it and passed it on. This is what civilizations do.

But it didn't take long for you to tell us how you truly feel about Islam, no? Nobody provoked you here. You provoked people with that insensitive remark, which did not serve any purpose. What important point did you put across?

I guess my important point was that it's not just crazy Islamo-phobes like Daniel Pipes who can take issue with points in Islam. And yeh, I've never kept my criticisms of Islam a secret, they come up when they come up. I don't go stirring up trouble around here. Because this is the first time you've seen them doesn't mean it's been the first time I've voiced them. Those who've been around a while know where I stand on the matter.

And you want to blame everything "Muslim" conquerers had done wrong on Islam and its Prophet? Is that what you're saying, or did I misunderstand?

Everything? No. But the two, Islam and Muslims, aren't as separate as everyone makes them out to be. As a non-Muslim who doesn't accept the tenets of Islam as my own, I have to accept how Islam is manifested by it's followers as part of what Islam is.

[Jamroll]

Yeah, I agree, people from Arabia are idiots. They're always complaining when we bomb their countries and take their oil. Whiny little so-and-so's!

[Timbit]

Originally Posted by Variable

Girls and guys dancing together. Music in fact being portrayed, at very least, as a bad habit that one needs to do his or her best to kick. Cultural artwork. Having a girlfriend or boyfriend, or just being close to a member of the opposite gender who isn't my spouse. Italian food... the list goes on.

You hold dancing with girls and going out with them dear to your heart?
Cultural artwork isn't haraam and neither is Italian food. And not all Muslim scholars think all music is bad. Depends on the content of it too.

And in any case, Islam wasn't spread by force.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Jamroll

Yeah, I agree, people from Arabia are idiots. They're always complaining when we bomb their countries and take their oil. Whiny little so-and-so's!

are you responding to my post? Because I never said anything like that.

Originally Posted by Timbit

You hold dancing with girls and going out with them dear to your heart?
Cultural artwork isn't haraam and neither is Italian food. And not all Muslim scholars think all music is bad. Depends on the content of it too.

Yes in fact I do hold those things dear Timbit. Does that sound strange to you? And it's not just me, dance is a defining elements of some cultures. And I'm sure if you told an Italian they couldn't eat proscuito with wine, they'd throw their hands up and storm of shouting inaudibly. A culture's menu - another defining element. Stuatues? Of people? Of nude people? I think more than two thirds of the main museum in my city would be considered haram by most people on this board. As for music... the very fact that it's questioned whether it's prohibited by God is enough to throw up warning flags.

Those things may not be important to you, they may seem strange to you. But they are important to me, and most of the rest of the world.

And in any case, Islam wasn't spread by force.

Who told you that? Of course it was, in part, spread by force. And did in fact cause suffering.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Variable

As for music... the very fact that it's questioned whether it's prohibited by God is enough to throw up warning flags.

1) Do you know why its prohibited?

2) Do you know the prohibition is on certain types of music, and that prohibition is relaxed for certain times and events?

[Revert]

Originally Posted by Timbit

You hold dancing with girls and going out with them dear to your heart?
Cultural artwork isn't haraam and neither is Italian food. And not all Muslim scholars think all music is bad. Depends on the content of it too.

And in any case, Islam wasn't spread by force.

Actually i've read some opinions that say garlic and onions (staples of Italian food) are Haraam because the Prophet (saws) didn't like them.

To say Islam wasn't spread by force at all is a narrow view, because it was, especially during the spread of the Ottoman empire and now consider the goals of the Taliban and such.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Revert

Actually i've read some opinions that say garlic and onions (staples of Italian food) are Haraam because the Prophet (saws) didn't like them.

I'd be interested in hearing the rationale of anyone who declares those two foods as haraam simply because the Prophet didn't like them. I always thought the reason he didn't eat them is because of their strong smell they leave in your mouth, and with him being the Prophet, it wouldn't be proper.

Now if they say its makruh, yeah that I can understand.

And if its those two things that make Italian foods "haraam" then a lotta desi and arab food would also automatically become haraam too, lol.

[Khairan]

Originally Posted by Arabesque

Did you, in your right mind, think that you could speak of a man who brought civilisation to half the world and beyond in such a disrespectful manner, and then not have people express their feelings of disgust and anger towards that?

Whether or not you believe he was a Prophet is not the issue. Truth is, it is offensive to Muslims for you to refer to their Prophet as "some guy from Arabia." This "guy from Arabia" has done more good to the world than anyone from your part of the world has ever done so, or will ever do. What civilisation do you pride yourself in to begin with? That of guns, bombs and destruction? How do you even feel about being a Canadian, when you know your forefathers settled by force in the lands of others whom they have marginalised and massacred to accommodate migrants from Europe? Don't get me started on this.

All you need to know is that your statement was offensive. There's no need to ridicule Muslims, their beliefs or their revered Prophet to put across your point. And how ironic that you'd say that right after I had said, "you've always been respectful". You just had to prove me wrong. Bravo!

When he calls the Prophet "some guy" -- he's expressing a concept, not an insult. That concept is that most people who are not Muslim do not view Rasoolillah through the same lenses of reverence that Muslims do, and as a result of that the examples he sets for us and the teachings he passes on do not carry the same "obvious" value as they do to us.

This is NOT and should NOT be taken as an offence -- it is, rather, a very important point in interfaith dialogue. Just as a Muslim who discusses religion with a Christian recognizes intuitively that the Bible does not carry the ring of holiness and truth to it that devout Christians ascribe to it, we must accept that it is the same when we deal with non-Muslism ourselves.

I consider Islam a relatively intellectual religion, in the sense that I would venture most people who are educated Muslims would argue they are drawn to Islam because it "makes sense," not necessarily because it "feels good." That is certainly how I would describe myself. However, we can't deny that there is a strong degree of emotionality in our attachments to certain figures in Islam, and that emotionality is bound to affect how we interpret those people's words and deeds.

Variable's comment is emphasizing that he has no such emotionality in this regard, but rather his emotionalities run to other attachments (such as dancing, music, and other things he has listed). He's making a criticism that Abrahamic religions feel free to call things other people hold very important "evil" or "sinful" but see themselves as protected or above similar criticisms. Right or wrong (it's not really the issue whether his statement is correct) he makes a fair point that deserves consideration and ought to be taken in the spirit it was said -- and that spirit was clearly not with the intent to insult Muslims or the Prophet, any more than WE are trying to insult HIM by saying that music is haraam or pork is nasty.


Because we ALL know that pork is really freakin' nasty.