[IbnAbdullah]

It's interesting they consider zoroastrians from the people of the book and their men can marry majoosi women.

Likewise, God talks about the People of the Book, (Jews, Christians and we include here the Zoroastrians), without referring to them as Arabs: Say O People of the Book come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but God and that we shall ascribe no partners to Him and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God [III:64].

Qur'an in Islam

This is the sentence, "Oh Prophet tell all those who claim to follow a divine book of the past (to the Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians or perhaps even the Sabeans whose name occurs in the Quran and to all people who follow a previous divine book) to come and assemble around one tenet and under one banner." (3:64)

Spiritual Discourses

[rahat]

Yes, I agree that Shia fiqh allows marriage to them as Ahle Kitab, however, I don't understand if you are simply pointing this out, or assigning a particular negative or positive connotation to the idea...

[Jaysh]

As-Salam Alaykum.

Bismillah.

I gotta side with Rahat on this. I do think it is interesting, but I don't think it is something that must necessarily be understood as having a negative implication to it. After all, we are allowed to marry the Jews, who are stereotyped even more than the Zoroastrians.

Fi Aman Allah.

[kenneth]

Have you studied the Avesta?

[sixpakistan]

Jaysh said:

As-Salam Alaykum.

Bismillah.

I gotta side with Rahat on this. I do think it is interesting, but I don't think it is something that must necessarily be understood as having a negative implication to it. After all, we are allowed to marry the Jews, who are stereotyped even more than the Zoroastrians.

Fi Aman Allah.

I don't think that's really comparable. The Jews were understood to be an ummah that preceded us in our tradition; they worship One God and they follow the nabis up to Musa (AS). The Zoroastrians were referred to as "fire worshippers" by the Prophet (SAW) (though they deny being fire worshippers, in the same way that Hindus deny worshipping idols).

[Timbit]

They don't deny being fire worshippers. They actually aren't fire worshippers.
And a Shia friend of mine told me some Shias consider Hindus to be People of the Book too.

[sixpakistan]

Timbit said:

They don't deny being fire worshippers. They actually aren't fire worshippers.
And a Shia friend of mine told me some Shias consider Hindus to be People of the Book too.

By Islamic standards, they are considered fire worshippers. They worship in front of a fire, the same way Hindus consider themselves to be worshipping in front of an idol. Fire is to them, a means of communion with the light of Ahura Mazda. They actually used to have temples with fires burning that were believed to be part of Ahura Mazda.

Anyway, is this a unanimous opinion of all the Shia marjas?

AFAIK none of the Shia marjas consider Hindus Ahle Kitab.

[Timbit]

sixpakistan said:

By Islamic standards, they are considered fire worshippers. They worship in front of a fire, the same way Hindus consider themselves to be worshipping in front of an idol. Fire is to them, a means of communion with the light of Ahura Mazda. They actually used to have temples with fires burning that were believed to be part of Ahura Mazda.

Anyway, is this a unanimous opinion of all the Shia marjas?

AFAIK none of the Shia marjas consider Hindus Ahle Kitab.

We worship in front of a lot of things. The Ka'aba, for one. Doesn't mean we're worshipping those things. Fire plays a role in religious ceremony/ritual, yes, but they still worship Ahura Mazda.

And I dunno. I'll ask him next time I see him.

[sixpakistan]

Timbit said:

We worship in front of a lot of things. The Ka'aba, for one. Doesn't mean we're worshipping those things. Fire plays a role in religious ceremony/ritual, yes, but they still worship Ahura Mazda.

We worship toward the Ka'aba, not in front of it. That is a key distinction. Zoroastrians always worship in front of fire. Hence, their designation as "majoosis," or fire-worshippers by the Prophet (SAW).

To say "fire plays a role in religious ceremony/ritual" is a great over-simplification and understatement of the Zoroastrian view of fire. It has much more significance than that of a mere symbol; it's considered to be a manifestation of Ahura Mazda's divine energy.

Quote

And I dunno. I'll ask him next time I see him.

A random Shia probably isn't a good source of what the Shia marja rulings are, any more than a random Sunni is a good source on what the opinions of mujtahid imams on a given topic would be.

As far as I know, the Shia interpretation of the Qur'an forbids any food from Hindus being eaten whatsoever, due to their status as pagans/idolaters (whereas a Sunni would only refrain from eating meat from Hindus, which is pretty much a non-issue since Hindus don't own any abattoirs). I don't know if that's a unanimous ruling with them, though (maybe rahat can clarify). So I can't imagine they would be allowed to marry Hindus.

[TrentReznor858]

sixpakistan said:

We worship toward the Ka'aba, not in front of it. That is a key distinction. Zoroastrians always worship in front of fire. Hence, their designation as "majoosis," or fire-worshippers by the Prophet (SAW).

To say "fire plays a role in religious ceremony/ritual" is a great over-simplification and understatement of the Zoroastrian view of fire. It has much more significance than that of a mere symbol; it's considered to be a manifestation of Ahura Mazda's divine energy.

[sixpakistan]

TrentReznor858 said:

You have no knowledge of the topic at hand and are incapable of forming a solid critique of the argument, so you resort to google images to make a non-point. I guess it's better than trying to use reasoning, which would just result in you looking stupid. *shrug*

[TrentReznor858]

sixpakistan said:

You have no knowledge of the topic at hand and are incapable of forming a solid critique of the argument, so you resort to google images to make a non-point. I guess it's better than trying to use reasoning, which would just result in you looking stupid. *shrug*

Of course because you are the first to admit that you are wrong about things and gracefully admit so, instead of reacting like a child and making circular arguments, making personal insults, and inventing nonsensical terms to make yourself sound smart. And you nitpicking at useless things to prove something isnt a nonpoint, but thanks for trying.

[sixpakistan]

TrentReznor858 said:

Of course because you are the first to admit that you are wrong about things and gracefully admit so, instead of reacting like a child and making circular arguments, making personal insults, and inventing nonsensical terms to make yourself sound smart. And you nitpicking at useless things to prove something isnt a nonpoint, but thanks for trying.

Reasoning would be establishing why it is nitpicking, instead of merely calling it nitpicking via some random image in a sad attempt at being witty. Of course, you lack the intellect to engage in such endeavors, so you merely resort to ad hominem attacks that don't address the argument whatsoever instead (as seen above).

[Jaysh]

As-salam Alaykum.

Bismillah.

Bro Six Pak, well, I think in its isolation it would not be that damning. But I guess when you factor in other issues, such as how the Shias celebrate Zoroastrian fire-worshiping holidays, then I guess it becomes an issue.

Fi Aman Allah

[TrentReznor858]

[Revert]

I've never even heard of a zoroastrian...

[sixpakistan]

TrentReznor858 said:

Lack the intellect? Please. It is impossible to attempt any sort of discussion with simpletons such as yourself, who resort to childish remarks, spewing out hot air, making circular arguments, and inventing terms.

You haven't made a point, but an accusation followed by more ad hominem attacks. Again, making a point would be saying "you are nitpicking, and this is why." You merely defined nitpicking, but you haven't established that what I did fits that definition.

But since you are intellectually feeble, I'll humor you.

Why is what I said nitpicking? Is toward not distinct from 'in front of?'

Did the Muslims not pray 'toward' Jerusalem at one point in time? Would anyone say we prayed "in front" of Jerusalem? Why or why not? Did anyone ever actually pray in physical proximity to Jerusalem?

Also, why did we pray toward Jerusalem? Is Jerusalem an object? And why do we pray toward the kaaba? Is the Kaaba the most sacred place on earth? Are the underlying reasons for why we pray toward the Kaaba distinct or indistinct from why one would pray in front of a specific object?

[TrentReznor858]

sixpakistan said:

You haven't made a point, but an accusation followed by more ad hominem attacks.

I guess I have to use blocks to spell it out for you since my previous explanation went over your head. See below:

sixpakistan said:

Again, making a point would be saying "you are nitpicking, and this is why." You merely defined nitpicking, but you haven't established that what I did fits that definition.

You are nitpicking. I shouldnt have to explain to you what that is.

sixpakistan said:

But since you are intellectually feeble, I'll humor you.

As supposed to a strong intellect like yourself? ***** please. Thanks for the laugh.

sixpakistan said:

Why is what I said nitpicking?

Praying toward is the same as praying in front of. Pretty simple huh?

sixpakistan said:

Is toward not distinct from 'in front of?'

Not really, only because they almighty sixpak wants it to be

sixpakistan said:

Did the Muslims not pray 'toward' Jerusalem at one point in time? Would anyone say we prayed "in front" of Jerusalem? Why or why not? Did anyone ever actually pray in physical proximity to Jerusalem?

This is pretty much the definition of nitpicking. Praying within proximity is not the point and you know it. Just as the Kabah is a necessary piece of our salah, fire is a necessary piece of their prayer ritual. Would you not pray "in front of" the Kabah if you could? Why or why not?

sixpakistan said:

Also, why did we pray toward Jerusalem? Is Jerusalem an object? And why do we pray toward the kaaba? Is the Kaaba the most sacred place on earth? Are the underlying reasons for why we pray toward the Kaaba distinct or indistinct from why one would pray in front of a specific object?

We pray towards Jerusalem and the Kaabah because Muslims needed a specific direction to pray towards, and since those buildings are important religious landmarks, the prophet decided to use those. Pretty simple. The prophet did not want the sahabah using the sun or fire or idols to pray towards, so he picked those places.

[sixpakistan]

TrentReznor858 said:

I guess I have to use blocks to spell it out for you since my previous explanation went over your head. See below:

You didn't have a previous explanation. You just had an ad hominem attack that didn't center around my argument, and an accusation that I was nitpicking. I already know what nitpicking is; again, merely defining it doesn't prove your point.

Quote

Again, making a point would be saying "you are nitpicking, and this is why." You merely defined nitpicking, but you haven't established that what I did fits that definition.

Quote

You are nitpicking. I shouldnt have to explain to you what that is.

See above. It's pretty amusing to me that what you are doing now is the exact definition of a circular argument, and also amusing to me that you probably don't realize it because you probably aren't really aware of what a circular argument is, and are only using that term because Jinnzaman used it.

Quote

Praying toward is the same as praying in front of. Pretty simple huh?

Really? Praying toward is not the same as praying in front of? So when you pray, would you say you pray in front of the kaaba? Did anyone pray "in front of" Jerusalem?

Quote

Not really, only because they almighty sixpak wants it to be

They're two distinct words with distinct meanings. Not because sixpak says so, but because Merriam-Webster says so.

Anyway, you didn't answer this question:

Quote

Would anyone say we prayed "in front" of Jerusalem? Why or why not?

Quote

This is pretty much the definition of nitpicking. Praying within proximity is not the point and you know it. Just as the Kabah is a necessary piece of our salah, fire is a necessary piece of their prayer ritual.

This is the actual substance of the argument. Semantics and all the fun & games aside, why do we pray toward the kaaba for salah, and why is fire a necessary piece of their prayer ritual?

Fire and light are venerated in the Zoroastrian religion. Fire is referred to throughout the Yasna as the 'son' of Ahura Mazda. They consider it an earthly manifestation of Ahura Mazda, or more accurately, his divine energy. This is why they pray before fire; because they consider it necessary for them to establish a direct connection to Ahura Mazda.

This is a completely different understanding from what the Muslims have of the Kaaba, and mirrors the Bhakti Hindu understanding of their own form of idolatry. This is why Hindus are said to be idol worshippers, even though by their belief, they are not worshipping the idols directly.

Further, AFAIK it's only a relatively recent understanding of the Avesta (which came about as a result of the critiques of Muslim & Christian scholars) that makes a distinction when it comes to worshipping the fire itself.

From the Yasna itself:

Quote

[B]7. Yea, we worship thee, the Fire, Ahura Mazda's son! the holy lord of the ritual order; and we worship all the Fires...

The Zend Avesta, Part III (SBE31): The Yasna: Yasna XXV

It'd seem the "Fires" are a reference to the "undying" (now dead) fires in the "Great Temples," but I don't know if to make that claim would be historically accurate.

Hence, the Prophet (SAW)'s own reference to them as "majoosis." Which alone should be enough to end the debate.

TrentReznor858 said:

Would you not pray "in front of" the Kabah if you could? Why or why not?

If I could pray in Masjid al Haram, yes, I would. I would also pray in Masjid al Aqsa if I could, or Masjid un Nabi.

Quote

We pray towards Jerusalem and the Kaabah

We don't pray toward Jerusalem.

TrentReznor858 said:

because Muslims needed a specific direction to pray towards,

Why?

Quote

and since those buildings are important religious landmarks, the prophet decided to use those.

Huh? Jerusalem is a building? We pray toward the kaaba because it's an "important religious landmark?" It was the Prophet (SAW) who decided to "use those?"

Quote

Pretty simple. The prophet did not want the sahabah using the sun or fire or idols to pray towards, so he picked those places.

Again, it was the Prophet (SAW)'s decision that we should pray to the Kaaba? Is the reasoning your own conjecture, or is there some basis to it?

[SoSoHalalish]

Hmmm, Id have to agree with Sixpakistan.

How can you justify Zoroastrians as being People of the Book? They don't share a similar origin, as do Judaism, Christianity, and Islam- they don't share in our stories of the prophets, the angels, creation, judgement day, our sense of right and wrong... what exactly about them qualifies them as people of the book? The fact that they have a One God?
Don't Hindu's have something similar? Isn't that what Om is? Like yeah they have millions of gods, but theres this one mystical being. Would Sikhs be considered people of the book- since they have One God?


Well this is interesting, maybe thats why Jinnah married Fatimah Jinnah when she was a Parsi... but she did convert.