     Ahmed Qatal | Monday, September 04, 2000 - 05:42 pm
Assalaam u alaikum
Dear Brothers and Sisters
The person by name “Mad Mac” is truly here to cause fitnah. Please ignore him/her. Mad Mac, if you die as an unbeliever in God you will go to Hell.
The Quran:
3:151 Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers! |
| MAD MAC | Monday, September 04, 2000 - 10:51 pm
Ahmed
I believe, just in a different way. Are we really so different? You see the world and religion through such a narrow prism you do not allow for any possibilities other than yours. If the Islamic world ignored the rest of the world it would be to the detriment of Moslems world wide - there are more non-Moslems (by a factor of six) than there are Moslems. Your view is so narrow that now you don't even desire discourse with those who do not subscribe to the Qur'an in its entirety. The loss is more yours than mine. I will find Moslems and none Moslems to talk to, while your circle of friends will continue to shrink as you rule out all of those who don't fit in your narrow definitions. Funny how I can respect your viewpoint but you can not respect mine.
BTW, Mohamed's own actions are grossly at odds with that line from the Qur'an. Mohamed maintained friendly terms with Christians and Jews - he never attempted to "cast terror into their hearts". Indeed he built a Christian Church for them to worship in. I wonder what the Wahabis did to it?????? |
| asad | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 01:20 am
"Mohamed maintained friendly terms with Christians and Jews".
Yes, he did, but only as long as the christians and the jews didn't cause fitnah. If they did, the prophet was told to be harsh on them. In fact, there were times when the jews in madina cuased fitnah and the prophet "casted terror into their hearts". There is no such thing in Islam as turn the other cheek.
"Indeed he built a Christian Church for them to worship in."
I have never heard of the prophet building a Christian Church. Where did you get this info, Mad Mac? |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 04:14 am
Asad
I got this info from an Qur'anic scholar named Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Can you tell me what the heel Fitnah is? It sounds from context as prostelytation, but I'm not sure and I don't want to interpret the phrase improperly.
Turning the other cheek, which was espoused by the prophet Issa, references turning the other cheek to one who insults you or does wrong to you. Someone who engages in a debate about dieties, beliefs and the supranatural requries no turning of the other cheek, it requires simple tolerance for other points of view. To tolerate is not to accept or condone, simply to acknowledge that everyone has the right to believe what he wants and express those beliefs. |
| asad | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 06:43 am
mad mad, i read the biography of the prophet very extensively and i read yusuf ali's translation of the Qur'an many many
times. i think you have wrong info about the prophet. if you do not mind, can you tell us the name of the book by the Qur'anic scholar Abdullah Yusuf Ali you said you read that says the prophet built a christian church?
"Can you tell me what the heel Fitnah is?"
fitnah is anything that is bad. the finah i'm talking about is the one the jews caused against Islam during the prophet's
time. they harbored the most enmity and hatred to Islam and the prophet. when the prophet first came to madina, he was running from the arab pagans. the arabs wanted to kill the prophet and he ran for his life. he made a deal with the people in madinah, included the jews. he said to the people in madinah, included the jews: whosoever follows us shall have aid and succour; they shall not be injured, nor any enemy be aided against them. however, the jews double crossed the prophet in order to undermined the cause of Islam. they helped the arab pagans against the prophet secretly and tried to cause fidnah between the new muslims, those who lived in madinah and those who came from makah. the jews broke the treaty they
had with the prophet; thus, causing fitnah. the jews started a series of provocative and harmful deeds against the muslims. the prophet exercised the highest degree of patience with the jews but they went too far in their provocative deeds in order to undermine the cause of Islam. they even made an attempt to the prophet's life. then, lastly the jews started war against muslims. they tried to assassinate the prophet many times and caused acts of treachery against muslims by helping the arab pagans. but the muslims cast horror into the hearts of the jews and finally the jews were willing offered to comply wit the prophet's order to leave madinah. yes, everyone has the right to believe what he wants and express those beliefs, but if the non muslims can not tolerate, accept or condone friendly terms with the muslims, and instead cause fitnah, muslims were told to cast horror into their hearts. there were no such thing as turn the other cheek with the enemy. you can't have your enemy sleeping with you in the same bed, can you, mad mac? |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 10:54 am
Asad I think I'm with you. I suspect that Fitnah roughly translates to treachery. As with other Arabic words, this one probably has a deeper meaning but that's the closest I can come to based on your description.
I agree, the terms of the deal have to be equal. Muslims have the same rights to express themselves as everyone else. In fact, I'll take it a step further, I'm willing to fight so that Muslims can have those rights.
It's the same guy. I read it in his translation of the Qur'an. I tried to find it a little while ago but I read it some months ago. You know how in his translation he wrote these little anecdotes that put things in historical context. It was one of those. My point about the Prophet, however, is less that he built the Church and more that he tolerated non-Muslim communities and taught tolerance for same. And when I say tolerance I mean tolerance - they could express themselves and live in peace like normal citizens. The Wahabis of today operate in direct contradiction to the Prophets teaching. |
| asad | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 12:28 pm
mad mac,
i read his translation of the Qur'an too (many many times), but no where in his translation or his commentaries or his anecdotes did he say that the prophet built a christian church. we muslims would have heard this long time ago if that was the case. we maybe you thought he did say that. anyway, don't be also confused what the muslims do (be the wahibis or others) with what Islam breaches. as i said, the prophet exercised the highest degree of patience and tolerance towards his enemy, but he bunished them when they went too far. it is clear from the Qur'an that tolerance is what Islam teaches and it is what the prophet preached, but the prophet neither built churches nor burned them. |
| MAD MAC | Tuesday, September 05, 2000 - 10:33 pm
Asad
You know, I'll be the first to admit that I'm hardly and Islamic scholar, but another guy on the net here, about 5 months ago (maybe it was Huriwaa or Bashir Abdi - but I don't think so - I was talking to them a lot back then) also mentioned the Church thing. But like I said, I don't think it's asspecially important. What I do think is important is your last line - the he niether built them nor burned them. He preached tolerance. He defined greatness. And the followers of his time, for the most part, accepted his principals in total. I don't understand why so many modern day Muslims stray from the Prophets teachings and then charge others with doing the same. It seems hypocritical to me. Anyway, I can tell from your writings you already understand this. Thanks for writing - if I find anything else on this Church thing, I'll post it here. If not assume it's BS. |
| asad | Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 07:59 am
mad mac,
"I don't understand why so many modern day Muslims stray from the Prophets teachings and then charge others with doing the same. It seems hypocritical to me."
whoever muslim did stray from the prophet's teachings (be he a wahabi or a somali) is no different than the one (the gaal) he is pointing his finger at. |
| asad | Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 08:01 am
i mean they both did stray from the prophet's teacings, right? |
| MAD MAC | Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 09:40 am
Exactly, that's what I mean. The difference, of course, is that one (the gaal) never professed to follow his teachings, hence he can not be accussed of hypocrisy, but the other makes his claim in Islams name. Thanks for the info. Be cool. |
| asad | Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 01:17 pm
yes, one professes to follow prophet's teachings while straying from it which makes him a hypocrite and the other denies or rejects the teaching of the prophet which makes him a gaal. but still, the fact is that, the prophet was sent for both of them. the gaal is not exempt from following and accepting his prophet (mohammed). the prophet is not only for the muslims; he was sent for the whole world. |
| asad | Wednesday, September 06, 2000 - 01:27 pm
but guess what? the hypocrite is the one going to get the worst deal in the hereafter. hypocrites will be in the Lower-deck in hell. they both can avoid being in hell by following the teachings of their prophet(mohammed) before they leave from this world. |
