PDA

View Full Version : Is Secularism Shirk can anyone explain please ?



truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 06:01 AM
As Salaam Alaikum is Secularism Shirk can anyone explain please ? I have heard many Muslims say Secularism is Idolatry is this true ? Does only God have the right be the Legislator since God created Natural Laws Day and Night and the Universe and Humanity and Life ? Does denying that God is the Legislator is this a form of Atheism or Godless thinking ? Yes I know there are Religions that would allow a Secular State or World view but this just proves that these religions are man made religions anyone agree ? I believe man made law is denying God would Islam agree ? Also do Islamic Texts say anything about why God is the Legislator not Mankind since God is the Creator of Everything and Everyone I know Darwinism/Evolution/Materialism does deny this since Atheism/Secularism/Humanism leads to a Corrupt Society in my opinion and view thank you agreed ? I know that the United States of America and many other Western Nations have Freedom of Religions in their Constitutions but so did the Soviet Union's Constitution but the Soviet Union was still an Atheist Society and Marxism/Socialism/Communism is Atheist Communists are Materialists are they not ? A Secular Society leads to a Corrupt Society it is Inevitable what does everyone here think feel free to agree or disagree with me thank you very much ? Both Capitalism and Communism are both Secular Materialist Systems in my view. as is Nationalism Patriotism and Atheism. I think Secularists worship their Politicans not God they take their Political Leaders as gods a Cult of Personality I don't much care for Western Politics many Americans I know just view Politics as Entertainment which it is not made to be Entertainment Politics is about Solving Problems not Entertainment like Sports. There are Religions and Followers of Religion that take their Clergy as gods or like a god doesn't the Quran say this anyone know what verse ? God sent Prophets and Messengers to guide Humanity to follow God's Laws correct ? I know I typed a lot of words on this post but I had a lot to say thank you would anyone here agree with my staements and views ? My last question is if Secularists and or Atheists and Humanists have no Absolute Morality than all you have is man made Laws/man made Constitutions/man made Morality that can Change why is this good ?

Richard Dawkins interviewing a Muslim guy

Born and raised in a strict Orthodox Jewish environment in America Yousef Al-Khattab, formerly Joseph Cohen, is a devout Orthodox Jew, he moved to Israel in 1998 in the name of Judaism, where he stayed in Gush Qatif , few years later Yousef discovers Islam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8b3vhTO248


1936 CONSTITUTION OF THE USSR


ARTICLE 124. In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the state, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens.


http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/.../36cons04.html

Shirk
(Assuming partners for God)

Shirk
(Assuming partners for God) There are indirect connotations too for Shirk in al-Ebadah. Already we have seen how people "worship" their clergy or secular leaders just by giving them the status of lawgivers. In fact “worship” may include even “worship” of money or one’s own desires. For example God says:

Have you not seen the one who takes his desires as his God” (25:43)

http://www.muslimliving.org/faith/shirk.htm

DEBATE Islam vs. Atheism: 'God has a role in politics' - SUMSA Islamic Awareness Week IAW 2010

Islam vs. Atheism: God has a role in politics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAVmeVi7pXU

Ten facts about Sharia law (Islamic law)

The aim of the Shari'ah is to preserve society in a form which is healthy and fruitful for the inhabitants on earth. Shari'ah helps mankind live the way the creator has decreed us to live, and to ease our worship to Allah (SWT).

In (Western) society, there is a race to maintain a basic lifestyle, to provide food, shelter and clothing for you or your family, only to meet the basic necessities. You will see this same behaviour anywhere where the Shari ah is not implemented. To provide even the most basic commodities such as electricity, gas and water it is a hassle and something western democracy has failed to give or provide us even till today, this is why we find the population resorting to crime, effectively leading to mass corruption and depression.

Is it in the governments interest to serve God (Allah) or the political elite? With broken families, high rape, paedophilia, massive percentages of alcohol related diseases and deaths, homelessness, obesity. These statistics reflect the success of a government which rules by man made law and it paints a picture that tells us the government only serve the interests of the political elite, including big corporations, banks and man's desires.

Let us look to what the Shari'ah offers us, and lets see what Allah (SWT) has legislated for mankind. Ultimately, if any book is divine, it will detail all affairs for man and tell us how to deal with today's problems.

http://dcfnfb.blogspot.com/2010/11/t...lamic-law.html




A believer adheres to
these moral values because his nature, fortified by faith, induces him to do so,
and because the religion he believes in commands him with them and promises him
a reward for them in the Hereafter. Secularism, on the other hand, even in its
less virulent form that satisfies itself with removing religion from political
life, rejecting it and the innate values as a basis for legislation, undermines
the two foundations for moral values in the hearts of mankind. As for
secularism in its extreme atheistic form, it completely demolishes these two
foundations and replaces them with human whims, either the whims of a few rulers
in dictatorial systems or the whims of the majority in democratic systems.


“Have
you seen the one who has taken his own desire as his god? Would you then be a
guardian over him?” (Quran 25:43)


Since whims and desires
are by their nature constantly changing, the values and behaviors based on them
are also mutable. What is considered today to be a crime, punishable by law
with the severest of penalties, and causes its practitioners to be deprived of
certain rights granted to others, becomes permissible tomorrow, or even
praiseworthy, and the one who objects to it becomes “politically incorrect.”
This shift from one point of view to its opposite, as a result of society’s
estrangement from innate religious values, is a frequent occurrence. However
ignorant a traditional society may be, it, or many of its members, will maintain
some innate values; but the further a society penetrates into secularism, the
fewer such individuals will become, and the more marginal their influence will
be, until the society collectively rebels against those same innate religious
values it used to uphold. There may be another reason for some traditional
Jahili[1] cultures to maintain innate religious values:
they might appeal to their desires, or they represent their heritage and do not
conflict with their desires.

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/5245/

Anjem choudary's invitation to leaders of other faiths

Anjem Choudary inviting leaders of other faiths to Islaam so that they come out of the darkness of man made ideologies to the light of Islaam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x3oi5E9s4U

Robert Ham Interviews Yousef al-Khattab (Part 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mTfe1usZB4

Islam or Secularism: Which one makes more sense? by Abdulla Al Andalusi

Islam or Secularism: Which one makes more sense? by Abdulla Al Andalusi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4YRSh7ijgc

Allah is The Lawmaker (Legislator) - Abdur Raheem Green

The most basic of our duties to Allah (Subhanahu Wa Taala), is to establish His laws and make Him the Sovereign of the land .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7AMT7mPkjM



Professor Kevin Barrett Interviewed on Wisconsin TV (Part 2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGlBKSL1-QE
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 07:05 AM
I believe that a man made political system economics and a man made philosophy will always be and become corrupt it is Inevitable.
Reply

truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 07:05 AM
Look at the Greed.
Reply

truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 07:08 AM
Secularism and Man Made Law is of Satan the Devil. or promoted by Satan.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 07:09 AM
The United States of America and Israel are called the Great Satan I can understand why many Muslims say this does only Iran say which is Shia not Sunni or do Sunni say this too ?

The Great Satan (Persian شيطان بزرگ Shaytân-e Bozorg) is a derogatory epithet for the United States of America in some Iranian foreign policy statements. Occasionally, these words have also been used toward the government of the United Kingdom.

The term was originally used by Iranian leader Ruhollah Khomeini in his speech on November 5, 1979 to describe the United States whom he accused of imperialism and the sponsoring of corruption throughout the world.

Ayatollah Khomeini also occasionally used the terms Iblis (Diabolis - the primary devil in Islam) to refer to the United States and other Western countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Satan
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 09:49 AM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
I believe that a man made political system economics and a man made philosophy will always be and become corrupt it is Inevitable.
The evidence of history is that all political systems become corrupt and self serving, if they remain in power long enough. Religious or otherwise.
Reply

glo
11-29-2012, 11:56 AM
Originally Posted by Independent
The evidence of history is that all political systems become corrupt and self serving, if they remain in power long enough. Religious or otherwise.
I would tend to agree. It is in our human nature that power corrupts. Just too much temptation to use your power and influence for your own gain ... :hmm:
Reply

جوري
11-29-2012, 12:47 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
The evidence of history is that all political systems become corrupt and self serving, if they remain in power long enough. Religious or otherwise.
are you suggesting a down with capitalism?
If a system is fail proof the problem would then lie with individuals rather than the system itself and the people themselves not having respect for their individual freedoms and rights that they grow tolerant of abuse!
It is a three parts dynamics!
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 01:36 PM
Originally Posted by شَادِنُ
are you suggesting a down with capitalism?
What does this mean?

Originally Posted by شَادِنُ
If a system is fail proof the problem would then lie with individuals rather than the system itself
People are not perfect. Any system that depends on the assumption that people can ever be perfect is likely to be worse than one that accepts human frailty, and therefore includes checks and balances to prevent tyranny.
Reply

جوري
11-29-2012, 02:24 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
What does this mean?
you wrote:

Originally Posted by Independent
all political systems become corrupt and self serving,
I took that as an admittance that the current system in the west has failed!


Originally Posted by Independent
People are not perfect. Any system that depends on the assumption that people can ever be perfect is likely to be worse than one that accepts human frailty, and therefore includes checks and balances to prevent tyranny.
checks and balances fail is they're all driven by the same tenet and if said tenet is corrupt at the roots!
an ex. if you've a parliament/congress and presidential body that are driven only by the AIPAC then what hope is there for fairness or justice?

best,
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 02:47 PM
Originally Posted by شَادِنُ
I took that as an admittance that the current system in the west has failed!
Surprise, surprise...you read into it what you wanted to read into it.

Like any system, most western systems are capable of being coerced or misused at least temporarily. But because of the checks and balances it's not possible for any single group or party to obtain permanent power (unless they overthrow the system itself, but that is a criticism you could apply to any system).

Whereas - for example - in a country like Iran, all power is centred in one man who will ultimately choose his own successor. The only way to change this is by another revolution.
Reply

truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 04:23 PM
As Salaam Alaikum is Secularism Shirk can anyone explain please ? I have heard many Muslims say Secularism is Idolatry is this true ? Does only God have the right be the Legislator since God created Natural Laws Day and Night and the Universe and Humanity and Life ? Does denying that God is the Legislator is this a form of Atheism or Godless thinking ? Yes I know there are Religions that would allow a Secular State or World view but this just proves that these religions are man made religions anyone agree ? I believe man made law is denying God would Islam agree ? Also do Islamic Texts say anything about why God is the Legislator not Mankind since God is the Creator of Everything and Everyone ?
Reply

truthseeker63
11-29-2012, 04:24 PM
Yes I know there are Religions that would allow a Secular State or World view but this just proves that these religions are man made religions anyone agree ?
Reply

Dagless
11-29-2012, 05:12 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Like any system, most western systems are capable of being coerced or misused at least temporarily. But because of the checks and balances it's not possible for any single group or party to obtain permanent power (unless they overthrow the system itself, but that is a criticism you could apply to any system).
It depends on your definition of misuse. Places like the US have checks and balances but these are overridden by having a lot of money. This shows that even though one party does not have permanent power, there is actually only one set of interests (those of the rich) which are advanced. This to me is the same thing as corruption... just slightly less in the open.

Originally Posted by Independent
Whereas - for example - in a country like Iran, all power is centred in one man who will ultimately choose his own successor. The only way to change this is by another revolution.
Having a leader does not automatically lead to corruption. Most recently; I believe the Ottomans weren't corrupt while they followed religious law, it was when they moved to a more secular system things started getting worse.
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by Dagless
This shows that even though one party does not have permanent power, there is actually only one set of interests (those of the rich) which are advanced.
And yet, one of the main issues in the recent presidential election was Medicare, which represents a transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor.

The US may be the biggest western economy but it's also one of the least typical. If you look at Scandanavia for example, you will see remarkable support for vulnerable groups. And in the UK, I would argue that the publicly owned National Health Service is quite simply the best state institution in history.

Originally Posted by Dagless
Having a leader does not automatically lead to corruption
If absolute power persists, it always leads to oppression. Very few absolute rulers hand over power voluntarily. Usually, the only way to change regime is by revolution, which almost always causes collateral damage in death and destruction, even if the end result is desirable.
Reply

جوري
11-29-2012, 07:09 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Surprise, surprise...you read into it what you wanted to read into it.

Like any system, most western systems are capable of being coerced or misused at least temporarily. But because of the checks and balances it's not possible for any single group or party to obtain permanent power (unless they overthrow the system itself, but that is a criticism you could apply to any system).

Whereas - for example - in a country like Iran, all power is centred in one man who will ultimately choose his own successor. The only way to change this is by another revolution.
Rather I read what was obvious to the naked eye.
I don't see much difference between an American system and an Iranian one both are indeed corrupt - it doesn't matter if you divide the corruption by three or one. At times in fact three heads can halt the progress and throw folks in for a loop for instead of a root elimination of one tyrant, they have three tyrants with the same agenda in the way!

best,
Reply

Dagless
11-29-2012, 07:12 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
And in the UK, I would argue that the publicly owned National Health Service is quite simply the best state institution in history.
I love the NHS too. Definitely one of the best things ever. The last few years have been bad though; they're closing more hospitals than meth labs.


Originally Posted by Independent
If absolute power persists, it always leads to oppression. Very few absolute rulers hand over power voluntarily. Usually, the only way to change regime is by revolution, which almost always causes collateral damage in death and destruction, even if the end result is desirable.
As I mentioned, the Ottoman Empire didn't do this afaik. It was one of the leaders who moved to secularism, not revolt.
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 07:21 PM
Originally Posted by شَادِنُ
I don't see much difference between an American system and an Iranian one
The US has had one revolution (and that was for independence, not merely a change of government). Whereas Iran looks on course for another already. The US is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Whereas Iran can't even provide petrol to its own people.

One man rule might work for awhile if you're lucky, but in the end it results in chaos and civil war.
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 07:32 PM
Originally Posted by Dagless
As I mentioned, the Ottoman Empire didn't do this afaik. It was one of the leaders who moved to secularism, not revolt.
I'm not sure which period you're referring to. But at times the Ottoman succession was positively Darwinian - survival of the fittest. Whoever wins, kills off all the possible alternative heirs. And since there was also a harem system, there were spectacular numbers of heirs...
Reply

جوري
11-29-2012, 07:42 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
The US has had one revolution (and that was for independence, not merely a change of government). Whereas Iran looks on course for another already. The US is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Whereas Iran can't even provide petrol to its own people.

One man rule might work for awhile if you're lucky, but in the end it results in chaos and civil war.
Let's get one thing out of the way I don't condone the Iranian regime in any form or fashion, now, I think you need to amend your own knowledge on the U.S national debt and its continuous need to raise its debt ceiling and redefine what it means to be bankrupt- along with its unemployment rate and its 40c to the dollar owed to China. Printing money that has no value in gold doesn't equal wealth, neither is invading other nations to sustain the economy or bequeathing the perpetual debt to generations yet born.
In fact the U.S and Iran are bed fellows so much fluff and no substance.. the end results are already chaotic here but unlike the liberal dogs of Egypt which are heavily funded by the west, those trying to for a revolt in this country are shelved to a place like Zacotti park and then marginalized by all media outlets as leader and directionless!

best,
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 08:36 PM
Originally Posted by شَادِنُ
Let's get one thing out of the way I don't condone the Iranian regime in any form or fashion,
Although Shia, the Iranian regime would seem to be structured in a similar way to what you favour - ie real power is with the religious leader, not the elected government (which isn't a free election anyway). So the system is similar, even if the religion is not the one you want.
Reply

جوري
11-29-2012, 09:33 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
Although Shia, the Iranian regime would seem to be structured in a similar way to what you favour - ie real power is with the religious leader, not the elected government (which isn't a free election anyway). So the system is similar, even if the religion is not the one you want.
That's not how an Islamic system works, an Islamic system is based on shura/consulship.. so what do you know of what I favor? You're completely presumptuous! A Judiciary system in an Islamic system isn't set up so that some religious leader would get a divine inspiration and bam he passes a ruling or that one man would hold absolute power in fact it isn't about power at all which in and of itself has led Umar Ibn Ilkhtaab to remove Khalid Ibn Ilwaleed from heading the armies even though he had one conquest after the next, but so people wouldn't be entranced with power and forget that all success and all victory comes from Allah not from some man being smart and powerful. It is a sound and foolproof system of which you know nothing and I indeed know little but at least it is a bit more than you to take the liberty to presume for someone else what they would or wouldn't favor!
Reply

Junon
11-29-2012, 10:49 PM
Salaam

Originally Posted by Independent
The US has had one revolution (and that was for independence, not merely a change of government). Whereas Iran looks on course for another already. The US is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Whereas Iran can't even provide petrol to its own people.

One man rule might work for awhile if you're lucky, but in the end it results in chaos and civil war.
This is not a like not a like for like comparison after all the Iranian revolution is only 30+ years old and living under very different historical circumstances. For example Iran is surrounded by enemies and ever since the revolution been under harsh sanctions from those who (try) to control resources means of production (eg. access to technology is limited by US/EU sanctions).

Wouldn't call it 'one man rule' more oligarchic, in fact the similarities with the US is interesting with it narrow concentration of wealth in the hands of the few.

In the question of secularism, yes it has the potential to be dangerous to those who value religious freedom. You only have to look at the old Soviet Union or less extreme example France (ban on headscarf etc etc).

In the UK there was a recent vote on women Archbishops it was rejected for various reasons by the Anglican much to the hysteria of liberal types. In the debate that followed (secular) parliament not so subtly ordered the Church to accept women bishops (regardless of how the vote went.) Don't be surprised in the future when religious believers, organisations will be 'persuaded' to adopt legislation that goes against their beliefs (performing gay marriage etc).
Reply

Independent
11-29-2012, 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Junon
the Iranian revolution is only 30+ years old and living under very different historical circumstances.
Revolutions often attract counter revolutions and invasion, that's not unusual. (Look at what happened to the French Revolution). My point is simply that if a governmental system is 'closed' - if there is no in-built mechanism for changing the government and installing a new one - then in the end it will lead to violent overthrow. As for Iran, it's hard to know exactly what's going on. But it shows all the signs of building social tension and frustration with the ruling theocracy.
Reply

truthseeker63
12-02-2012, 01:29 PM
Is Secularism Shirk can anyone explain please ? Does only God have the right be the Legislator ? Since God created Natural Laws Day and Night and the Universe and Humanity and Life ? Does denying that God is the Legislator is this a form of Atheism or Godless thinking ?
Reply

truthseeker63
12-02-2012, 01:30 PM
Can we please get back the topic of my thread thank you ?
Reply

Logikon
12-04-2012, 02:36 AM
Originally Posted by truthseeker63
I have heard many Muslims say Secularism is Idolatry is this true ?
No, it is not idolitary


I have just made this up but it is intended to illustrate:

In reference to a specific stretch of road:

The Jewish teaching says we should not exceed 40mph
The Christian teaching says we should not exceed 60mph
The Muslim teaching says we should not exceed 80mph

Secularists test the road using different types of vehicles in different conditions.

The tests are done in a scientific manner and all weather conditions and variables are taken into consideration.

The speed limit is set at 65mph

So, secular laws satisfy everybody.
.
Reply

جوري
12-04-2012, 03:28 AM
Originally Posted by Logikon
So, secular laws satisfy everybody.
Secular laws satisfy secularists only! and yes it is a form of kuffr!
You don't get to speak on behalf or Islam or for Muslims!
Reply

Akeyi
12-29-2016, 08:20 PM
Originally Posted by Independent
I'm not sure which period you're referring to. But at times the Ottoman succession was positively Darwinian - survival of the fittest. Whoever wins, kills off all the possible alternative heirs. And since there was also a harem system, there were spectacular numbers of heirs...
You should not speak about the things you don't know. Harem system is not aganist the islam. Before we talk about harem we need to talk about slavery system which is required when there is war. There are no great wars now. But if there is war slavery is crucial for the weak. Any army who won a victory sees his brother died . In non muslim armies worst things happens. If there would be no slavery then there would be no man left after any victory. Army which has victory would wipe out the defeated army. Slavery saves the lives of the defeated army. And there is so much benefits of this. And tell me who now eats his boss eats and wears what his boss wears. It is the order of our prophet s.a.v that our slave should eat what we eat and should dress what we dress if i am not mistaken.

And have you heard about the people who goes to heaven with chains ?

And far as i know only way to for someone to be a slave is war.
Girls in harem are slaves. Read the fetva about slave girls from imam's of the 4 mezhep.

And i learn about deutsch history. If you ask me only reason they whole europe tried to find a system like ottoman empire which is absolutimus is the defeat ottoman empire.

And not always strongest leads in ottoman empire. There were times which there was a system to decide who will lead. But sometimes they weren't. And there are wars of heirs in ottoman empire. But not always the heir who won the war leaded. Also smartness was important. And there are examples of it. The heir who lost war with another heir was the lead the empire. Also this system already puts the better one in charge. Correct me if i am wrong but islam already says READ QURAN 4/58 .

And islam doesn't say us to lead with a specific system. There are some requirements if they are there. Then it is ok. People have no right to rebel. And one of them is requires a congress.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!