/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Things in Islam I am curious about...



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Grace Seeker
02-13-2007, 03:12 PM
Edit on request of Grace seeker himself: This thread covers significantly more issue than just music which in has been sufficiently addressed over the last several month; new posters are requested to join the thread in progress on the last page, rather then just repeating what has already been stated numerous times among the many pages of this thread.

Having read the Quran and other books about Islam, and having been on these boards a short period of time there are many things I have learned about Islam. Some I agree with, some I don't. Much I respect. A few things I am still leary of.

And then there are those things that I still don't fully understand, or at least don't understand the reasoning behind them. (Perhaps for some there is none; maybe it is just what is commanded.)

First, among the things I am curious about, is the role of music, or maybe I should say the absence of a role for music. Music plays an important part in the life and worship of both Christianity and Judaism. If Islam is the same message that would have been presented by all of the prophets, and music had such an important place previously in the practice of worship, why didn't those prophets condemn it? And since they didn't, why is it not allowed now? And yet, the call to worship itself sounds like a type of chant, isn't this a form of music?

Is it just in worship that music is not allowed? On the forums I hear people talk about music as if it is itself an evil thing? Yet I know that many Muslims enjoy music, that folk music is central to the lives of many people scattered around the world in nearly every country, and these include Muslims. The whirling dervishes of Turkey are supposedly a type of worship and are most certainly accompanied to music. Some people grow rich by marketing special types of music specifically to Muslims. So, many of these things just don't fit together for me.

What is halal and what is haram in regards to music? What makes one halal and the other haram?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
shible
02-13-2007, 03:19 PM
May be dude you can check the following post it will answer your queries

I need proof from The Noble Quran that music is haraam
Reply

Idris
02-13-2007, 03:27 PM
What is the benefit in music? To me it is just a waste of time, and with music, most of the time there comes too many bad side effects with it.
Reply

'Abd al-Baari
02-13-2007, 03:28 PM
Hi
Without sounding offensive i'd just like to say that
Music is something that has a rythm and the call to prayer or reciting the quran has none but it is readf with tune.
In Islam music is regarded as something without a purpose and these sort of acts are not allowed. Allah states in the Quran 'And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…' [Luqmaan 31:6]
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
Dawud_uk
02-13-2007, 03:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Having read the Quran and other books about Islam, and having been on these boards a short period of time there are many things I have learned about Islam. Some I agree with, some I don't. Much I respect. A few things I am still leary of.

And then there are those things that I still don't fully understand, or at least don't understand the reasoning behind them. (Perhaps for some there is none; maybe it is just what is commanded.)

First, among the things I am curious about, is the role of music, or maybe I should say the absence of a role for music. Music plays an important part in the life and worship of both Christianity and Judaism. If Islam is the same message that would have been presented by all of the prophets, and music had such an important place previously in the practice of worship, why didn't those prophets condemn it? And since they didn't, why is it not allowed now? And yet, the call to worship itself sounds like a type of chant, isn't this a form of music?

Is it just in worship that music is not allowed? On the forums I hear people talk about music as if it is itself an evil thing? Yet I know that many Muslims enjoy music, that folk music is central to the lives of many people scattered around the world in nearly every country, and these include Muslims. The whirling dervishes of Turkey are supposedly a type of worship and are most certainly accompanied to music. Some people grow rich by marketing special types of music specifically to Muslims. So, many of these things just don't fit together for me.

What is halal and what is haram in regards to music? What makes one halal and the other haram?
peace grace seeker,

there are many things that were considered allowable to previous peoples that were made prohibited, other matters were considered prohibited but islam considered them halal.

isnt jesus himself reported in your bible to rebuke the jews for their over zelousness with the sabbith to think of one example just off the top of my head of another prophet changing what appears to be established law and custom.

so previous laws and customs can be changed by the prophets of God,

also, it is possible there were previous prohibitions but that these were forgotten by the people. the old testiment forbids pious people to consume wine and yet this is allowed by most modern christians.

paul changes simular established custom and goes against jesus christ when he allows forbidden meat such as pork.

so it could be that God in his wisdom chose this time to change the ruling as he had previously, or it could be there was a previous prohibition that was forgotten by the people so needed to be brought back again.

now whirling dirvishes are innovators, they are doing something prohibited in islam because they change the religion of islam and when someone changes the religion of islam and says what they have is better they call God and his last messenger (pbuh) a liar.

Imaam Maalik, a famous imam of islam (rahimahullaah) is reported as saying - "Whosoever introduces into Islaam an innovation, which he deems is good, then he has claimed that Muhammad has betrayed (the trust of conveying) the Message. Read the saying of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic: 'This day I have completed your Religion for you, and I have perfected My favour upon you, and I am pleased with Islaam as a Religion for you.' [Surat-ul-Maa'idah: 3] So whatever was not (part of) the Religion on that day, is not (part of) the Religion on this day. And the last part of this ummah (nation) will not be rectified, except by that which its first part was rectified by."

islam is God's final revelation and message to mankind, there will be no more changes and those who say it can be changed to make it better call God a liar and as such can even reach the level of committing an disbelief by denying the Quran.

hope this helps.

peace be upon those who follow righteous guidence,

Abu Abdullah
Reply

czgibson
02-13-2007, 03:38 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Abdullah2907
Hi
Without sounding offensive i'd just like to say that
Music is something that has a rythm and the call to prayer or reciting the quran has none but it is readf with tune.
Also without trying to be offensive (I may have misunderstood you):

The call to prayer and reciting the Qur'an do have a rhythm. So do our voices when we speak, or our hearts when they beat. Does that make all of those things music and therefore haraam? I think not.

Peace
Reply

'Abd al-Baari
02-13-2007, 03:49 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


Also without trying to be offensive (I may have misunderstood you):

The call to prayer and reciting the Qur'an do have a rhythm. So do our voices when we speak, or our hearts when they beat. Does that make all of those things music and therefore haraam? I think not.

Peace
hmmm that's probably true
but there's something different about music (cant seem to get it in my head)
Reply

Dawud_uk
02-13-2007, 03:55 PM
why does islam prohibit music?

there are logical reasons we can give, but the truth is that the command of Allah and his messenger (saws) is enough for us,

if we convince the non muslims the Quran is the true word of God, that muhammad pbuh is the last and final messenger of God then everything else falls into place.

this is why we should bring it back to this always, we obey Allah and his messenger pbuh so we dont listen to music.

someone asks you why you cover or keep a beard, tell him or her the logical reasons but always bring it back to obedience to God and dont get lost in logic and reason.

our logic and reason is in the Quran and Sunnah, if they believe those two sources to be true then everything else follows, so dont get bogged down in 2ndary issues, always being back to obeying God through following the Quran and Sunnah.

convince them the Quran is true and all else including music follows.

Abu Abdullah
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-13-2007, 04:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Having read the Quran and other books about Islam, and having been on these boards a short period of time there are many things I have learned about Islam. Some I agree with, some I don't. Much I respect. A few things I am still leary of.

And then there are those things that I still don't fully understand, or at least don't understand the reasoning behind them. (Perhaps for some there is none; maybe it is just what is commanded.)

First, among the things I am curious about, is the role of music, or maybe I should say the absence of a role for music. Music plays an important part in the life and worship of both Christianity and Judaism. If Islam is the same message that would have been presented by all of the prophets, and music had such an important place previously in the practice of worship, why didn't those prophets condemn it? And since they didn't, why is it not allowed now? And yet, the call to worship itself sounds like a type of chant, isn't this a form of music?

Is it just in worship that music is not allowed? On the forums I hear people talk about music as if it is itself an evil thing? Yet I know that many Muslims enjoy music, that folk music is central to the lives of many people scattered around the world in nearly every country, and these include Muslims. The whirling dervishes of Turkey are supposedly a type of worship and are most certainly accompanied to music. Some people grow rich by marketing special types of music specifically to Muslims. So, many of these things just don't fit together for me.

What is halal and what is haram in regards to music? What makes one halal and the other haram?
One of the general rule of fiqh shariah is that everything that leads to haraam is haraam (if u read much about islaam u should know that)
Music leads to inter mingling of man and woman
e.g music leads to dancing .when u dance with a girl u should touch her and thsi also leads to zinaa/adultery which may lead to baby born without marriage and lead to....... the chain is long .I Hope my explanation is not difficult
Reply

'Abd al-Baari
02-13-2007, 04:24 PM
One of the general rule of fiqh shariah is that everything that leads to haraam is haraam (if u read much about islaam u should know that)
Music leads to inter mingling of man and woman
e.g music leads to dancing .when u dance with a girl u should touch her and thsi also leads to zinaa/adultery which may lead to baby born without marriage and lead to....... the chain is long .I Hope my explanation is not difficult
Mashallah a good answer, didn't think of that one myself
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-13-2007, 06:54 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Dawud_uk
why does islam prohibit music?

there are logical reasons we can give, but the truth is that the command of Allah and his messenger (saws) is enough for us,
Of coure. It is like this with any religion. Still I appreciate very much the efforts of those who have also been willing to help me understand the nature of whatever logic may lay behind it such a command.

now whirling dirvishes are innovators, they are doing something prohibited in islam because they change the religion of islam and when someone changes the religion of islam and says what they have is better they call God and his last messenger (pbuh) a liar.
So, dervishes are not considered halaal in Islam? Should one even visit them? And what of the nasheed and sufi music?




format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
One of the general rule of fiqh shariah is that everything that leads to haraam is haraam (if u read much about islaam u should know that)
Music leads to inter mingling of man and woman
e.g music leads to dancing .when u dance with a girl u should touch her and thsi also leads to zinaa/adultery which may lead to baby born without marriage and lead to....... the chain is long .I Hope my explanation is not difficult

I appreciate you effort in providing this answer, but it seems that it is indeed a long chain, and one may never know the results of what were intended to be innocent actions. Just as the beat of a butterfly's wings can produce a hurricane, so doing the most innocent of things could lead to haraam and by your defintiion would then itself be haraam. Eventually one reaches a result where an action may be both halal and haraam at the same time. Such a position does not seem reasonable to me.



Unless I missed it (and I easily might have) I know of nothing in the Quran that specifically speaks against music. The prohibitiions come from the hadiths, and these hadiths are not by specific declaration but by way of interpretation, while other hadiths are sometimes understood by others to declare music halaal on certain occassions: on the eid, at weddings, other celebrations.

In Bukhari, a hadith relates a connection between musical instruments and the family of David (saw). This is evidence that, indeed, the Psalms were musical in nature:
Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 568:
"Narrated Abu Musa that the Prophet said to him' "O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David.'"


The hadith which relates of how the adhan came to be, it also tells of how the Prophet's companions suggested the use of musical instruments such as the horn or bell like the People of the Book. Now although the Prophet ultimately approved the use of the human voice, there is no mention that the Prophet chastised his companions for suggesting musical instruments for the adhan. And if the Prophet was so very much against musical instruments, then why would his companions dare to suggest the use of such sinful things in the call to prayer?
Reply

Trumble
02-13-2007, 07:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Idris
What is the benefit in music?
Good grief. What is the benefit in art? In literature? In poetry? Like music, all of that is part of what makes life actually worth living. I'm fascinated as to the 'bad effects' as well.. rock music I could understand but Beethoven, Mozart or Mahler? Utter nonsense, and one of the more ridiculous 'interpretations' IMHO.
Reply

snakelegs
02-13-2007, 08:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Idris
What is the benefit in music? To me it is just a waste of time, and with music, most of the time there comes too many bad side effects with it.
i listen almost exclusively to qawwali (sufi music - btw, graceseeker, sufis are not approved of here). it has brought be closer to god than almost anything else. when i listen to naats i feel love for the prophet, even tho i am not muslim.
so i find all this extremely ironic.
there seems to be a tendency among some muslims to lump things in one pile. obviously, there is music that any religious person (even me) would want to avoid - it seems that rather than judge the specific music or trust in the power of discrimination, the safe path is taken and it is all thrown out.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 01:10 AM
In short,

Music is the tool of the devil.

It twists emotions, harden the heart, distracts people from the real purpose of life, leads to things which are forbidden.

Example: a few weeks ago I was in a bad mood, and I happened to end up in the presence of a really annoying slow, sad style song... and it just made me get more emotion even though I was trying to bloke out the sound! It is like a drug in that way.

From what I understand, people use music as a part of worship. I don't understand this at all. People are trying to draw nearer to Allah using the tools of the devil, and what is it that makes them feel closer to Allah, the music or the message? Because you can listen to any kind of music and it is almost guaranteed to effect ones emotions.

closeness to God should be sought through understand and contemplating, not through music...
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 01:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So, dervishes are not considered halaal in Islam? Should one even visit them? And what of the nasheed and sufi music?
Nasheeds are only allowed provided they do not contain music, and the content of the nasheed is good.
Unless I missed it (and I easily might have) I know of nothing in the Quran that specifically speaks against music. The prohibitiions come from the hadiths, and these hadiths are not by specific declaration but by way of interpretation, while other hadiths are sometimes understood by others to declare music halaal on certain occassions: on the eid, at weddings, other celebrations.
This hadith is pretty explicit:

It was reported in a saheeh hadeeth from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “In my ummah there will be people who allow fornication/adultery (zina), silk, wine and musical instruments [ma’aazif]. Some people will stay at the side of a mountain, and they will have flocks of sheep. When a poor person comes in the evening to ask them for something he needs, they will say. ‘Come back to us tomorrow.’ Then during the night Allaah will destroy them by causing the mountain to fall upon them, while He changes others into apes and swine. They will remain in such a state until the Day of Resurrection.’”

(Reported by al-Bukhaari in al-Saheeh mu’allaqan, 51/10.)
Reply

Skillganon
02-14-2007, 01:18 AM
Learn tawheed First. Knowing everything else is secondary.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 01:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
In short,

Music is the tool of the devil.

It twists emotions, harden the heart, distracts people from the real purpose of life, leads to things which are forbidden.

Example: a few weeks ago I was in a bad mood, and I happened to end up in the presence of a really annoying slow, sad style song... and it just made me get more emotion even though I was trying to bloke out the sound! It is like a drug in that way.

From what I understand, people use music as a part of worship. I don't understand this at all. People are trying to draw nearer to Allah using the tools of the devil, and what is it that makes them feel closer to Allah, the music or the message? Because you can listen to any kind of music and it is almost guaranteed to effect ones emotions.

closeness to God should be sought through understand and contemplating, not through music...

Malaikah, I'm especially glad for your post. See, I'm not denying your experience, but I have frequently had the exact opposite experience. That is, that music has been used as a tool of God to lead me into more contemplative, deeper, and more reverant worship. When the cares and pressures of life are distracting me from thinking about God, music has helped me to focus and concentrate my attention on God. When my spirit has been depressed, music has helped me to realize that there is one bigger than me or my problems that I can turn to and in whom I can take refuge. And that is why I think that music can be, and often is a tool against the devil, and of God. That has been my experience, which is notably different from yours. Probably we shouldn't judge based upon anecdotal experience however, expect to use them to inform ourselves of the veracity of that which we are able to arrive at by reasoning.

You cite the music is a tool of the devil because it can be used to manipulate emotions. Well, certainly it can manipulate emotions, and therefore I would concur it could be used by the devil. But does that necessarily mean that all music is a tool of the devil? Cannot logic, art, love, and many other things also be used by the devil. It seems to me that the devil will attempt to, and generally is successful at, perverting all of God's good gifts for his own destructive purposes. Love gets turned to lust. Honor gets turned to pride and arrogance. Justice gets turned to revenge. Even the Quran and hadiths of the prophet are misquoted and arguments are taken out of context so as to convince the unaware to do things supposedly for Allah that are truly against Allah's will from "honor" killings to suicide bombings. Is the problem with love, honor, justice, the Quran? No, it is with how they are being used, or I should say, misused. Perhaps the same could be said of music.

Why did the Prophet (pbuh) accept the presence of music at a wedding? Though he eventually selected a man who chose to call the people to prayer with his voice, why did he not speak against the suggestion by the companions that a horn or drum be used to call the people to prayer? And why, when the call to prayer took on the form of a chant (using both tone and rythmn, the definition of what makes something music by musicologists) did he allow it?

Are the use of a chant (i.e. music) to call the people to prayer and the allowance of music at a wedding exceptions, or do they show that music is not something that the prophet was against, and it was later interpreters of the hadith which created this prohibition, not the prophet, and more importantly, not God?

I am of the belief that all things created by God are good, and it is only the perversion of those creations that is bad. I do not believe the devil is actually capable of creating anything in his own right, and can at best merely imitate that which God has already created and corrupt it. Is this what has happened with music? If it is, can music be redeemed? And perhaps by using music as the prophet has allowed, he has in fact showed us ways in which music not only can, but should be redeemed to bring glory to Allah?
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 01:56 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
This hadith is pretty explicit:

It was reported in a saheeh hadeeth from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “In my ummah there will be people who allow fornication/adultery (zina), silk, wine and musical instruments [ma’aazif]. Some people will stay at the side of a mountain, and they will have flocks of sheep. When a poor person comes in the evening to ask them for something he needs, they will say. ‘Come back to us tomorrow.’ Then during the night Allaah will destroy them by causing the mountain to fall upon them, while He changes others into apes and swine. They will remain in such a state until the Day of Resurrection.’”

(Reported by al-Bukhaari in al-Saheeh mu’allaqan, 51/10.)
I thought there was a general rule in Shariah that everything is lawful unless proven unlawful. It has been suggested by others that there is not substantional proof in the hadith you cite to prove that music is in fact unlawful. Here are some of their reasons:

Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hanuti stated: "The Hadith referred to in saying that it is haram as narrated by al Bukhari is not fulfilling the requirements of the Sahih in al Bukhari's collection. 1) Al Bukhari in Hadith al Ma'azif himself narrated the Hadith to be of a broken chain of narrators in which there is a gap between al Bukhari and the second narrator, so he drops the first narrator in his chain. That is called Mu'allaq. Some scholars tried to connect the chain through other means like whan ibn Hajar did in his dissertation (connecting what is disconnected) in which he connected the Isnad of this Hadith. But still, one of the main narrators whose name is Hisham ibn Ammar as profiled in Tahthib at-Tahthib by ibn Hajar is not reliable enough for some scholars to be a source of a narration that depends on somebody like him. 2) Even when we said the Hadith is Sahih, there are questions that would emerge when we study the version of the Hadith when it says, "People will make adultery, pure silk, liquor and Ma'azif into Halal." We know that adultery is Haram by another proof and it is a unanimous Hukum. Pure silk is not of consensus Hukum. If a Muslim says Zina is Halal deliberately, then they are considered a kafir. However, if a Muslim says pure silk is not Haram, he is not a kafir. We know that liquor is Haram as it is in the Qur'an, but where do we find an authentic hadith or Qur'an to tell us that Ma'azif are Haram other than this source. The last point is to get the clear meaning of Ma'azif in arabic dictionaries because there are more than one meaning for Ma'azif. It is acceptable for a Muslim to hear somebody says Makruh but not Haram because Haram is in need of clear-cut meaning and certain narration."

In addition to what they have said, the hadith you cite does not actually give the reason the mountain fell on them. Was it just circumstances and they missed out on an important opportunity to do good? Perhaps that is the intended lesson? Or, perhaps they were punished for their laziness and lack of compassion for not putting this poor people off till another day while tending to their own needs? Perhaps the intended lesson is don't put off the good you can do today or don't neglect another's needs because you are so busy looking after your own? I notice that not all of the things mentioned that these people were engaged in are considered haraam in Islam -- having flocks of sheep is not haraam. Staying at the side of a mountain is not considered haraam. I know that fornication and adultery are considered haraam from other sources. But why link musical instruments to fornication? Why not link it to having sheep?

Maliakah, I am not actually attempting to argue with you. I'm just trying to look at this from all sides.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 02:11 AM
lol Grace Seeker. :D I can't believe we are having this discussion.

Look, to be honest, the questions you are asking are question that need to be addressed to scholars and people of knowledge, who had studied the hadith and understand it's science etc, and have come to their conclusions. The overwhelming majority of scholars agree that music is haram, so I'm sure they have their reasons.

Some of the things you mentioned don't seem to be all together relevant, such as the call to prayer- beautifying ones voice isn't considered music, especially when it is something prescribed, such as well reading Quran. The prohibition refers to actual instruments (you get people who argue that if music is haram why do birds *sing*, isn't that music- sigh, no it isn't:rolleyes:).

And the example you gave of allowing music at weddings, that is not entirely true, only a special type of drum was allowed, and it is very, very different to full on music mixed with other types of instruments. And the reason it was allowed was given in one of the hadith, as showing the non-Muslims that there is some ease/'enjoyment' in our religion.

As for the uncertainty in the hadith I quoted, can you give a source for that text you provided please?

Oh, and I might add, my life is so much more beneficial with out music, alhamdulilah. It was only when I got away from it that I realise who twisted it really was.

Oh, and another thing, perhaps the reason you find music so important is because your bible isn't read in the way the Quran is? We have the Quran to listen to when we feel down, and it's effect is much purer than anything music can give. As Muslims, I guess we have something better to replace the music with.

Here is an article that I found very comprehensive on the matter:
http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=5000&ln=eng
Reply

syilla
02-14-2007, 02:12 AM
i think we are missing out the point that music/singing without the instruments (background music) is not haram.

Actually quranic verses should be mingling inside our head...not music.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 02:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
In addition to what they have said, the hadith you cite does not actually give the reason the mountain fell on them.
It is very clear that the reason they were destroyed is because they were major sinners.

Was it just circumstances and they missed out on an important opportunity to do good? Perhaps that is the intended lesson? Or, perhaps they were punished for their laziness and lack of compassion for not putting this poor people off till another day while tending to their own needs? Perhaps the intended lesson is don't put off the good you can do today or don't neglect another's needs because you are so busy looking after your own?
With out doubt is a combination of all these things, most specifically, the allowance fornication/adultery and wine- which are major sins in Islam. (Major sins means that Allah has mentioned a punishment for them, wether in this life or the next).

I notice that not all of the things mentioned that these people were engaged in are considered haraam in Islam -- having flocks of sheep is not haraam. Staying at the side of a mountain is not considered haraam.
True, it might have been there just to add context or something. The mountain side is obviously mentioned because that is what destroyed them. As for the sheep, who knows? It might be to show wealth or something? I'm not so sure what sheep meant to the Arabs, but I know it meant a lot.
I know that fornication and adultery are considered haraam from other sources. But why link musical instruments to fornication? Why not link it to having sheep?
I believe the whole point was that linking the allowance of music to the other major sins shows how serious of a sin it was that they allowed music.
Maliakah, I am not actually attempting to argue with you. I'm just trying to look at this from all sides.
I'm not sure why you mentioned this- I didn't see anything pertaining to agreement in your post!:?:D
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 02:51 AM
from syilla
i think we are missing out the point that music/singing without the instruments (background music) is not haram.
I really appreciate this point. So it is not music that is haraam, it is instrumentation that is haraam. There is a significant difference.


format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
It is very clear that the reason they were destroyed is because they were major sinners.
I get that is the best understanding for why the story would be told, but I don't see that it must follow that the musical instruments are to be equated with the sinning. As I said, if they are, then why not the act of keeping flocks of sheep too? Can it not be that the musical instruments and the silk are included just as the sheep are, as you said, simply to add context, a fleshing out of the story. I don't see the proof in the hadith that the musical instruments are THE source of sin, only that the people were sinners.

You also asked where I got my source on the hadith: "Narrated Abu 'Amir or Abu Malik Al-Ash'ari that he heard the Prophet saying" the hadith you provided. The other commentary I quoted can be found here: ISSUE OF SINGING AND MUSIC IN ISLAM . Included in it are some of the other issues you addressed about the conclusion of scholars. According to this website, "There were many scholars in the past that said that music was permissible: Shawkawni, Ibn Hazm, Ghazalli, Abú Bakr al-'Arabi, Qaradawi, and others."


Oh, and I might add, my life is so much more beneficial with out music, alhamdulilah. It was only when I got away from it that I realise who twisted it really was.
Well, whether the hadith is the reason or not, it sounds like the getting away from music has been a good thing for you. I won't argue with that. If it has been good for you, then it has been good for you and I am glad that it has been.


Oh, and another thing, perhaps the reason you find music so important is because your bible isn't read in the way the Quran is? We have the Quran to listen to when we feel down, and it's effect is much purer than anything music can give. As Muslims, I guess we have something better to replace the music with.
Perhaps. You may have a very good point there.

I like to sing scripture. Apart from the fact that I mean Christian scriptures, not the Quran, does that fit within or outside the context of the principles of Islam with regard to listening to or reciting the scriptures?



I'm not sure why you mentioned this- I didn't see anything pertaining to agreement in your post!:?:D
Don't mistake disagreement for being argumentative. For me, learning is often accomplished by challenging ideas, questioning things. Been this way for 50 years, but it isn't an attack. It is just a part of my personality inherited from my grandfather.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 03:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I get that is the best understanding for why the story would be told, but I don't see that it must follow that the musical instruments are to be equated with the sinning. As I said, if they are, then why not the act of keeping flocks of sheep too? Can it not be that the musical instruments and the silk are included just as the sheep are, as you said, simply to add context, a fleshing out of the story. I don't see the proof in the hadith that the musical instruments are THE source of sin, only that the people were sinners.
It comes from the fact that the music is included in the sentence referring to things that were made lawful by these people. If music was already lawful, then why was it included as something that the people made lawful? Surely the only logical conclusion here is that the music was unlawful, and they made it lawful?

The sheep were not included in the sentence that is talking about the things that these people made permissible, whereas the music was.

The sheep could serve many uses, for example, to show the wealth of the people, who still denied the poor person. Or something like that.

According to this website, "There were many scholars in the past that said that music was permissible: Shawkawni, Ibn Hazm, Ghazalli, Abú Bakr al-'Arabi, Qaradawi, and others."
If we are going to have a battle of the scholars... the scholars who said music is haram are much more respected and higher is status (and Allah is the true Judge) than those guys.

Their names might not be familiar to you, but they are:

Ibn ‘Abbaas
Imam Malik
Imam Abu hanifa
Imam Ahmad
Imam As-shafa'i
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah

And many others.

But yeh, we don't follow scholars, we follow the evidence.

I like to sing scripture. Apart from the fact that I mean Christian scriptures, not the Quran, does that fit within or outside the context of the principles of Islam with regard to listening to or reciting the scriptures?
Sorry, I don't know.

Also, about the hadith being weak, it has been classifies by others as authentic... so I'm not sure about why they differ on this point.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 03:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
It comes from the fact that the music is included in the sentence referring to things that were made lawful by these people. If music was already lawful, then why was it included as something that the people made lawful? Surely the only logical conclusion here is that the music was unlawful, and they made it lawful?
You use "only logical" in a way that I am not willing to (just as some people use "clearly" and "obviously" when things are neither clear nor obvious to me), but I do see your point in the grouping of the items. Btw, I had not heard that silk is haraam. Is it only mentioned here, or are there other places where it is also listed as haraam?

The sheep were not included in the sentence that is talking about the things that these people made permissible, whereas the music was.
Yes, this would follow from your other point.


If we are going to have a battle of the scholars... the scholars who said music is haram are much more respected and higher is status (and Allah is the true Judge) than those guys.

Their names might not be familiar to you, but they are:

Ibn ‘Abbaas
Imam Malik
Imam Abu hanifa
Imam Ahmad
Imam As-shafa'i
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah

And many others.

But yeh, we don't follow scholars, we follow the evidence.
No. That isn't my intent. But this must be one of the most broken commands in Islam, as every Eid party I have ever been to (a grand total of 2) has had music at it. And there are is so much music that comes out of countries like Turkey, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Morocco with large Muslim populations, some as high as 98%.



Also, about the hadith being weak, it has been classifies by others as authentic... so I'm not sure about why they differ on this point.
I didn't understand that website to be saying the hadith was not authentic, so much as challenging the interpretation of the hadith as being inconclusive on the point of prohibiting music.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 04:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Btw, I had not heard that silk is haraam. Is it only mentioned here, or are there other places where it is also listed as haraam?
Yeh, it is haram for men to wear silk. It is allowed for women though.

But this must be one of the most broken commands in Islam, as every Eid party I have ever been to (a grand total of 2) has had music at it. And there are is so much music that comes out of countries like Turkey, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Morocco with large Muslim populations, some as high as 98%.
I know, it upsets me so much that Muslims are so ignorant on this issue of music. Trust me, it is rare to find a Muslim who will believe it is haram... they just think we are making it up, and don't realize that most respected scholars say it is haram. But then, most of them don't care, they have become desensitised to haram things like music and most of the stuff on TV anyway.

I didn't understand that website to be saying the hadith was not authentic, so much as challenging the interpretation of the hadith as being inconclusive on the point of prohibiting music.
The part that you pasted before suggested a weakness in the hadith, however other scholars have said it is authentic (meaning there isn't a weakness).
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 04:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Yeh, it is haram for men to wear silk. It is allowed for women though.



I know, it upsets me so much that Muslims are so ignorant on this issue of music. Trust me, it is rare to find a Muslim who will believe it is haram... they just think we are making it up, and don't realize that most respected scholars say it is haram. But then, most of them don't care, they have become desensitised to haram things like music and most of the stuff on TV anyway.



The part that you pasted before suggested a weakness in the hadith, however other scholars have said it is authentic (meaning there isn't a weakness).

OK. Well, thank-you, Maliakah, for doing such a good job -- with the help of a few others -- of explaining this view regarding music.

Now you raised a second curiousity (I have many, but one at a time, unless others chime in). Why is it haraam for men to wear silk and not women? The hadith you cited earlier does not allude to the individuals' sex, so it would seem to me to apply to both genders.
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 04:57 AM
You're welcome.

As for silk, yes, but there is other evidence to forbid it:

The scholars are agreed that it is permissible for women to wear and use pure silk, and that it is haraam for men to do so, because of the hadeeth of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) took a piece of silk in his right hand and a piece of gold in his left, held them aloft and said: “These are haraam for the males of my ummah and permitted for the females.” (Reported by Ibn Maajah, 2/1189).

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=2037&ln=eng&txt=silk

As for the wisdoms:

The scholars have discussed the reasons for silk being forbidden for men in this world. For example, al-‘Allaamah Ibn al-Qayyim suggested in his brilliant work Zaad al-Ma’aad that:

“Among those who believe that there is reason and wisdom (behind the rulings of Islam) – and they are the majority – are some who answer that Islam has forbidden it so that people will keep away from it and give it up for the sake of Allaah, so they will be rewarded for that. Others reply that it was basically created for women, as is the case with gold jewellery, so it was forbidden for men because it can corrupt them by making them resemble women. Some of them said that it was forbidden because of what it may lead to in the way of pride, showing off and self-admiration. Some of them said that it was forbidden because when it touches the body, it makes a man effeminate and goes against his masculinity and manliness, so if he wears it his heart gains the characteristics of femininity and softness, as is obvious, even if he was the most masculine and chivalrous of men. There is no doubt that wearing silk will diminish these manly characteristics, if not take them away altogether. Whoever is too dense to understand this should just submit to the Wise Lawmaker.”

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=3662&ln=eng&txt=silk
Reply

north_malaysian
02-14-2007, 05:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


Also without trying to be offensive (I may have misunderstood you):

The call to prayer and reciting the Qur'an do have a rhythm. So do our voices when we speak, or our hearts when they beat. Does that make all of those things music and therefore haraam? I think not.

Peace
It's not the music that's haram, but the instruments used, the activities involved and the lyrics sung...(for very religious muslims .... of course)
Reply

snakelegs
02-14-2007, 05:10 AM
why do many find it acceptable to watch TV and see movies? - everything has music in it.
Reply

north_malaysian
02-14-2007, 05:14 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
why do many find it acceptable to watch TV and see movies? - everything has music in it.
not all Muslims strictly follow this ruling... only ultra-observant Muslim does...
Reply

shible
02-14-2007, 05:19 AM
:sl:

i hope this link might help us to clear some issue of Music in Islam


here is the link

Music

:w:
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 05:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
why do many find it acceptable to watch TV and see movies? - everything has music in it.
The problem with movies is much greater than the just the music! Lets not forget the half-nakedness (or more like 90% nakedness), the time-wasting, the heart-harding, the illicit themes, the twisting of emotions, the presentation of morals and values contrary to those of Islam...

The list goes on. :rolleyes:
Reply

snakelegs
02-14-2007, 06:04 AM
actually, i would agree with you - most movies aren't worth watching. and i don't have a tv.
whenever music comes up here it seems a chorus (no instruments) of haram! haram! haram!
and yet movies and tv seem to be popular (maybe you don't watch them, but obviously many do) and they all have music.
Reply

snakelegs
02-14-2007, 06:06 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by north_malaysian
not all Muslims strictly follow this ruling... only ultra-observant Muslim does...
i'm thankful that they don't, because muslims make some of the greatest music in the world!
Reply

Malaikah
02-14-2007, 06:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by snakelegs
and yet movies and tv seem to be popular (maybe you don't watch them, but obviously many do) and they all have music.
I know, it is so annoying!:raging:
Reply

akulion
02-14-2007, 06:34 AM
Salam alaikum,

The first thing that we must understand is that Islam is not a new religion, but in fact it is the continuation of the same message which was sent through Abraham(s), Moses(s), Jesus(s) and the other prophets.

Before the advent of Moses(s) we can only assume that pork was allowed to be eaten by people. He brought the law forbidding it. This message was reaffirmed by Jesus(s) and also alcohol was prohibited. It is another matter that the Christians choose to ignore their scriptures and eat pork and drink wine, so we will not get into it. However according to scripture both Pork and Alcohol is forbidden for Christians.

"And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you. (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 11:7-8)".

We see a reaffirmation of this law through Mohammed(s), and further more we see other laws being brought forward as well. I will get to these in a moment. First I would like to explain why I am giving all this historical context. The reason is to show that religion was sent down in parts by God to humanity so that they take the laws on one by one and dont get a whole chunk all at once. Also it was done to facilitate human understanding and learning.

As we get to Mohammed(s) we see some new laws being introduced, one of them being the forbiddance of Musical instruments of a certain kind.

As far as Islam is concerned the usage of:
- stringed and
- wind instruments
is forbidden.

However the usage of:
- duff (a kind of drum) and
- the tamborine
is not prohibited.
Also singing is not prohibited either as long as the song itself does not contain objectionable content such as swear words and inadequate theme matter (sexual etc)

So all this brings us to the Question 'why was Dawood(s) and other Prophets allowed it yet in the last stages we see a prohibition?'

To address this question is not a simple matter to be honest and we will have to discuss this over this topic with time. It requires some understanding of sociological effects of Music on society as well as a realistic observation of what is happening to humanity as a result.

So before I would begin, I will leave it here so that the readers can grasp all what I have written so far and understood it, so we can move on to the next step where I will attempt with my limited knowledge to answer my above stated question.

So once you are ready please let me know and I will continue :)

aku
Reply

SilentObserver
02-14-2007, 08:12 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abdullah2907
Hi
Without sounding offensive i'd just like to say that
Music is something that has a rythm
So poetry is not allowed as well?

format_quote Originally Posted by Abdullah2907
Allah states in the Quran 'And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…' [Luqmaan 31:6]
It does not say that in the Quran. It says "'And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks to mislead from the path of Allaah…" That verse interpreted properly means something very different, and if you read it without what some guys added, it is clear what it means.


In Islam music is regarded as something without a purpose and these sort of acts are not allowed.
I think that what really happened was that some old man was feeling cranky one day, and the music was irritating him. So he told everybody that it was a waste of time and therefore not allowed.


format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
In short,

Music is the tool of the devil.
Ever watch old episodes of Saturday Night Live with Dana Carvey? "Well now...... isn't that special?"
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-14-2007, 03:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by akulion
Before the advent of Moses(s) we can only assume that pork was allowed to be eaten by people. He brought the law forbidding it. This message was reaffirmed by Jesus(s) and also alcohol was prohibited. It is another matter that the Christians choose to ignore their scriptures and eat pork and drink wine, so we will not get into it. However according to scripture both Pork and Alcohol is forbidden for Christians.

"And the pig, though it has a split hoof completely divided, does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you. (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 11:7-8)".
While I appreciate your contribution to the discussion to answer questions of which people may be curious with regards to Islam, the evidences you put forth with regard to Christian beliefs show that you do not have as clear of an understanding of them as you might suppose. I suggest that on this thread you restrict your commentary to that which you know best, that being Islam. Thank-you.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-15-2007, 03:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abdullah2907
Hi
Without sounding offensive i'd just like to say that
Music is something that has a rythm and the call to prayer or reciting the quran has none but it is readf with tune.
In Islam music is regarded as something without a purpose and these sort of acts are not allowed. Allah states in the Quran 'And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…' [Luqmaan 31:6]


So it is more than music, it is "idle talks" that here are haraam. What other things would that include: joking, movies, dime novels? I would think certainly gossip? I consider a lot of conversation just so much idle talk as people talk about the weather, sports, and probably even much of what we do here on internet forums.

Also, is the reference to music and singing actually in the text, or is that someone else's interpretation of what is being referred to by idle talk? And if it isn't actually in the text, on what basis does one consider music idle talk?

Music isn't necessarily even voiced, let alone talk. Indeed, singing differs from talk by virtue of the use of rythmn and pitch in a way that is not common to ordinary conversation. And while I suppose that one could term pop songs "idle" in nature, much of music is more serious than that or is intended as serious commentary and reflection on things such as life, God, the world in which we live -- hardly idle at all. So, unless the terms "(i.e. music, singing)" are actually part of the text, I don't see how this verse applies. Music may still be haraam based on other verses, but I would hardly think it could be even inferred from this verse.
Reply

Keltoi
02-15-2007, 05:02 PM
Just a personal thought. I think the world would be quite boring without the gift of music. It is one of the greatest gifts to mankind. That is just me though.
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-15-2007, 05:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So it is more than music, it is "idle talks" that here are haraam. What other things would that include: joking, movies, dime novels? I would think certainly gossip? I consider a lot of conversation just so much idle talk as people talk about the weather, sports, and probably even much of what we do here on internet forums.

Also, is the reference to music and singing actually in the text, or is that someone else's interpretation of what is being referred to by idle talk? And if it isn't actually in the text, on what basis does one consider music idle talk?

Music isn't necessarily even voiced, let alone talk. Indeed, singing differs from talk by virtue of the use of rythmn and pitch in a way that is not common to ordinary conversation. And while I suppose that one could term pop songs "idle" in nature, much of music is more serious than that or is intended as serious commentary and reflection on things such as life, God, the world in which we live -- hardly idle at all. So, unless the terms "(i.e. music, singing)" are actually part of the text, I don't see how this verse applies. Music may still be haraam based on other verses, but I would hardly think it could be even inferred from this verse.
I want to point out one thing

1:The one who consume drug like heroin/hashish is call a drug addict but the singer (most singers do) who do that is a star and is given flowers while the other go to jail
2;the one who sell his/her body is called a prostitute and is arrested by the police and may go to jail
the other one who do it in public on TV is called ACTOR/ACTRESS
Think about it ,if it was islaam the law would have applied to both
Reply

czgibson
02-15-2007, 05:28 PM
Greetings,

This quote:

"A Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that, somewhere, someone might be having a good time." --Henry Louis Mencken

seems to be very appropriate here.

If musicians and actors are automatically evil, let's ban them all. Let's ban TV, movies, radio, record companies and instruments. Let's ban storytelling, because we know that making up stories is bad. In fact, let's try and do our best to eliminate fun altogether.

Peace
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-15-2007, 05:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
I want to point out one thing

1:The one who consume drug like heroin/hashish is call a drug addict but the singer (most singers do) who do that is a star and is given flowers while the other go to jail
2;the one who sell his/her body is called a prostitute and is arrested by the police and may go to jail
the other one who do it in public on TV is called ACTOR/ACTRESS
Think about it ,if it was islaam the law would have applied to both
Huh? Your point is completely lost on me. Maybe it is just me being dense. Not sure?

Anyone else able to make sense of Zaki's point here?


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

This quote:

"A Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that, somewhere, someone might be having a good time." --Henry Louis Mencken

seems to be very appropriate here.

If musicians and actors are automatically evil, let's ban them all. Let's ban TV, movies, radio, record companies and instruments. Let's ban storytelling, because we know that making up stories is bad. In fact, let's try and do our best to eliminate fun altogether.

Peace
If my purpose in this thread was to critique Islam as it applies in a secular world, then you would have a point. But that isn't my purpose. I am trying to understand where Islam comes from with respect (i.e. with regard and care, not outright rejection) to its views on music.
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-15-2007, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

This quote:

"A Puritan is someone who is desperately afraid that, somewhere, someone might be having a good time." --Henry Louis Mencken

seems to be very appropriate here.

If musicians and actors are automatically evil, let's ban them all. Let's ban TV, movies, radio, record companies and instruments. Let's ban storytelling, because we know that making up stories is bad. In fact, let's try and do our best to eliminate fun altogether.

Peace
my answers are precise and specific ,yours are general
Reply

czgibson
02-15-2007, 07:50 PM
Greetings,

Anyone else able to make sense of Zaki's point here?
As I understand it, he's saying that because some actors do sex scenes, that makes all actors prostitutes. Similarly, because some musicians take drugs, that makes all musicians drug addicts. I do not think that these are necessarily Islamic views; I do think they are incorrect, however.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
If my purpose in this thread was to critique Islam as it applies in a secular world, then you would have a point. But that isn't my purpose. I am trying to understand where Islam comes from with respect (i.e. with regard and care, not outright rejection) to its views on music.
In that case I apologise, but my post was intended to address the points made in Zaki's post, rather than being a comment on Islam as a whole. Sorry for not making that clear.

If you look around at some of the older threads on music you might see my posts on the subject there. I've tried to understand the Islamic view too, but without much success.

Peace
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 08:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,



As I understand it, he's saying that because some actors do sex scenes, that makes all actors prostitutes. Similarly, because some musicians take drugs, that makes all musicians drug addicts. I do not think that these are necessarily Islamic views; I do think they are incorrect, however.



In that case I apologise, but my post was intended to address the points made in Zaki's post, rather than being a comment on Islam as a whole. Sorry for not making that clear.

If you look around at some of the older threads on music you might see my posts on the subject there. I've tried to understand the Islamic view too, but without much success.

Peace
music ,movies etc are more than responsible for crime increasing,disobedience to parents ,theft .generally speaking increasings of sins and problem of laws n order in mall countries . ask the elders
Reply

Malaikah
02-16-2007, 10:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So it is more than music, it is "idle talks" that here are haraam. What other things would that include: joking,
Joking is permissible provided that it doesn't involve anything haram, including telling a lie and tricking people in a way that might cause them a temporary fright.

movies,
I explained that earlier:

format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
The problem with movies is much greater than the just the music! Lets not forget the half-nakedness (or more like 90% nakedness), the time-wasting, the heart-harding, the illicit themes, the twisting of emotions, the presentation of morals and values contrary to those of Islam...

The list goes on. :rolleyes:
dime novels?
What is a dime novel? :? Novel in general that do not contain haram content would be considered a waste of time, and wasting time is highly discouraged in Islam. Though I can't say if they are haram or not, I don't know. Also keep in mind that some story have good morals and the like and can be beneficial...

I would think certainly gossip?
Gossip is forbidden very explicitly in other place, specifically by the verse that likens back biting to eating the flesh of the person being talked about. It is considered a major sin in Islam. Much worse than music.

I consider a lot of conversation just so much idle talk as people talk about the weather, sports, and probably even much of what we do here on internet forums.
True, but it doesn't mean people can't just sit back and relax every now and then!

Referring back to the verse, not it wasn't talking only about idle talk, but about idle talk that misleads mankind:

“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]

So I hardly think discussing the weather would be considered as such.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-16-2007, 04:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah

Referring back to the verse, not it wasn't talking only about idle talk, but about idle talk that misleads mankind:

“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]
Malaikah,

Thank-you for being patient with me on this.

As I understand what you are saying here, what makes something haraam here then is not just that it is idle talk, but that the idle talk misleads mankind. Does intent matter?

Perhaps someone is engaging in a joke that they just mean to be funny, but other people find the joke offensive because it uses racial or ethnic slurs. Would such a joke be haraam?

And surely as far as doing something that misleads others, wouldn't any activity that misleads people, not just idle talk, be haraam? I would think it is haraam simply to mislead people.

Now, look at the quote provided, can you tell me who inserted the parenthetical comment? "I.e" is a latin phrase which basically means "such as". They are listed as examples, but not exhaustive examples. And in this case, I would like to know if the examples were selected by Muhammad, a companion, or were added later? I think this may be important with respect to this verse, but will wait to till I find out which it was before going any further, as your answer may also make it irrelevant.
Reply

Abdul Fattah
02-16-2007, 04:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Malaikah,

Thank-you for being patient with me on this.

As I understand what you are saying here, what makes something haraam here then is not just that it is idle talk, but that the idle talk misleads mankind. Does intent matter?

Perhaps someone is engaging in a joke that they just mean to be funny, but other people find the joke offensive because it uses racial or ethnic slurs. Would such a joke be haraam?

And surely as far as doing something that misleads others, wouldn't any activity that misleads people, not just idle talk, be haraam? I would think it is haraam simply to mislead people.

Now, look at the quote provided, can you tell me who inserted the parenthetical comment? "I.e" is a latin phrase which basically means "such as". They are listed as examples, but not exhaustive examples. And in this case, I would like to know if the examples were selected by Muhammad, a companion, or were added later? I think this may be important with respect to this verse, but will wait to till I find out which it was before going any further, as your answer may also make it irrelevant.
Another interesting tendency in Islam is that all the roads and actions that could easily lead towards bad things are also considered as bad, even if the road itself has no inherited evilness and perhaps even has some good in it.

This means that sometimes a rule can seem harsh, but if you see it in its context toghether with other rules you often find that such harsh rules often create consistency in actions and make it easier to follow other rules by avoiding temptation itself rather then only resisting it.
Reply

czgibson
02-16-2007, 05:34 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Now, look at the quote provided, can you tell me who inserted the parenthetical comment? "I.e" is a latin phrase which basically means "such as". They are listed as examples, but not exhaustive examples. And in this case, I would like to know if the examples were selected by Muhammad, a companion, or were added later? I think this may be important with respect to this verse, but will wait to till I find out which it was before going any further, as your answer may also make it irrelevant.
I am curious about this too. I should point out, however, that 'i.e.' is not used to give examples - it stands for id est, meaning 'that is', and is used for clarification. Examples should be preceeded by 'e.g.' (exempli gratis).

So, this means that 'music, singing' is not a list of examples, but apparently a clarification of the meaning of 'idle talks'. Now, it should be clear that in English the meaning of 'idle talks' has nothing to do with music or singing, so presumably there is some connection in the original Arabic. Can anyone confirm this?

And just who did add those parenthetical words?

Peace
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 06:24 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by steve
Another interesting tendency in Islam is that all the roads and actions that could easily lead towards bad things are also considered as bad, even if the road itself has no inherited evilness and perhaps even has some good in it.

This means that sometimes a rule can seem harsh, but if you see it in its context toghether with other rules you often find that such harsh rules often create consistency in actions and make it easier to follow other rules by avoiding temptation itself rather then only resisting it.
Why have alcohol(wine ,rhum,beer,etc) been declared haraam
The quran answers the question ,it says that the disadvantges are more than the advantages . How much money does a state spent due to thsi problem
Alcohol provoke divorce,crimes ,making child orphans ,up to 70 % patient in hospital are due to alcohol tec,, any state may spent more than 50 % of his budget due to this problem
who pay the tax ,vat ,income tax custom and duty tax ,etc

answer U and ME
Reply

Abdul Fattah
02-16-2007, 06:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
Why have alcohol(wine ,rhum,beer,etc) been declared haraam
The quran answers the question ,it says that the disadvantges are more than the advantages . How much money does a state spent due to thsi problem
Alcohol provoke divorce,crimes ,making child orphans ,up to 70 % patient in hospital are due to alcohol tec,, any state may spent more than 50 % of his budget due to this problem
who pay the tax ,vat ,income tax custom and duty tax ,etc

answer U and ME
Selam aleykum
I don't see how your reply relates to my post at all. I was saying something entirely different.
Also, I doubt 70% is an accurate representation of alcohol-related-hospitalisations.
Also the estimation of statespending is hugely inaccurate. I know no single state in teh world that spends anything remotely near 50% of their budget on healt-care.
And finally you're wrong about the tax to. Taxes on alcohol are individual taxes. These taxes are raised on the producer/distributor who in turn ads this to the price of his product. So those taxes are not payed by you and me, but instead they are paid by the end-consumer: people that drink alcohol.
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 07:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by steve
Selam aleykum
I don't see how your reply relates to my post at all. I was saying something entirely different.
Also, I doubt 70% is an accurate representation of alcohol-related-hospitalisations.
Also the estimation of statespending is hugely inaccurate. I know no single state in teh world that spends anything remotely near 50% of their budget on healt-care.
And finally you're wrong about the tax to. Taxes on alcohol are individual taxes. These taxes are raised on the producer/distributor who in turn ads this to the price of his product. So those taxes are not payed by you and me, but instead they are paid by the end-consumer: people that drink alcohol.
the problem of alcohol is not only on health care ,it is a problem that concern all departments of any government ,prison ,police ,weapons used ,forensic experts,etc

I just quote one problem which occur one month ago ,two children nine years old wre found saoul they have taken off their clothes and were laughing a lot in a government school .they have drunk wine
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 07:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Having read the Quran and other books about Islam, and having been on these boards a short period of time there are many things I have learned about Islam. Some I agree with, some I don't. Much I respect. A few things I am still leary of.

And then there are those things that I still don't fully understand, or at least don't understand the reasoning behind them. (Perhaps for some there is none; maybe it is just what is commanded.)

First, among the things I am curious about, is the role of music, or maybe I should say the absence of a role for music. Music plays an important part in the life and worship of both Christianity and Judaism. If Islam is the same message that would have been presented by all of the prophets, and music had such an important place previously in the practice of worship, why didn't those prophets condemn it? And since they didn't, why is it not allowed now? And yet, the call to worship itself sounds like a type of chant, isn't this a form of music?

Is it just in worship that music is not allowed? On the forums I hear people talk about music as if it is itself an evil thing? Yet I know that many Muslims enjoy music, that folk music is central to the lives of many people scattered around the world in nearly every country, and these include Muslims. The whirling dervishes of Turkey are supposedly a type of worship and are most certainly accompanied to music. Some people grow rich by marketing special types of music specifically to Muslims. So, many of these things just don't fit together for me.

What is halal and what is haram in regards to music? What makes one halal and the other haram?


a uestion
what did jesus say about musicand what did christianity say about music
Reply

czgibson
02-16-2007, 07:16 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
a uestion
what did jesus say about musicand what did christianity say about music
I don't know, but maybe you could ask these guys.

Peace
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 07:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


I don't know, but maybe you could ask these guys.

Peace
If u want to get the to the right path ,research is important
in islaam we do not say things if we do not have refernces because on the day of judgement people will be questioned for that
some will say i heard that but the right will say i was seeking for knowledge ,i open books ,i ask for questions though teh answers were sometimes veryvery harsh
have a look at any religion ,it comes orthodox ,what happens after ,in 1000 years it becomes 70 sects
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-16-2007, 07:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
a uestion
what did jesus say about musicand what did christianity say about music

The clear teaching of the New Testament with regard to music can be found in this passage:
Ephesians 5:18-20
Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jesus actually does not mention anything about music one way or another, he does narrate a story of what the kingdom of God is like in which he describes the celebration for a lost son who returns home and parallels that with the joy in heaven when people who are lost find their way back to God. In that story (the Prodigal Son, Luke 15) Jesus describes the celebration as one which included music in a very positive light.

Indeed throughout the Bible (both the Tanakh and the New Testament) singing songs is enjoined upon God's people as a way for them to give praise to God:
Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. (James 5:13)
Reply

czgibson
02-16-2007, 08:04 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
If u want to get the to the right path ,research is important
in islaam we do not say things if we do not have refernces because on the day of judgement people will be questioned for that
some will say i heard that but the right will say i was seeking for knowledge ,i open books ,i ask for questions though teh answers were sometimes veryvery harsh
have a look at any religion ,it comes orthodox ,what happens after ,in 1000 years it becomes 70 sects
I'm sorry; I don't see how your comments here are in any way relevant to my post.

Peace
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 08:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
The clear teaching of the New Testament with regard to music can be found in this passage:

Jesus actually does not mention anything about music one way or another, he does narrate a story of what the kingdom of God is like in which he describes the celebration for a lost son who returns home and parallels that with the joy in heaven when people who are lost find their way back to God. In that story (the Prodigal Son, Luke 15) Jesus describes the celebration as one which included music in a very positive light.

Indeed throughout the Bible (both the Tanakh and the New Testament) singing songs is enjoined upon God's people as a way for them to give praise to God:

i want to ask a question a bit aside
where does the prophecy end
are we bound to follow new prohphet e.g i am in the time of prophet jesus peace be upon him should i follow him or not
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-16-2007, 08:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


I'm sorry; I don't see how your comments here are in any way relevant to my post.

Peace
the question si not relevant to the post i would be happy if u answer
Reply

Abdul Fattah
02-16-2007, 08:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
the problem of alcohol is not only on health care ,it is a problem that concern all departments of any government ,prison ,police ,weapons used ,forensic experts,etc

I just quote one problem which occur one month ago ,two children nine years old wre found saoul they have taken off their clothes and were laughing a lot in a government school .they have drunk wine
Selam aleykum
First of all, I wasn't defending alcohol. I myself am against it. However I think the arguments you brought up are inaccurate. And an inaccurate argument is more like to encourage people who are pro alcohol rather then discourage them.

As for the different departments that are according to you related with alcohol-abuse:
*Lets start with government. Does a country that allows alcohol spend more of their budget on the government? Do they need to employ extra people because of that? I fail to see how.
*police. Police is a necessary budget. And a policeman's work never stops. If he's not keeping people from drinking he might be occupied with lesser felons during his day. But just because a government forbids alcohol wont enable them to cut back on police-fundings.
*weapons used. 90% of murders in the west are passionate murders and are not necessarily linked to alcohol-abuse. However most of those cases were not with firearms. Firearms are mostly used by criminals. If you make alcohol illegal you can expect a rise in criminality and illegal bootleggers. So the government will actually have to invest more to fight crime rather then save money trough their banishment.
*forensic. Again, banning alcohol will not enable a government to put less forensic-experts on the pay-role or to cut back on there fundings. These things are necessary costs, you can't just cut 'm back. Even if criminality would drop the government would still keep the same police-civilian-ratio instead the police will just be occupied with other affairs instead.
*prison There are not that many people who go to prison for a long period of time because they drunk alcohol. Mostly people do bad things because they are bad in nature. Yes, take out alcohol out of the equation and there will be less incidents, but there'll still be bad people, they won't change overnight, and I doubt the number will even change over generations only by the implementation of this rule. In fact when alcohol becomes illegal, you can expect a lot of alcohol smugglers and distillers that you will have to arrest, so you will have to make sure that the state prisons can accommodate them, hence you will have more costs rather then less.

Finaly, another point is that the budget itself will be smaller because the government will no longer have the alcohol taxes to add to their fundings.

So basically rather then saving money by this rule, a government might actually loose money with it.
Let me stress again, I am against alcohol. I'm in no case trying to justify it or defend it. I just think your arguments don't make any sense.
Reply

czgibson
02-16-2007, 08:41 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
the question si not relevant to the post i would be happy if u answer
What question? What would you like me to answer?

Do we have a language barrier here?

Sorry I haven't understood you.

Peace
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-16-2007, 08:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by zaki.aumeerudy
i want to ask a question a bit aside
where does the prophecy end
are we bound to follow new prohphet e.g i am in the time of prophet jesus peace be upon him should i follow him or not

Tell you what. You start a thread, "Things in Christianity you are curious about" and I'll answer you there.
Reply

Malaikah
02-17-2007, 01:04 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Thank-you for being patient with me on this.
You're welcome.

As I understand what you are saying here, what makes something haraam here then is not just that it is idle talk, but that the idle talk misleads mankind. Does intent matter?
Misleads mankind from the path of Allah. Er, I can't imagine why someone would misguide people from the path of Allah, i.e. with good intentions... considering the alternate path ends at hell. :X

Perhaps someone is engaging in a joke that they just mean to be funny, but other people find the joke offensive because it uses racial or ethnic slurs. Would such a joke be haraam?
If the joke is racist, then yes, of course it would be haram! Racism is a sin.

And surely as far as doing something that misleads others, wouldn't any activity that misleads people, not just idle talk, be haraam? I would think it is haraam simply to mislead people.
Keeping in mind that it is referring to misleading people from the path of Allah, then yes that is sinful.

Now, look at the quote provided, can you tell me who inserted the parenthetical comment? "I.e" is a latin phrase which basically means "such as". They are listed as examples, but not exhaustive examples. And in this case, I would like to know if the examples were selected by Muhammad, a companion, or were added later? I think this may be important with respect to this verse, but will wait to till I find out which it was before going any further, as your answer may also make it irrelevant.
From what I understand, the main person who interpreted the verse this was a companion of the prophet, Ibn 'Abbas, who was best known for his reliability at interpreting the Quran, (even the Prophet Muhammad pbuh recognised this talent of his). Naturally, he received his understand of the Quran from the prophet Muhammad pbuh himself. It was also interpreted this way by Ibn Mas’ood, another reliable companion of the Prophet.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The interpretation of the Sahaabah and Taabi’in, that ‘idle talk’ refers to singing, is sufficient. This was reported with saheeh isnaads from Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood. Abu’l-Sahbaa’ said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about the aayah (interpretation of the meaning), ‘“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks’ [Luqmaan 31:6]. He said: By Allaah, besides Whom there is no other god, this means singing – and he repeated it three times. It was also reported with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) that this means singing. There is no contradiction between the interpretation of “idle talk” as meaning singing and the interpretation of it as meaning stories of the Persians and their kings, and the kings of the Romans, and so on, such as al-Nadr ibn al-Haarith used to tell to the people of Makkah to distract them from the Qur’aan. Both of them are idle talk. Hence Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Idle talk” is falsehood and singing.

And:

Al-Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this includes all manner of haraam speech, all idle talk and falsehood, and all nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience; the words of those who say things to refute the truth and argue in support of falsehood to defeat the truth; and backbiting, slander, lies, insults and curses; the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit. (Tafseer al-Sa’di, 6/150)

http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=5000&ln=eng

so, both these interpretations are valid.

Hope that helps!
Reply

zaki.aumeerudy
02-17-2007, 07:20 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by steve
Selam aleykum
First of all, I wasn't defending alcohol. I myself am against it. However I think the arguments you brought up are inaccurate. And an inaccurate argument is more like to encourage people who are pro alcohol rather then discourage them.

As for the different departments that are according to you related with alcohol-abuse:
*Lets start with government. Does a country that allows alcohol spend more of their budget on the government? Do they need to employ extra people because of that? I fail to see how.
*police. Police is a necessary budget. And a policeman's work never stops. If he's not keeping people from drinking he might be occupied with lesser felons during his day. But just because a government forbids alcohol wont enable them to cut back on police-fundings.
*weapons used. 90% of murders in the west are passionate murders and are not necessarily linked to alcohol-abuse. However most of those cases were not with firearms. Firearms are mostly used by criminals. If you make alcohol illegal you can expect a rise in criminality and illegal bootleggers. So the government will actually have to invest more to fight crime rather then save money trough their banishment.
*forensic. Again, banning alcohol will not enable a government to put less forensic-experts on the pay-role or to cut back on there fundings. These things are necessary costs, you can't just cut 'm back. Even if criminality would drop the government would still keep the same police-civilian-ratio instead the police will just be occupied with other affairs instead.
*prison There are not that many people who go to prison for a long period of time because they drunk alcohol. Mostly people do bad things because they are bad in nature. Yes, take out alcohol out of the equation and there will be less incidents, but there'll still be bad people, they won't change overnight, and I doubt the number will even change over generations only by the implementation of this rule. In fact when alcohol becomes illegal, you can expect a lot of alcohol smugglers and distillers that you will have to arrest, so you will have to make sure that the state prisons can accommodate them, hence you will have more costs rather then less.

Finaly, another point is that the budget itself will be smaller because the government will no longer have the alcohol taxes to add to their fundings.

So basically rather then saving money by this rule, a government might actually loose money with it.
Let me stress again, I am against alcohol. I'm in no case trying to justify it or defend it. I just think your arguments don't make any sense.


are u a muslim
have a look at that b4 we continuehttp://www.unodc.org/unodc/bulletin/bulletin_1974-01-01_1_page004.html

this is the website
Home Site Map Links Contact Us
Regional Websites select the site Afghanistan Bolivia Brazil Central Asia Colombia Egypt India Iran Kenya Lao PDR Mexico Myanmar New York Nigeria Pakistan Peru Russia Senegal South Africa Thailand Vietnam


Login




Search




Friday, 16 February 2007

print document






News and Publications

Press Releases

Speeches

Events

Newsletters

Multimedia

Publications

Alternative Development

Research and Analysis

Commission on Narcotic Drugs

Corruption

Drug Abuse / Demand Reduction

Crime and Criminal Justice

Evaluation

Human Trafficking

Illicit Crop Monitoring

Supply Reduction

Scientific Support

Treaty and Legal Affairs

World Drug Report

Other Publications

INCB

UNICRI

Promotional Material

Drug Abuse & Demand Reduction

Drug Supply Reduction

Terrorism, Corruption & Human Trafficking

Treaty & Legal Affairs

Research, Analysis, Statistics & Scientific Support

About Us

Employment Opportunities


United Nations Crime and Drug Conventions

Crime Commission (CCPCJ)

Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND)

Global Youth Network


Information Services for Member States

UNOV/UNODC Online Services for Staff




Home\ News and Publications\ Publications



UNODC is cosponsor of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS - UNAIDS
A cross-cultural study of the prevalence and correlates of student drug use in the United States and Mexico
Sections
Method
Results
Discussion
Correlates of drug use
Student attitudes toward drug use, users, and social issues
Summary
Bibliography

Details
Author: David WELLISCH
Pages: 31 to 42
Creation Date: 1974/01/01

A cross-cultural study of the prevalence and correlates of student drug use in the United States and Mexico
M.A. David WELLISCH
University of Houston and J. Ray HAYS, Ph.D
Texas Research Institute of Mental Sciences, Houston

Drug abuse and drug dependence are increasingly being considered international rather than national problems. Cameron (1968) has conceptualized abuse and dependence as a large scale communicable disorder where the host paradoxically seeks out the agent. Recent epidemiological patterns, on a global scale, point to diverse areas of the world where drug abuse has become a major problem. Peck and Diaz-Guerrero (1967) found in a study of value systems in Mexican and United States college-age youth that students, especially from border zones, showed a diffusion of values and differed more from either "core culture pattern" than the core patterns differed from each other. It is therefore reasonable to assume that a diffusion of values, in reference to attitude about drugs, and in use of illicit and non-illicit chemical substances, should begin to emerge between Mexican and United States youth. This should be especially true in border zone areas.

Latin America in general, and Mexico in particular, have long been concerned with the damaging effects of chemical abuse, especially those of alcohol. In 1960 a Latin American Seminar on Alcoholism, sponsored by the Pan American Sanitary Office of the World Health Organization, was held in Chile. According to this conference, the prevalence of alcoholism among adults in Mexico, age twenty or over, was about 3.5 per cent. Millan (1962), in his role as Director of Mental Health and Rehabilitation for Mexico, stated that there were 4,420 alcoholics per 100,000 population, of those over 20 years of age. Barra (1966), in a survey on the effects of alcohol on Mexican society, views it as a major cause of absenteeism in industry and accidents on the job. Alcoholism in Mexico is seen by Narvaez (1970) as a social entity stemming from problems in the nuclear family groups, and thereby often leading to juvenile deliquency in the offspring of the alcoholic patient.

Fromm and Maccoby (1970) deal with alcoholism as a part of their larger socio-psychoanalytic study of the Mexican village. They feel that alcoholism is a critical problem for the Mexican peasant village with 18 per cent of the men over 20 years of age who are alcoholic. Alcoholism is classed as a principal precipitator of violence and broken homes in Mexican village life, and is seen as undermining those institutions such as the nuclear family that might potentially improve the villager's existence. Fromm and Maccoby hold as their basic hypothesis that as the breakdown of the patriarchal structure occurs in Mexican society, the male becomes more vulnerable to alcoholism. This agrees with the conceptualizations drawn from a cross-cultural study in drunkenness by Field (1962).

In a study of the conscious motivations of marijuana smoking adolescents in Chile, Gomberoff, Florenzano and Thomas (1972) found the search for a psychotomimetic effect and curiosity as the motive in the majority of cases. This study also found that 6.9 per cent of the population of 732 sampled had ever smoked marijuana, and of those who did smoke marijuana, males outnumbered females by more than 2 to 1.

A study of 163 drug involved youths in El Salvador (Panameño, 1972) showed a 9 to 1 male-female ratio. Of these youths 55.7 per cent attended private schools or universities, indicating wealth or affluence as a significant co-variate with drug use in E1 Salvador. Analysis of the problems of North American adolescents led Diaz (1970) to speculate that drug abuse is a critical social problem for young people, but that the North American adults large scale use of alcohol and other drugs was an even greater social problem, and a negative example for the adolescents to follow. Observing many of the same conflicts emerging in Mexican society as have already emerged in United States society, Diaz postulates that the strong potential for drug abuse among Mexican adolescents is a maladaptive quest for solutions to family, occupational, and value system problems.

Hays (1970) under the auspices of the Houston Independent School District (HISD) Drug Education Committee, conducted an extensive survey of 5,908 students in grades 7 through 12 in 55 secondary schools on the nature and extent of their drug use. The data demonstrated that drug use increased across grade levels reaching a peak in the 12th grade. Alcohol and tobacco were the most used substances, and marijuana was the third most widely used substance. The over-all percentage of marijuana use was 22 per cent, but 48 per cent of 12th grade males had used marijuana one or more times. Opiates or cocaine had the lowest over-all use of the substances reported, with a total of 5 per cent of the students indicating use at least one time. Males were more likely to have used drugs and continue to use them than females. Anglos showed the highest prevalence of drug use, with Mexican-Americans next, and Blacks reporting lowest use. The socioeconomic co-variates in this study are consistent with the results of the previously discussed Latin American studies. It was found that the higher the educational level of the parents, the more likely the child is to have used drugs and report continued use of drugs.

The present study was carried out in a Monterrey, Mexico, school setting. It was an attempt to obtain baseline data on drug use, as well as socioeconomic and attitudinal co-variates of drug use in Mexico. The second, and perhaps primary intent of this study, was to make cross-cultural comparisons of the Monterrey data and the Houston (Hays, 1970, 1971) surveys in an attempt to delineate potential trends and co-variates which influence student drug use and abuse on an international basis.

Method
The sample. The study was conducted with a sample of 229 subjects, 172 males and 57 females, who ranged in age from 15 to 18. The grade levels of the Mexican students were equivalent to grades 9 through 12 in the United States system. All were enrolled in a parochial school in a middle class neighbourhood in Monterrey, Mexico. This school has a college preparatory programme, and did not segragate boys from girls in separate classroom buildings. Table 1 contains the breakdown of the Monterrey sample of students by age and sex. This sample was compared to the HISD sample of students in grades 10, 11, and 12, which was a random cluster sample composed of 2,277 students approximately equally divided between males and females. The ethnic composition of this sample of students was approximately as follows: Anglo, 51 per cent; Black, 32 per cent; Mexican-American, 11 per cent; and others, 6 per cent (Indians, Orientals, etc.).

Instrument. The instrument used in the Monterrey, Mexico study was basically the 88 item questionnaire designed by Hays (1971) for use in the Houston Independent School District survey. The format of the questionnaire was multiple choice with thfirst twenty-seven questions designed to show the frequency of use of nine categories of substances during three time periods. The nine categories of substances were as follows: marijuana, hallucinogens, opiates or cocaine, tobacco, alcohol, cough syrup, solvents, barbiturates and stimulants. The three time periods were as follows: ever used, used in the past six months, and used in the past seven days. In addition to the drug use items there were sixty items devoted to demographic, attitudinal, and factual variables. One item concerning Texas marijuana laws was not relevant to the Mexican population and was deleted. Two items were altered between the Houston and Monterrey surveys. These items both asked "of the following, what do you think is the most important issue facing young people today?", and each gave five options clearly relevant to United States youth, but in part irrelevant to Mexican youth. The options were altered to facilitate relevance to a Mexican youth population. The survey was translated into Spanish by faculty members of the Spanish department at the University of Houston, and back-translated into English to check for errors by a Mexican-American staff member of the Drug Abuse Clinic at the Texas Research Institute of Mental Sciences

TABLE 1
Demographic tabulation of age and sex in the sample of Monterrey students
Variable
Number
Per cent

Age
15 76 35.7
16 87 40.9
17 28 13.1
18 22 10.3
Blank 19
Sex
Male 172 75.1
Female 57 24.9
Blank 3

Procedure. The survey was conducted at one school in Monterrey, Mexico, with the aid of the school administrators. This school was divided into two separate groups, one meeting in the morning, one in the late afternoon. Eight classes were selected randomly by both the day and evening class directors to represent the equivalent of 9th through 12th grades in the Houston sample. A group administration procedure was used, and a standard set of instructions was given to each class by a University of Monterrey female graduate student in psychology, who also answered all questions from the students pertaining to the testing procedure. The classroom teachers and school administrative personnel either left the site of testing during the actual procedure, or in some cases remained seated at the front of the classrooms. At no time did they circulate through the classrooms as the students filled out their individual questionnaires. This survey was anonymous; thus the students were not ego involved to the extent that they might alter the report of their drug use because of fear of self-incrimination. The answer sheets were designed in such a way that each response the student gave could be immediately hidden by placing the answer sheet under the booklet of the 87 items on the survey. The methodology of sampling and administration of the questionnaire were similar in both the Houston and Monterrey surveys to facilitate comparison of data from the two countries.

Results
The results of the drug use items by age and sex are found in tables 2, 3, and 4. Only two females of age 18 completed the survey and hence no data are listed for that age and sex. Table 5 compares drug use between the Monterrey and Houston samples for the three time periods.

The most frequently used of the nine substances is tobacco with 73.8 per cent of the Monterrey students ever having used it. This is a significantly higher use than that reported in the Houston sample, where 59 per cent of the students had smoked tobacco. There is no general increase in use of tobacco by age in the Monterrey sample. This is inconsistent with the Houston sample where there is a trend of increased use of substances by successive ages or grade levels.

TABLE 2
Percentage of students by age and sex who have ever used the listed substance
15
16
17
18

M
F
M
F
M
F
M
Over-all

Tobacco 68.0 56.0 88.1 52.9 68.4 77.8 95.0 73.8
Alcohol 54.9 20.0 80.6 11.8 61.1 33.3 95.0 58.9
Marijuana 7.8 0.0 16.2 5.6 15.8 0.0 40.0 12.9
Cough syrup 2.0 0.0 14.7 0.0 5.3 11.1 10.0 7.3
Solvents 4.0 0.0 7.4 5.6 5.3 0.0 5.0 4.8
Stimulants 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 4.7
Hallucinogens 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 3.5
Barbiturates 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 1.7
Opiates or cocaine 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9

TABLE 3
Percentage of students by age and sex who have used the listed substance in the past six months
15
16
17
18

M
F
M
F
M
F
M
Over-all

Tobacco 64.7 44.0 83.3 50.0 42.1 77.8 75.0 66.9
Alcohol 41.2 16.0 72.1 0.0 63.2 11.1 80.0 50.1
Marijuana 5.9 0.0 10.3 5.6 10.5 0.0 35.0 10.5
Cough syrup 2.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 2.6
Stimulants 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 2.6
Solvents 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 5.3 0.0 5.0 1.3
Hallucinogens 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.9
Barbiturates 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.9
Opiates or cocaine 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4

TABLE 4
Percentage of students by age and sex who have used the listed substance in the past seven days
15
16
17
18

M
F
M
F
M
F
M
Over-all

Tobacco 47.1 28.0 66.2 35.3 47.4 66.7 68.4 52.6
Alcohol 8.9 0.0 38.8 0.0 27.8 11.1 60.0 24.9
Marijuana 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 5.6 0.0 30.0 5.2
Cough syrup 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.4
Solvents 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.4
Stimulants 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Hallucinogens 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Barbiturates 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Opiates or cocaine 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

TABLE 5
Comparison between Monterrey and Houston samples of use of the listed substances
Ever used percentage
Use in past six month percentage
Use in past seven days percentage

Substance
Monterrey
Houston
Monterrey
Houston
Monterrey
Houston

Tobacco 73.8 59.3 66.9 46.6 52.6 30.9
Alcohol 58.9 77.9 50.1 71.6 24.9 39.5
Marijuana 12.9 45.7 10.5 38.8 5.2 26.0
Cough syrup 7.3 9.9 2.6 8.5 0.4 3.0
Stimulants 4.8 27.8 2.6 20.9 0.0 10.1
Solvents 4.7 12.1 1.3 9.6 0.4 2.2
Hallucinogens 3.5 19.1 0.9 12.0 0.0 4.2
Barbiturates 1.7 24.5 0.9 19.0 0.0 9.4
Opiates or cocaine 0.9 13.8 0.4 4.9 0.0 3.9

Alcohol was the second most widely used substance by the Monterrey sample, with 58.9 per cent of students reporting use. Alcohol was the most used substance in the Houston survey with 85 per cent of males and 72 per cent of females having used it by grade 12.

The third most widely used substance in both the Monterrey and Houston samples was marijuana. In the former sample, 12.9 per cent of the students reported use versus 46 per cent of students in the Houston sample. Almost half of the Monterrey youth who reported use of marijuana stated they had used it ten or more times. This finding is consistent with the data generated in Houston where slightly more than half of the students who had used marijuana once had used it ten or more times. This would indicate that in both cultures there is a given proportion of students who proceed beyond experimentation once they are introduced to the use of marijuana.

The fourth most used substance by the Monterrey sample was cough syrup, with 7.3 per cent of students reporting use. Use of cough syrup at age 17 is the only instance in the sample where female drug use exceeds male use (11.1 per cent female to 5.3 per cent male). In addition this was the only age bracket where females reported use of cough syrup. With reported use of 10 per cent cough syrup was the fifth most widely used substance among the Houston students where, at ages 13 and 16, its use by females exceeded that of males.

The fifth most used substance by the Monterrey sample was solvents, with 4.8 per cent of students reporting use. Females report use of solvents at age 16 only. Use of solvents reaches a peak for the Monterrey male and female sample at age 16, and declines thereafter. In the Houston sample solvents ranked sixth in frequency, with 12 per cent of students reporting use. Peak use of solvents for Houston females was reported at age 16, which was identical for Monterrey females.

The sixth most used substance by the Monterrey sample was stimulants, with 4.7 per cent of students reporting use. Male use of stimulants increased with age, going from 4.4 per cent at age 16, to 25 per cent at age 18. In the Houston sample stimulants were the fourth most widely used substance, with 28 per cent of students reporting use.

The seventh ranked substance by the Monterrey sample was hallucinogens, with 3.5 per cent of students reporting use. Hallucinogens' use increased with age, from 2.9 per cent use by males at age 16, to a peak of 15 per cent use by males at age 18. Use of hallucinogens in the Houston sample reaches a peak for males at age 17 and at age 16 for females. The use of hallucinogens for the Houston sample has a more consistently increasing trend through successive age brackets than for the Monterrey sample.

The eighth most widely used substance by the Monterrey sample was barbiturates, with 1.7 per cent of students reporting use. The only age bracket to report use was 18 year old males. In the Houston sample, 25 per cent of students report use. The peak age for male use was 18 which is identical to peak male use in Monterrey.

The ninth and least used category of substances in both the Monterrey and Houston samples were those of opiates or cocaine. In the Monterrey sample, of 229 cases only two respondents claimed use of this category of substances. Neither of these respondents indicated their sex or age on the forms. The over-all use by Monterrey students, without regard to age or sex, was 0.9 per cent. In the Houston sample 14 per cent reported use of these substances.

The Monterrey survey data present evidence, though on a highly reduced scale in comparison to the Houston survey, that multi-drug use patterns are emerging.

Discussion
Alcohol and tobacco are shared cross-culturally as the most used substances by the Monterrey and Houston youth. Alcohol use is of the same magnitude in both cultures, but tobacco is used more frequently in Mexican youth culture. This may be attributable to cigarettes being less expensive in Mexico than in the United States, and also due to lack of a minimum age requirement on purchase of cigarettes in Mexico, as there is in the United States. Use of marijuana is clearly widespread in both cultures and appears to be highly age related.

Monterrey males reported use of marijuana rising from 7.8 per cent in 15 year olds to 40 per cent in 18 year olds. When viewing these figures in the light of reported data that 23 per cent of the total sample knew ten or more males who use marijuana 37 at least one time per week, the potential unreliability of the 40 per cent peak male use figure, and the 12.9 per cent over-all use figure, becomes apparent. With extended sampling, it can be expected that use of marijuana by age brackets and over-all use will change.

In both cultures male use of the nine substances appears significantly greater than female, and this becomes especially true in the Monterrey sample. Use of stimulants, barbiturates, and hallucinogens is never reported by Monterrey females. Use of high-risk substances may be linked with a need to demonstrate "machismo" not felt by, or required of, Mexican females. Use of these three substances in the Houston sample is far more evenly distributed between males and females, with the need to demonstrate machismo being significantly absent in United States culture. The use of cough syrup is apparent among both the Houston and Monterrey females, surpassing male usage, at times, in both cultures. This is potentially attributable to greater reluctance on the part of females, against getting involved in the process of seeking out illicit chemicals, especially in Mexican society, and easy access to cough syrup, which is not an illicit item in either culture. This is a reasonably clear instance where the female "drug of choice" is, in reality, the drug of easiest availability.

Most disturbing on an individual and societal basis, for the culture, is the use of opiates or cocaine. Use of these substances by the Monterrey youth was less than one-fifth of that shown in the Houston survey; it should be understood that more representative sampling of Mexican young people might reveal a different figure in this category. Any incidence of use among a student population of this substance group can be understood to have a high risk/epidemic potential for non-users.

Correlates of drug use
One item on the questionnaire (item 55) asked students to classify themselves with regard to their use of drugs excluding alcohol and tobacco. There were five options (which will be reported with tabulated responses):

I have used drugs and am still using them (Monterrey 3 per cent, Houston 10 per cent);

I have used drugs and might use them again (Monterrey 5 per cent, Houston 9 per cent);

I have used drugs and will not use them again (Monterrey 6 per cent, Houston 6 per cent);

I have not used drugs but might try them (Monterrey 4 per cent, Houston 7 per cent);

I have not used drugs and am not going to use them (Monterrey 82 per cent, Houston 68 per cent).

Results from item 55 corresponded closely with drug use as reported on the prevalence of use items in different categories of drugs. Chi-square tests between item 55 and 22 of the 27 drug use items were significant. The five questions which were not significant were due to the lack of adequate responses to complete the required contingency table. This confirms item 55 as appropriate for cross tabulation with other variables. In this way it is possible to study the differences between drug users and non-users in relation to their activities, beliefs, and attitudes. The results of these cross tabulations are grouped into those which are of general interest, those of special interest to educators, to parents, and to law enforcement personnel and public service agencies. The final section deals with student attitudes toward drug use, drug users, and social issues.

Age level is related to drug use for the Monterrey sample, as it was in the Houston sample. A Chi-square test between age and classification on item 55 for males was significant (χ 2 = 41.16; df = 12; P< .001). The same test could not be done for females because of blank cells in the contingency table. For Mexican males, maximum drug use is at age 18, but in the case of United States males this is true only for 5 out of 9 of the substances at age 18.

In the Monterrey sample males are far more likely to have used drugs and to plan to continue using them than females. (Eight per cent of the sample replied in this sense; of these 60 per cent were males and none females.) This is consistent with the Houston findings, where, 24 per cent of males and 15 per cent of females who had used drugs either might or will use drugs again.

Socioeconomic co-variates were highly significant in the Houston sample but the same trends were not evident in the Monterrey sample. In the Houston sample there was a significant relationship between the educational level of the mother and reported drug use (&;chi 2 = 31.3; df = 16; P< .02) and father's occupation and reported drug use (χ 2= 32.5; df = 16; P< .01). For the Monterrey sample no significant relationship could be established between parental occupational level and use of drugs. However, there was an inverse relationship between the mother's educational level and reported drug use in the Monterrey sample (χ 2= 26.9; df = 16; P< .05). The lack of any clear-cut or consistent relationship between socioeconomic level and drug use in the Monterrey sample is contrary to the findings in the Houston survey. Affluence has been implicated as one causal factor in the United States of youthful drug use. This is not yet evident in Mexico and is therefore worthy of more investigation.

Frequency of attendance at religious services was a significant co-variate in relation to drug use in both the Monterrey and Houston samples. In the former, 20 per cent of those who admitted past drug use do not attend church at all, as contrasted by 4 per cent claiming past use who attend church more than one time per week. In the Houston sample, 35 per cent of those who claim past drug use never attend church as opposed to 10 per cent of users who attend church more than once per week.

Of special interest to educators

Over-all grade average and future expectation of over-all grade average are inversely related to drug use in both the Monterrey and Houston samples. The higher the grade average the less likely the student is to be drug involved. In the Houston sample, 13 per cent of reported users who earned a grade average of "A" (the highest grade possible) last semester either plan or might continue drug use in contrast to none of the Monterrey reported users who, having earned an "A" average, plan to continue using drugs. Of those Houston students who earned "F" (a failing grade, the lowest possible) averages last semester, 60 per cent report drug use and plan to continue it, whereas only 17 per cent of Monterrey students who earned "F" averages last semester plan to continue using drugs. It is true for both cultures that the lower the student expects his grade average to be in the future the more likely he is to have used drugs and to plan to continue their use in the future. Since individuals who have low grade averages may have low self-esteem the data suggest that low self-esteem leads to increased drug use. This then may be a vicious circle in both cultures which must be broken in order to begin an abstinence cycle. Frequency of school absences is cross-culturally linked to drug use, with increased absences related to increased drug use.

Lack of life direction appears to figure significantly in the lives of both the Monterrey and Houston drug users. Of those who plan to get a job after high school, 24 per cent of the Houston sample report drug use and 9 per cent of the Monterrey sample report use; of those who plan to attend college, 16 per cent of the Houston group report drug use and 13 per cent of the Monterrey sample report drug use ; of those who plan to enter the armed forces, 26 per cent of the Houston sample and 14 per cent of the Monterrey sample report use. Of those without plans after school, 31 per cent of the Houston sample and 25 per cent of the Monterrey group report use. The cross-cultural similarity of responses on this critical question tends to confirm the hypothesis that drug abuse is symptomatic of lack of direction in the life of an individual. It is probable that adolescents in technologically sophisticated cultures experience heightened feelings of anxiety when thinking of the future and most of these search for ways of lessening this anxiety. One may reduce this uncertainty by having a plan or goal, but in the absence of such a plan or goal to fill a future void, drug use or abuse appears cross-culturally to become a maladaptive solution to this urgent need for orientational identity.

Students in both cultures saw the best means of drug education to be live panels of professionals and former users. The least effective programme in both cultures was thought to be books or readings on the issue.

The use of alcohol and tobacco by parents is significantly related to the use of drugs cross-culturally. In the Houston sample, use is highest (23 per cent) where fathers use both alcohol and tobacco. This is also true of the Monterrey sample (22 per cent) where fathers use both alcohol and tobacco. In the Houston sample only, the mothers' use of tobacco and alcohol is even more highly related to whether or not the children report use of drugs. Of the Houston students whose mothers use both alcohol and tobacco, 26 per cent reported that they have used drugs in the past and either would or might continue use in the future. Of the Monterrey students whose mothers use both alcohol and tobacco, only 15 per cent report past drug use and either plan to or might continue use in the future. This seems to indicate that for the United States adolescent, both mother and father serve as equally significant role models, but for the Mexican adolescent the father is a far more significant model for learning of behaviour than is the mother. Thus, parental education for the management of potential or actualized Mexican adolescent drug problems should not ignore the role of the mother, but should stress as much as possible the critical modelling function of the father. These results would also tend to validate the conception of Mexican middle class society as being patriarchical, and to identify United States society as far less (if at all) patriarchical.

Parental awareness of use of drugs was widely different in the Monterrey and Houston samples. Fifty per cent of the Houston sample reporting use of alcohol and tobacco indicate that their parents are not aware of their use of these substances, while only 19 per cent of the Monterrey sample indicated that their parents are not aware of their offsprings' use of alcohol and tobacco. Almost 75 per cent of the Houston students who report use of the other drugs indicate their parents do not know it, while only 31 per cent of Monterrey students indicate their parents are unaware of drug use in their adolescents. This may be partially due to the fact that Mexican mothers work with far less frequency than do United States mothers (15 per cent working Mexican mothers versus 65 per cent working United States mothers), and therefore the Mexican adolescent is under more extensive parental supervision than is the United States adolescent. This is especially true for Mexican female adolescents as opposed to United States female adolescents.

The amount of money available to spend per week is significantly related to reported drug use in both Mexican and United States youth cultures. Among Houston students who have more than ten dollars a week to spend, 34 per cent report drug use, and 33 per cent of the Monterrey students in this same category report drug use. Of the Houston students who have from 5 to 10 dollars per week to spend, 26 per cent report drug use as opposed to 13 per cent of the Monterrey students in this same category. In both cultures, students with 1 to 2 dollars spending money per week report lower drug use. This correlation between low drug use and small amounts of spending money, cross-culturally, may potentially be attributable to decreased ability to spend time in activities away from the home due to lack of money. As stated previously, when parental awareness of the activities is greater, drug use tends to be lower. Lack of money and greater time spent at home, therefore, would generally result in increased parental awareness of behaviour.

Of special interest to law enforcement and public service agencies

The original source of drugs for those who claim drug use, cross-culturally, is almost always a friend of the same age. For those who are presently using drugs, again almost always the source of supply is a friend of the same age. No Monterrey users claim obtaining drugs through an adult dealer. This finding should help to dispel the hypothesis of adult pushers preying on naive youths for their own profit. This cross-cultural data indicate that adolescent drug use is a peer group initiated and maintained activity.

A very significant difference between Monterrey and Houston drug involved students is revealed when they are asked where they would go for help with a drug problem. The Houston students ranked a friend as their first choice for help (41 per cent), second is a parent (26 per cent), third is a professional person (21 per cent), fourth is a religious advisor (9 per cent) and last a teacher (3 per cent). The Monterrey students ranked their first choice for help as parents (52 per cent), second a friend (18 per cent), third a professional (17 per cent), fourth a religious leader (7 per cent), and last a teacher (6 per cent). The fact that almost twice as many Monterrey students as Houston students would go to their parents with a drug problem indicates more trust of the parents by the Monterrey students. This may indicate that the lack of trust and amount of distance between Houston drug involved students and their parents is a prime factor in the differential level of severity between Houston and Monterrey adolescent drug use patterns. It is also significant that in all cases teachers were viewed as the least desirable group to approach with drug problems. In view of this acute lack of trust by drug-involved students, it is doubtful that drug education disseminated by teachers would be accepted with even a minimal degree of confidence by students in either culture.

Student attitudes toward drug use, users, and social issues
Four times in the survey the question was asked, "of the following, what do you think is the chief reason some students use drugs?" The response patterns were widely different between the Monterrey and Houston groups in general, but were highly similar between Monterrey users, experimenters, and non-users.

For users of the Houston survey, the chief reason was always oriented toward psychological or physical sensations such as, "for fun, kicks, or thrills" or "because it creates a good feeling". Monterrey users listed increased sensations part of the time, but also "to relieve or escape tension or worry" and "they want to feel at home with the group" were seen as influencing factors.

For Houston experimenters, peer pressures, increased sensation, and curiosity about effects of drugs were seen as primary motivating factors. For Monterrey experimenters, escape of pressure in school and home, increased sensations, and group pressure were seen as primary reasons.

For non-users of the Houston sample increased sensations were most often viewed as the primary reason for drug use, peer pressure ranking second. For Monterrey non-users, escape of pressures in school and home, curiosity about effects of drugs, and peer pressure were seen as the main reasons for drug use. There was major agreement between Monterrey users, experimenters, and non-users that escape of pressures at home and in school was a basic variable in a drug-involved student's life but this was rarely viewed as critical by any of the Houston groups.

Summary
Many of the co-variates of drug use found in Houston are evident in the data generated in Monterrey. The prevalence for most drug use is lower in Monterrey, however. Future comparative studies need to be conducted to find how patterns of behaviour follow and develop from culture to culture. If effective prevention and education programmes are developed they could be applied in areas where drug use has not yet become pandemic.

Bibliography
Barra, L.L. "Algunos Aspectos Psicosiales Del Alcoholismo". Revista Mexicana de Psicologia, 1966, 2, 751-757.

Cameron, D.C. "Youth and Drugs, A World View". Journal of the American Medical Society, 1968, 206, 1267-1271.

Cronicas de la Primera Semona Nacional de Salud Mental. Mexico, 1962.

Edicion de la sec. de Salubridad y Asistencia, Direc. Gral. de Nuerologia, Salud Mental y Rehabilitacion.

Dioz, M.S. "Crisis Actual Del Adolescente en Los Estados Unidos". Revista Mexicana de Psychologia, 1970, 4, 102-112.

Field, P.B. "A New Cross Cultural Study of Drunkenness". In: Society, Culture and Drinking Patterns. Pittman, D. J., and Snyder, C. R. (Eds.), New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1962.

Fromm, E., and Maccoby, M. "Social Character in a Mexican Village", New Jersey: Prenwtice. Hall, 1970.

Gomberoff, M., Florenzano, R., and Thomas, J. "A Study of the Conscious Motivation and the Effects of Marijuana Smoking on a Group of Adolescents in Chile". Bulletin on Narcotics, XXIV, 3, pp. 27-35.

Hays, J.R. "The Incidence of Drug Abuse Among Secondary School Students in Houston, 1971". St. Joseph Hospital Medical Surgical Journal, 1972, 7 (4), 146-152.

Hays, J.R. "The Incidence and Correlates of Drug Abuse in The Secondary Schools of the Houston Independent School District". A technical report of the Drug Education Committee of the Board of Education of the Houston Independent School District, November, 1971.

Narvaez, G.C. "Consecuencias Sociales y Economicos De La Ingestion Anormal De Alcohol". Revista Mexicana de Psicologia, 1970, 4, 29-47.

Panameño, P. A. "Drug Abuse in El Salvador". Bulletin on Narcotics, XXIV, 3, pp. 37-45.

Peck R. F., and Diaz-Guerrero, R. "Two Core Culture Patterns and the Diffusion of Values across their Border". International Journal of Psychology, 1967, 2, (4), 275-282.






back to top


Home | Site Map | Links | Search | Contact Us
Copyright © 2006 UNODC, All Rights Reserved Legal Notice
Reply

Abdul Fattah
02-17-2007, 05:55 PM
Selam aleykum
No offense, but I would advice some more reflection before you start posting.

1. Am I a muslim? -> look on the left panel there you can see some personal information of the posters, among other information there's a line: "way of life:"
Mine says Muslim, I have also said selam aleykum to you in previous posts, that should be a dead giveaway.

2. Copy pasting huge amounts of text from other sources is not allowed. It says so in the forum rules.

3. The discussion about Alcohol is off-topic. If you truly wish to continue this debate I suggest you start a new topic.

4. The text you posted only gives some statistics about usage of alcohol and drugs but doesn't do anything but that it doesn't relate to any of the previous claims. It doesn't defend your arguments and it doesn't defeat mine. I know Alcohol is wide spread in the west, I live there, I don't need that text to tell me so. However the point I made was that banning alcohol doesn't necessarily generate profits for a government from an economical p.o.v.
Reply

akulion
02-17-2007, 07:09 PM
lool im so sorry i totally forgot about this

dont have the time to continue so i will have to withdraw myself from the discussion

sorry about that
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-17-2007, 08:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Misleads mankind from the path of Allah. Er, I can't imagine why someone would misguide people from the path of Allah, i.e. with good intentions... considering the alternate path ends at hell.
Certainly one would hardly want to label an actions as a person intending good if they understand what they were doing was the moral equivalent of leading someone to hell. But, that was not the nature of my question. As I understood your correction of me earlier, not all idle talk is haraam, only that idle talk which misleads mankind. My question of intent has to do with the realities of life, that one cannot always forsee the results of a given action. One may in fact do something with the intent to accomplish good, and yet in the long run it might still mislead mankind from the path of Allah. Given the text cited, would that qualify it as haraam or not?

An example from American history, Eli Whitney invented a cotton gin which made the processing of cotton much easier than it had ever been before. Because of that the southern farmers found it economical to grow cotton on large plantation whereas this had not been the previous pattern. To work those plantations they needed lots of cheap labor and the importation of slaves was seen as a way to accomplish this. Now, Eli Whitney did not believe in slavery, yet his invention did more to institutionalize it in the USA than anything before or since. Eli Whitney was just trying to help poor struggling farmers who couldn't make ends meet, be able to make a living off of their land. He did not intend to do something that would become the key to the instutionalization of slavery, yet he did. Was the invention of the cotton gin, the discussions (talk) by which it was figure out and the orders (more talk) by which it was actually built, were they all haraam? Or does the "haraamness" (sorry, I invented a word) of something depend on the intent of the individual involved with it, i.e. actually owning slaves?




From what I understand, the main person who interpreted the verse this was a companion of the prophet, Ibn 'Abbas, who was best known for his reliability at interpreting the Quran, (even the Prophet Muhammad pbuh recognised this talent of his). Naturally, he received his understand of the Quran from the prophet Muhammad pbuh himself. It was also interpreted this way by Ibn Mas’ood, another reliable companion of the Prophet.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The interpretation of the Sahaabah and Taabi’in, that ‘idle talk’ refers to singing, is sufficient. This was reported with saheeh isnaads from Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood. Abu’l-Sahbaa’ said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about the aayah (interpretation of the meaning), ‘“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks’ [Luqmaan 31:6]. He said: By Allaah, besides Whom there is no other god, this means singing – and he repeated it three times. It was also reported with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) that this means singing. There is no contradiction between the interpretation of “idle talk” as meaning singing and the interpretation of it as meaning stories of the Persians and their kings, and the kings of the Romans, and so on, such as al-Nadr ibn al-Haarith used to tell to the people of Makkah to distract them from the Qur’aan. Both of them are idle talk. Hence Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Idle talk” is falsehood and singing.

And:

Al-Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this includes all manner of haraam speech, all idle talk and falsehood, and all nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience; the words of those who say things to refute the truth and argue in support of falsehood to defeat the truth; and backbiting, slander, lies, insults and curses; the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit. (Tafseer al-Sa’di, 6/150)

http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=5000&ln=eng

so, both these interpretations are valid.

Hope that helps!
Yes, it does help. It helps and raises a follow-up question. (Sorry, I not only try to give detailed answers when asked by others, I tend to ask detailed questions too.imsad )

Others in this thread have clarified that singing with the voice of alone is not haraam, that it is when it is accompanied by background instruments that it is haraam. Yet, what you have cited here makes it seem to me that all singing would be haraam. How can I resolved the discrepancy?

Secondly, the last item you supplied from Al-Sa’di reads to me that it is not just which mislead people from Allah, but "all idle talk". I read it that way because it seems like he is listing a series of things that are haraam. Idle talk is #1, falsehood is #2, nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience is #3, and so on. Is this just my misreading of the text, or is there some difference here from what I understood you to have said previously?


(You realize, I hope, that I have a few more curiousities beyond the question of music, but let us get this one out of the way before moving on to new questions. It seems I have struck a chord for a few other people as well.)

Thanks again for the community's patience. (And for the willingness of the majority to stay on, or at least near, topic.)
Reply

Malaikah
02-18-2007, 01:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
My question of intent has to do with the realities of life, that one cannot always forsee the results of a given action. One may in fact do something with the intent to accomplish good, and yet in the long run it might still mislead mankind from the path of Allah. Given the text cited, would that qualify it as haraam or not?
Oh, definitely! We can't help if your good actions end up with bad results. as long as the person had good intentions and the act it self was not something forbidden (the general rule is that you can't do something evil with good intentions unless there is a great overriding need), then it is fine. It isn't up to us how our actions turn out, but that is up to God. We do our best, and place out faith in God.

I hope I understood the question this time.:?

Others in this thread have clarified that singing with the voice of alone is not haraam, that it is when it is accompanied by background instruments that it is haraam. Yet, what you have cited here makes it seem to me that all singing would be haraam. How can I resolved the discrepancy?
It is referring to singing songs of bad nature... for example, much of the stuff out there in the music industry (about love, extra-marital relationships, all that haram stuff) is obviously haram, but singing stuff of good nature, with good morals and stuff like that is fine- provided there is no musical instruments of course (but at the same time people shouldn't indulge in it so much that they allow it to distract them from the Quran and other obligations and stuff).

Secondly, the last item you supplied from Al-Sa’di reads to me that it is not just which mislead people from Allah, but "all idle talk". I read it that way because it seems like he is listing a series of things that are haraam. Idle talk is #1, falsehood is #2, nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience is #3, and so on. Is this just my misreading of the text, or is there some difference here from what I understood you to have said previously?
But actually everything he mentioned does mislead people from Allah.


this includes all manner of haraam speech, all idle talk and falsehood,
All haram speech misleads people from Allah.

and all nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience;
^That kind of talk without doubt misleads people.

the words of those who say things to refute the truth and argue in support of falsehood to defeat the truth;
Wow, that is super misleading.

and backbiting, slander, lies, insults and curses;
That is just plan haram, and as I said earlier all haram misleads one from Allah.

the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit.
hmm I am not so sure what he meant here by "which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit", it is possible that he is referring to those instruments that are allowed in Islam, such as the women using a 'daff' (drum like thing) at weddings and on eid. And where he refers to singing, it does not necessarily mean all singing, but rather the singing that is classified as the instruments of the devil (such most music of today).

Hope that helped, looking forward to the next of questions. :D
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-18-2007, 04:37 AM
Maliakah, are women allowed to be Imams? I know they are not, but you are very good at this. Better than many of the brothers on the forum.

I need to state this previous thought of mine better:
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Secondly, the last item you supplied from Al-Sa’di [seems like it is referring to more than just that]which mislead[s] people from Allah, but "all idle talk".
Yes, I understand that the list of things is a list of things which would be haraam: (1) the idle talk, (2) falsehood, (3) nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience, and the list could be continued on to perhaps hundreds of things.

But it then also seems to me, that if it is a list of things, then it is not a particular type of idle talk (that idle talk which misleads people from Allah) which is haraam, but all idle talk which this passage would say is haraam. Just like it is not just that falsehood that misleads people from Allah, but all falsehood that is haraam. And if that is so, then the clarification if idle talk wherein singing is listed, could include many other forms of idle talk in addition to the two mentioned. My own personal list of talk which I would categorize as idle talk would include: (a) that which misleads from God, (b) talking just to hear one's own voice, (c) gossip, (d) most pleasantries that are casually exchanged between such as greeting somone by asking "How are you?" and not stopping to listen to the answer -- that's a big one with me, (e) promises made by politicians running for office, and probably a dozen more things. Point being, "idleness" isn't limited to singing. There are lots of idle things. Luqmaan 31:6 makes it appear that the Islamic definition of "idle" is limited to just the couple of things in the parenthesis. Whereas the Al-Sa'di passage does not attempt to define "idleness" and I would assume it then refers to all talk that is of no real worth, no importance, or no significance.

Btw, I would not consider all music to fit this definition of idle -- of no real worth, no importance, or no significance -- which I got from the dictionary. Sure, there is plenty of music that is of no real worth, and much of it is base, deals with immoral themes, and has other problems associated with it. But that is hardly true of all music. Much of it is all grand, inspiring, and thoroughly redepmtive; such music is certainly significant and of worth. I would hate to think that it was haraam simply because it was played on a piano rather than with the voice.
Reply

Malaikah
02-18-2007, 05:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Maliakah, are women allowed to be Imams? I know they are not, but you are very good at this. Better than many of the brothers on the forum.
Thanks, lol. Just because we don't lead men in prayer doesn't mean we can't be scholars and the like.

But it then also seems to me, that if it is a list of things, then it is not a particular type of idle talk (that idle talk which misleads people from Allah) which is haraam, but all idle talk which this passage would say is haraam.
But aren't you taking part of the verse and ignoring the rest that way?

“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]

It is explicit that the idle talk being referred to is that which is used with the intention of doing evil and mislead men from that path of Allah.

As for "talking just to hear one's own voice" and "most pleasantries that are casually exchanged between such as greeting someone by asking "How are you?" and not stopping to listen to the answer", okay maybe they are pointless and might be annoying, but keep in mind, are what you are suggesting is that they are forbidden, meaning that anyone who does them is committing a sin, and so has the potential to be punished for it by Allah! I mean, that is getting a little on the Muslim then isn't it?:uuh:

Point being, "idleness" isn't limited to singing. There are lots of idle things. Luqmaan 31:6 makes it appear that the Islamic definition of "idle" is limited to just the couple of things in the parenthesis.
Oh okay, well I know why they only used those two, perhaps because they are the ones most strongly indicated by the verse, or because everyone already knows that the other things are haram but they don't know that music is haram and they didn't want to have too much extra information shown?

I really don't know why someone made that choice.

Much of it is all grand, inspiring, and thoroughly redepmtive; such music is certainly significant and of worth. I would hate to think that it was haraam simply because it was played on a piano rather than with the voice.
Perhaps if you looked at it from the perspective that it was actually the devil using the music to bring that change in you, you would understand why it is considered idle? Because the change is coming from something evil (devil) not from God. Sure a drug user might like drugs because they put him on a high... but that doesn't necessarily mean drugs are good for him...
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-20-2007, 09:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Thanks, lol. Just because we don't lead men in prayer doesn't mean we can't be scholars and the like.



But aren't you taking part of the verse and ignoring the rest that way?

“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]

It is explicit that the idle talk being referred to is that which is used with the intention of doing evil and mislead men from that path of Allah.
No, I wasn't, I have just failed to make myself clear to you. Anyway, I get the gist of what you are saying, and was beginning to address minor points that are not that important. So, I see this thread has rested for a few days. Maybe I can go on to question #2 that I am curious about and see if I can raise as much excitement over it as I did the first one. :D


My second question has to deal with art, specifically the use or non-use of images in Islamic art.

What I understand is that Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, believes it is wrong (haraam) to create any idol in the worship of God. And it seems to me that while some Christians do have images present where they worship (though they are there for decoration, not adoration), that Islam prefers to simply not risk anyone getting the wrong idea and eliminates them completely from any worship space. So far, no question.

But, what I also see is that Islam seems to eliminate images from any other place as well. Now I have many sub-questions here, but I'll start with this, and let you explain the concepts behind the elimination of images in situations not associated with worship.
Reply

جوري
02-20-2007, 10:59 PM
I don't want to give wrong reasoning here but I don't think Music is Haram. I think it depends on the type of music. I recall two incidents in the time of the prophet where once someone used a lute and the prophet didn't prohibit it, And another when someone was getting married and they were allowed to keep their customs which I believe included music. I am not here to negate anyone. I am not really decisive on the ruling. I think if you are listening to debauchery and things of poor nature as is common today that can be considered Haram... but if you use it in your hour of recreation to relax... I really don't see the harm. We are supposed to strike a balance in our lives. Time for prayers, time for fast, time for recitation of Quran, time for work and time off to unwind the self. I love writing poetry and have been playing the piano since I was a kid, and I hope it doesn't make me less of a Muslim...

I pray G-D forgives me if I am comitting something Haram but it isn't my intention to. and I genuinly don't believe that it is. I prefer it as a hobby over playing a video game....
lots of nasheeds now a days include soft instrumentaion, and I believe when the prophet (PBUH) went to medina people greeted him with "tala3 albadro 3lyna min thnyat ilwada3, wajaba alshokr 3lyna ma da3a lilah da3--ayoha Almab3ooth feena j'et bil'amr ilmota3, ji'et nawrta almadeena, mar7aban ya khyr da3"" which is a type of nasheed that I am sure had rhythm was genuine and came from the heart.
A knife can be used by a surgeon to heal or by a psychopath to kill.. It depends on your intention and how you use it.....

Allah A3lam above all...
thank you
Reply

taqi
02-20-2007, 11:22 PM
the question why?,what r its benefits ? r being raised my muslims quite frequently...n i believe if benefits 2 all actions,laws were 2 be told,then how would GOD test our iman,we would follow them for our benefit.What about Obidence to Allah and his messenger SAW.
Reply

taqi
02-20-2007, 11:23 PM
plz correct me if i'm wrong.
Reply

Malaikah
02-21-2007, 01:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
But, what I also see is that Islam seems to eliminate images from any other place as well. Now I have many sub-questions here, but I'll start with this, and let you explain the concepts behind the elimination of images in situations not associated with worship.
I think you can appreciate how important it was to forbid ALL images in the early days of Islam, considering that most of the Arabs who converted to Islam where pagan idol worshipers before. So extra precaution had to be taken to make sure that all possible ways of returning to idolatry had to be eliminated. This included removing ALL images of living creatures, even beyond the mosque, so they couldn't be influenced by it at all, while still in a vulnerable state.

By the way, we also worship in your homes so I don't see the point only banning in the mosque...

It is not permitted to draw anything that depicts animate beings, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, according to the saheeh hadeeth: “Every image maker will be in the Fire.

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The most severely punished of people on the Day of Resurrection will be the image-makers, those who tried to imitate the creation of Allaah.

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The makers of these images will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and they will be told, ‘Give life to that which you have created.’”

http://islamqa.com/index.php?ref=39806&ln=eng

So the act of drawing animate objects is itself not allowed. Also, the angels do not enter a house/place that has images in it (I believe it only counts if the images are on the walls...not sure though).

We should also consider the story of how idolatry started. It was a few generations after Prophet Nuh (Noah). When some righteous men had died, the devil came to the people and told them to make statues of these people to remind them of be good Muslims (because those people were righteous themselves). So they did that. However, as generations passed, the people started to worship these idols, thinking that the reason they were built was for worship, because the devil lead them to think that.:uuh:

Anyway, that story is in response to any 'Oh, but we know they are just pictures, we don't worship them' type argument.

And God knows best.

Hope that helps!
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-21-2007, 02:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
I think you can appreciate how important it was to forbid ALL images in the early days of Islam, considering that most of the Arabs who converted to Islam where pagan idol worshipers before. So extra precaution had to be taken to make sure that all possible ways of returning to idolatry had to be eliminated. This included removing ALL images of living creatures, even beyond the mosque, so they couldn't be influenced by it at all, while still in a vulnerable state.

By the way, we also worship in your homes so I don't see the point only banning in the mosque...
Good point. I knew that, and should have thought of that. But as you can see I don't think "Islam"; that's why I have to ask stupid questions like this.

It is not permitted to draw anything that depicts animate beings, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, according to the saheeh hadeeth: “Every image maker will be in the Fire.
So, no Muslim could be an animator for a company like Disney or Pixar, nor provide illustrations for children's storybooks. Makes me wonder...I assume that you have books for children. Do they not have any pictures in them?


And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The most severely punished of people on the Day of Resurrection will be the image-makers, those who tried to imitate the creation of Allaah.
OK, but not all images are an attempt to imitate the creation of Allah. Some are just attempts at sharing the creation of Allah with others.

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The makers of these images will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and they will be told, ‘Give life to that which you have created.’”
:D Good luck to them. ooops, I think I read somewhere that sarcasm is also haraam.


We should also consider the story of how idolatry started. It was a few generations after Prophet Nuh (Noah). When some righteous men had died, the devil came to the people and told them to make statues of these people to remind them of be good Muslims (because those people were righteous themselves). So they did that. However, as generations passed, the people started to worship these idols, thinking that the reason they were built was for worship, because the devil lead them to think that.:uuh:

Anyway, that story is in response to any 'Oh, but we know they are just pictures, we don't worship them' type argument.
Gotcha. Heading off trouble before it happens instead of cleaning it up afterwards.

And God knows best.
:D Hey, we agree again. And this time definitely no sarcasm.

Hope that helps!
It does. I've got a few more follow-ups. But this seems to work best if I don't ask too many questions at one time.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
02-21-2007, 03:07 AM
We can draw like nature, but we can't draw living things.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-21-2007, 03:13 AM
So, you can draw ocean waves and rocks and stones and petrfied trees, but not living trees or grass blowing in the wind?
Reply

Malaikah
02-21-2007, 03:17 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So, no Muslim could be an animator for a company like Disney or Pixar, nor provide illustrations for children's storybooks. Makes me wonder...I assume that you have books for children. Do they not have any pictures in them?
Actually, I'm not so sure about animations, because a lot of them can't be considered life like. Take these fellas for example--> :D:eek: :playing: :mad: imsad :smile: :coolalien

They are fine, firstly because they aren't a complete form, and secondly because they aren't life like AT ALL, they are just yellow cirlces with a bunch of lines on them.

So, some cartoons are okay, but a lot of cartoons are too detailed these days and they look life-like, but as for those which cleary can not really be humans/animals, they are fine inshaallah.

God knows best.
Reply

Malaikah
02-21-2007, 03:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So, you can draw ocean waves and rocks and stones and petrfied trees, but not living trees or grass blowing in the wind?
You can draw any tree- the only prohibition is on things that have a soul, like humans and animals (and I guess angels, not like we know what they look like anyway...)
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-21-2007, 03:24 AM
So Mickey Mouse? He looks life-like in many respects, but I don't know any mice that actually look like him.

What do you mean animals that have a soul? I'm not ready for a tangent, but does Islam understand animals to have a soul?

How does this concept of the complete form work? If I am drawing a picture of a person on a sheet of paper, the most I can draw is the front half, not the complete form (front, side, and back). How about if I only draw the face and shoulders, and not the whole body?
Reply

Malaikah
02-21-2007, 03:35 AM
The Hanbal&#238; jurist Ibn Qud&#226;mah writes: “If a vital part of the animal is deleted, such as its chest area or its belly, or the head was drawn separate from the body, then it is not prohibited. However, if the deleted part does not prevent such a creature from living, such as removing the eye, hand, or leg, then it is still a complete image and is prohibited.” [al-Mughn&#238; (10/199)]

http://islamtoday.com/show_detail_se...&main_cat_id=1

Though one shouldn't draw living things, even in the style mentioned above, if they do not need to. Better safe than sorry.

As for Mickey Mouse, in reality he is just a bunch of lines, coloured in? Right? But I'm no exert at knowing what is okay and what is not...

And i don't know whether animals have souls... I think they do but I can't be sure, sorry.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
02-21-2007, 03:56 AM
Someone told me birds don't lol. They have just like air/energy or whatever. I dunno lol. Someone want to clarify?
Reply

جوري
02-21-2007, 03:59 AM
Everything has a soul... everything on heaven and on earth worships Allah....
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
02-21-2007, 04:03 AM
Lol, i thought so :D
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-21-2007, 03:41 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
The Hanbalî jurist Ibn Qudâmah writes: “If a vital part of the animal is deleted, such as its chest area or its belly, or the head was drawn separate from the body, then it is not prohibited. However, if the deleted part does not prevent such a creature from living, such as removing the eye, hand, or leg, then it is still a complete image and is prohibited.” [al-Mughnî (10/199)]

http://islamtoday.com/show_detail_se...&main_cat_id=1

So, based on this, one could create a bust, such as the head of Queen of Elizabeth, as long as it is just her head.

But one could not create a drawing of a flying dragon, even though we know there are no such things as flying dragons, if it was the complete image of whatever in your mind you imagined a flying dragon would look like.

And, if I read the article correctly, I would make the same interpretation for Mickey Mouse that I have for the dragon.
Reply

snakelegs
02-22-2007, 04:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Everything has a soul... everything on heaven and on earth worships Allah....
i like this.
Reply

Malaikah
02-22-2007, 08:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
So, based on this, one could create a bust, such as the head of Queen of Elizabeth, as long as it is just her head.
Like I said, I'm no expert, but I don't think it means that we should go around drawing a headless Queen Elizabeth... caution should still be applied, and it would be in cases of need when the rule is applied, such as for books for students studying animals and the human body etc.

format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Everything has a soul... everything on heaven and on earth worships Allah....
:sl:

Even though everything worships God, I don't think that means they have souls, because Ibn `Abbâs said: “Draw trees and whatever has no soul." [Sahîh al-Bukhârî]. If everything had a souls, that would include trees. :?
Reply

InToTheRain
02-22-2007, 09:43 AM
Interesting thread :thumbs_up

Just wanna add this link here, its very detailed so please look into it Insha'Allah:

[PIE]In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

The worst case scenario in the event of being inflicted with a disease is when the one involved refuses to believe that he has been inflicted with that disease. The way this phenomenon is accepted and recognised in diseases and illnesses that affect the physical body, it is also true with regards to spiritual diseases and ailments.

When a person commits a sin (may Allah save us all) believing that a sin is being committed and feels regret and remorse in the heart, then this is far better then committing the sin and believing it to be lawful (halal). In the former situation, only one sin is being committed, and it is very likely that the individual may repent out of the remorse felt in the heart. In the latter case, however, in addition to the sin being committed, there is the greater sin of trying to justify it. Normally, such an individual does not receive the guidance to repent from his sin. (May Allah save us all, Ameen).

Music and Singing?

The case with music and unlawful singing is the same. It has been decisively prohibited in Shariah, as the evidences mentioned further along will show. Yet there are individuals that are not ready to believe that it is Haram.

In the modern era, music has spread to such an extent that nobody is free from it. Individuals are confronted with situations where they are forced to listen to music. It is played nearly in all department stores and supermarkets. If you sit in a taxi, make a phone call or even walk down the street, you will not be saved from this evil. Young Muslims drive around in their cars with the music fully blasted. The increasing popularity of music, which is prevalent in our society, poses a great threat to the Muslims.

Music is a direct ploy of the Non-Muslims. One of the main causes for the decline of the Muslims is their involvement in useless entertainment. Today we see that Muslims are involved, and at the forefront perhaps, of many immoralities and evils. The spiritual power which once was the trait of a Muslim is nowhere to be seen. One of the main reasons for this is music and useless entertainment.

Harms and effects of music

We should be aware that nothing has been prohibited by the Almighty Creator except that which is harmful to the Muslims and the society as a whole. There are great harms and ill-effects of music.

Islam totally forbids adultery and also those things that lead to it. Allah Most High says:

“And do not come near to adultery, for it is a shameful deed and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)” (al-Isra, 32).

Islam does not only prohibit adultery and fornication, but also those things that may lead to it. This is the reason why the Qur’an orders Muslim men and Women to lower their gazes. It prohibits one from being alone with someone from the opposite sex (khalwa). Informal interaction with the opposite sex has also been made unlawful.

This is also one of the main reasons for the prohibition of music, as it effects one’s emotions, creates arousal, passion and excitement, and also leads to various physiological changes in the person. It is a psychological proven fact that two things are instrumental in arousing the human sexual desire, one being the voice of a female (for males) and the other music.

This is the reason why Allah Most High says:

“O wives of the prophet! You are not like other women, if you are god-fearing. So do not be soft in speech. Lest in whose heart is disease should be moved with desire.” (Surah al-Ahzab, v. 32).

Thus, Islam forbids listening to the female voice with lust and desire. The great Hanafi Jurist, Ibn Abidin (Allah have mercy on him) states:

“It is permissible for women to converse with non-Mahram men at the time of need (and visa versa, m). However, what is not permissible is that they stretch, soften and raise their voice in a melodious way” (Radd al-Muhtar, V.1, P. 406).

Similarly, it is also unlawful for women to listen to the voice of non-Mahram men with lust and desire. One of the great western thinkers said: “the voice is one of the quickest ways that make a woman fall in love with a man. This is the reason why many women adore singers”.

The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) was also wary of this fact when he said to the Companion Bara ibn Malik: “O Bara! Let not the women here your voice” (Kanz al-Ummal, 7/322). The same has also been reported from the Companion Anjasha (Allah be pleased with him).

Physical Effect of Music

Experiments carried out by doctors and researchers confirm that music is such that it does not only affect the brain, but each and every organ of the body. There is a close relationship between music and bodily movements.

It is also proved that music affects one’s emotions, increases arousal in terms of alertness and excitement and also leads to various psychological changes in the person. In a psychological experiment, it was found that listening to moderate type of music increased one’s normal heart beat, whilst listening to rock music the heart beat increased even further, yet people claim that music has no effect.

In conclusion, music and the instruments used for singing are a cause for arousing the sexual desire of an individual. It could lead a person to adultery and fornication. Therefore, Islam takes the preventive measure rather than suffer the consequences. This is also one of the principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, namely ‘blocking the means’ (sadd al-dhara'i). This is based on the idea of preventing an evil before it actually materializes, and is taken from the heart of the guidance of the Qur’an and Sunnah that, “Preventing harm is given precedence even to achieving possible benefits.”

Becoming Heedless of Allah



One of the harms of music is that it distracts one from his Creator. It serves as a temporary means of pleasure and satisfaction, which makes one forget who he really is and why he was created. This is the reason why musical instruments are known in the Arabic language as ‘malaahi’ meaning instruments that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah Almighty.

Human has been created for a noble purpose. Allah Most High says:

“I have created jinn and humans only that they serve (worship) me” (Surah al-Dhariyat, 56).

Music and temporary entertainments sink the human in physical pleasures and prevent him/her from true spiritual gains. In conclusion, music has a great role to play in preventing a human from realising the purpose of creation.

Un-Islamic Values

Another harm of music is that it instills the ideologies of the Non-Muslims in the heart and mind. The messages of today’s music follow a general theme of love, fornication, drugs and freedom.

We find that the whole world is obsessed with the Kufr idea of unrestrained freedom, i.e. freedom of speech and movement, etc… This idea of freedom, “it’s my life, I’ll do what I want” is a predominant theme of music today. It is used as a means of drilling western ideologies into the hearts and minds, which are totally contrary to Islamic values and teachings.

The Difference Between Legal Wisdom and Legal Reasons

The above are just some of the harms and evil effects of music. One must remember here that these are the wisdoms for the prohibition of music and not the reason (illah). The Shariah ruling is based upon the reason, and not the wisdom. In other words if the harms for the prohibition of music is taken care of, it does not make music permissible.

An example for this is that the wisdom behind the prohibition of wine and alcohol is that it creates enmity and hatred between people and it hinders one from the remembrance of Allah. The reason, however, is that it is an intoxicating substance. Now, if one was to say that wine will be Halal for me, as I will lock myself up after drinking wine, thus no destruction will be caused. Any sane person will conclude that he is wrong, as wine is Haram whether you cause any destruction and damage to others or not. The reason being, that the cause for the prohibition of wine is that it intoxicates you, regardless of whether the wisdom is present or not.

The same is with music. If one is saved from the abovementioned harms, even then music will still remain Haram. It can not be held lawful even if one is saved from its harms. This is a well established principle in the science of Usul al-Fiqh.

Ruling on musical instruments and unlawful singing

In the light of the evidences that will be mentioned later, the following are unlawful in Shariah:

a) Musical instruments that are exclusively designed for entertainment and dancing, and create charm, pleasure and bliss on their own (even without the singing), such as the drum, violin, guitar, fiddle, flute, lute, mandolin, harmonium, piano, string, etc… are impermissible to use under any circumstance.

There is a consensus of the whole Ummah on this. Since the first century, the Companions (sahaba), their followers (tabi’een), jurists (fuqaha) and the scholars have been generally unanimous on this ruling.

b) Singing that is a cause for a sin is also unlawful with the consensus of all the scholars, such as songs that prevent one from the obligatory (fard & wajib).

c) Any singing that is accompanied by other sins, such as songs that consist of unlawful, immoral, and sexual themes, or it is sang by non-Mahram women, etc will also be unlawful. This ruling is also with the consensus of all the scholars.

Evidences

There are numerous evidences in the Qur’an and Sunnah which support this view. We will attempt to look at a few:

1) Allah Most High says:

“And there are among men, those that purchase idle tales, to mislead (men) from the path of Allah and throw ridicule. For such there will be a humiliating punishment” (Surah Luqman, V. 6).

The great Companion Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud (Allah be pleased with him) states in the explanation of the word “idle tales”:

“By Allah its meaning is music” (Sunan al-Bayhaqi, 1/223 & authenticated by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, 2/411).

Imam Ibn Abi Shayba related with his own transmission that He (Ibn Mas’ud) said:

“I swear By Him besides whom there is no God that it refers to singing” (132/5).

The great Companion and exegete of the Qur’an, Abd Allah ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) states:

“The meaning of the word is music, singing and the like” (Sunan al-Bayhaqi, 1/221& Musannaf Ibn abi Shayba, 132/5).

He also stated:

“Music and the purchase of female singers” (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba, 132/5).

Hasan al-Basri (Allah be pleased with him) said:

“This verse was revealed in relation to singing and musical instruments” (Tafsir ibn Kathir, 3/442)

The same explanation has also been narrated from Mujahid, Ikrima, Ibrahim Nakha’i, Mak’hul and others (Allah be pleased with them all).

The above verse of the Qur’an, along with the statements regarding its meaning is clear in the prohibition of music. It also serves as a severe warning for those who are involved in the trade of music in any way, shape or form, as Allah warned them of “Humiliating punishment”.

As for those that say, the verse refers to things that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah and not music, do not contradict the aforementioned explanation. The interpretation of the verse with “things that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah” is a more general interpretation which includes music and song, as one of the foremost things that stop you from the remembrance of Allah is music. This is the reason why the majority of the exegetes of the Qur’an have interpreted the verse with music only, or with all those acts that prevent one from the truth with music being at the forefront.

2) Allah Most High says whilst describing the attributes of the servants of the Most Compassionate (ibad al-Rahman):

“Those who witness no falsehood, and if they pass by futility, they pass by it with honourable avoidance” (Surah al-Furqan, V. 72).

Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas relates from Sayyiduna Imam Abu Hanifah (Allah be pleased with him) that the meaning of “falsehood (zur)” is music & song, (Ahkam al-Qur’an, 3/428).

3) Allah Most High said to Shaytan:

“Lead to destruction those whom you can among them with your (seductive) voice” (Surah al-Isra, V.64).

One of the great exegete, Mujahid (Allah have mercy on him) interpreted the word “voice (sawt)” by music, singing, dancing and idle things. (Ruh al-Ma’ani, 15/111).

Imam Suyuti (Allah have mercy on him) quoted Mujahid as saying: “Voice (in this verse) is singing and flute” (al-Iklil fi istinbat al-tanzil, 1444).

Another exegete, Dahhak (Allah have mercy on him) also interpreted the word “Sawt” with flutes. (Qurtubi, al-Jami` li Ahkam al-Qur’an, 10/288).

Here also, a general interpretation can be given, as indeed some commentators of the Qur ' an have done, but this, as mentioned earlier, does not contradict the meaning given by Mujahid and Dahhak, as it is included in the more broad and general meaning.

Guidance of the Messenger of Allah
(Allah bless him & give him peace)

The are many Ahadith of the blessed Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) which prohibit music and the usage of musical instruments to the extent that some scholars have gathered approximately forty Ahadith, of which the chain of transmission of some is sound (sahih), some good (hasan) and some weak (da’if). We will only mention a few here:

1) Sayyiduna Abu Malik al-Ash’ari (Allah be pleased with him) reports that he heard the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) say: “There will appear people in my Ummah, who will hold adultery, silk, alcohol and musical instruments to be lawful” (Sahih al-Bukhari)

2) Abu Malik al-Ash’ari (Allah be pleased with him) narrates a similar type of Hadith, but a different wording. He reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Soon there will be people from my Ummah who will consume alcohol, they will change its name (by regarding it permissible. m), on there heads will be instruments of music and singing. Allah will make the ground swallow them up, and turn them into monkeys and swine” (Sahih Ibn Hibban & Sunan Ibn Majah, with a sound chain of narration).

In the above two narrations, the word ma`azif is used. The scholars of the Arabic language are unanimous on the fact that it refers to musical instruments (Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, V.9, P.189).

The prohibition of musical instruments is clear in the two narrations. The first Hadith (recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari) mentions that certain people from the Ummah of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) will try to justify the permissibility of using musical instruments, along with adultery, silk and alcohol, despite these things being unlawful (haram) in Shariah.

Moreover, by mentioning music with the likes of adultery and alcohol just shows how severe the sin is. The one who attempts to permit music is similar to the one who permits alcohol or adultery.

The second Hadith describes the fate of such people in that the ground will be ordered to swallow them and they will be turned into monkeys and swine (may Allah save us all). The warning is specific to those that will hold music, alcohol, silk and adultery to be permissible. It is something that should be of concern for those who try and justify any of these things.

Also, to say that music will only be unlawful if it is in combination with alcohol, adultery and silk is incorrect. If this was the case, then why is it that the exception is only for music from the four things? The same could also be said for adultery, alcohol and silk. One may then even justify that alcohol and adultery is also permissible unless if they are consumed in combination with the other things!

Thus the above two narrations of the beloved of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) are clear proof on the impermissibility of music and songs.

3) Imran ibn Husain (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “This Ummah will experience the swallowing up of some people by the earth, metamorphosis of some into animals, and being rained upon with stones”. A man from amongst the Muslims asked: “O Messenger of Allah! When will this be?” He said: “When female singers and musical instruments appear and alcohol will (commonly) be consumed” (Recorded by Imam Tirmizi, Imam Ibn Majah in their respective Sunan collections, and the wording here is of Sunan Tirmizi).

4) Sayyiduna Ali ibn Talib (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the blessed Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “When my Ummah begin doing fifteen things, they will be inflicted with tribulations, and (from those 15 things He said): “When female singers and musical instruments become common” (Sunan Tirmizi).

5) Na’fi reports that once Abd Allah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them both) heard the sound of a Sheppard’s flute. He put his fingers in his ears, turned his mule away from the road and said: “O Nafi’! Can you hear? I (Nafi’) replied with the affirmative. He carried on walking (with his fingers in his ears) until I said: “the sound has ceased” He removed his fingers from his ears, came back on to the road and said: “I saw the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) doing the same when he heard the flute of the Sheppard” (Recorded by Imam Ahmad in his Musnad and Abu Dawud & Ibn Majah in their Sunans).

6) Abd Allah Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Verily Allah has forbidden alcohol, gambling, drum and guitar, and every intoxicant is haram” (Musnad Ahmad & Sunan Abu Dawud).

7) Abu Umama (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) said: “Allah Mighty and Majestic sent me as a guidance and mercy to believers and commanded me to do away with musical instruments, flutes, strings, crucifixes, and the affairs of the pre-Islamic period of ignorance” (Musnad Ahmad & Abu Dawud Tayalisi).

8) Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Song makes hypocrisy grow in the heart as water does herbage” (Sunan al-Bayhaqi).

9) Anas (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) said: “On the day of Resurrection, Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress” (Recorded by Ibn Asakir & Ibn al-Misri).

10)Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reports that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Bell is the flute of Shaytan” (Sahih Muslim & Sunan Abu Dawud).

There are many more narrations of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) in prohibition of musical instruments and unlawful singing. I have merely mentioned a few as an example.

The imam of the Shafi`i school, Imam Ibn Hajr al-Haytami gathered all these Ahadith which approximately total to forty in his excellent work ‘ Kaff al-Ra’a an Muharramat al-Lahw wa al-Sama’ , and then said: “All of this is explicit and compelling textual evidence that musical instruments of all types are unlawful” (2/270).

Statements of the Fuqaha

The great Hanafi jurist al-Kasani states:

“If a singer gathers people around him only to entertain them with his voice, then he will not be considered a upright person (a’dil), even though if he does not consume alcohol, as he will be considered the leader of sinners. If however, he only sings to himself in order to eradicate loneliness, then there is nothing wrong in doing so.

As far as the one who uses musical instruments is concerned, if the instruments themselves are not unlawful, such as the bamboo and tambourine, then there is nothing wrong with that and he will still be considered upright. However, if the instrument is unlawful, such as the lute and the like, then he will not be considered a upright person (to be a witness in the court. m), as these instruments can never be considered lawful” (Bada’i al-Sana’i, 6/269).

It is stated in Khulasat al-Fatawa:

“Listening to the sound of musical instruments is unlawful (haram), as the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Listening to songs is a sin” (4/345).

Ibn Humam, the great Hanafi Mujtahid makes a decisive statement in his famous Fath al-Qadir:

“Unlawful (haram) singing is when the theme of the song consists of unlawful things, such as the description of a particular living person’s beauty and features, the virtues of wine that provoke wine-drinking, the details and particulars of family affairs or those songs that mock and ridicule others.

However, songs that are free from such unlawful things and they consist of descriptions of the natural things, such as flowers and streams, etc… will be permissible. Yes, if they are accompanied by musical instruments, then it will be unlawful even if the song is full of advice and wisdom, not because of what the songs consist of, rather due to the musical instruments that are played with it.

And it is stated in the al-Mugni of Ibn Qudamah (Hanbali Madhhab) that musical instruments are of two types:

1) Unlawful, Such as those that are specially designed for entertainment and singing, like the flute and mandolin, etc…

2) Lawful, like the playing of the tambourine (daff) at weddings and other happy occasions” (Ibn Humam, Fath al-Qadir, 6/36).

The same has more or less been mentioned in the other Hanafi works also, such as al-Ikhtiyar, al-Bahr al-Ra’iq, al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya and others.

Imam an-Nawawi, the great Hadith and Shafi’i scholar states:

“It is unlawful to use or listen to musical instruments, such as, those which the drinkers are known for, like the mandolin, lute, cymbals, and flute. It is permissible to play the tambourine (daf) at weddings, circumcisions and other times, even if it has bells on its sides. Beating the Kuba, a long drum with a narrow middle, is also unlawful” (Mugni al-muhtaj, 4/429, & Reliance of the traveller, 775).

There are many other statements of the Fuqaha and scholars such al-Qurtubi, and each of the four Madhhabs, but due to the length of the article, I will suffice with the above.

As for those who hold music to be lawful usually present the Hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari in which two girls were singing in the presence of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) and Sayyida A’isha (Allah be pleased with her).

However, the permissibility of music can not be justified with this Hadith. The Hadith expert, Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani has refuted this claim in length in his Fath al-Bari, 2/345).

Firstly, theses young girls were singing without any unlawful musical instruments and secondly, the content of the song was regarding war, thus perfectly lawful. Also, they were not professional singers as the words of the Hadith clearly indicate.

Some try to justify music with the Hadith in which the permissibility of playing the tambourine (daf) is mentioned.

However, as stated in the works of the Fuqaha, to play the tambourine is permissible at weddings, as it is not designed for sole entertainment and pleasure, rather for announcement, etc…

Conclusion

In the light of the above evidences from the Qur’an, sayings of our beloved Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) and texts of the various Fuqaha, the following is the decisive ruling with regards to music:

Musical instruments that are solely designed for entertainment are unlawful, with or without singing. However, to play the tambourine (daf) at weddings (and other occasions according to some fuqaha) will be permissible.

As far as the songs are concerned, if they consist of anything that is unlawful or they prevent one from the obligatory duties, then they will be unlawful. However, if they are free from the abovementioned things (and they are not accompanied by instruments), then it will be permissible to sing them.

And Allah Knows best

Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari, UK
[/PIE]
Reply

جوري
02-22-2007, 03:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
:sl:

Even though everything worships God, I don't think that means they have souls, because Ibn `Abbâs said: “Draw trees and whatever has no soul." [Sahîh al-Bukhârî]. If everything had a souls, that would include trees. :?
I don't know. I think if you draw for sake of science it isn't Haram... lots of early islamic books included drawings. I believe there is a middle ground to everything. I have an art book here entitled Medicine a treasury of Art and literature and it includes some early islamic drawing detailing certain ailments and their cure....Maybe early Muslims knew something we don't?.... I do know they advanced in different fields if not all fields.. they were fearless..... so Allah A3lam..
:w:
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-22-2007, 03:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
Interesting thread :thumbs_up

Just wanna add this link here, its very detailed so please look into it Insha'Allah:
WnbSlveOfAllah, thank-you for your post. I think all of these things have already been covered, but you have now presented them in one place.

I get that there are types of music where the content is haraam. Of course, there is music where the content itself is not haraam. But then, I, also, get that music can be a very effective tool (whether with that intent or not is unimportant) to mislead people into haraam activities. And in that sense music becomes haraam again. I remain unconvinced that all music does this. I think there are types of music that do not lead to haraam, and so I do not see what would be wrong with them. But, my view is irrelevant. I was asking how it is understood within Islam, and within Islam it does seem that even if not in the Qu'ran, then at least in the hadiths of the prophet that nearly all music is haraam. Whether there might be some cases wherein music is permitted seems to be disputed based on which scholar you happen to read. And while I think that the conclusions which are garnered from some of the hadiths are rather forced and not so clear as they are interpreted to be, my view on this too is irrelevant. I'm not desiring to enter into such an internal debate. Though I may disagree with the reasoning behind it, for me the question is settled that on the whole music is generally not to be a part of Islam, whether for worship, celebration (with perhaps some exceptions), therapy, and certainly not for entertainment.

There is one part of your presentation against music that leads me to ask another question, however.

One of the harms of music is that it distracts one from his Creator. It serves as a temporary means of pleasure and satisfaction, which makes one forget who he really is and why he was created. This is the reason why musical instruments are known in the Arabic language as ‘malaahi’ meaning instruments that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah Almighty.

Human has been created for a noble purpose. Allah Most High says:

“I have created jinn and humans only that they serve (worship) me” (Surah al-Dhariyat, 56).

Music and temporary entertainments sink the human in physical pleasures and prevent him/her from true spiritual gains. In conclusion, music has a great role to play in preventing a human from realising the purpose of creation.
Surely this concern over the effects of music is found in nearly all forms of entertainment. Would not entertainment itself, not just in the form of music but in all of its forms have a great role in distracting us from our creator, thus preventing humans from realizing their purpose in creation? So, shouldn't all forms of entertainment, not just music, be haraam?
Reply

جوري
02-22-2007, 03:39 PM
Everyone is a self-proclaimed Mufti.....even the term mufti is a realtively new term for people to come up with conclusions without much research except that prophet (PBUH) advised us to unwind the heart every now and then... He used to race with Aisha RA and used to draw lines in the sands.... do you not consider that entertainment? here is one hadith and I am trying to find the other..
The Prophet said: 'The religion (of Islam) is easy. No one ever made it difficult without it becoming too much for him. So avoid extremes and strike a balance, do the best you can and be cheerful, and seek Allah's help (through prayer) in the morning, and evening, and part of the night.' (Sah&#238;h Bukh&#226;r&#238;)

remember that intent is one third of the law in Islam
Reply

czgibson
02-22-2007, 03:50 PM
Greetings,

I've seen this article before. Every time I look at it I'm amazed at the cultural difference it shows. It may look very sensible to a Muslim person, but to me it just looks like someone clutching at straws.

In the modern era, music has spread to such an extent that nobody is free from it. Individuals are confronted with situations where they are forced to listen to music. It is played nearly in all department stores and supermarkets. If you sit in a taxi, make a phone call or even walk down the street, you will not be saved from this evil. Young Muslims drive around in their cars with the music fully blasted. The increasing popularity of music, which is prevalent in our society, poses a great threat to the Muslims.
I also find music playing in supermarkets and other public places to be very annoying, but not for any spiritual reason - simply because it's normally terrible music that gets played!

Music is a direct ploy of the Non-Muslims.
I think this is an outrageously paranoid thing to say, and I would seriously question the psychological condition of anyone who actually believed this. Can you imagine Beethoven composing a symphony and saying to himself: 'All my years of study have paid off - now I have the tools to weaken the faith of the world's Muslims with my distracting rhythmic subtlety and harmonic tensions!" Or how about The Beatles: "We may well be the most popular group in the world, but we're not interested in that - all we want to do is to defeat Islam with our deft song-writing and harmony vocals!"
It is a psychological proven fact that two things are instrumental in arousing the human sexual desire, one being the voice of a female (for males) and the other music.
I would love to see this writer's psychology credentials. First, there are obviously a lot of other things that arouse human sexual desire, and second, to assume that all music has the same effect is like saying that all food tastes the same. I'd be concerned about someone who got aroused listening to Scum by Napalm Death or Bach's Mass in B Minor...

Experiments carried out by doctors and researchers confirm that music is such that it does not only affect the brain, but each and every organ of the body. There is a close relationship between music and bodily movements.
Well, there's a bold and radical statement of the obvious. All sound has physical effects.

In a psychological experiment, it was found that listening to moderate type of music increased one’s normal heart beat, whilst listening to rock music the heart beat increased even further, yet people claim that music has no effect.
I've asked this before in relation to this article: who claims that music has no effect?
In conclusion, music and the instruments used for singing are a cause for arousing the sexual desire of an individual.
This is very far from having been proven, for the reasons I've given above.

It could lead a person to adultery and fornication.
This is an absolutely pathetic argument. Being alive could lead to a person committing fornication, so why don't we just kill everybody as a preventative measure?

One of the harms of music is that it distracts one from his Creator. It serves as a temporary means of pleasure and satisfaction, which makes one forget who he really is and why he was created.
So does eating yoghurt - ban it!

Another harm of music is that it instills the ideologies of the Non-Muslims in the heart and mind. The messages of today’s music follow a general theme of love, fornication, drugs and freedom.
I think the writer here is thinking of lyrics, not music. There's no way a B flat minor chord can convince you to take drugs, as far as I'm aware.

We find that the whole world is obsessed with the Kufr idea of unrestrained freedom, i.e. freedom of speech and movement, etc… This idea of freedom, “it’s my life, I’ll do what I want” is a predominant theme of music today. It is used as a means of drilling western ideologies into the hearts and minds, which are totally contrary to Islamic values and teachings.
Then why are people attracted to Western ideologies? If Islamic values are so much better, then surely people will naturally see that? Surely 'truth stands clear from error'?

I find it very hard to believe that someone has devoted so much time and energy to writing such an ill-informed, paranoid and irrational piece. It's also worrying that there are people here who are willing to give it credence.

Don't listen to music if you think it's bad for you, but please don't just make up nonsense about it to justify that choice.

Peace
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
02-22-2007, 05:36 PM
^^Are you talking about Islam or the Qur'an. I hope not. If so then thats really obnoxious and rude :X
Reply

czgibson
02-22-2007, 05:58 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by Tayyaba
^^Are you talking about Islam or the Qur'an. I hope not. If so then thats really obnoxious and rude :X
I'm sorry if you think I've been rude - that's not my intention at all. All I'm doing is giving a response to the article posted by WnbSlveOfAllah. You will see this if you read what I've written.

Peace
Reply

InToTheRain
02-22-2007, 06:20 PM
Greetings CZGibson,

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

I think this is an outrageously paranoid thing to say, and I would seriously question the psychological condition of anyone who actually believed this. Can you imagine Beethoven composing a symphony and saying to himself: 'All my years of study have paid off - now I have the tools to weaken the faith of the world's Muslims with my distracting rhythmic subtlety and harmonic tensions!" Or how about The Beatles: "We may well be the most popular group in the world, but we're not interested in that - all we want to do is to defeat Islam with our deft song-writing and harmony vocals!"
I agree, infact its the ploy of Satan and he has done a good job seeing as how everyone is hell bent on it, then again he has years of experience, since the begining of mankind might I add.

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
I would love to see this writer's psychology credentials. First, there are obviously a lot of other things that arouse human sexual desire, and second, to assume that all music has the same effect is like saying that all food tastes the same. I'd be concerned about someone who got aroused listening to Scum by Napalm Death or Bach's Mass in B Minor...
I don't know what type of music your talking about but from my experience with music its true, I used to be quite the ... erm ... head banger should I say. and bear in mind the article is talking about Music listened by youths, especially Muslim youths, and you may not be aware of what they listen to but it what the article says makes a lot of sense if you do. they listen to HipHop, RNB, Bhangra etc which is about love which conjures up images of the opposite sex. Now thinking about images of the opposite sex, especially under the context of love can lead things which Islam makes HARAM. Sex, drugs and rock roll as they say eh? And they all have the same affect - a negative one.

The only type of music I guess I that wouldn't come under the sex, drugs and rock and roll theme maybe Oprah? hmmm... no actually its about love too..o and violence :eek:


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
This is an absolutely pathetic argument. Being alive could lead to a person committing fornication, so why don't we just kill everybody as a preventative measure?
Given that the article is talking about the type of music majority of the people and indeed the muslim youth is listening toit will lead to negative/Unislamic thoughts and desires.

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Then why are people attracted to Western ideologies? If Islamic values are so much better, then surely people will naturally see that? Surely 'truth stands clear from error'?
There are people who are attracted to Islam and there are people who are attracted to satans bait and blinded by it. Why did Adam(AS) have the fruit from the tree Allah(SWT) forbade him? you think there was just one tree in heaven to eat from? no, there were millions, but satan lured Adam(AS) to the forbidden tree.

Do try and understand the context, its an article for the Muslim youths, and I may have made a mistake by giving it here as it will be (and it has been) misinterpreted.
Reply

czgibson
02-22-2007, 06:55 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
I agree, infact its the ploy of Satan and he has done a good job seeing as how everyone is hell bent on it, then again he has years of experience, since the begining of mankind might I add.
That's not what the writer said, though, is it? I quote: "Music is a direct ploy of the Non-Muslims." This implies that Beethoven and the Beatles would have thought along the lines I indicated, which is quite obviously ludicrous.

I don't know what type of music your talking about but from my experience with music its true, I used to be quite the ... erm ... head banger should I say.
Fine, but really this just proves my point: people who condemn music outright don't usually know very much about it.

and bear in mind the article is talking about Music listened by youths, especially Muslim youths, and you may not be aware of what they listen to but it what the article says makes a lot of sense if you do. they listen to HipHop, RNB, Bhangra etc which is about love which conjures up images of the opposite sex.
I know perfectly well what young people listen to - I'm surrounded by them all day every day! I agree that there is a lot of rubbish out there, but if you ban all music, then that means that young people may never get to hear all the excellent hip-hop, r & b and bhangra that exists. Who knows, they might even discover some other genres of music too.

Now thinking about images of the opposite sex, especially under the context of love can lead things which Islam makes HARAM. Sex, drugs and rock roll as they say eh? And they all have the same affect - a negative one.
I'm interested in the idea that sex is something negative. I've always thought it's one of the highlights of human existence. Mainstream religions tend to be terrified of sex; this causes a lot of psychological repression and unnecessary mental suffering.

The only type of music I guess I that wouldn't come under the sex, drugs and rock and roll theme maybe Oprah? hmmm... no actually its about love too..o and violence :eek:
What about all the many examples of music with no lyrics at all? Why should they be banned?

Following the logic that is being set out here, it is surprising that Islam only allows unaccompanied vocal music, yet condemns instrumental music.

Given that the article is talking about the type of music majority of the people and indeed the muslim youth is listening toit will lead to negative/Unislamic thoughts and desires.
To be honest I think the writer of the article doesn't know the first thing about music of any kind.

There are people who are attracted to Islam and there are people who are attracted to satans bait and blinded by it. Why did Adam(AS) have the fruit from the tree Allah(SWT) forbade him? you think there was just one tree in heaven to eat from? no, there were millions, but satan lured Adam(AS) to the forbidden tree.
The West isn't perfect, but its ideologies have brought prosperity and technological advancement to millions of people. If that's Satan's bait, then call me a Satanist.

Do try and understand the context, its an article for the Muslim youths, and I may have made a mistake by giving it here as it will be (and it has been) misinterpreted.
I think the Muslim youth need to know that they are being fed a load of utter drivel by people who know nothing about what they condemn.

Peace
Reply

جوري
02-22-2007, 08:00 PM
CZ.. if you wanted an appropriate ruling on things in Islam you can go to the attached website and ask a scholar on any subject matter. Realize that in Islam there are four "Mazahib" and people making "ijtihad" with as many sources as possible to confer proper ruling. Also realize that intent is 1/3 the law in Islam. Are you doing things to teach and enhance knowledge or doing them for idol worship, vain discourse and to lead people astray? Things can be looked at from many different perspectives.....
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/S.../FatwaCounselE

^^^ for questions

Here is a drawing by an early Muslim scholar-- subject is: texts on Medicine and pharmacology



An exerpt:
"In addition to the major encyclopedic works produced by such scholars as al-Razi (Latin Rhazes, d. 925 AD) and Ibn Sina (Latin Avicenna, d. 1037 AD), whose works were translated into Latin as early as the twelfth century, and continued to be studied through the second half of the seventeenth century, the major Islamic discoveries and contributions to the field of medicine include:

1) The introduction of new fields of medical research and clinical practice such as maternity, gynecology, embryology, pediatrics, dietary medicine, public health, and psychic medicine.

2) The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of many new diseases such as smallpox and measles.

3) The qualitative development of the field of pharmacology beyond the comparatively limited earlier state of knowledge.

4) In contrast to the Greek tradition which excluded it, Muslims incorporated surgery into the study of medicine, and developed its practice and techniques."

so images were drawn for sake of science and to enhance the quality of living-- early Muslims Advanced in all facets not by sitting on a forum and arguing semantics.... also I am sure you have seen a whole site here about Nasheeds... in which instumentaions and words are being used. Again I think one should consider how and why and for what purpose anything is being used... else we're all just talking back & forth with an argument of our own making....

http://www.library.yale.edu/neareast/exhitmedicine.htm

all in all I hope we can remain civil...
thank you
Reply

InToTheRain
02-22-2007, 08:41 PM
Greetings Satanist :D

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


That's not what the writer said, though, is it? I quote: "Music is a direct ploy of the Non-Muslims." This implies that Beethoven and the Beatles would have thought along the lines I indicated, which is quite obviously ludicrous.
you think satan is a muslim?? no he is a non-muslim and so are those that follow him.

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Fine, but really this just proves my point: people who condemn music outright don't usually know very much about it..
Don't be so presumptuous, He lives in UK where the Music BHOOM is, im sure he knows what he is talking about.

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
I know perfectly well what young people listen to - I'm surrounded by them all day every day! I agree that there is a lot of rubbish out there, but if you ban all music, then that means that young people may never get to hear all the excellent hip-hop, r & b and bhangra that exists. Who knows, they might even discover some other genres of music too.

I'm interested in the idea that sex is something negative. I've always thought it's one of the highlights of human existence. Mainstream religions tend to be terrified of sex; this causes a lot of psychological repression and unnecessary mental suffering

What about all the many examples of music with no lyrics at all? Why should they be banned?

Following the logic that is being set out here, it is surprising that Islam only allows unaccompanied vocal music, yet condemns instrumental music.

try to understand that prevention is better then cure. with all the technological advancements the
state of humanity as a whole is still deteriorting. Thee are more crimes and deseases then ever before.
Gun crimes, teen pregnancies, drugs & alcahol abuse and disorderly behaviour is a common trend with the youths these days
and they all have one thing in common...yes you guessed it! there love for music, apparently its a their single most
big influence, that and eastenders round where i live anyways

As far as I know only the duff was allowed is allowed. The prominent scholars who are far more knowledgable of Islam
have selflessly undertook rigirous studies in order to guide mankind have made the ruling that Music is Haram. Now in honesty I
myself have questions and which I would like more detailed explanation to, for instance would music be allowed to one who is married and uses
it for leisure as it reminds him of his wife?

but you have to keep an open mind to this, as Allah(SWT) made laws for the whole of mankind based on their limits, abilities to do things,
with the knowledge of the unseen and infinite wisdom. We accept his judgements knwoing we cannot fathom his reasoning and ration, onyl knowing that he knows whats best for us even though we cannot fathom how, its called FAITH. The best of mankind Mohammad(SAW) didn't do it nor his companions and the PROMINENT scholars upon studying the Qur'an and sunnah have some to the
conclusion that it's because it leads to Unlawful thoughts/actions.

And I know there are many brothers and sisters out there that listen to music, thinking that maybe its ok even though there is doubt within their own judgement. For instance
the music of Sami Yusuf, Naudhubillah. But where there is doubt one should leave it. WOuld you eat a sandwhich which has rat-droppings around it only to suffer the consequences if it did later? I think not... well at least I hope so.


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
The West isn't perfect, but its ideologies have brought prosperity and technological advancement to millions of people. If that's Satan's bait, then call me a Satanist.
Technological advncements maybe but bought prosperity? I THINK NOT :rant:

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
I think the Muslim youth need to know that they are being fed a load of utter drivel by people who know nothing about what they condemn.

Peace
Well atleast you tried to keep those inflammatory remarks to yourself till the end eh? :)

Peace
Reply

czgibson
02-23-2007, 03:43 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
you think satan is a muslim?? no he is a non-muslim and so are those that follow him.
To be quite frank I think that Satan is a fictional character. He's also not mentioned in the argument I thought we were discussing.

Don't be so presumptuous, He lives in UK where the Music BHOOM is, im sure he knows what he is talking about.
You yourself admitted you didn't know what music I was talking about; therefore, you don't have a particularly wide knowledge of music. As for the article we're discussing, the author shows no indication of knowing anything about music.

try to understand that prevention is better then cure. with all the technological advancements the
state of humanity as a whole is still deteriorting. Thee are more crimes and deseases then ever before.
Evidence for this bold assertion?!

Gun crimes, teen pregnancies, drugs & alcahol abuse and disorderly behaviour is a common trend with the youths these days
and they all have one thing in common...yes you guessed it! there love for music, apparently its a their single most
big influence, that and eastenders round where i live anyways
Are you interested in having a rational debate here, or are you just going to make baseless generalisations?
As far as I know only the duff was allowed is allowed. The prominent scholars who are far more knowledgable of Islam
have selflessly undertook rigirous studies in order to guide mankind have made the ruling that Music is Haram.
Selflessly? It's their job! Continuing to do what they do helps to consolidate their position of authority.

Also, is it not Allah that has supposedly made music haram?

but you have to keep an open mind to this, as Allah(SWT) made laws for the whole of mankind based on their limits, abilities to do things,
with the knowledge of the unseen and infinite wisdom. We accept his judgements knwoing we cannot fathom his reasoning and ration, onyl knowing that he knows whats best for us even though we cannot fathom how, its called FAITH.
That's precisely why I think faith can be so dangeous. Someone who believes they are right, even though they have no real reasons to support their view, is capable of anything.

The best of mankind Mohammad(SAW) didn't do it nor his companions and the PROMINENT scholars upon studying the Qur'an and sunnah have some to the
conclusion that it's because it leads to Unlawful thoughts/actions.
They've tried to justify a ruling after the fact, and as I've been trying to show, their justifications are based on ignorance and paranoia - little more.
But where there is doubt one should leave it. WOuld you eat a sandwhich which has rat-droppings around it only to suffer the consequences if it did later? I think not... well at least I hope so.
Thank you for that rather colourful analogy, although I'm not sure how it fits in here...

Technological advncements maybe but bought prosperity? I THINK NOT :rant:
What has led you to this view? The gap between rich and poor is substantial now, but nothing like as wide as it was, say, 600 years ago.

Well atleast you tried to keep those inflammatory remarks to yourself till the end eh? :)
What is inflammatory about them? If you believe the arguments given by the article we're discussing, you are being conned - it's as simple as that.

Don't just believe whatever you're told simply because the person telling you is in a position of authority - think for yourself.

Peace
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-23-2007, 04:45 PM
WnbSlveOfAllah,

I've had my curiousity settle with regard to Muslim interpreations of music. However, there is one part of your presentation against music that leads me to ask another question. I asked it above, but it went unanswered. Would you mind addressig it, please.
One of the harms of music is that it distracts one from his Creator. It serves as a temporary means of pleasure and satisfaction, which makes one forget who he really is and why he was created. This is the reason why musical instruments are known in the Arabic language as ‘malaahi’ meaning instruments that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah Almighty.

Human has been created for a noble purpose. Allah Most High says:

“I have created jinn and humans only that they serve (worship) me” (Surah al-Dhariyat, 56).

Music and temporary entertainments sink the human in physical pleasures and prevent him/her from true spiritual gains. In conclusion, music has a great role to play in preventing a human from realising the purpose of creation.

Surely this concern over the effects of music is found in nearly all forms of entertainment. Would not entertainment itself, not just in the form of music but in all of its forms have a great role in distracting us from our creator, thus preventing humans from realizing their purpose in creation? So, shouldn't all forms of entertainment, not just music, be haraam?
Reply

KAding
02-23-2007, 08:09 PM
What I always wonder about, is it the task of an Islamic state to outlaw something like music? Is everything that is haram in Islam automatically outlawed? And would such prohibitions also be in force for non-Muslims who live in an Islamic state?
Reply

zoro
02-23-2007, 10:29 PM
With respect to ideas about music in Islam, I found the following comments interesting, copied from Link deleted .

47. by Saadiq

Speaking as a Muslim, what Islam lacks most today in contrast to the times of Mohammed is the Islamic concept of ijtihad, or creative interpretation.

There are certain teachings of the faith that believers hold to transcend time and space, to be sure. But many of the teachings of the Qur'an and hadith were intended to be dynamic and flexible, evolving over time to best fit with the various societies that practiced Islam. Hence, ijtihad.

In it's golden age, Islamic philosophers espoused a wide variety interpretations of Islamic law and life; sometimes, these interpretations were contradictory, as well, but everybody lived and let live.

This faith is now lacking within the organized structure of Islam and has been replaced with a neurotic fear of pluralism and innovation, a trend that not only betrays the past of Islam, but threatens its future, as well.
And the following response by khorshid (#128):

This closing of the door of Ijtihad is connected to the ascendance of a clergy class, despite the fact that in theory islam is not supposed to have any clergy.

These interpreters of the law find it in their interest to prevent too much reasoning and innovation in order to preserve their hold on the present…
My impression is that, once again and as with most religions, it is the clerics' quest for power that has taken some good ideas and twisted them for the clerics' benefit.
Reply

Woodrow
02-24-2007, 01:27 AM
The quotes in the post above can not be accepted as fact for Muslims unless it can be shown they are supported by Sunnah and authentic Ahadith
Reply

Philosopher
02-24-2007, 05:14 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
What is halal and what is haram in regards to music? What makes one halal and the other haram?
Sunnis believe all music is haraam. Shia Muslims believe that any music is allowed as long as the lyrics have no explicit content.
Reply

InToTheRain
02-24-2007, 01:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


To be quite frank I think that Satan is a fictional character. He's also not mentioned in the argument I thought we were discussing.
Thats your belief. In Islam, christianity and Judaism as well as other religions the existence of Satan is a very real thing.


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
You yourself admitted you didn't know what music I was talking about; therefore, you don't have a particularly wide knowledge of music. As for the article we're discussing, the author shows no indication of knowing anything about music.
I admtted I didn't know the type of music your talking about. However it doesn't take a genius to figure alcahol in its many varieties when consumed will cause negative affects to the body (Haram) however when applied as medicine it is permited (Halal). Similiarly there are case Music is Haram unless using certain instruments and the context of the song.


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
Evidence for this bold assertion?!

Are you interested in having a rational debate here, or are you just going to make baseless generalisations?
Living in London and having first hand experience I would hardly say its Baseless. What s baseless is to think the world is full of bowls of roses just because you have no problems with it.
If your argument for properity of a nation is technological advancements and economic growth then you should really take a look at this. Uk being one of the most pwerful countries in the EU is the still the worst for the youth of today:

http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...tml#post665811

"Illustrating the yawning gap between rich and poor, it said the 20 percent of people living in high-income countries consume 86 percent of the world's goods and services. The poorest 20 percent, by contrast, consume just 1.3 percent, the UN gives in a snap shot of the wealth and poverty of nations. "

http://academic.udayton.edu/race/06h...ca/china03.htm

http://southmovement.alphalink.com.a...UNrichpoor.htm


format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
They've tried to justify a ruling after the fact, and as I've been trying to show, their justifications are based on ignorance and paranoia - little more.

Thank you for that rather colourful analogy, although I'm not sure how it fits in here...?
Its a metaphor. The sandwhich is Music, and the rat droppings are doubts we may have about if it is right or wrong to listen to it based on our belief. Given that it is Haram except for certain instruments, we should stay away from it even though we cannot comprehend at first why it would lead to a negative result. As I have explained before, it is called faith, and I have no reasons to doubt my faith to date.

format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
What has led you to this view? The gap between rich and poor is substantial now, but nothing like as wide as it was, say, 600 years ago.?
Now who is the one making baseless assertions? :D



format_quote Originally Posted by czgibson
What is inflammatory about them? If you believe the arguments given by the article we're discussing, you are being conned - it's as simple as that.

Don't just believe whatever you're told simply because the person telling you is in a position of authority - think for yourself.

Peace
Thanks for the advice and I'm not as gullible or naive as you as you have assumed due to your prejudice. I sincerely hope that you and many others who are ignorant of Islam do your own research as well.
Reply

InToTheRain
02-24-2007, 02:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
WnbSlveOfAllah,
Surely this concern over the effects of music is found in nearly all forms of entertainment. Would not entertainment itself, not just in the form of music but in all of its forms have a great role in distracting us from our creator, thus preventing humans from realizing their purpose in creation? So, shouldn't all forms of entertainment, not just music, be haraam?
Hi Grace_seeker,

Too much of anything is not good for us, and as sister Purest_ambrosia has pointed out, Mohammad(SAW) told us to strike the balance.

Just to give an example of how too much a good thing may lead to a bad thing from one of the companions of the Prophet Salmaan Al-Farsi(RA):

[PIE]He once stayed with Abu Ad-Dardaa', under the same roof. Abu Ad-Dardaa' used to pray all night and fast all day. Salmaan blamed him for this excessive worship. One day, Salmaan wanted to stop him from fasting and to say it was supererogatory. Abu Ad-Dardaa' asked him, "Would you prevent me from fasting for my Lord and from praying to Him?" Salmaan replied, "No, your eyes have a claim upon you, your family has a claim upon you, so fast intermittently, then pray and sleep."

This reached the Prophet (PBUH) who said, "Salmaan is, indeed, full of knowledge." The Prophet (PBUH) was often impressed by his wisdom and knowledge, just as he was impressed by his character and religion. On the Day of Al-Khandaq the Ansaar stood up and said, "Salmaan is of us," the Muhaajiruun stood up also and said, "Salmaan is of us." The Prophet called to them saying, "Salmaan is of us, O People of the House (Prophet's house)."

http://www.iberr.org/salmaan.htm
[/PIE]

There is no reason we can't entertain ourselves so long as it is permissible. In the article the speaker is giving his opinon, he is partially right, we can do other things such as reciting the Quran which I find entertaining and from here we also find that our ideas of entertainment isn't the same. We also learn that the speaker is talking about the youth if today and what they find entertaining which has a lot of haram things within it.

Where the scholars have given valid concensus derived from Quran and Sunnah for something to be permissible I don't see anything wrong with doing it.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-24-2007, 02:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
There is no reason we can't entertain ourselves so long as it is permissible.
But the argument against music was that one of the reason it isn't permissible is because it is entertainment. These two views seem to work against each other.


In the article the speaker is giving his opinon, he is partially right, we can do other things such as reciting the Quran which I find entertaining and from here we also find that our ideas of entertainment isn't the same.
I get that doing that which is good for you, one learns to enjoy. But we don't read the Qu'ran for entertainment. We read it for edification and then also derive joy from it in addition, as a side benefit. The argument was that which is done purely for entertainment (reading the Qu'ran does not fit that description) is haraam. So, I am suggesting that this would apply to many other things, such as the activies of the youth you mention. But not just of youth, I see old men and women do things purely for entertainment as well, I think people always have. According to the argument advanced against music, wouldn't those things be haraam as well.

And, just thinking a little more deeply, even reading the Qu'ran, if read purely for entertainment, and not to praise God or to grow in knowledge of God, but simply for one's selfish amusement, I would think that it too might not be pleaseing to Allah. Perhaps it is possible to read the Qu'ran in an unfit manner, and I can't think of one more unfitting Allah, than to read his word, purely for entertainment.
Reply

Silver Pearl
02-24-2007, 07:20 PM
Greetings Grace,

I hope you don't mind that I'm addressing your post.

But the argument against music was that one of the reason it isn't permissible is because it is entertainment. These two views seem to work against each other.
The fact that music is not permissible has nothing to do with it being entertaining as far as I know, if that were the case no sport would be allowed in Islam. There are various reasons as to why it not allowed. I'm sure people have highlighted this for you already so I'll save both of us time by not dwelling into that. Music is very dominant in society, you can not go anywhere without having music blaring in your ears, whether it is awful music or good music. The youth are influenced highly by what type of music they listen to. Alot of the time music has a negative impact on youngsters. Certain types of music makes them more suicidal and depressed, the lyrics are very morbid. Then you have the pimp wanna-bes advocated by alot of hip-hop and RnB music. Music soothes some people, music inspires cerrtain people but all of that is psychological, if I keep telling myself that music soothes me it will do just that. Our mind is a great tool, you can sometimes deceive it.

I get that doing that which is good for you, one learns to enjoy. But we don't read the Qu'ran for entertainment.
People differ, when I read the Qur'an I read it for entertainment, just like I read books for entertainment. This is not disrepectful nor am I doing it for selfish amusement. When I'm obliged to read a text for analytical purpose however it kills all the entertainment out of it. Your last statement is a generalisation and holds little basis for it.

We read it for edification and then also derive joy from it in addition, as a side benefit.
I'd have to disagree based on the comments I made above.


The argument was that which is done purely for entertainment (reading the Qu'ran does not fit that description) is haraam. So, I am suggesting that this would apply to many other things, such as the activies of the youth you mention. But not just of youth, I see old men and women do things purely for entertainment as well, I think people always have. According to the argument advanced against music, wouldn't those things be haraam as well.
I know you're not addressing me, I think perhaps you may have misunderstood what WnB meant or perhaps he rephrased his comment too ambigioiusly. I have not heard that music was made unlawful because it is entertaining.

And God knows best
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-24-2007, 10:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Silver Pearl
Greetings Grace,

I hope you don't mind that I'm addressing your post.



The fact that music is not permissible has nothing to do with it being entertaining as far as I know, if that were the case no sport would be allowed in Islam. There are various reasons as to why it not allowed. I'm sure people have highlighted this for you already so I'll save both of us time by not dwelling into that. Music is very dominant in society, you can not go anywhere without having music blaring in your ears, whether it is awful music or good music. The youth are influenced highly by what type of music they listen to. Alot of the time music has a negative impact on youngsters. Certain types of music makes them more suicidal and depressed, the lyrics are very morbid. Then you have the pimp wanna-bes advocated by alot of hip-hop and RnB music. Music soothes some people, music inspires cerrtain people but all of that is psychological, if I keep telling myself that music soothes me it will do just that. Our mind is a great tool, you can sometimes deceive it.



People differ, when I read the Qur'an I read it for entertainment, just like I read books for entertainment. This is not disrepectful nor am I doing it for selfish amusement. When I'm obliged to read a text for analytical purpose however it kills all the entertainment out of it. Your last statement is a generalisation and holds little basis for it.



I'd have to disagree based on the comments I made above.




I know you're not addressing me, I think perhaps you may have misunderstood what WnB meant or perhaps he rephrased his comment too ambigioiusly. I have not heard that music was made unlawful because it is entertaining.

And God knows best

I don't mind you addressing this point at all. Your very simple, reasoned, logical argument was most refreshing. Your points with respect to sometimes just reading of the Qu'ran for its entertainment value are well taken. And I would think that doing so would NOT distract you from the Creator.

Further, from my experience the same is probalby true with books (and, for me, even with music). So, it could be that something could have entertainment value, from which would be a means of pleasure and satisfaction in life, and still not make one forget who one really is or why one was created. If that is your point, then we definitely agree.

I am also aware that not all arguments against music are based on the question of its role as a form of entertainment, but some have been.

Here is the part of WnB's post that led to my question.
One of the harms of music is that it distracts one from his Creator. It serves as a temporary means of pleasure and satisfaction, which makes one forget who he really is and why he was created. This is the reason why musical instruments are known in the Arabic language as ‘malaahi’ meaning instruments that prevent one from the remembrance of Allah Almighty.

Human has been created for a noble purpose. Allah Most High says:

“I have created jinn and humans only that they serve (worship) me” (Surah al-Dhariyat, 56).

Music and temporary entertainments sink the human in physical pleasures and prevent him/her from true spiritual gains. In conclusion, music has a great role to play in preventing a human from realising the purpose of creation.
As that was part of a greater argument against music. I am just suggesting that one could substitute nearly any other form of entertainment for the word "music" in his post, if entertainment is the problem. Thus it would read: "One of the harms of sports, or reading books, or playing cards,..."

Now, if that seems inappropriate to do, then it would seem that at least this argument against music (one which if you read this post, and all the links provided has been repeated several times) should be dismissed as not applicable. Leave the others, things like: "because Muhammad (pbuh) said so", but don't continue to add specious arguments where the maker of the argument is unwilling to follow it to its logical conclusion.
Reply

InToTheRain
02-25-2007, 12:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Here is the part of WnB's post that led to my question. As that was part of a greater argument against music. I am just suggesting that one could substitute nearly any other form of entertainment for the word "music" in his post, if entertainment is the problem. Thus it would read: "One of the harms of sports, or reading books, or playing cards,..."

Now, if that seems inappropriate to do, then it would seem that at least this argument against music (one which if you read this post, and all the links provided has been repeated several times) should be dismissed as not applicable. Leave the others, things like: "because Muhammad (pbuh) said so", but don't continue to add specious arguments where the maker of the argument is unwilling to follow it to its logical conclusion.
I completely agree with you, that he could have used many other forms of entertainment to highlight the problem, but he is talking about a certain category of people and the affects he has seen on them due to music.

As Sister SilverPearl has said, Entertainment is not Haram and not everyone finds the same things entertaining. The article mentions that entertainment distracts you from your creator but would that be applicable to me as I find reading the Qur'an out loud, or even listening to it entertaining? I also play various sports such as tennis, football etc regardless I am aware of the times I need to pray and even work in praises for Allah(SWT) during my sports games (highly entertaining might I add :D ). In the article he is talking about a certain category of individuals with a certain mindset which unfortunately is the Majority amongst the Muslim youths of today, maybe adult as well as you have mentioned. without a doubt, he could have used words to communicate the same message, as I have also mentioned before, I may have made a mistake by posting the article here as a non-muslim will misinterpret it.

Peace
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-25-2007, 04:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
I may have made a mistake by posting the article here as a non-muslim will misinterpret it.

Peace


We might. But, please don't let that stop you from posting. I have asked because I am curious about these things. And this is NOT just a question and answer thread. I don't mind debate, becaue I learn from debating. The reasons behind something or the process by which one reaches a particular view are just as informative to me as the answer itself. And if you sense that I am misinterpreting, I invite you to post again and again, as much as you find necessary.
Reply

Pygoscelis
02-26-2007, 08:55 AM
Music certainly can effect one's emotions. I don't see that as a particularly good or bad thing, but I do agree it has that effect.

As for it arousing men sexually and leading to fornication, doesn't that depend on the song? I imagine some songs would even have the opposite effect.
Reply

Malaikah
02-26-2007, 09:19 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
As for it arousing men sexually and leading to fornication, doesn't that depend on the song? I imagine some songs would even have the opposite effect.
Well yeh, but about 95% of the current music industry seems to fit in that category. :rollseyes
Reply

duskiness
02-26-2007, 10:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Well yeh, but about 95% of the current music industry seems to fit in that category. :rollseyes
maybe 95% of pop, r'n'b, hiphop music. But there are other kinds! Jazz as an easy example.
Reply

Ayesha Rana
02-26-2007, 10:12 AM
You\'ve been very polite throughout this discussion Grace Seeker and i respect u for that. You mentioned in the beginning that alot of muslims listen to music, well id like to say that music is a temptation and not everyone is strong enough to resist it, even if they know it is Haram.
Im glad that alot of the brothers and sisters on LI have knowledge of it being Haram Alhamdu\'lillah.
I was told that we cannot love both music and Qur’an at the same time and that they have a battle in our heart till one of them is thrown out and our heart is filled with the other.
Well I\'d like my heart to be filled with Allah’s guidance so I don’t listen to music, even if the instruments are used in Islamic Nasheeds, because mixing Halal and Haram does not make what is forbidden Halal.
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-27-2007, 03:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
As for it arousing men sexually and leading to fornication, doesn't that depend on the song? I imagine some songs would even have the opposite effect.
Well yeh, but about 95% of the current music industry seems to fit in that category. :rollseyes

Not only the current music industry, but when one looks back in time, one finds the vast majority of popular songs to be about various types of love relationships. However, I don't think that means we should label all music as guilty of that character simply because so much of it is? Nor if I was passing judgment on music simply on whether or not people can be led astray by it, would I want to pass the same sentence on music that does not lead people astray that I do on music that does, simply because both are music. It may be a small percentage, but there is still plenty of music that is righteous and uplifting.

Having never been to Australia, the only Australians I know are people like Rod Stewart, Olivia Newton John, and Elle McPhearson. Based on that should I treat all Australians as I would them?

And then there is the biblical story of Lot in Sodom. God tells Abraham that he is going to destroy Sodom because of the wickedness there.

Genesis 18
16 When the men got up to leave, they looked down toward Sodom, and Abraham walked along with them to see them on their way. 17 Then the LORD said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? 18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. 19 For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing what is right and just, so that the LORD will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him."
20 Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. [e] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: "Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare [f] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge [g] of all the earth do right?"

26 The LORD said, "If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake."

27 Then Abraham spoke up again: "Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city because of five people?"
"If I find forty-five there," he said, "I will not destroy it."

29 Once again he spoke to him, "What if only forty are found there?"
He said, "For the sake of forty, I will not do it."

30 Then he said, "May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?"
He answered, "I will not do it if I find thirty there."

31 Abraham said, "Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?"
He said, "For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it."

32 Then he said, "May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?"
He answered, "For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it."

33 When the LORD had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.
Evidently God did not find even 10 righteous people in Sodom for he destoryed it, rescuing only Lot, his wife, and 2 daughters. But the point of this part of the story is that you don't condemn the righteous with the unrighteous, even if it is 95% bad. In my humble opinion, I think the same is true with regard to music.
Reply

AbuAbdallah
02-28-2007, 02:54 AM
salaam,
If I may interject here.

I just want to emphasize the point that music is haraam is because it is an order from Allah. Not because it is entertainment or that it leads to fornication. Why is eating pork haraam? Why do we enter the Mosque with our right foot? We can't always search for the reasons why, sometimes the reasons are explained or are obvious, and sometimes they aren't.
Having to know why something is halaal or haraam is not a condition of following that act.

If we as Muslims learned that listening to music or eating pork would make us live longer healthier lives, would we do it? Why not? Because the reason for doing something is not based on logic, it is based on fearing your Lord and doing what he commands.

And Allah knows best
Reply

Grace Seeker
02-28-2007, 04:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by AbuAbdallah

If we as Muslims learned that listening to music or eating pork would make us live longer healthier lives, would we do it? Why not? Because the reason for doing something is not based on logic, it is based on fearing your Lord and doing what he commands.

And Allah knows best
:bravo: Truly a well spoken answer. Righteousness before reason.


Yet, my thanks to those who tried to help me get at what might be behind this thinking also.
Reply

Skavau
03-01-2007, 11:04 PM
If we as Muslims learned that listening to music or eating pork would make us live longer healthier lives, would we do it? Why not? Because the reason for doing something is not based on logic, it is based on fearing your Lord and doing what he commands.
Well that does categorise not just Islamic thought but all submissive thought. What I see above is not an example of righteousness in my eyes, but an example of oppression based upon fear. That is a worrying thing to see from my perspective. I do not deem it a positive option to apply a system of fear willingly into yourself on the basis of faith. It is anti-rational and dangerous

If you are willing to defy logic on the basis that the one you worship tells you to, then what is the limit of defiance for other people on other faiths? If someone is told that their God they worship thinks you should kill people to please him, but all rational ethical systems say otherwise with reason - according to allegience, the believer should happily kill. The point is that faith is dangerous to society. It promotes a never-changing position of one viewpoint, can advocate conflict and is dangerous for those caught in crossfire.

Onto the topic at hand though. Music is haramm? Well I would agree that a lot of music is indeed repulsive out there and I'm no fan of the cheesy lyrics in pop songs, or the braindead lyrics of R'n'b and I wouldn't be caught listening to it ever. But to suggest that Music itself is inherently going to lead to sex is just paranoia and isn't true. Everything can argubly lead to sex. It is only the imagery in music that can cause any kind of sexual arousal, but that itself is not music. That is imagery.

I myself listen mostly to Heavy Metal, Power Metal, Prog. Metal and a lot of misc. Classic/Epic tracks with a dab of Electronic Music. The lyrics in most are positive, because I like positive and epic music. Many are also fantasy based in lyrical style. Is that bad?

If you don't listen to Music due to the risk of 'being torn away' from worshipping Allah - then entertainment itself should be compromised surely for the same purpose?

Thanks, Skavau.
Reply

AbuAbdallah
03-02-2007, 05:31 AM
If you are willing to defy logic on the basis that the one you worship tells you to, then what is the limit of defiance for other people on other faiths? If someone is told that their God they worship thinks you should kill people to please him, but all rational ethical systems say otherwise with reason - according to allegience, the believer should happily kill. The point is that faith is dangerous to society. It promotes a never-changing position of one viewpoint, can advocate conflict and is dangerous for those caught in crossfire.
Why are speaking hypothetically here? We are talking about Islam.
Faith is dangerous to society? Have you looked at the crime rate recently? Not believing in God, deeds, or the afterlife, is dangerous to society. If someone is told not to murder someone because you will be punished by God, they will behave a lot better then someone who believes that once they die they will cease to exist.
Reply

IceQueen~
03-02-2007, 11:44 AM
musical instruments are not allowed...'voice' is not classed as a musical instrument so yeah...

the other thing is that musical instruments have an effect on your mind- the sounds etc put your brain in an altered state of conscious which allows whatever the words are to go into your subconscious---which thereby affect you, the music itself affects even if there are no words

the other thing that is forbidden is vain talk, gossip, dirty, lustful poems or songs etc

this is because whatever you hear and see and experience around you goes into your mind and bases your beliefs whether you are consciously aware or not
and your beliefs form your thoughts and your thoughts form your actions...

so environment (influences) =beliefs (form)= thoughts= actions

so you reap what you sow and you sow whatever you allow into your mind
Reply

czgibson
03-02-2007, 03:44 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by IceQueen~
musical instruments are not allowed...'voice' is not classed as a musical instrument so yeah...
The idea that the voice is or is not an instrument is an arbitrary classification. I'd describe it as the oldest human musical instrument.

But it seems that what most Muslims object to are the lyrics of songs, not the music. That's why the prohibition seems so upside-down to me.

What harm can a chord change with a melody really do?

Peace
Reply

IceQueen~
03-02-2007, 03:46 PM
you haven't read the whole of my post
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-02-2007, 04:01 PM
Well, I thought I was done with the music question, but I do have another.

This is just for those Muslims who have no objection to songs with the human voice, but do see it as haraam when accompanied by musical instruments.

It sounds like singing a comforting lullaby to put my baby to sleep at night would not be haraam, but if I sang that same song was accompanied by any sort of musical instrument it would be. What makes the difference?
Reply

IceQueen~
03-02-2007, 04:03 PM
the musical instruments lol
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-02-2007, 04:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by IceQueen~
the musical instruments lol
OK, I deserved that. You also could have said, because Allah said so. But, is that it? Because I still don't understand why it would be that way.
Reply

aamirsaab
03-02-2007, 04:10 PM
:sl: and Hi Grace seeker,
It may be better for you to seek an answer from a scholar or imam since they would know the exact rulings.
Reply

czgibson
03-02-2007, 04:12 PM
Greetings,
format_quote Originally Posted by IceQueen~
you haven't read the whole of my post
Are you talking to me?

I certainly did read all of your post. It just left me with the questions I've mentioned.

Peace
Reply

Ra`eesah
03-02-2007, 04:14 PM
There are many things that are no allowed in Islam, and the bottom line is in fact because Allaah said so, there is no reason to sit here and argue on what are the harms of music and what are the benefits. That is not the point, the point is that Allaah has made it so that we must abstain from it. Point Blank. I feel that answer " Allaah said so" should be enough for anyone who understands what following a religion is, he, Allaah doesn't have to explain everything to his creation, that is where the role of faith plays in.
I strongly believe that there are more things more important about Islam to be asking then “why is music not allowed”


P.S.
The difference is, that certain harmless musical interment that is used, was the same that was prohibited, that makes all the difference. Its not the matter of being harmless its the principal of the matter. I hope you understand.

I hope I didn’t sound harsh, if you got that impression, I apologize.
Reply

Ra`eesah
03-02-2007, 05:43 PM
Bismillaah hir Rahmaan nir Raheem

'In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful'

Islam has provide for humanity a concrete and naturalistic way of life based on good by which he/she can conduct his/her life. It calls upon mankind not only to practice moral excellence but also to establish it and to eliminate all which is harmful. It obtains the supremacy of one's conscience in all state of affairs, so that what is harmful cannot gain the favorable position in either an individual's or a society's life. Furthermost, these rights can be realized in one's daily and social life, Islam provides a very effective moral system, “whatever improves the well-being of an individual or a society is morally good, and whatever harms this well-being is morally bad..”

Generally there are moral principles of Islam, but sometimes they are not clear yes and no answers, and particular circumstances will have to be taken into account each time a decision is made. Suicide or euthanasia, for example, Islam's respect for life and the recognition that human life is ultimately owned by God who created it, means that no human being has the right to end one's own life or that of another. In the case of abortion, however, there are situations where the life of the mother has to be put before the life of the child. To protect an already established life if put at risk by a developing life whose survival is still questionable, Islam permits abortion under certain medical conditions.

There are many theories that have derived to define morality. One can try and compare Consequentialism, Deontic Ethics, and Virtue Ethics. Moreover, try and find which concept would best suite them thus, come to a reasonable deduction, but there must be one that is correct in all aspects. Yet what is different about Islam is that it takes into consideration the well being of the norm as well as the individual, it makes laws that are universal same time can suite the individual. A complete, flawless system made with such perfection that till today no man could give a concept even close to these system of rules. Which goes on to prove how it could have only been made by the one and only Creator of all that exists.


Many individuals who do not ascribe themselves to any religion will say that they obey the law of the land and act morally, and do what is morally right, and stay away from that which is morally wrong. It is impossible for people to live along side each other with this kind of mentality, as what one person deems to be morally right, can be seen as morally wrong to another. A modern day example of this is, the cut off age for legalintimate relations in countries around the world, in the USA it varies depending on which state you live in, in the UK it is 17 for males, 16 for females, in South Korea it is 13 for both genders. Now for those living in the UK, it would be immoral for them to have Intimate relations with anyone below the age of 16, whereas countries such as South Korea, find it perfectly acceptable.


In addition to that many wars have been initiated under the banner of morality, but there has been great dispute over this as well. A recent example of this, USA and its few allies decided to invade Iraq, they thought that there was enough justification and it was morally right to do so. However, they came across heavy opposition, and they also argued their case based on morality.

This is the danger of moral relativism, now so widespread in many societies. This is why it’s imperative that one must believe in and live his life in accordance to the divine laws of almighty God. This is something that does not alter or change to suit mans desires. Hence, this corruption is thereby prevented. Another benefit is the gradual internalization of these moral standards, for one seeks to obey them voluntarily to please God, not because some government or people tell him to do so. An individual's belief in God, when added to his belief in the Day of Judgment, is a powerful motivating factor for one to live a highly moral life.

How does one know what is righteous and what is not? On what scales are moralities appraised? We read in the Qur’an:


It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and each and every act of obedience to Allah, etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al-Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masakin (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and gives the Zakat, and who fulfill their covenant when they make it, and who are As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.) in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting (during the battles). Such are the people of the truth and they are Al Muttaqun(2:177)

We are given an aesthetic description of the righteous and the religiously committed individual in these verses. This is the standard by which a particular mode of conduct can be analyzed as either good or bad. It also provides the core around which an individual's as well as a societies moral code should form a resolution about. Before laying down any moral enjoinments, Islam tries to securely instill firmly in man's heart the conviction that his dealings are with God, who sees him at all times and in all places. While he may hide himself from others or deceive them, he knows that he cannot do so with God. Islam teaches that the objective of one's life is to live a life that is pleasing to God.

In conclusion, Islam provides mankind with a higher system of morality that can be used by an individual to realize his greatest potential. It removes impurities from the soul of self-seeking pride, dictatorship, immorality and lack of discipline. It creates God-fearing men who are dedicated to their ideals, motivated by piety, abstinence, and discipline, and unable to make any compromise with falsehood. It induces feelings of moral responsibility and fosters the capacity for self-control. It nourishes noble qualities from which only good may be expected. In accompaniment tothat God sent his last and final messenger Muhammad ( may peace and blessings be upon him) to perfect the morals and character of the people, and so that we may use him as a leader and follow in his examples. He taught us how to generate kindness, generosity, mercy, sympathy, peace, tolerance, to be high-principled, fairness, and truthfulness towards all creation in all situations.
Reply

Skavau
03-02-2007, 06:02 PM
Islam has provide for humanity a concrete and naturalistic way of life based on good by which he/she can conduct his/her life. It calls upon mankind not only to practice moral excellence but also to establish it and to eliminate all which is harmful.
How is Homosexuality harmful?

It obtains the supremacy of one's conscience in all state of affairs, so that what is harmful cannot gain the favorable position in either an individual's or a society's life. Furthermost, these rights can be realized in one's daily and social life, Islam provides a very effective moral system, “whatever improves the well-being of an individual or a society is morally good, and whatever harms this well-being is morally bad..”
That is a similar position to my own idea of Morality. Mine is that "Do as you will, as long it does not inflict upon the well-being of others."

Generally there are moral principles of Islam, but sometimes they are not clear yes and no answers, and particular circumstances will have to be taken into account each time a decision is made. Suicide or euthanasia, for example, Islam's respect for life and the recognition that human life is ultimately owned by God who created it, means that no human being has the right to end one's own life or that of another.
Ah. But I disagree there. I have no quirks with Euthanasia. If someone wishes to have their life ended due to physical pain, or mental pain - then they are autonomous human beings and have the right to have that request recognised. I do not agree that God created everything so the idea that we shouldn't end our life because God created us means nothing to me and that idea forcefully implemented into a society is an obstruction of independent choice.

There are many theories that have derived to define morality. One can try and compare Consequentialism, Deontic Ethics, and Virtue Ethics. Moreover, try and find which concept would best suite them thus, come to a reasonable deduction, but there must be one that is correct in all aspects.
That is the search.

Yet what is different about Islam is that it takes into consideration the well being of the norm as well as the individual, it makes laws that are universal same time can suite the individual.
Islamic ideals do not suit the individual. What if someone has homosexual lust, or back to the euthanasia point - wishes to die? The individual choice is sacrificed and does not suit many people. Islamic Laws implemented on me would definitely not suit me.

Many individuals who do not ascribe themselves to any religion will say that they obey the law of the land and act morally, and do what is morally right, and stay away from that which is morally wrong. It is impossible for people to live along side each other with this kind of mentality, as what one person deems to be morally right, can be seen as morally wrong to another.
So the article is asserting that disagreement means we should all embrace the views of a single ethical system? Everyone has different views of morality and this is the result of different ethical theories, but these views do not mean that co-existence is impossible. It is typical Islamic Logic that I've noted that suggests that problems should just be covered up. Evidence suggests that societies are able to co-exist peacefully with autonomous individuals in it. A system of law needs to be established in order to uphold order and justice and justice should be based on reason and the infliction of human rights, which it mostly is.

A modern day example of this is, the cut off age for legalintimate relations in countries around the world, in the USA it varies depending on which state you live in, in the UK it is 17 for males, 16 for females, in South Korea it is 13 for both genders. Now for those living in the UK, it would be immoral for them to have Intimate relations with anyone below the age of 16, whereas countries such as South Korea, find it perfectly acceptable.
Yes, that is true. But this Moral Relativism isn't destroying co-existence though - is it?

In addition to that many wars have been initiated under the banner of morality, but there has been great dispute over this as well. A recent example of this, USA and its few allies decided to invade Iraq, they thought that there was enough justification and it was morally right to do so. However, they came across heavy opposition, and they also argued their case based on morality.
Not everyone would agree with Islamic Morality, or Sharia Law. I certainly wouldn't. Does that make it an illegitimate ideology because it is inevitable disagreement enfolds from it?

This is the danger of moral relativism, now so widespread in many societies. This is why it’s imperative that one must believe in and live his life in accordance to the divine laws of almighty God.
Moral Relativism roots from different cultures. I do not agree with Moral Relativism, but I do not see Islam as the unifier of this.

This is something that does not alter or change to suit mans desires. Hence, this corruption is thereby prevented. Another benefit is the gradual internalization of these moral standards, for one seeks to obey them voluntarily to please God, not because some government or people tell him to do so. An individual's belief in God, when added to his belief in the Day of Judgment, is a powerful motivating factor for one to live a highly moral life.
This is the implication that Atheism, or Secularism is not compatible with morality. If you are only moral from religion then you are a weak individual.

While he may hide himself from others or deceive them, he knows that he cannot do so with God. Islam teaches that the objective of one's life is to live a life that is pleasing to God.
I do not believe pleasing the divine is necessary for morality.
Reply

Trumble
03-02-2007, 06:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ra`eesah
And that is exacly why we have moral rules that were given to mankind by their creator because in fact we as humans can not lay down the laws of what is moral and what is not.
Why not? I would have thought doing exactly that is part of what makes us human.
Reply

Ra`eesah
03-02-2007, 08:19 PM
Bismillaah hir Rahmaan nir Raheem

'In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful'

As Muslims we can not agree with certain laws and theory’s made by man, because it goes against everything we believe in example such as:

In thermodynamics there is a maxim principal ; a theorem which states that Matter can not be created or destroyed rather it can transform from one form to another, and Einstein’s theory of relativity E = mc2, which is co-relating matter with energy there is a constant level of both energy and matter and it does not increase nor decrease.

We as Muslims can not accept this, for the simple fact that, Allaah creates it and Allaah destroys it.

When humans come up with theory’s of morality, they always change. What was not allowed and not acceptable long ago is now acceptable. What is good and bad changes from time to time and place to place. Its amazing to see that just 100 years ago in this country ( United States ) it was unimaginable for a women to leave her house with out some sort of head covering such as a scarf or a bonnet.

It is also difficult to conceive that just 2 generations ago premarital sex was taboo, and if it did happen they were very ashamed and embarrassed by it. And now, it is said that 60 to 70 % of just high school kids indulge in that same act that was frown upon a couple of generations ago.

1 generation ago, a single mother who conceived out of wed-lock was looked down upon in society so evilly that no respectable women would even dare to have child with out marriage. But in our times, it’s normal.

And the biggest issue that has dramatically change I can say is how the norm now views Homosexuality. I can honestly say as a kid growing up I can remember how that life style was looked down upon and how the average masses viewed such people and the horrible names and crimes that were acted towards them was like. Now look at how we “ regressed” yes regressed. That not even a Jew or a Christian can speak out against it in this day and age. And if they do then they are homophobes and “ how dare they speak against this!” they can not even speak against these people, who might I say were punished in such a severe way that no other nation was ever punished and this is agreed by the Abrahamic religion “ Sodom and Gomorra”

We are living in a nation that keeps changing its values, one day something is good and then the next it is bad. When good and evil evolves around their own culture and society.

Who has the right to tell me what I can and can not do? The answer for me is clear it is Allaah my creator, the only one who has the authority to legislate and has complete right to tell me what and what not to do. That is the essences of Islam, exactly that submission, submit to what? To the law of Allaah. A Muslim by definition gives up his right and says “Oh Allaah you created me and you know what’s best for me.”

In the west its, noone has the right to tell me what and what not to do, I am a free man/woman I do what I want. I decide what’s good for me and what’s bad. Western society revolves around Humanism and Hedonism, self pleasure and humanistic philosophy. This is now the modern religion in the west, so of course for them there is no concept of a higher being who has the authority to tell them what to do what not to do, so that leaves me with a dilemma, for how can I argue with someone about good and bad when they do not accept the fact that there is this being who has the right to command you. How can I justify the commands when you do not believe in the existence of the commander? The answer is simple. I can not because we are missing common grounds and with that gap being there we can not proceed. So I say to each his own.

May Allaah guide you to the right path.

~Ameen
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-02-2007, 11:58 PM
Hey, y'all. Can I have my thread back to ask about things in Islam that I am curious about?

If you're all curious about something in Islam, too, by all means ask. Not that I don't appreiciat the nature of the present discussion, but for a philosophical discussion of the points of origin and role of ethics in a pluralistic society, perhaps we need another thread. Thanks.
Reply

Malaikah
03-03-2007, 02:04 AM
Got any other things you are curious about Grace Seeker? :D

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
It sounds like singing a comforting lullaby to put my baby to sleep at night would not be haraam, but if I sang that same song was accompanied by any sort of musical instrument it would be. What makes the difference?
God gave you a voice with which you can sing to your child, why do you need to ruin it with something evil? (i.e. the music?)
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-03-2007, 06:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
God gave you a voice with which you can sing to your child, why do you need to ruin it with something evil? (i.e. the music?)
You haven't heard my voicep; sadly, if I sing, it sounds pretty evil too. :cry:


Malaikah, I know where you stand on this -- Muhammad (pbuh) has told you that Allah said it was bad, and that settles it. Give your personal faith, I can actually understand why that would be your view.

For me, given that God certainly was pleased with music used to worship him before the time of Muhammad, given that he actually encouraged it with musical instrumets such as flute and lyre and tamborine even, and given that I don't think the character of God itself has changed (even if I were to accept the concept that his message is now different, though Islam says that it is really the same basic message), this view of music that it is evil is one of the things that makes me doubt the validty of the Islam. It is as if it is a witness against itself.

I was hoping to hear that it was something that came out of the culture and therefore I could understand the origin of the prohibition, but to think that God himself would see it as evil now when it was something used for the very praise and worship of God before, for muy way f thinking, casts a shadow of doubt on the credibility of those (most notably the companions who have been cited) who testify against it.


Got any other things you are curious about Grace Seeker? :D
Yeah. And I'm sorry the above sounds so negative. That wasn't actually my intent, though I guess it is reflective of my feelings at the moment.

I do have other things I am curious about, got a couple of more questions regarding the concept of drawing we were talking about earlier and other stuff pops up on these threads all the time. The good news, I am learning. Sometimes I understand more. Sometimes I end up being better informed, but understanding less -- I think that is what happened with regard to the issue of music. Anyway, I want to give this thread a chance to calm down for a couple of days to make sure that those who want to continue the music discussion have had their chance to post before I move on to something different. Thanks for caring enough (that's not just Malaikah, but all of you who have taken the time to better inform me) to help learn.

:sl:
Reply

Malaikah
03-04-2007, 12:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
For me, given that God certainly was pleased with music used to worship him before the time of Muhammad, given that he actually encouraged it with musical instrumets such as flute and lyre and tamborine even, and given that I don't think the character of God itself has changed (even if I were to accept the concept that his message is now different, though Islam says that it is really the same basic message), this view of music that it is evil is one of the things that makes me doubt the validty of the Islam. It is as if it is a witness against itself.
Not at all. Different times, different people, different measures. Music may well have been something good for people of other times, but that doesn't mean it has to be something good in our times. (That is, assuming it was even permissible at all).

Example, 3000 years ago, people didn't have the means to create an entire music industry like the one we have today. Perhaps, then, music was permissible for them because it was unlikely to lead to great evils, whereas for us it is impermissible due to the ease with which it can be (and has been) abused?

That is just an example of course to illustrate what I mean, by no means is it actually the real reason. But it shows that with something, you just need to have faith in God that He knows what is best for us even if we do not know it ourselves.

Another example, I don't know if this belief is held by Christians, but it is by Muslims, how did Adams kids get married? They married their brothers and sisters didn't they? Incest! We both know that this is totally not allowed in both our religions, but clearly God allowed it once a upon time. Different times call for different measures. :thumbs_up
Reply

YusufNoor
03-04-2007, 10:24 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
You haven't heard my voicep; sadly, if I sing, it sounds pretty evil too. :cry:


Malaikah, I know where you stand on this -- Muhammad (pbuh) has told you that Allah said it was bad, and that settles it. Give your personal faith, I can actually understand why that would be your view.

For me, given that God certainly was pleased with music used to worship him before the time of Muhammad, given that he actually encouraged it with musical instrumets such as flute and lyre and tamborine even, and given that I don't think the character of God itself has changed (even if I were to accept the concept that his message is now different, though Islam says that it is really the same basic message), this view of music that it is evil is one of the things that makes me doubt the validty of the Islam. It is as if it is a witness against itself.
I was hoping to hear that it was something that came out of the culture and therefore I could understand the origin of the prohibition, but to think that God himself would see it as evil now when it was something used for the very praise and worship of God before, for muy way f thinking, casts a shadow of doubt on the credibility of those (most notably the companions who have been cited) who testify against it.


Yeah. And I'm sorry the above sounds so negative. That wasn't actually my intent, though I guess it is reflective of my feelings at the moment.

I do have other things I am curious about, got a couple of more questions regarding the concept of drawing we were talking about earlier and other stuff pops up on these threads all the time. The good news, I am learning. Sometimes I understand more. Sometimes I end up being better informed, but understanding less -- I think that is what happened with regard to the issue of music. Anyway, I want to give this thread a chance to calm down for a couple of days to make sure that those who want to continue the music discussion have had their chance to post before I move on to something different. Thanks for caring enough (that's not just Malaikah, but all of you who have taken the time to better inform me) to help learn.

:sl:
Greetings of Peace Brother Gene,

forgive me for asking about this remark as i do realize that it IS your thread...

BUT, has God's Character changed that He needed a NEW covenant?? ie, Christianity.
has God's Character changed in doing away with the Temple at Jerusalem?
has God's Character changed in changing, according to some Christians, the Sabbath from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday to all day Sunday?
has God's Character changed when Christians themselves changed said Sabbath?
has God's Character changed when "doing away" with circumcision?
has God's Character changed in, according to some Christians, doing away with dietary laws?
has God's Character changed in, according to most Chrisitans, doing away with polygamy?
has God's Character changed in initiating Baptism?
has God's Character changed in "doing way with" the ancient Israeli Holy Days?
has God's Character changed in that now He prefers Pagan holidays to those Holy Days?
has God's Character changed in doing away with animal sacrifice?

Christiany can "change" ALL THAT and still remain viable, but some Muslims claim, and i'm not yet convinced it's correct, that music is Haram and THAT makes you feel that Islam is not valid?

really???

just wondering?

by that way, it's been a fascinating discussion 'tween you and Malaikah!
props to Malaikah!!

:w:

Yusuf
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-05-2007, 12:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by YusufNoor
Greetings of Peace Brother Gene,

forgive me for asking about this remark as i do realize that it IS your thread...

BUT, has God's Character changed that He needed a NEW covenant?? ie, Christianity.
has God's Character changed in doing away with the Temple at Jerusalem?
has God's Character changed in changing, according to some Christians, the Sabbath from sunset Friday to sunset Saturday to all day Sunday?
has God's Character changed when Christians themselves changed said Sabbath?
has God's Character changed when "doing away" with circumcision?
has God's Character changed in, according to some Christians, doing away with dietary laws?
has God's Character changed in, according to most Chrisitans, doing away with polygamy?
has God's Character changed in initiating Baptism?
has God's Character changed in "doing way with" the ancient Israeli Holy Days?
has God's Character changed in that now He prefers Pagan holidays to those Holy Days?
has God's Character changed in doing away with animal sacrifice?

Christiany can "change" ALL THAT and still remain viable, but some Muslims claim, and i'm not yet convinced it's correct, that music is Haram and THAT makes you feel that Islam is not valid?

really???

just wondering?

by that way, it's been a fascinating discussion 'tween you and Malaikah!
props to Malaikah!!

:w:

Yusuf
Yes, I agree it has been a fascinating conversation. Yes, I do believe God has created a New Covenant (even in not exactly the way in which you stated, for instance I don't think that God's character has changed), and yet I question Islam because of a change in the view of God toward music. Your point is well taken. Thank-you. And thank-you for the very subtle and kind way you made it.


And I agree, props too to Malaikah with her understanding of how it might be that God might change his views of what is good for us, not because it is itself good or bad, but because of our ability (or lack there of) to handle it appropriately in society. (I have advanced this same argument myself with regard to alcohol at times.)

Of course, I'm not sure that I agree with the conclusion, but I have a better sense of why you might see it as a gracious act of God rather than a capricious and callous decision. These last two posts restore a sense of grace that I was missing throughout much of this thread.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
03-05-2007, 02:37 AM
^^Alhumdulillah, thats good :D
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-05-2007, 04:31 PM
OK. Is everyone ready for my next question?



This is an excerpt from a post in another thread:

I don't like your choice of word "Would not God continue the deception after the crucifixion and make people think they found Jesus since He induced them to think they crucified Him?"G-D doesn't deceive!
The original poster (a non-Muslim) was remarking on the Islamic view that someone other than Jesus died on the cross. And that God made it so that everyone simply thought it was Jesus when it really wasn't him at all. To this the subesquent poster (a Muslim) was upset not by the reference to the subsititution, but that it was categorized as a deception.

While I don't believe God to be a deceiver either, my question is this: What else do you call it, when God makes something that is held to be not true (Jesus death on the cross) appear to be as if it were real, besides deception?
Reply

جوري
03-05-2007, 06:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
OK. Is everyone ready for my next question?



This is an excerpt from a post in another thread:



The original poster (a non-Muslim) was remarking on the Islamic view that someone other than Jesus died on the cross. And that God made it so that everyone simply thought it was Jesus when it really wasn't him at all. To this the subesquent poster (a Muslim) was upset not by the reference to the subsititution, but that it was categorized as a deception.

While I don't believe God to be a deceiver either, my question is this: What else do you call it, when God makes something that is held to be not true (Jesus death on the cross) appear to be as if it were real, besides deception?
Everyone doesn't think Jesus died on the cross... that is your own modern Christian perspective. Those who tried to do Jesus (PBUH) harm, were fooled into believing it was him on the cross.... (they were the true deceivers)
I borrowed this from bro. Al. Madani
proving that even during the time of Jesus (PBUH) not everyone were "deceived" into believing that Jesus was crucified either....



He was taken up both body and soul and he will return with both body and soul:
Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, "Just before Allah raised `Isa to the heavens, `Isa went to his companions, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping water and he said, `There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after he had believed in me.' He then asked, `Who volunteers that his image appear as mine, and be killed in my place. He will be with me (in Paradise)' One of the youngest ones among them volunteered and `Isa asked him to sit down. `Isa again asked for a volunteer, and the young man kept volunteering and `Isa asking him to sit down. Then the young man volunteered again and `Isa said, `You will be that man,' and the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man while `Isa ascended to heaven from a hole in the house. When the Jews came looking for `Isa, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of `Isa's followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, Al-Ya`qubiyyah (Jacobites), said, `Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to heaven.' Another group, An-Nasturiyyah (Nestorians), said, `The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to heaven.' Another group, Muslims, said, `The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.' The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad .'' This statement has an authentic chain of narration leading to Ibn `Abbas, and An-Nasa'i narrated it through Abu Kurayb who reported it from Abu Mu`awiyah. Many among the Salaf stated that `Isa asked if someone would volunteer for his appearance to be cast over him, and that he will be killed instead of `Isa, for which he would be his companion in Paradise.

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=12730

Already the proof is in the Quran and in the Gospel if it weren't so deranged from original word

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا {157}
[Pickthal 4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.


لَّـكِنِ الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ مِنْهُمْ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيكَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ وَالْمُقِيمِينَ الصَّلاَةَ وَالْمُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ أُوْلَـئِكَ سَنُؤْتِيهِمْ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا {162}
[Pickthal 4:162] But those of them who are firm in knowledge and the believers believe in that which is revealed unto thee, and that which was revealed before thee, especially the diligent in prayer and those who pay the poor-due, the believers in Allah and the Last Day. Upon these We shall bestow immense reward.


To deceive it to conceal the truth to cause to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid... but the truth here is written for all to see clear as day for those who are lucid to reflect and search instead of just accept!

The true deception falls on St. Paul and Athanasius the champion of Trinity for this state of modern Christianity!

peace!
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 05:28 AM
Even in this account you have written that Jesus asked: "Who volunteers that his image appear as mine". So, now the 12 know the truth. But it appears that Allah is very intentionally trying to make others think that they have been successful in killing Jesus when they have not. And the means he uses for this is to make them believe something is true which in fact is not true.

What am I missing in the story?
1) The youth is in essence wearing a Jesus mask over his entire body when they take him to be crucified.
2) Allah is the one who had him put it on.
3) This was done with the intent to make them think they had crucified Jesus, something which in fact was not true.
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 05:33 AM
[QUOTE=Grace Seeker;676090]

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
What am I missing in the story?.
I don't know!
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
1) The youth is in essence wearing a Jesus mask over his entire body when they take him to be crucified..
mask? where did you read of a mask anywhere?

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
2) Allah is the one who had him put it on..
put what on?

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
3) This was done with the intent to make them think they had crucified Jesus, something which in fact was not true.
Why not? from a Christian perspective, I wouldn't understand why G-D would foresake his "son"? Sacrificing his "son "seems far much worst to me to so-called deception even more unusual is how Jesus is part G-D and still asks why he was foresaken?? Shouldn't a G-D or a son of G-D know of G-D's intent? which technically is also his own?..furthermore why would he display fear or grief or even question being foresaken?...:-\
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 08:00 AM
One more time.

As I understand the Muslim version of the event:

1) Jesus does not die, but someone else dies in his place.

2) Allah makes this person appear to be Jesus to everyone who witnesses the crucifixion.

3) If those people believe their eyes (and none but the 12 knew any different), they will believe something that is not true (Jesus died on the cross) to be true.

4) Allah is the one who created the scenario whereby these people would believe a falsehood was the truth.

These are the facts of the situation as I understand it to have taken place according to the teachings of Islam. Do I have the facts summarized correctly?
Reply

ABWAN
03-06-2007, 08:29 AM
I dont think its only the muslims who believe Jesus was not crucified. Logically from a non-muslim's perspective, it would make more sense not to look at what happened 600 years after birth of Jesus. They could very well look at what happened in just 100-200 years since the birth of Jesus.

With that logic, if you look at the beliefs of gnostics, especially Basilides, they also agree that it was not Jesus who was crucified, but it was someone else. They believe this 'someone else' took up the position of Jesus at the very last moment. As far as Islam is concerned, i am not sure if it mentions a specific point of time when that 'someone else' was made Jesus.

Now, I am not familiar with who were there (from local community, jews and roman empire representatives) when Jesus was crucified. I think christians might know better.

2) Allah makes this person appear to be Jesus to everyone who witnesses the crucifixion.

3) If those people believe their eyes (and none but the 12 knew any different), they will believe something that is not true (Jesus died on the cross) to be true.

4) Allah is the one who created the scenario whereby these people would believe a falsehood was the truth.
I see your point here. But how can we interpret the word "appear" literally? I have no clue what happened that time, but I feel its not worth exploring what "appear" means. There are references in both Islam and christianity that God created Adam in His image. now does it mean God looks like a man? It would, if we take the word "image" literally.
Reply

north_malaysian
03-06-2007, 08:45 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Everyone doesn't think Jesus died on the cross... that is your own modern Christian perspective. Those who tried to do Jesus (PBUH) harm, were fooled into believing it was him on the cross.... (they were the true deceivers)
I borrowed this from bro. Al. Madani
proving that even during the time of Jesus (PBUH) not everyone were "deceived" into believing that Jesus was crucified either....



He was taken up both body and soul and he will return with both body and soul:
Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, "Just before Allah raised `Isa to the heavens, `Isa went to his companions, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping water and he said, `There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after he had believed in me.' He then asked, `Who volunteers that his image appear as mine, and be killed in my place. He will be with me (in Paradise)' One of the youngest ones among them volunteered and `Isa asked him to sit down. `Isa again asked for a volunteer, and the young man kept volunteering and `Isa asking him to sit down. Then the young man volunteered again and `Isa said, `You will be that man,' and the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man while `Isa ascended to heaven from a hole in the house. When the Jews came looking for `Isa, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of `Isa's followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, Al-Ya`qubiyyah (Jacobites), said, `Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to heaven.' Another group, An-Nasturiyyah (Nestorians), said, `The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to heaven.' Another group, Muslims, said, `The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.' The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad .'' This statement has an authentic chain of narration leading to Ibn `Abbas, and An-Nasa'i narrated it through Abu Kurayb who reported it from Abu Mu`awiyah. Many among the Salaf stated that `Isa asked if someone would volunteer for his appearance to be cast over him, and that he will be killed instead of `Isa, for which he would be his companion in Paradise.

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=12730

Already the proof is in the Quran and in the Gospel if it weren't so deranged from original word

وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا {157}
[Pickthal 4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.


لَّـكِنِ الرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ مِنْهُمْ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيكَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ وَالْمُقِيمِينَ الصَّلاَةَ وَالْمُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ أُوْلَـئِكَ سَنُؤْتِيهِمْ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا {162}
[Pickthal 4:162] But those of them who are firm in knowledge and the believers believe in that which is revealed unto thee, and that which was revealed before thee, especially the diligent in prayer and those who pay the poor-due, the believers in Allah and the Last Day. Upon these We shall bestow immense reward.


To deceive it to conceal the truth to cause to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid... but the truth here is written for all to see clear as day for those who are lucid to reflect and search instead of just accept!

The true deception falls on St. Paul and Athanasius the champion of Trinity for this state of modern Christianity!

peace!
Thanks for giving me this knowledge, Jazakallah!!!!!:thumbs_up
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 08:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ABWAN
how can we interpret the word "appear" literally? I have no clue what happened that time, but I feel its not worth exploring what "appear" means.
From what Purest Ambrosia provided: "the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man ".
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 02:21 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
One more time.

As I understand the Muslim version of the event:

1) Jesus does not die, but someone else dies in his place.

2) Allah makes this person appear to be Jesus to everyone who witnesses the crucifixion.

3) If those people believe their eyes (and none but the 12 knew any different), they will believe something that is not true (Jesus died on the cross) to be true.

4) Allah is the one who created the scenario whereby these people would believe a falsehood was the truth.

These are the facts of the situation as I understand it to have taken place according to the teachings of Islam. Do I have the facts summarized correctly?
Just to sum it up all for you correctly! Jesus NEVER asked for anyone to spread the good word! In fact he came with his message just for (bani Israel)... They didn't want him... just like they didn't want those before him..during his time people were divided in opinion. St. Paul took it upon his person to spread falsehood. Islam came for all of mankind, not just Bani Israel. To give the criterion for all of man kind. Jesus (PBUH) is to come back firstly as a sign of the end of time. 2nd to abrogate that which the Christians of now a days are doing in the way of worshipping falsehood! 3rdly to fulfill that which he didn't during his time and lastly to die here on earth such as the lot of man! I hope that clarifies things for you?
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 02:24 PM
I find the concept confusing too. Why would God resort to deception? Perhaps it is simply another of those differences in the way in which Muslims and Christians percieve God. Hopefully another Muslim member can add to the discussion and bring a different perspective to help in understanding the issue.
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 02:25 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Just to sum it up all for you correctly! Jesus NEVER asked for anyone to spread the good word! In fact he came with his message just for (bani Israel)... They didn't want him... just like they didn't want those before him..during his time people were divided in opinion. St. Paul took it upon his person to spread falsehood. Islam came for all of mankind, not just Bani Israel. To give the criterion for all of man kind. Jesus (PBUH) is to come back firstly as a sign of the end of time. 2nd to abrogate that which the Christians of now a days are doing in the way of worshipping falsehood! 3rdly to fulfill that which he didn't during his time and lastly to die here on earth such as the lot of man! I hope that clarifies things for you?
With all due respect...that doesn't even address the issue we are referring to. We understand that Islam doesn't accept the divinity of Jesus Christ, but that isn't the issue here.
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 02:39 PM
I love how you all grab that twig to hang on to to deflect from all the other absurdities of G-D foresaking his son... but, it is all right!

Why does the above relate? It is really simple. Jesus came for Bani Israel, & Bani Israel plotted against him... G-D in fact kept his word and saved not foresaken him Jesus PBUH. If G-D were to deceive he would in fact have foresaken him; and wouldn't have sent the seal of the prophet with the criterion and a message for all of mankind!
peace!
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 03:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
Just to sum it up all for you correctly! Jesus NEVER asked for anyone to spread the good word! In fact he came with his message just for (bani Israel)... They didn't want him... just like they didn't want those before him..during his time people were divided in opinion. St. Paul took it upon his person to spread falsehood. Islam came for all of mankind, not just Bani Israel. To give the criterion for all of man kind. Jesus (PBUH) is to come back firstly as a sign of the end of time. 2nd to abrogate that which the Christians of now a days are doing in the way of worshipping falsehood! 3rdly to fulfill that which he didn't during his time and lastly to die here on earth such as the lot of man! I hope that clarifies things for you?
Why are you SHOUTING!?

I've tried to simply ascertain if I understood the Islamic beliefs regarding events that Christians know as the Crucifixion. Rather than answer what I thought was a simply YES of NO question, you've given me all sorts of other rhetoric, that I don't see as having any relevance or connection to the question at hand. I've not spoken of people spreading a "good word". I've not asked about why Jesus came? I've not asked about Jesus' return. I've not even mentioned St. Paul, as he wasn't ever associated with the Crucifixion story according to Christian texts about it. Unless there is some connection I am unaware of in the Qu'ran between Paul and Jesus' "supposed" Crucifixion I can't figure out why you would even mention him. I haven't.

To answer your last question: "I hope that clarifies things for you?" Not even close. Answering my actual question would, however. Do I understand the events of Jesus' "supposed" Crucifixion correctly as believed from the Muslim perspective?

I understand that you don't really believe that Jesus was crucified.
I understand that you believe that someone else was crucified in Jesus' place.
I understand that you believe that Allah made it appear to those who witnessed this crucifixion that it looked like they were crucifying Jesus, even though they really weren't.

Do I understand correctly?

(It's a YES or NO question. Essays on other topics are not helpful at this time. If you feel a need to add other information, please help me to see the connection, because I don't yet. It just seems like someone ranging off to other incidentals that they are concerned about, but leaving me without an answer to my original question.)
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 03:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Why are you SHOUTING!?

I've tried to simply ascertain if I understood the Islamic beliefs regarding events that Christians know as the Crucifixion. Rather than answer what I thought was a simply YES of NO question, you've given me all sorts of other rhetoric, that I don't see as having any relevance or connection to the question at hand. I've not spoken of people spreading a "good word". I've not asked about why Jesus came? I've not asked about Jesus' return. I've not even mentioned St. Paul, as he wasn't ever associated with the Crucifixion story according to Christian texts about it. Unless there is some connection I am unaware of in the Qu'ran between Paul and Jesus' "supposed" Crucifixion I can't figure out why you would even mention him. I haven't.

To answer your last question: "I hope that clarifies things for you?" Not even close. Answering my actual question would, however. Do I understand the events of Jesus' "supposed" Crucifixion correctly as believed from the Muslim perspective?

I understand that you don't really believe that Jesus was crucified.
I understand that you believe that someone else was crucified in Jesus' place.
I understand that you believe that Allah made it appear to those who witnessed this crucifixion that it looked like they were crucifying Jesus, even though they really weren't.

Do I understand correctly?

(It's a YES or NO question. Essays on other topics are not helpful at this time. If you feel a need to add other information, please help me to see the connection, because I don't yet. It just seems like someone ranging off to other incidentals that they are concerned about, but leaving me without an answer to my original question.)
"Shouting" ? I didn't hear a thing! Simply found your repeated rhetoric a little on the dense side!
why can't you infer what is plain for you to see? hammering the same nail in each and every one of your posts as if you had stumbled upon Pandora's box and about to unleash-- alas hope; that G-D according to Muslims is but a deceiver! We answer you from the left you don't like it.. from the right you don't like it.
Did G-D Deceive...... NO!.... Plain and simple... that is what you conceive in your own mind to be true! To deceive would have been to forsake your messenger on the cross ...not save him from those plotting against him!If you don't want a detailed answer then I suggest you not partake in this subject and just skip it all together!
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 05:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
"Shouting" ? I didn't hear a thing! Simply found your repeated rhetoric a little on the dense side!
why can't you infer what is plain for you to see? hammering the same nail in each and every one of your posts as if you had stumbled upon Pandora's box and about to unleash-- alas hope; that G-D according to Muslims is but a deceiver! We answer you from the left you don't like it.. from the right you don't like it.
Did G-D Deceive...... NO!.... Plain and simple... that is what you conceive in your own mind to be true! To deceive would have been to forsake your messenger on the cross ...not save him from those plotting against him!If you don't want a detailed answer then I suggest you not partake in this subject and just skip it all together!
That doesn't answer the question, not even with the large font. My question, and what I'm attempting to understand, is whether the Quran states that God used deception to "stop" Christ from being crucified. It is a yes or no question. It isn't an "attack", it is an honest question with the intent of understanding the stance of the Quran on the subject. The reason your "answer" isn't sufficient is because of the passage about God covering the face of Jesus...something to that effect, and that would seem like an obvious play at deception.
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 05:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
That doesn't answer the question, not even with the large font. My question, and what I'm attempting to understand, is whether the Quran states that God used deception to "stop" Christ from being crucified. It is a yes or no question. It isn't an "attack", it is an honest question with the intent of understanding the stance of the Quran on the subject.
lol
I'll quote AGAIN the above "Did G-D Deceive...... NO"
Does it say he deceived in the Quran. Again NO... No and one more time NO!from where I am standing you are the ones offended trying to wash it down with repeat posts!...
lastly, I don't feel attacked, I feel frustrated, this isn't brain surgery.. I am not so sure what is difficult to comprehend in NO?!
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 05:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
lol
I'll quote AGAIN the above "Did G-D Deceive...... NO"
Does it say he deceived in the Quran. Again NO... No and one more time NO!from where I am standing you are the ones offended trying to wash it down with repeat posts!...
lastly, I don't feel attacked, I feel frustrated, this isn't brain surgery.. I am not so sure what is difficult to comprehend in NO?!
No reason to be defensive. What about the passage referring to God making another's face appear to be that of Jesus?
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 05:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
No reason to be defensive. What about the passage referring to God making another's face appear to be that of Jesus?
What does that mean to you? From where we stand G-D saved Jesus against those plotting against him (Didn't foresake). From where you are standing it is an act of deception. You are welcome to believe the version that appeals to you most!
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 05:21 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
What does that mean to you? From where we stand G-D saved Jesus against those plotting against him (Didn't foresake). From where you are standing it is an act of deception. You are welcome to believe the version that appeals to you most!
It isn't about what I believe, as this thread is about the beliefs of Islam. I do understand what you believe, and I will assume this is the proper understanding in the Quran.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
"Shouting" ? I didn't hear a thing! Simply found your repeated rhetoric a little on the dense side!
why can't you infer what is plain for you to see? hammering the same nail in each and every one of your posts as if you had stumbled upon Pandora's box and about to unleash-- alas hope; that G-D according to Muslims is but a deceiver! We answer you from the left you don't like it.. from the right you don't like it.
Did G-D Deceive...... NO!.... Plain and simple... that is what you conceive in your own mind to be true! To deceive would have been to forsake your messenger on the cross ...not save him from those plotting against him!If you don't want a detailed answer then I suggest you not partake in this subject and just skip it all together!
I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?
de·cep·tion
n.
The use of deceit.
The fact or state of being deceived.
A ruse; a trick.

de·ceive
–verb (used with object)
1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
2. to be unfaithful to (one's spouse or lover).
3. Archaic. to while away (time).
–verb (used without object)
4. to mislead or falsely persuade others; practice deceit: an engaging manner that easily deceives.
5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:
  • A ruse; a trick
  • 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
  • 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 06:04 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?



I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:
  • A ruse; a trick
  • 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
  • 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?
Thanks for summing up the question in better terms than I seem to be able to do today. Yes, this isn't about attacking anyone's faith, I'm just interested about this issue because of my obvious beliefs about Christ, but also because it is something in the Quran that I've always been curious about.
Reply

ABWAN
03-06-2007, 06:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Originally Posted by ABWAN
how can we interpret the word "appear" literally? I have no clue what happened that time, but I feel its not worth exploring what "appear" means.

From what Purest Ambrosia provided: "the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man ".
Hmm..I am no scholar, but i have never come across anything (from the Quran) that says someone was made to appear as Jesus. Perhaps its possible, if so, I would like to see the proof myself.

Although I know I am drifting away from the topic of Jesus here, I hope this little story would help us here. During the time of prophet Muhammed(saw), he was once chased by the people of Qurayish (his enemies). He (saw) and his closest companion Abu Bakr(ra) hid themselves in a cave. The enemies came close to the entrance of the cave and were about to enter the cave. They noticed a spider web at the entrance of the cave. So they assumed no one could have entered the cave as the spider web was intact and so they went looking for the prophet in other places.

Had they seen the prophet that day, that would have been the end of the story of Islam and I doubt if I would have been a muslim today.

Now I can certainly relate this story to the verse in question about Jesus. Were the people of Qurayish made to assume Muhammed(saw) was not in the cave? Most certainly. Did God decieve them? I dont think so, everything seems to have a strong scientific basis here. Dont you think?
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 06:20 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I understand typing in big bold letters to be the equivalent of "shouting" when using the internet. In my experience, others do as well. As you were posting in that style of type, it came across to me as if you were shouting.


This is no pandora's box. No secrets and no evils have been released. Hope still exists. There is nothing that we (or at least I) am trying to put back in a box.

I have said repeatedly that these are things I am trying to understand. I am trying to see them from the Muslim point of view. Indeed, I might be dense on a few of these things, maybe all of these things. After all, I was not raised Muslim. I am not presently Muslim. I look at the world through a different lense, but I AM TRYING to understand Islam not by reading books about it written by Christians, but by interacting peacably with Muslims. If I chew on smaller bites than you desire to feed me, that is just the way it is. I will continue to ask that which I am curious about. If you don't like me consuming the information in these small bites, then perhaps you should let someone else feed me.

Now, back to the topic at hand...



So, you are saying that my summary of the events is correct, but you do not see a deception in it. You also add that to have let Jesus die on the cross would have been a deception.

They strike me as two related, but, nonetheless, separate issues. Yet I do not understand either of those two points.

Maybe the problem is with our understanding of what it means to deceive?



I don't see how Jesus dying on the Cross would fit this definition of a deception? I can see it as a travesty. I can see it as a tragic waste. I can see it as an attack against God. I can see it as a lot of things, but not as a deception. What would be false in Jesus dying on the cross if that is what appeared to have happened. If the issue is that it was Allah's desire to save Jesus, then why was it necessary substitute another in Jesus' place. Surely God could have saved Jesus without having to sacrifice another in Jesus' place. And even more to the point, if another was to be sacrificed, why make it appear as if it were Jesus that was being sacrficed?

It is not the saving of Jesus that has the appearance of being a deception to me. But you are right, I think a deception was involved. What appears as a deception is that another was substituted in Jesus' place and then made to appear as if it were Jesus when it was not. That seems to fit the definitions given above:
  • A ruse; a trick
  • 1. to mislead by a false appearance or statement; delude: They deceived the enemy by disguising the destroyer as a freighter.
  • 5. to give a false impression: appearances can deceive.

It seems you take offense at this question. Yet I ask it not to offend, not to call God a deciever. I ask it because I do not believe God to be a deciever, nor to I understand Muslims to believe God to be a deciever. Yet in this accounting of the event God has clearly caused those who witnessed the crucifixion of this young man to be under a false impression that it was Jesus -- which is the definition of creating a deception. So, how does one reconcile the dicohotomy? Knowing that Muslims do not consider it a deception, what is it?
My understanding of big bold letters is you don't have to look for a needle in a haystack.. considering those are the very words you seem to have been searching for post after post?

You call it a deception and I call your words a disambiguation.
You want to look at this elephant from the rear instead of all angels!

I am not taking offense and I certainly don't appreciate this Jungian approach to my psyche... please don't feign to analyze what it is I am feeling.

Maybe it is something that is rudimentary to me to believe that G-D wouldn't forsake but in fact save his messenger or in your case his "son". What would be illogical and in fact down right deceptive to me is to break your covenant with one you hold so dear. Also why did G-D do this or not do that is beyond me, It is far beyond me to begin to remotly explain how G-D works.. All I know is that he is just... and I am but human!

There is more to one explanation to what happened that day... Some Muslims in fact believe that it was Judas who appeared to them as Jesus and they crucified him, others believe that it was someone who volunteered himself with the promise of being Jesus' companion in the paradise. There is NO consensus. To be quite honest it doesn't matter from where I am standing which one of these possibilities took place. Could have very well been Judas who was crucified in Jesus' stead!
You want to call that deception and post definitions from dictionaries, that is your prerogative. And I am certainly not here to challenge your understanding...
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 06:24 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
My understanding of big bold letters is you don't have to look for a needle in a haystack.. considering those are the very words you seem to have been searching for post after post?

You call it a deception and I call your words a disambiguation.
You want to look at this elephant from the rear instead of all angels!

I am not taking offense and I certainly don't appreciate this Jungian approach to my psyche... please don't feign to analyze what it is I am feeling.

Maybe it is something that is rudimentary to me to believe that G-D wouldn't forsake but in fact save his messenger or in your case his "son". What would be illogical and in fact down right deceptive to me is to break your covenant with one you hold so dear. Also why did G-D do this or not do that is beyond me, It is far beyond me to begin to remotly explain how G-D works.. All I know is that he is just... and I am but human!

There is more to one explanation to what happened that day... Some Muslims in fact believe that it was Judas who appeared to them as Jesus and they crucified him, others believe that it was someone who volunteered himself with the promise of being Jesus' companion in the paradise. There is NO consensus. To be quite honest it doesn't matter from where I am standing which one of these possibilities took place. Could have very well been Judas who was crucified in Jesus' stead!
You want to call that deception and post definitions from dictionaries, that is your prerogative. And I am certainly not here to challenge your understanding...
So now I think I understand better. There is no agreement on the issue. So there is nothing in the Quran that states God made the face of another person appear to be that of Jesus? I'm slightly confused on whether the passage exists or not...
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 06:30 PM
This is the verse from the Quran with two transliteration-- as to whom was on that cross? I have already stated more than one opinion.
وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًا {157}
[Yusufali 4:157] That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
[Pickthal 4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 07:28 PM
I can understand why it seems rudimentary to you that God would not forsake his messenger. That is not what I question. It is that which you have quoted from the Qu'ran with which I struggle:
they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them
To me it appears to be deceptive to those to whom it appeared that it was Jesus.
To you it does not.


So, we have must have different view of what it means to be deceptive, which I why I turned to a dictionary for a definition.

Whatever you want to call it, like with the spider, God tricked the people who were looking for Muhammad to kill him. I don't have a problem with that. But with regard to this substitution of another for Jesus' place at the crucifixion, suffice it to say that if this is the way of Allah, by whatever means you call it, or label you give to it, that I do not understand it. Of course, there are things within Christianity that I do not understand about the way God works also. Thank-you for your efforts to educate me, I guess this is just one point where my denseness prevents me from learning.
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 07:38 PM
In child like charm Grace seeker-- those who plotted ( were the bad guys) ... seems almost like you are rooting for the bad guys to crucify him?...... but then again I think that is what you already believe. This late in the game I think there is no more a point for this discussion..
peace!
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 07:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
In child like charm Grace seeker-- those who plotted ( were the bad guys) ...
Then God deceived the bad guys!! Yeah God!! I don't see what would be so wrong in saying that if that is what you believe.

But what I see is that it is what you believe, but not the word you want to use, because you don't want to label God a deceiver. Something sounds wrong about that. But maybe, the reality is that God did deceive people and there is nothing wrong with the fact that he did?

Still searching, but understand if you want to move on to something else. Again, thanks for trying.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
03-06-2007, 07:50 PM
Would u call me a deciever if i had to trick some bad people to save a good person? Or would u call me a hero? How can anyone have the audacity to call God a deciever?
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 07:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Jazzy
Would u call me a deciever if i had to trick some bad people to save a good person? Or would u call me a hero? How can anyone have the audacity to call God a deciever?
I would say that you used deception, and used it well. As I just posted, perhaps we need to be careful about the term "deceiver". I don't want to apply it to God either, it has such negative connotations. But maybe the problem is with connotations. I need not apply those connotations to what God did, perhaps like in your example, the deception should be seen as heroic.
Reply

جوري
03-06-2007, 07:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Then God deceived the bad guys!! Yeah God!! I don't see what would be so wrong in saying that if that is what you believe.

But what I see is that it is what you believe, but not the word you want to use, because you don't want to label God a deceiver. Something sounds wrong about that. But maybe, the reality is that God did deceive people and there is nothing wrong with the fact that he did?

Still searching, but understand if you want to move on to something else. Again, thanks for trying.
lol... it is almost as if you enjoy drawing satisfaction out of simplistic conclusions? Deception is your own word!... as you conceive in your own mind! I will not attempt to explain an entire doctrine to you in a paragraph, and I understand that this gnaws at the very citadel of Christianity. Deception in this case and visible to the naked eye would be forsaking the one with whom you have a covenant. not saving him from plotters! This is becoming a very circular argument and to be honest I need to let it go!
Thank you for your time and I hope there are no hard feelings!
peace!
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 08:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PurestAmbrosia
This is becoming a very circular argument and to be honest I need to let it go!
Thank you for your time and I hope there are no hard feelings!
peace!
No. No hard feelings at all.

It will probably do me good to ruminate on it over night. And thank-you for all your patience, I know it is trying when someone just doesn't get what you are trying to say.

Peace to you as well.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
03-06-2007, 08:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I would say that you used deception, and used it well. As I just posted, perhaps we need to be careful about the term "deceiver". I don't want to apply it to God either, it has such negative connotations. But maybe the problem is with connotations. I need not apply those connotations to what God did, perhaps like in your example, the deception should be seen as heroic.
So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly. So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 08:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Jazzy
So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly. So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.
Speaking of human beings using deception to save someone's life is something a little different than the proposition that God Himself used deception in order to save someone. Perhaps as Grace Seeker suggested, it is the negative understanding of the word "deception" that is causing this confusion. I suppose the idea of God using "deception", for lack of a better word, in order to stop the death of individual, Jesus Christ, seems odd to me as a Christian. I think I understand the stance of the Quran on this issue, and that is all I was looking for.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-06-2007, 08:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Jazzy
So if u were to save someone because their life was in danger and u had too lie, would it be sane to call it deception? Comeon bro...thats silly.
If you lie, of course it is deception. What else would you call it? I can't call it forthrightness just because I consider the end good.

So basically anyone who has saved anyone else is a deciever.
No. That doesn't follow.
Not all people who save others have to lie or use deception to accomplish it. There are those who save people by simple extracting them from life threatening situations. The lifeguard who jumps in the pool to save a potential drowning victim, the firefighter who pulls you from a burning building, the parent who grabs a child's hand so he can't run into the busy street -- all instances of saving a person's life without deception.

But one of the things that I am realizing in this discussion is that we shouldn't jump to a conclusion that all deceptions are necessarily bad. Allah created many animals to use deception as part of their very nature -- the cameleon that changes its appearance to blend in to its surroundings for example, the snapping turtle that sticks out a tongue that looks like a worm to lure fish within range for it to grab and eat -- these are aspects of how Allah created them and I don't think that such deception is wrong. Of course, some deception is bad -- a lie is bad -- and yet I've told my wife "no that dress doesn't make you look fat" or "yes, that haircut looks nice". Should I label myself a deceiver? Well, maybe. But perhaps not all deception is bad? In my own country there was something called the Underground Railway that was operated to help slaves escape to freedom, and it certainly worked by deception, convincing those who were looking for any runaway slaves that they would have better luck looking elsewhere, all the while actually hiding them under a floor or in a hiden closet.

I still can't come up with another name for what is reported that Allah did -- he fooled people into thinking something that wasn't true by changing the appearance of the one they crucified to make it appear to them as if it were Jesus when it wasn't it. But, for the moment at least, I'll try not to sit in judgment as to whether that was a good or bad thing.
Reply

Malaikah
03-06-2007, 08:51 PM
I don't see why punishing the evil people with 'deception' is any worse than God punishing them with, say, hell fire? Both are something not allow for us humans to do (it is haram to punish/kill anyone with fire), yet it is perfectly okay for God to punish with fire...

Just a point of interest...
Reply

Keltoi
03-06-2007, 08:52 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
I don't see why punishing the evil people with 'deception' is any worse than God punishing them with, say, hell fire? Both are something not allow for us humans to do (it is haram to punish/kill anyone with fire), yet it is perfectly okay for God to punish with fire...

Just a point of interest...
I don't think anyone was confused about God's "right" to do anything. I was just slightly confused on what position the Quran took on the issue, and I believe I understand now.
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
03-06-2007, 08:57 PM
Grace, I was referring to people saving others in this scenario. i should have been more clear.
Reply

YusufNoor
03-07-2007, 01:04 AM
:sl:

Aalaamu Alaykum EVERYONE!!!

Gene, 2 items are mentioned in the Qur'an that are NOT thoroughly explained, Jesus' crucifixtion and referring to Ezra as the "son of G-d". we ARE NOT given the definitive explanation on either of these 2 issues, the latter, imho, being easier to understand. BECAUSE of that, we can't TRULY answer your question in a way the you would like it answered.

but to try a little:

if the purpose was souly to save Isa/Jesus(as), then only those present were decieved and there are Qur'anic references to deception as well as in stories about King David(as) [none springing to mind, but while he was on the run from Saul]. AND the story of Judah's daughter-in-law Tamar.

from a Muslim point of view, it's a very small audience AND it saved a Prophet(as). from our point of view, those that "created the crucifiction/resurrection myth" would be guilty of a MUCH LARGER and, from an Islamic point of view, MORE DASTARDLY deception or crime. that is the deifying of Jesus/Isa(as)! assigning of partners to Allah(SWT) is about the worst form of sin that there is in Islam. in which case, THAT would be deception by the arch enemy of mankind: Shaytan.

btw, i'm strongly inclined to believe that the Jesus/Isa(as) and the Ezra issue are meant to be stumbling blocks for those "considering" Islam but not quite ready to "fully submit". if that WASN'T the case, then BOTH issues would have been fully explain by the Messenger of Allah(pbuh)! wewould have lots of Ahadith or Tafseer resovling the issue.

to see where Islam and Christianity cross paths, look for the answer to the question, "am i my brothers keeper?"

i probably didn't help much, but anyone who expounds MORE than that would pretty much have to be making it up...

oh, and i didn't yell! :)

:w:

Yusuf
Reply

Skillganon
03-07-2007, 01:25 AM
I think that the Crufixion and the Ezra being called the son of God has been covered, numerous time.

I don't see why they will be a stumbling block.
Reply

YusufNoor
03-07-2007, 01:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Skillganon
I think that the Crufixion and the Ezra being called the son of God has been covered, numerous time.

I don't see why they will be a stumbling block.
:sl:

a: it's Gene's thread

b: i meant for Christians and Jews...
1) were you EVER one of those?

:w:
Reply

north_malaysian
03-07-2007, 06:33 AM
can we replace the term "deception" with "trick"?
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-27-2007, 10:36 PM
OK. Everybody ready to move on to a new question, I hope.


I keep coming across something called "istikhara". At first I saw it in connection with marriage, and now I am seeing it with regard to a few other things. But I really have no idea what it is. Who can help?
Reply

YusufNoor
03-28-2007, 12:41 AM
A`udhu Billahi mina Shaytanir Rajeem,

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalamu alaykum wa'rahma-tullahi, wa'barakatahu Gene!

how are you and the family? are you finished with the deception thingy?

i don't know/can't explain "istikhara", BUT i've had a burning question for about 3 weeks! :D

read:

Woodrow,


I've read enough of your posts that I think I can safely say you and I are on the same page on this one.

I would not want a non-Christian to be teaching Sunday school in my church. I wouldn't even want a nominal Christian (some one who was a Christian in name only, simply because of the cultue they were raised in) to be the one placed in the position of being responsible for teaching others about the Christian faith.

I while it would be his/her own decision, I would counsel against a Christian marrying a non-Christian, or even a non-practicing Christian, simply because of the closeness of that relationship and the choices they will have to make together on which they may find it impossible to agree.

But for all other things I would welcome you as a Muslim into my family without any reservation whatsoever. (And if my daughter would choose to marry you -- well I would just pray that it is my Muslim daughter not my Buddhist daughter who makes that decision. )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last edited by Grace Seeker : 3 Weeks Ago at
care to enlighten us about that last little comment??? :omg:

:w:

Yusuf
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 01:06 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by YusufNoor
care to enlighten us about that last little comment??? :omg:

:w:

Yusuf
Sure. I have a total of 8 kids. Not all biological. Among them is Asli who lived with us as an exchange student from Turkey several years ago. During the year we treated her as our daughter and she called us "Mom" and "Dad". Though she is back home in Turkey, none of that relationship has changed. And Asli happens to be Muslim.

I also have a Buddhist daughter from Thailand, if you are interested in the other reference.


If you want to get on my bad side quickly, ask me about my "real" children. ALL of my children are real. Some of them were not born to us and also have other parents. But all of them are real.


Of course, all of my kids are also probably a little too young for Woodrow. :statisfie
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-28-2007, 01:20 AM



I seek refuge in Allah (The One God) from the Satan (devil) the cursed, the rejected

With the name of ALLAH (swt) -The Bestower Of Unlimited Mercy, The Continously Merciful


Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh (May the peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you)

&&


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I keep coming across something called "istikhara". At first I saw it in connection with marriage, and now I am seeing it with regard to a few other things. But I really have no idea what it is. Who can help?
---let me try :p

when we can't make any decision , then it's encouraged to offer 2 rakat ( sorry don't know the English word ) special salat/namaz/prayer . It's better to do the salat at night before sleeping.


We seek guidance from God ...the dua/supplication is like that , God , u know what is good , what is bad for me. so , if this work is good for my this life & the life hereafter , then grant it for me & make it easy for me ; if it's not good for me & my life hereafter , then keep me away from it & grant me what is good & keep me satisfied .


If we have a good dream , then we can do the work, bad dream indicates NO, it won't be good. If there is no dream , then we will do what seems right. It's good to offer the prayer minimum 3 times.

Insha Allah , i will try to collect more info ....if u want :)


** some more :D


Dua and Prayers Suggestions from God - Salah tul Istikhara




"Istikhara" means to seek goodness from Allah (Exalted is He), meaning when one intends to do an important task they do istikhara before the task.

The one who does the istikhara is as if they request Allah Almighty that, O the Knower of Unseen (Exalted is He) guide me if this task is better for me or not?


TRANSLATION:

"O Allah! I seek goodness from Your Knowledge and with Your Power (and Might) I seek strength, and I ask from You Your Great Blessings, because You have the Power and I do not have the power.


You Know everything and I do not know, and You have knowledge of the unseen.


Oh Allah! If in Your Knowledge this action ------------------------------------------------ (which I intend to do) is better for my religion and faith, for my life and end [death], for here [in this world] and the hereafter then make it destined for me and make it easy for me and then add blessings [baraka'] in it, for me.


O Allah! In Your Knowledge if this action is bad for me, bad for my religion and faith, for my life and end [death], for here [in this world] and the hereafter then turn it away from me
and turn me away from it and whatever is better for me, ordain [destine] that for me and then make me satisfied with it."



Answer: If in the dream one sees whiteness (means any thing white in color, for example: milk, white paper, white sky, white clothes, white light etc.)

or greenness (means any thing green in color, for example: grass, plants, trees, green clothes, green light etc.) then understand that this task is better

and if one sees redness (means any thing red in color, for example: blood, red clothing, red fruit, red light etc.)

or blackness (means any thing black in color, for example: black water, black light, black clothings, black sky, black wall etc. ) then understand it is bad and avoid it.

[ wooowww, i did not know about that ...thanks Grace Seeker for asking . How Christians pray when in trouble ??? it's not the right thread to answer ; so when u r free , pl. answer it in related thread ....BTW , what about thread answered by Christians ....is that still closed ????]


If do not remember any dream or do not see any colors then follow your heart. Whatever intention grows stronger in your heart regarding your targated work follow it after seven days of Istakhara.


Islamic Academy
2200 Los Rois Blvd, Suite 130, Plano TX 75074 - Phone 972-423-2626
http://www.islamicacademy.org/html/D..._Istakhara.htm
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
03-28-2007, 01:20 AM
Istikhara is a sort of seeking guidance from Allah(swt), when you are unable to decide about a lawful matter. Usually we should use our common sense and AQL/intellect and weigh things properly, to decide about them, However, for any reason or under any circumstances, if we are unable to make a decision, then we can seek the help of Allah(swt) by doing Istikhara.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 02:23 AM
hmmmm

This sort of reminds me of the idea of putting out a fleece. Are you familiar with that concept, practiced by many (but by no means all) Christians, and maybe Jews too, I don't know -- it's based on the story of Gideon from the Tanakh.


So, you only offer it when you need more help than the common sense and rational wisdom that God gave you, not for everything? I guess I wonder if having a pizza to late at night might be more the cause of a bad dream than Allah's directions. Maybe this is why it was suggested to offer it 3 times.

Ever have inconclusive results?
Reply

Malaikah
03-28-2007, 06:27 AM
GraceSeeker,

You don't have to have a dream. I don't actually know of any hadiths that say you need to have a dream. Basically you just offer a short prayer, and at the end you read this supplication, and then do what ever you think is right and hope for the best, knowing that you asked Allah for his help, and knowing that whatever happens, even if it was bad, it is still better than the other option because this is what Allah guided you to asfter you asked him.

The supplication (it really explains a lot):

O Allah, I seek Your help in finding out the best course of action (in this matter) by invoking Your knowledge; I ask You to empower me, and I beseech Your favor. You alone have the absolute power, while I have no power. You alone know it all, while I do not. You are the One Who knows the hidden mysteries. O Allah, if You know this thing (I am embarking on) [here mention your case] is good for me in my religion, worldly life, and my ultimate destiny, then facilitate it for me, and then bless me in my action. If, on the other hand, You know this thing is detrimental for me in my religion, worldly life, and ultimate destiny, turn it away from me, and turn me away from it, and decree what is good for me, wherever it may be, and make me content with it.

check out this thread, it has heaps of information on it:

http://www.islamicboard.com/cyber-co...-guidance.html
Reply

north_malaysian
03-28-2007, 07:33 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Sure. I have a total of 8 kids. Not all biological. Among them is Asli who lived with us as an exchange student from Turkey several years ago. During the year we treated her as our daughter and she called us "Mom" and "Dad". Though she is back home in Turkey, none of that relationship has changed. And Asli happens to be Muslim.

I also have a Buddhist daughter from Thailand, if you are interested in the other reference.


If you want to get on my bad side quickly, ask me about my "real" children. ALL of my children are real. Some of them where not born to us and also have other parents. But all of them are real.
Are you Angelina Jolie? :okay:
Reply

bint abdulhamid
03-28-2007, 10:16 AM
to da sister who woz asakin 'bout back up regarding music 4rm da quraan & ahadeeth well eres a story which occured durin da tym of da prophet (s.a.w)
well...dis is wot happend '' once da slave of a companion of da prophet (s.a.w) went 2 da market to purchase something howeva music could b heard within da bazaar 4 dis reason the slave girl flee 4rm da bazaar terrified dat da azaab(punishment) of allah comes down and she b'comes involved in it. ''so it should b taken into consideration how fightend da companioms were afraid of museic entering their ears without it even bieng their fault. i hope dis helps fufil ur doubt in anyway........................................'''p eace!!!!!!!!!!!!'''
Reply

samah12
03-28-2007, 03:24 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
Good grief. What is the benefit in art? In literature? In poetry? Like music, all of that is part of what makes life actually worth living. I'm fascinated as to the 'bad effects' as well.. rock music I could understand but Beethoven, Mozart or Mahler? Utter nonsense, and one of the more ridiculous 'interpretations' IMHO.
I like this comment. Of course there is music that should be avoided, drinking, carousing, etc is all a path to our destruction but are we not able to use our judgement as to what is good or bad. I would not permit my husband or sons to go drinking and watching belly dancers but when we listen to Sami Yusuf singing about supplication and our beloved Prophet (pbuh) it makes our hearts swell with love for Allah.

For those people that do not know of Sami Yusuf the following are some of the lyrics from a song called Supplication:

Oh my Lord my sins are like the highest mountain
my good deeds are very few they're like a small pebble
I turn to you my heart full of shame, my eyes full of tears
bestow your forgiveness and mercy upon me
Ye Allah send your peace and blessing on the final Prophet
and his family and companions and those who follow him.

What about Hesham Abass singing the 99 names of Allah, yes it does not have instrumentation, but he is singing and can you tell me anything more beautiful in the history of the world than the names of Allah?

Also and very importantly, there has been a song on Arabic television recently and the singer of this song can regularly be seen leading prayer in Mecca! (I have emailed my husband for his name because I don't remember it but I want you to be able to verify what I am saying, as soon as I get the name I will post it). If I translate the arabic correctly the song is inviting a return to brotherhood in Islam rather than Muslim fighting Muslim.

Please can someone tell me how this could lead me to sin or how these beautiful sentiments are the tools of the devil? Listening to this makes me want to pray, not commit adultery. Please forgive me, I am not trying to be antagonistic, I just really cannot see how this hadith is so strictlly interpreted.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 05:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by north_malaysian
Are you Angelina Jolie? :okay:
See, I told Brad if we shared too much personal stuff we would eventually be found out. He said, "No. Brad and Angie are common names, no one will ever guess. But here you did, and I even used a different screen name. Well, it's been nice knowing you all, but you realize that I can't stay here now that the word is out. Maybe, I'll see you another time, another place, and (unfortunately) under another name."
Peace, Angie :okay:









(Because we are not to impersonate others, please know I typed this with tongue firmly planted in cheek.)
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 06:16 PM
Well, that was relatively easy. Why did you all say that "istikhara" was so hard to explain. It makes perfect sense to me. I see that there is NO ONE RIGHT WAY, but the principle seems basic to how I try to live my life everyday, that is when in doubt, seek God's guidance and trust that whatever way he leads you if you follow it, it will be better than any other you might have chosen, not because it is necessarily the one filled with blessings, but because it is the one God has chosen for you, and knowing that that is where one is is the greatest blessing of all.



So, I'm back with another question. And on this I think we may end up having to agree to disagree in the end. But I still want to discuss it if we may?


Below is a response from Fi_Sabilillah to a person who had just made the decision to convert to Islam. That person asked about the necessity of going public with the decision, especially as regard to sharing it with family and friends.

format_quote Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Wow kool! Praise be to Allaah. :) Just to go over it again, it's:


Ash hadu an laaa illaaha illAllaah, Muhammadur - Rasool Allaah.

I bear witness there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, (and) Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the Messenger of Allaah.


Inshaa Allaah that is the right way to say it. Do you want to make a new thread so the brothers and sisters on the forum know of your reversion? Do it only if you want to.

And no - you don't have to mention it to your family and friends until you feel it's best, we know from the lives of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah that they would hide it out of fear of persecution etc. So do it when you feel its best. :)


I'm really proud of ya! :D :) i hope Allaah makes the path to paradise easy for you and all the muslims, ameen.
Now, I didn't use Fi_Sabilillah's response to pick on him personally, but because I know he is well respected, and gives advice that comes from the core of Islam. I must also say, I have seen many other Muslims give similar advice to a few others. So, I take it that this is the standard answer to that question of whether or not to go public: there is no need, some of the companions kept it secret out of fear themselves, so you don't have to tell anyone if you don't want to.

Now, my question/statement: I don't get it.
What is the point of claiming something that one does not profess publically?

One begins with the statement: "I bear witness ...", but to bear witness is to testify to others. I'm not saying that I expect every new Muslim to get up and start proclaiming their faith from the rooftops over megaphones. I wouldn't expect this of any convert to any religion. But how does one show that Allah is the first place priority in one's life, crouched in fear and hiding it from others?

Like I said, I don't get it. To me, keeping it secret is the antithesis of bearing witness.
Reply

samah12
03-28-2007, 06:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

One begins with the statement: "I bear witness ...", but to bear witness is to testify to others. I'm not saying that I expect every new Muslim to get up and start proclaiming their faith from the rooftops over megaphones. I wouldn't expect this of any convert to any religion. But how does one show that Allah is the first place priority in one's life, crouched in fear and hiding it from others?

Like I said, I don't get it. To me, keeping it secret is the antithesis of bearing witness.
Firstly may I say as a convert/revert that it is very difficult to find the courage to announce your conversion because of the reputation Muslims have of being 'fanatics' or 'extremists'. It takes time but you get there in the end.

Secondly are you saying that your priority is to make sure people know (and therefore admire you) for your faith or is it more important that Allah recognises your love for him?
Reply

rubiesand
03-28-2007, 07:32 PM
I think first we bear witness before God within our own soul. Then our verbal declaration is witnessed by the people who are present when we take it. Then the wider community witnesses our participation in the public expressions of our faith such as in congregational prayer and pilgrimage to the sacred house.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 07:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Firstly may I say as a convert/revert that it is very difficult to find the courage to announce your conversion because of the reputation Muslims have of being 'fanatics' or 'extremists'. It takes time but you get there in the end.

Secondly are you saying that your priority is to make sure people know (and therefore admire you) for your faith or is it more important that Allah recognises your love for him?
The second. I am not ashamed of the faith I have in God. Hiding it seems as if I am acting as if I am.

I trust that Muslims are not truly ashamed of their faith, but the descriptions people hae posted in other places on the forum sound this way.

I guess, if I was an Imam one of the lessons that I would probably feel led to give at Friday night prayers is to quit living in fear. Trust Allah. Be proud of your faith. If someone ridicules you, insults you, knocks you down or attacks you for it, give praise to Allah that he has given you the opportunity to bear witness to him even under those circumstances.

It seems weak to me to say, "Well, if you don't feel comfortable letting people know that you have faith in Allah, it is OK, as long as you have faith". I see too much of that sort of easy, lackluster faith among Christians. As a pastor I see this all the time among teenagers who act strong on Sundays, but put them in a non-Christian peer group the rest of the week and like a camelion they transform into what ever the group is into as it is the easiest thing for them to do. To won't stand up, they won't live up, they won't speak up for their faith. And here I sense permission being given for young Muslims to do nearly the same thing. I know no one has said that they can just copy kufr activitiy, but isn't being ashamed or afraid to recognize Allah as first place in your life, making Allah something less than first place in your life?

To me it cheapens the value of faith to say: "It's enough for me and God to know about my faith. No one else needs to know, because I'm afraid of what might happend if they did."

I translate that to be: "No one else needs to know, because I lack faith to believe God will given me the protection I need to live openly for him."


I don't want this to come across as if I am saying that you are wrong in this practice. It is not my place to say how a Muslim should live out his/her faith. I'm just saying that I don't get it.
Reply

samah12
03-28-2007, 08:57 PM
[QUOTE=Grace Seeker;697899]The second. I am not ashamed of the faith I have in God. Hiding it seems as if I am acting as if I am.

I trust that Muslims are not truly ashamed of their faith, but the descriptions people hae posted in other places on the forum sound this way.

To me it cheapens the value of faith to say: "It's enough for me and God to know about my faith. No one else needs to know, because I'm afraid of what might happend if they did."

I translate that to be: "No one else needs to know, because I lack faith to believe God will given me the protection I need to live openly for him."
QUOTE]

Oh no, you misunderstand me. You are talking to a woman that never leaves the house without her head covered - how much of a declaration of my faith is that? Nothing short of a neon sign over my head saying Muslim can top that one. And I am very proud that my head cover lets people know of my faith. I do not wear it to impress people, I wear it to please Allah but it certainly denotes my faith.

I was suggesting that in the beginning, when you are unsure of yourself it is enough that Allah knows your true heart. In time when you become more confident you inevitably declare your faith. The issue of declaring faith in Islam is difficult purely because of the media and political retoric and the labels put on us - 'fanatics', 'extremists' and "all muslims are suicide bombers". We know that peer pressure is difficult for young people, I am not saying do whatever pleases your friends but you must accept that it can be difficult for young people to 'go against the grain'.

If these labels were attached to your faith what advise would you, as a pastor, give to young people?
Reply

Mawaddah
03-28-2007, 09:09 PM
:sl:

Thats a Good Question Grace Seeker. Shouldn't we proud of our faith? if we are proud of our faith then why should we hide it?

Well see, in Islaam it also encourages us to think of the consequences of our actions. Perhaps when this person announces his Islam to his family they will discriminate him, maybe harm him in some way, and by doing that it will be a big blow to him who is probably dependant on them.
It's not about being proud of our faith or not, but it's about considering the situation about you, If you feel that you are strong enough to face rejection from family and such, and you are capable to go out there on your own, then alhamdulillah, but for some people it is not such.

If you are strong enough for it then like you said, Come out with it and be open and give thanks to Allah that you are capable to give praise to him, but people vary.
Reply

nevesirth
03-28-2007, 09:20 PM
[QUOTE=zinaa/adultery which may lead to baby born without marriage

whts the fate of a baby born without marriage? i knw many pple like tht. are they considered outcasts in the society or community?
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-28-2007, 11:37 PM


Salaam/peace ,


[QUOTE=nevesirth;697996][QUOTE=zinaa/adultery which may lead to baby born without marriage

whts the fate of a baby born without marriage? i knw many pple like tht. are they considered outcasts in the society or community?[/QUOTE]


----Islam does not say that punish the baby for parents sin . So , no one should ridicule the baby who is totally innocent.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-28-2007, 11:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Oh no, you misunderstand me. You are talking to a woman that never leaves the house without her head covered - how much of a declaration of my faith is that? Nothing short of a neon sign over my head saying Muslim can top that one. And I am very proud that my head cover lets people know of my faith. I do not wear it to impress people, I wear it to please Allah but it certainly denotes my faith.

I was suggesting that in the beginning, when you are unsure of yourself it is enough that Allah knows your true heart. In time when you become more confident you inevitably declare your faith. The issue of declaring faith in Islam is difficult purely because of the media and political retoric and the labels put on us - 'fanatics', 'extremists' and "all muslims are suicide bombers". We know that peer pressure is difficult for young people, I am not saying do whatever pleases your friends but you must accept that it can be difficult for young people to 'go against the grain'.

If these labels were attached to your faith what advise would you, as a pastor, give to young people?

Actually sometimes some of those labels are attached to the Christian faith. Not usually "suicide bomber", but "fanatic", "extremist", "fundy", "holy roller". I've even seen others ask if a new Christian was going to start blowing up abortion clinics. What I counsel young people is to answer all questions, "I've pledged to serve Christ in whatever he calls me to." When pressed with accussations, to let it back on the oppressor, "If you think Christ would be have in such a manner, that is your problem. The Christ I know would not." But generally, young people are not challenged by those accussations as much as by peer pressure to not take their faith seriously. To "enjoy" things that in Islam you would call haraam.

I appreciate that as a woman who never leaves the house without her head covered, that you indeed let your faith show publically. I think of two stories on here, a boy that wanted to be able to pray at school, but couldn't ask his parents to go with him to talk with the principle because he didn't want his parents to find out that he was Muslim. A girl that would not put on her headscarf until she left home because she didn't want her mom to find out that she had become a Muslim. Doesn't something seem wrong when you can go through the motions, but have to live a lie at home. (And while not technically lying, going to this much effort to keep something hidden, is definitely an act of deception with regard to one's parents.)
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-28-2007, 11:52 PM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
.....Please can someone tell me how this could lead me to sin or how these beautiful sentiments are the tools of the devil? Listening to this makes me want to pray, not commit adultery. Please forgive me, I am not trying to be antagonistic, I just really cannot see how this hadith is so strictlly interpreted.


--i know of a hadith where Prophet asked why nobody sent any singer to a newly wed girl's in-laws res because it was their custom to sing songs on wedding day.

In another hadith , people of Madina welcomed the Prophet (p) cheering & singing ( Yusuf Islam sang a wonderful song on this ' Tala Al badru ' ) when he migrated from Macca.

So , i also don't understand why & how all kinds of songs can be Haram. Sis , did u hear the song the veil of Dawud/ David Whrisby Ali ? It's so beautiful :) . Surely it will encourage Muslim women to wear veil . Also , his Life returns song on a Quranic verse is really good.

Do u have the link of the Islamic song u mentioned ?

Reply

Muslim Woman
03-29-2007, 12:04 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
...... Doesn't something seem wrong when you can go through the motions, but have to live a lie at home. (And while not technically lying, going to this much effort to keep something hidden, is definitely an act of deception with regard to one's parents.)


--if someone does anything under compulsion , out of fear ....s/he has no intention to disobey God then it's not a sin.

During the time of Prophet Muhammed (p) , few Muslims were forced to eat pork & uttered bad things about God & the Prophet of God. when they were freed & they came to the Prophet crying , then the verse revealed ( not the exact words) that assured Muslims that they did nothing wrong as it was not their intention.


If a young person fears that his/her parent will force to change the religion or will stop financing or can force him/her to leave home , then it's allowed for him/her to hide the religion.

Of Cource , we must respect parent but God comes first . So , to my knowledge , for the time being , s/he can hide identity & and proclaim Shahada is not a must even in front of Muslims.....may be encouraged but not a must .

Just curious.....if any Muslim teenager comes to u & say , hi , i m goona be a Christian but i don't earn & dad will kick me out of home if he finds out that Jesus (p) is my Saviour ; So i want to do it secretly .... then what advice will u give him ?

Reply

MustafaMc
03-29-2007, 02:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
It seems weak to me to say, "Well, if you don't feel comfortable letting people know that you have faith in Allah, it is OK, as long as you have faith".... I know no one has said that they can just copy kufr activitiy, but isn't being ashamed or afraid to recognize Allah as first place in your life, making Allah something less than first place in your life?

To me it cheapens the value of faith to say: "It's enough for me and God to know about my faith. No one else needs to know, because I'm afraid of what might happend if they did."

I translate that to be: "No one else needs to know, because I lack faith to believe God will given me the protection I need to live openly for him."
Having lived through what you are talking about, I refer you to the post that came up today of my conversion story (Discover Islam/Stories of Muslim Reverts! Post yours here!) I can't speak for others, but the transition to becoming a Muslim from being a Christian in the "Bible Belt" USA was not an easy one.

I converted at the age of 21 and immediately told my family. As expected, my family was not very accepting of my decision and could not understand why I would "reject Jesus as my Saviour". My relations with my family instantly became more distant. Parental ties are difficult ones to "loosen", particularly when one is financially dependent upon them.

Another difficulty was the rigors of Islamic worship and learning a new language. Christian (Baptist/Church of Christ) worship was relatively easy - I would go to church on Sunday sing some uplifting/emotionally inspiring songs, partake of "the Lord's Supper", listen to a sermon and pray along with someone else. As a Muslim, I had to learn a completely different means of praying in a language (Arabic) that I had no prior knowledge of. The prayer was much more ritualistic than I had ever encountered with prerequisite specific bodily washings, facing a specific direction, reciting previously memorized portions of the Quran, and performing prescribed physical actions of bowing and prostrating. To top it off, I had to perform this ritual prayer 5 times a day. The fasting during the day for a month was also more rigorous than any fasting that I had done previously.

You may call it prejudice (or perhaps it is the group survival instinct), but my opinion is that people are more comfortable with people who are more similar to them (race, nationality, national subgroup, education level, economic background, etc). I personally had major difficulty in being the only Caucasian American in a double row of 50 or so Muslims praying synchronously. I remember my Muslim brothers being kind and patient as I learned, but still they were different in significant ways from the people I grew up with.

Even as early as 1981, Islam was associated in the media with "terrorist" acts, particularly in Palestine & Iran hostage crisis. Sincere Christians are generally not violent people and abhore associating with them. Subconciously, I also did not want to be associated with people, as the media constantly reminded me, who did these acts.

It took me until the age of 41, which was 20 years after converting, that I was able to overcome all of these difficulties and make the final commitment to practice Islam. Perhaps, it was that my fear of Allah's eternal punishment overcame my worldly fears. I know that you did not mean it in a bad way, but, yes, each new convert in the West must overcome a certain amount of fear to openly practice Islam today.

Allah has willed that I have consistently (though imperfectly) practiced Islam since June 2001. Yes, I had to overcome the fear of being a social outcast, the fear of losing my job or not getting promoted, the fear of my marriage to a Christian breaking up, and the fear of being sent to prison (Patriot Act). I basically decided that regardless of the cost, I was going to practice the religion that I believed to be the Truth.

The point of this lengthy discussion is that if one chooses to keep his conversion private until his faith is strong enough to accept the rejection of his family and the other consequences of "going public" then I would encourage him/her to do so. The transformation to becoming a Muslim is not instataneous any more than a caterpiller becoming a butterfly is, but the process is certainly worth it and I would not want to compromise the end result.

I understand your point, but I would encourage patience and tolerance towards converts/reverts.
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-29-2007, 05:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Just curious.....if any Muslim teenager comes to u & say , hi , i m goona be a Christian but i don't earn & dad will kick me out of home if he finds out that Jesus (p) is my Saviour ; So i want to do it secretly .... then what advice will u give him ?
I have already answered that above. I would remind them of the words of Jesus: "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10: 37-38)
and
"If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." (Luke 9:26)


I have a friend who grew up a Christian in Malaysia, he said that the scenario you suggest is exactly what they lived with. That on more than one occassion police came into the church to arrest Muslims who had sought to convert to Christianity.

Not all Christians are asked to suffer, but many do --sometimes in big ways, sometimes in small ways. It is part of being in the world but not of the world. And so we are reminded: "If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name." (1 Peter 4:15-16)
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-29-2007, 09:32 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I have already answered that above. (1 Peter 4:15-16)

There is a story in Bible like that.....i read about that long ago. Prophet Abraham (p) introduced his wife as sister to a king.

I read somewhere that he did that because it was the custom of that time or area that nobody assaulted sis in front of bro. so , to protect wife , he hide her that identity. Does not it mean that when u r in danger , u r allowed to hide info ?




Reply

samah12
03-29-2007, 03:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Actually sometimes some of those labels are attached to the Christian faith. Not usually "suicide bomber", but "fanatic", "extremist", "fundy", "holy roller". I've even seen others ask if a new Christian was going to start blowing up abortion clinics. What I counsel young people is to answer all questions, "I've pledged to serve Christ in whatever he calls me to." When pressed with accussations, to let it back on the oppressor, "If you think Christ would be have in such a manner, that is your problem. The Christ I know would not." But generally, young people are not challenged by those accussations as much as by peer pressure to not take their faith seriously. To "enjoy" things that in Islam you would call haraam.

I appreciate that as a woman who never leaves the house without her head covered, that you indeed let your faith show publically. I think of two stories on here, a boy that wanted to be able to pray at school, but couldn't ask his parents to go with him to talk with the principle because he didn't want his parents to find out that he was Muslim. A girl that would not put on her headscarf until she left home because she didn't want her mom to find out that she had become a Muslim. Doesn't something seem wrong when you can go through the motions, but have to live a lie at home. (And while not technically lying, going to this much effort to keep something hidden, is definitely an act of deception with regard to one's parents.)
I was a christian for more than 30 years before I converted to Islam so am aware of the 'bible bashing' comments, my own father (a strict athiest) made awful fun of me as a child. So I think I am in a position to comment from both sides (only my personal opinions of course). From this comment you can take an educated guess at my age and even at the age I was when I converted I was terrified to tell my parents - Why? Because yes as a christian you can be taunted but family and friends are unlikely to exclude you or whisk you off to the psychiatrist (yes this has been done to a young convert I met).

I watched a UK documentary recently on the intigration of Muslims into US society, it was wonderful but it is not like that everwhere. Am I saying young people should hide their faith, No, I am just saying they should take their time. Take for example the issue of dress, if a young girl wishes to convert to Islam the first thing people will ask her about is the 'dress code'. Now if you read some of the threads on this site you can see clearly that women born Muslim still 'discuss' the rights and wrongs of the dress code, so how is a young girl with little knowledge of Islam going to answer this question?

I have not been a member long enough to know of the two stories you mentioned above. To be honest what I read shames me, as a convert it is incumbent upon me to assist in any way I can any person wishing to convert. These young people must have come into contact with other Muslims in order to wish to convert, so who is helping them? I don't mean teaching the Quran, that is for Islamic scholars to do but what about the social issues? My suggestion in such a case would be to get an older convert to go with the young person to discuss the issue with the parents. I have done this twice now and whilst it doesn't mean that the parents are delighted about the idea, it does give them a sounding board, I was able to answer some of the basic questions and I was living 'proof' if you like that just because you convert to Islam you do not automatically become a 'lunatic'. Of course the success of this would depend on the attitude of the older convert or it may just backfire.

My question to you is how would you have advised me as a young person, lets say I wanted to join your church but told you my parents would kick me out of the house because they are strict athiests.
Reply

samah12
03-29-2007, 03:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Salaam/peace ,

Sis , did u hear the song the veil of Dawud/ David Whrisby Ali ? It's so beautiful :) . Surely it will encourage Muslim women to wear veil . Also , his Life returns song on a Quranic verse is really good.

Do u have the link of the Islamic song u mentioned ?
I haven't heard this singer before, thanks for the recommendation I will try to get hold of some of his music. Sami Yusuf also sings a wonderful song called Piece of Scarf which talks about the abuse we face by wearing the cover and explaining we do it for Allah - it makes me cry :statisfie

I am sorry but I don't have a link for the song I mentioned, I will try to find it but be patient I am not very computer literate.
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-29-2007, 04:25 PM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
I haven't heard this singer before, thanks for the recommendation I will try to get hold of some of his music.
links :D




Dawud Wharnsby



What Did I Do Today?

The Veil

The Everything Song

Life Returns


http://www.islamonline.net/English/A...re/audio.shtml

http://www.unc.edu/depts/europe/conf...cs/theveil.htm


'Hijab: An Act of Faith'
Real audio clip


Lyrics

They say, "Oh, poor girl, you're so beautiful you know
It's a shame that you cover up your beauty so."


She just smiles and graciously responds reassuringly,
"This beauty that I have is just one simple part of me.

This body that I have, no stranger has the right to see.


These long clothes, this shawl I wear, ensure my modesty.
Faith is more essential than fashion, wouldn't you agree?



This hijab,
This mark of piety,
Is an act of faith, a symbol,
For all the world to see.

A simple cloth, to protect her dignity.
So lift the veil from your heart to see the heart of purity.

Reply

samah12
03-29-2007, 04:39 PM
Thank you sis that is wonderful. Try this one, you can listen to it free at www.lyricster.net/lyrics/Sami-Yusuf/Free/

Sorry it's such a long post and my apologies to those that think music is haraam.


What goes through your mind?
As you sit there looking at me
Well I can tell from your looks
That you think I’m so oppressed
But I don’t need for you to liberate me

My head is not bare
And you can’t see my covered hair
So you sit there and you stare
And you judge me with your glare
You’re sure I’m in despair
But are you not aware
Under this scarf that I wear
I have feelings, and I do care

CHORUS:
So don’t you see?
That I’m truly free
This piece of scarf on me
I wear so proudly
To preserve my dignity...

My modesty
My integrity
So don’t judge me
Open your eyes and see...
“Why can’t you just accept me?” she says
“Why can’t I just be me?” she says
Time and time again
You speak of democracy
Yet you rob me of my liberty
And all I want is equality
Why can’t you just let me be free?

For you I sing this song
My sister, may you always be strong
From you I’ve learnt so much
How you suffer so much
Yet you forgive those who laugh at you
You walk with no fear
Through the insults you hear
Your wish so sincere
That they’d understand you
But before you walk away
This time you turn and say:

But don’t you see?
That I’m truly free
This piece of scarf on me
I wear so proudly
To preserve my dignity
My modesty
My integrity
So let me be
She says with a smile
I’m the one who’s free
Reply

Grace Seeker
03-29-2007, 05:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Salaam/peace ,





There is a story in Bible like that.....i read about that long ago. Prophet Abraham (p) introduced his wife as sister to a king.

I read somewhere that he did that because it was the custom of that time or area that nobody assaulted sis in front of bro. so , to protect wife , he hide her that identity. Does not it mean that when u r in danger , u r allowed to hide info ?



The event is described in Genesis 12:10-20. The reasons are not quite as you have given them. It was not to prevent Abraham's wife, Sarah, from being assaulted, but to prevent Abraham from being killed by the king who he assumed would want to take Sarah as his own wife because of her beauty. So, it is as you suggest that fear was the motivating factor.

Speaking for myself alone, I do not think that this was something admirable which Abraham did here, and do not lift it up as a model for others. For me, the recording of it in the Bible simply shows that even God's best were flawed humans just as the rest of us are, yet God was able to use them and thus he can use us also if we will but submit to him.
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 12:38 AM


Salaam/peace ,


[QUOTE=samah12;698634].. Try this one, you can listen to it free at www.lyricster.net/lyrics/Sami-Yusuf/Free/


i found lyrics but could not listen :cry:

Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 12:42 AM
[QUOTE=Muslim Woman;699129]

Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
.. Try this one, you can listen to it free at www.lyricster.net/lyrics/Sami-Yusuf/Free/


i found lyrics but could not listen :cry:
I am sorry sister I will try to find it somewhere else for you. I had to download the player to listen to it on this site. Give me 10 minutes and I will try to post a new link.
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 12:43 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
..... it is as you suggest that fear was the motivating factor.

Speaking for myself alone, I do not think that this was something admirable which Abraham did here....

so , u believe Abraham (p) should have told the whole but not the half :giggling: :p truth & let the king killed him & made Sarah (ra ) a widow ?

Is it a sin if out of fear for life , one hides info ?

Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 12:46 AM


Salaam/peace ,



[QUOTE=samah12;699132]
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Give me 10 minutes and I will try to post a new link.

it's ok sis . take ur time.......Dad wants to go out for walk.....i have to go with him now

Allah Hafiz.


Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 12:56 AM
[QUOTE=Muslim Woman;699138]

Salaam/peace ,



format_quote Originally Posted by samah12


it's ok sis . take ur time.......Dad wants to go out for walk.....i have to go with him now

Allah Hafiz.

Hope you enjoy your walk. Try http://www.samiyusuf.com/hearthealbu...02_myummah.htm

it only gives a sample but it is all I can find - sorry
Reply

don532
03-30-2007, 01:14 AM
A very interesting thread. I did not know musical instruments were considered harmful in Islam, or pork was forbidden.
I also did not know until doing some reading here men were forbidden to wear silk, or that the growing of a beard was commanded by the prophet(pbuh).
Praying five times a day, facing east, ceremonial washing, fasting during ramadan, pilgrimage....those that are reverts have undergone more of a transformation than I thought.
What other behavior things must be done and changes must be made.....or dare I ask?

Or perhaps to keep on topic I should say Grace Seeker, what other things have you wondered about in Islam?
Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 01:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by don532
A very interesting thread. I did not know musical instruments were considered harmful in Islam, or pork was forbidden.
I also did not know until doing some reading here men were forbidden to wear silk, or that the growing of a beard was commanded by the prophet(pbuh).
Praying five times a day, facing east, ceremonial washing, fasting during ramadan, pilgrimage....those that are reverts have undergone more of a transformation than I thought.
What other behavior things must be done and changes must be made.....or dare I ask?

Or perhaps to keep on topic I should say Grace Seeker, what other things have you wondered about in Islam?
Ok, just to put the cat amongst the pigeons some scholars say singing and music are forbidden some say they are not. Big 'discussions' going on about that one on other threads.

Obviously alcohol is forbidden. Men are also not allowed to wear gold, as in wedding bands are made of silver for men gold for women. Dating is not allowed, even when a woman is engaged to be married she is not allowed to be alone with her fiance. Paying zakat (money to the poor), there is a prescribed amount in percentage of personal wealth to pay each year. Obviously as a revert I have had to cover my body and head, I cannot now leave the house without my head covered and if my husband brings a friend home I must cover my hair. Foul language is not allowed.

Gosh there are so many, I could be typing all night. But please be aware that these changes to our lives are not a burden, we make them to please Allah.
Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 01:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by don532
A very interesting thread. I did not know musical instruments were considered harmful in Islam, or pork was forbidden.
I also did not know until doing some reading here men were forbidden to wear silk, or that the growing of a beard was commanded by the prophet(pbuh).
Praying five times a day, facing east, ceremonial washing, fasting during ramadan, pilgrimage....those that are reverts have undergone more of a transformation than I thought.
What other behavior things must be done and changes must be made.....or dare I ask?

Or perhaps to keep on topic I should say Grace Seeker, what other things have you wondered about in Islam?
Sorry I made that sound as though only women change their dress code. Men are prescribed ways to dress as well, men must also be modest. Men must cover from the navel to the knees - so speedo's are a no-no. If a woman (other than mother, sister, wife) visits our home then my husband must dress modestly too.
Reply

don532
03-30-2007, 01:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Ok, just to put the cat amongst the pigeons some scholars say singing and music are forbidden some say they are not. Big 'discussions' going on about that one on other threads.

Obviously alcohol is forbidden. Men are also not allowed to wear gold, as in wedding bands are made of silver for men gold for women. Dating is not allowed, even when a woman is engaged to be married she is not allowed to be alone with her fiance. Paying zakat (money to the poor), there is a prescribed amount in percentage of personal wealth to pay each year. Obviously as a revert I have had to cover my body and head, I cannot now leave the house without my head covered and if my husband brings a friend home I must cover my hair. Foul language is not allowed.

Gosh there are so many, I could be typing all night. But please be aware that these changes to our lives are not a burden, we make them to please Allah.
Yes, thank you. I had assumed these changed practices were done not as a burden, but as a part of the practice of Islam.
Reply

syilla
03-30-2007, 01:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I have already answered that above. I would remind them of the words of Jesus: "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10: 37-38)
and
"If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels." (Luke 9:26)


I have a friend who grew up a Christian in Malaysia, he said that the scenario you suggest is exactly what they lived with. That on more than one occassion police came into the church to arrest Muslims who had sought to convert to Christianity.

Not all Christians are asked to suffer, but many do --sometimes in big ways, sometimes in small ways. It is part of being in the world but not of the world. And so we are reminded: "If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name." (1 Peter 4:15-16)
Good day Grace. How are you? Hope you are doing well.

May i suggest you to read a bit on the Malaysia history. It would make you understand a little bit more about Malaysia. :)

I suggest you to go the below link.
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-af...ahs-riots.html

Thank you.
Reply

MustafaMc
03-30-2007, 01:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Gosh there are so many, I could be typing all night. But please be aware that these changes to our lives are not a burden, we make them to please Allah.
Yes, these are correct. One thing that I want to point out is that Islam is a complete way of life. So just as some things are commanded to be done, some others are forbidden. A few other forbidden things are prostitution, homosexuality, gambling, fortune telling, astrology, and relying upon good luck charms to name a few.

The Muslim intention in all of this is not to earn salvation through our works, but to do as we are instructed to. We strive to do be obedient to the best of our ability, but in the end we know that it is Allah's judgment and mercy that determine whether we will go to heaven or to hell. He alone knows our inner most intentions for each deed or word better than we know ourselves.
Reply

noodles
03-30-2007, 01:57 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Ok, just to put the cat amongst the pigeons some scholars say singing and music are forbidden some say they are not. Big 'discussions' going on about that one on other threads.

Obviously alcohol is forbidden. Men are also not allowed to wear gold, as in wedding bands are made of silver for men gold for women. Dating is not allowed, even when a woman is engaged to be married she is not allowed to be alone with her fiance. Paying zakat (money to the poor), there is a prescribed amount in percentage of personal wealth to pay each year. Obviously as a revert I have had to cover my body and head, I cannot now leave the house without my head covered and if my husband brings a friend home I must cover my hair. Foul language is not allowed.

Gosh there are so many, I could be typing all night. But please be aware that these changes to our lives are not a burden, we make them to please Allah.
Just a note, after a Nikah is done(which is the signing of the contract, also referred to as engagement period) they are free to be in each other's presence.

They can date all they want and if it so happens that they find some qualities that they don't like in each other, then they are free to divorce and go about their own ways.

Just thought I'd point that out.

(Someone correct me if I'm wrong)

Salameleikum
Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 02:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by noodles
Just a note, after a Nikah is done(which is the signing of the contract, also referred to as engagement period) they are free to be in each other's presence.

They can date all they want and if it so happens that they find some qualities that they don't like in each other, then they are free to divorce and go about their own ways.

Just thought I'd point that out.

(Someone correct me if I'm wrong)

Salameleikum
Thank you for that brother, it is a new one for me. In our area engaged couples are not allowed to be alone until the wedding day, perhaps that is tradition? Can anyone answer that am curious now.
Reply

noodles
03-30-2007, 02:10 AM
Take a look at this thread.

http://www.islamicboard.com/marriage...-marriage.html

It is practised in many areas of the world, I only wish it was practised more in western countries.

As for the couples not able to see each other, its cultural aspect. For instance, I heard that in india or pakistan when a couple is getting married it is not allowed for the the bride to be alone with the groom (or vice versa).

Some may call it Bid'ah and some just accept it as a cultural aspect.

In essense it is stated in the Quran too, I will look up verses for you shortly.


(As far as celibate marriage goes, in indian sub-continent and much of eastern islamic states it isn't practised much, they try to get married as soon as possible so as to leave no reason to doubt their significant other.)
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 02:37 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Thank you for that brother, it is a new one for me. In our area engaged couples are not allowed to be alone until the wedding day, perhaps that is tradition? Can anyone answer that am curious now.


if engagement means just to give her a ring , then they are not married & staying alone is not permitted.

If Imam comes & asks the lady , u agree to marry the man ....son of .......ur mohar ( compulsory marriage gift from husband ) is so & so and she says yes , then the Imam asks the man .......he says yes in front of 2 men , then the couple is legally married .

They don't have to wait for a grand party or reception & can stay like wife & husband as marriage conditions were fulfilled.




Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 02:46 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Salaam/peace ,

if engagement means just to give her a ring , then they are not married & staying alone is not permitted.

If Imam comes & asks the lady , u agree to marry the man ....son of .......ur mohar ( compulsory marriage gift from husband ) is so & so and she says yes , then the Imam asks the man .......he says yes in front of 2 men , then the couple is legally married .

They don't have to wait for a grand party or reception & can stay like wife & husband as marriage conditions were fulfilled.
Thankyou sis, am still confused but only because of the cultural thing. My husbands cousin just got engaged to be married a couple of months ago, they did the two male witness thing, dowry of gold etc but at the moment her fiance (or whatever you call him) can't afford all the furnishing for the flat. So from this I would assume they have a 'celibate marriage' but 3 weeks ago she went by herself to have coffee in a cafe with her fiance. There was a huge fight between the family because her father and brothers found out and beat the poor girl from one end of the street to the other. I had to take it in turns with other women from the family to stay with her so she could not be alone with her fiance again. I understand her father and brothers still won't speak to her now.
Reply

noodles
03-30-2007, 02:54 AM
From what I understand about marriage I'd assume that was ok and there shouldn't have been a need to beat the poor girl. After all, my family friend got engaged a year ago and the marriage was put off a little later because the female wanted to complete her education and spend more time with her family.

Its completely acceptable.

I'm quite sure its a cultural thing

People now a days take the western engagement and the Islamic engagement to be the same thing. From what I understand, in the west, when the male proposes to the female(no vows are taken) they are claimed to be engaged.

However, in Islam, you become engaged, the moment your Nikah is performed, which happens to be the act of signing the contract. It is said that once you are engaged, both parties allow the male and female to be together Islamically. As for not allowing the female to see the male, that is just a cultural practice.
Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 03:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by noodles
From what I understand about marriage I'd assume that was ok and there shouldn't have been a need to beat the poor girl. After all, my family friend got engaged a year ago and the marriage was put off a little later because the female wanted to complete her education and spend more time with her family.

Its completely acceptable.

I'm quite sure its a cultural thing

People now a days take the western engagement and the Islamic engagement to be the same thing. From what I understand, in the west, when the male proposes to the female(no vows are taken) they are claimed to be engaged.

However, in Islam, you become engaged, the moment your Nikah is performed, which happens to be the act of signing the contract. It is said that once you are engaged, both parties allow the male and female to be together Islamically. As for not allowing the female to see the male, that is just a cultural practice.
Thank you for clearing that up for me, I shall now go back to Egypt and throw large rocks at her father. :D
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 03:07 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by samah12
Thankyou sis, am still confused but only because of the cultural thing. My husbands cousin just got engaged to be married a couple of months ago, they did the two male witness thing, dowry of gold etc but at the moment her fiance (or whatever you call him) can't afford all the furnishing for the flat. So from this I would assume they have a 'celibate marriage' but 3 weeks ago she went by herself to have coffee in a cafe with her fiance. There was a huge fight between the family because her father and brothers found out and beat the poor girl from one end of the street to the other. I had to take it in turns with other women from the family to stay with her so she could not be alone with her fiance again. I understand her father and brothers still won't speak to her now.

----the couple signed the contract in front of 2 male witnesses & the man gave her mohr ( at least a part of it ? ) If yes , then surely they are married. If they want , they can start their married life.

They don't need to take the permission from dad or bro.....though it's good if family members agree & have their blessings but they can't force the couple to stay away from each other.

Why not talk to the local Imam ? When tradition contradicts with Islamic law , surely it's the Islam who wins :D

spend time with husband & a married lady is beaten by dad & bro .....ask the parent to show proof from Quran or haidth that they can do it. It's their duty to prove that they are right.



[MAD]I shall now go back to Egypt and throw large rocks at her father[/MAD]


---hahaha , best of luck :D

oh poor dad & bro , let me know when they go to hospital....i will pray for them :statisfie

but before doing anything , pl . make sure that they are really married & not only a discussion took place & they fixed a date . Ask the cousin if they really signed on the contract.


Reply

Grace Seeker
03-30-2007, 03:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Salaam/peace ,





so , u believe Abraham (p) should have told the whole but not the half :giggling: :p truth & let the king killed him & made Sarah (ra ) a widow ?

Is it a sin if out of fear for life , one hides info ?
I think that Abraham should have had as much faith with regard to God being in control of the situation involving him and Sarah has he was later with regard to himself and his son.

Then whatever would have happened we know would have been in the will of God. As it was, Abraham at this time in his life showed less than perfect faith in God. I'm just glad he didn't stumble later on with respect to God asking Abraham to be faithful with regard to his son.

Or do you think that Abraham should have showed fear that God wanted his son and and hidden his son from God?
Reply

samah12
03-30-2007, 03:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

Salaam/peace ,





----the couple signed the contract in front of 2 male witnesses & the man gave her mohr ( at least a part of it ? ) If yes , then surely they are married. If they want , they can start their married life.

They don't need to take the permission from dad or bro.....though it's good if family members agree & have their blessings but they can't force the couple to stay away from each other.

Why not talk to the local Imam ? When tradition contradicts with Islamic law , surely it's the Islam who wins :D

spend time with husband & a married lady is beaten by dad & bro .....ask the parent to show proof from Quran or haidth that they can do it. It's their duty to prove that they are right.



[MAD]I shall now go back to Egypt and throw large rocks at her father[/MAD]


---hahaha , best of luck :D

oh poor dad & bro , let me know when they go to hospital....i will pray for them :statisfie

but before doing anything , pl . make sure that they are really married & not only a discussion took place & they fixed a date . Ask the cousin if they really signed on the contract.

I am away on holiday at the moment but I will certainly call my father in law tomorrow and ask about this. I don't want to cause a problem if I have misunderstood the situation. Thankyou for your advise though, it is true we learn something new every day.
Reply

YusufNoor
03-30-2007, 05:11 AM
[QUOTE=Grace Seeker;699237]I think that Abraham should have had as much faith with regard to God being in control of the situation involving him and Sarah has he was later with regard to himself and his son.

Then whatever would have happened we know would have been in the will of God. As it was, Abraham at this time in his life showed less than perfect faith in God. I'm just glad he didn't stumble later on with respect to God asking Abraham to be faithful with regard to his son.

Or do you think that Abraham should have showed fear that God wanted his son and and hidden his son from God?[QUOTE]

A`udhu Billahi mina Shaytanir Rajeem,

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalamu alaykum wa'rahma-tullahi, wa'barakatahu,

Hi Gene,

that's a good question for the Rabbi! i've seen some great exegis(sp??) on that issue! did he have faith enough to know that Allah(SWT) would stop him and/or that Allah(SWT) would bring him back to life if he actually did it. and the Jewish Rishonims get into the whole "what was Isaac thinking" issue as well.[cuz, in Judaic Literature, Isaac KNEW he was going to be the "offering"!]of course, NOT in Islamic Literature! :blind:

regarding the "wife" issue, in Islamic literature, i've heard that what he regretted was lying, but he probably HAD faith that Allah(SWT) would save her despite the prediciment that he put her in; so faith after all, in spite of an appearing lack of it...:)

:w:
Reply

Malaikah
03-30-2007, 08:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I think that Abraham should have had as much faith with regard to God being in control of the situation involving him and Sarah has he was later with regard to himself and his son.

Then whatever would have happened we know would have been in the will of God. As it was, Abraham at this time in his life showed less than perfect faith in God. I'm just glad he didn't stumble later on with respect to God asking Abraham to be faithful with regard to his son.

Or do you think that Abraham should have showed fear that God wanted his son and and hidden his son from God?
I think none of us here are in the position to criticise Abraham... if he, of all people, was lacking in faith, then I hate to think what the condition of the rest of us is.

But then again... you are basing that on the bible, and I know the bible does tend to have more than a few 'problems' with regards to the lives of the prophets. :rollseyes They aren't portrayed to be as God-fearing in the bible as they are in the Quran.
Reply

Muslim Woman
03-30-2007, 08:12 AM


Salaam/peace ,


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
....... do you think that Abraham should have showed fear that God wanted his son and and hidden his son from God?


--hehe, nope , no way :p


there is not any place that is hidden from God ; also as a believer , we have to obey God . But , the situation was different with the king . Hiding info from a human being is not like disobeying God .


Ok , let's see the matter like this. May be personally u would love to tell the whole truth without hiding info even in danger time but what if one does that ? Can it be considered as a sin or Jesus (p) will be really angry for that ?

Say , a riot is going on between Christians & Muslims .......so , if Christians want to go to a safe place & hide their identity while crossing Muslim majority areas , how it can be a sin ? Is there any verse in Bible that says that under any situation , Christians won't hide info ?


Reply

Grace Seeker
03-30-2007, 04:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman

there is not any place that is hidden from God ; also as a believer , we have to obey God . But , the situation was different with the king . Hiding info from a human being is not like disobeying God .
I would agree with that assessment, thought that does keep people from acting like they can hide things from God.


Ok , let's see the matter like this. May be personally u would love to tell the whole truth without hiding info even in danger time but what if one does that ? Can it be considered as a sin or Jesus (p) will be really angry for that ?
I'm not saying it is a sin. Though I think some types of hiding are so deceptive as to be the equivalent of lying.

Is lying a sin? Use the very situation you created: Say , a riot is going on between Christians & Muslims .......so , if some group is going though the city looking for members of the other religion that they are going to take hold of, torture, perhaps even kill. And then say that the persecuted group comes to your house asking your to hide them, can a you lie to protect them?

If lying is a sin, but lying in this situation would be permissable, aren't we really saying that it is the situation not the lie which determines whether something is a sin or not?
Reply

Hemoo
03-31-2007, 11:54 PM
when prophet abrahim (peace be upon him) said that his wife is his sister he wasn't lying

in islam we say that this is a "TA3reed" it means to say a word that have two meanings ,the near one and the far one

so when he said that Sarah is his sister it was a right statment because she is a sister to him in islam

and all muslim womens in this forum is my sisters in islam...
Reply

Hemoo
04-01-2007, 12:00 AM
and about the music here is a good small lecture Download it

A lecture about music status in Islamic laws by Mohammad Abd ElHakim
Reply

snakelegs
04-01-2007, 12:04 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
If lying is a sin, but lying in this situation would be permissable, aren't we really saying that it is the situation not the lie which determines whether something is a sin or not?
i would agree with the above. i think lying is ok if a life is in danger.
i think some christians call thie "situational morality". personally, i believe in it and the above would be a good example.
Reply

Woodrow
04-01-2007, 12:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I would agree with that assessment, thought that does keep people from acting like they can hide things from God.




I'm not saying it is a sin. Though I think some types of hiding are so deceptive as to be the equivalent of lying.

Is lying a sin? Use the very situation you created: Say , a riot is going on between Christians & Muslims .......so , if some group is going though the city looking for members of the other religion that they are going to take hold of, torture, perhaps even kill. And then say that the persecuted group comes to your house asking your to hide them, can a you lie to protect them?

If lying is a sin, but lying in this situation would be permissable, aren't we really saying that it is the situation not the lie which determines whether something is a sin or not?
This is a topic that has been ongoing for many generations. Does the end justify the means? I think it all boils down to how each one of us will act as an individual if we are ever faced with such a situation. (There I go, even trying to explain, I'm putting in into terms of situation)

Perhaps we need to look at what laws we are being asked to obey or to violate. We know we are forbidden to steal and we know we are to obey our parents. So would a son be justified in disobeying his father if his father told him to steal?
Reply

Muslim Woman
04-01-2007, 01:17 AM


Salaam/peace;


format_quote Originally Posted by hemoo
when prophet abrahim (peace be upon him) said that his wife is his sister he wasn't lying
-- Regarding Bible , Sarah (ra) was his step-sister. This story is not in Quran . So, we don't know really what happened there :blind:

Reply

MustafaMc
04-01-2007, 02:37 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
-- Regarding Bible , Sarah (ra) was his step-sister. This story is not in Quran . So, we don't know really what happened there :blind:
It seems that this is the first time the point was made in this thread that this story about Abraham is not in the Quran. For that matter, there are no stories in the Quran that portray a Prophet of Allah as immoral or sinful. Contrast this to the many Biblical stories of unspeakable immorality attribute to prophets.
Reply

don532
04-01-2007, 02:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
It seems that this is the first time the point was made in this thread that this story about Abraham is not in the Quran. For that matter, there are no stories in the Quran that portray a Prophet of Allah as immoral or sinful. Contrast this to the many Biblical stories of unspeakable immorality attribute to prophets.
Yes, true. The Bible portrays prophets as human. That's one reason Christians see Jesus(pbuh) as something more.
Reply

Grace Seeker
04-01-2007, 02:47 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
It seems that this is the first time the point was made in this thread that this story about Abraham is not in the Quran. For that matter, there are no stories in the Quran that portray a Prophet of Allah as immoral or sinful. Contrast this to the many Biblical stories of unspeakable immorality attribute to prophets.

Just to remind people how the issue of Abraham came up. I was commenting not on Abraham at all, I know the story and that he and Sarah were not just husband and wife, but also half-siblings. Whether it is in the Qur'an, the Bible, or even its truth/falsehood is not relevant to the original discussion. It was used merely as an illustration by which another asked me a hypothetical question. The actual topic under discussion was not an accusation with respect to anyone sinning (though situational ethics does fit the present topic under discussion), but about why young Muslims seem so hesitant to openly declare their faith.

The over whelming response has been, they are timid.

I understand the answer. I can understand where such timidity would come from. I just don't get it, and probably never will, because for me, to have faith is to let it show. I know that most mature Muslims certainly do in fact let there faith show. And there seems to be a willingness to not have to expectation of those who are less mature in their faith. I guess it is because in becoming a Christian this is usually the first step, not a later one, that I don't get it. It's OK. I don't have to get everything. I don't suggest that one is right and one is wrong. To me it is just unusual and out of character for a person of faith. But perhaps there is wisdom in allowing people to develop at their own rate of speed. I don't know.
Reply

MustafaMc
04-01-2007, 03:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
The actual topic under discussion was ... about why young Muslims seem so hesitant openly declare their faith.

The over whelming response has been, they are timid.

I understand the answer. I can understand where such timidity would come from. I just don't get it, and probably never will, because for me, to have faith is to let it show. ... To me it is just unusual and out of character for a person of faith. But perhaps there is wisdom in allowing people to develop at their own rate of speed. I don't know.
I can understand your perplexity.

I would have to say that a key element to understanding is the personal balance between faith in God with a focus on the hereafter as opposed to reliance on social & family ties with a fear of wordly (cordial family relations, social standing, job, marriage, life, etc) loss.

Again I encourage tolerance and restraint from being too judmental.

Imagine the situation if one was born to a Muslim family in a more Islamicly conservative Muslim countries and that he/she converted to Christianity while attending the university. I would imagine that you would choose to be "fed to the lions" rather than forsake your faith, but not everyone has that level of faith to endure the trial.
Reply

YusufNoor
04-01-2007, 03:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
It seems that this is the first time the point was made in this thread that this story about Abraham is not in the Quran. For that matter, there are no stories in the Quran that portray a Prophet of Allah as immoral or sinful. Contrast this to the many Biblical stories of unspeakable immorality attribute to prophets.
A`udhu Billahi mina Shaytanir Rajeem,

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem

Assalamu alaykum wa'rahma-tullahi, wa'barakatahu

from Sahih Muslim, iirrc:


Chapter 38: THE MERITS OF IBRAHIM, THE FRIEND OF ALLAH (PEACE BE UPON HIM)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5841:
Anas b. Malik reported that a person came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: O, the best of creation; thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He is Ibrahim (peace be upon him).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5842:
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Anas through a different chain of transmitters.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5843:
Anas reported a hadith like this from Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) through another chain of transmitters.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5844:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said that Ibrahim circumcised himself with the help of adz when he was eiclhty years old.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5845:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: We have more claim to doubt than Ibrahim (peace be upon him) when he said, My Lord, show me how thou wilt quicken the dead. He said: Believeth thou not? He said: Yes, but that my heart rest at ease (the Holy Qur'an. 260). May Lord have mercy on Lot that he wanted a strong support and had I stayed in the prison as long as Yusuf stayed I would have responded to him who invited me.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5846:
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Zuhri through another chain of transmitters.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5847:
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira through another chain of transmitters but with a slight variation of wording.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 030, Number 5848:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) never told a lie but only thrice: two times for the sake of Allah (for example, his words):" I am sick," and his words:" But it was the big one amongst them which has done that" and because of Sara (his wife). He had come in a land inhabited by haughty and cruel men along with Sara. She was very good-looking amongst the people, so he said to her: If these were to know that you are my wife they would snatch you away from me, so if they ask you tell that you are my sister and in fact you are my sister in Islam, and I do not know of any other Muslim in this land besides I and you. And when they entered that land the tyrants came to see her and said to him (the king): 'there comes to your land a woman, whom you alone deserve to possess, so he (the kings sent someone (towards her) and she was brought and Ibrahim (peace be upon him) stood in preyer, and when she visited him (the tyrant king came) he could help but stretch his hand towards her and his hand was tied up. He said: Supplicate Allah so that He may release my hand and I will do no harm to you. She did that and the man repeated (the same highhandedness) and his hand was again tied up more tightly than on the first occasion and he said to her like that and she again did that (supplicated), but he repeated (the same highhandedness and his hands were tied up more tightly than on the previous occasion). He then again said: Supplicate your Lord so that He may set my hand free; by. @ llah I shall do no harm to you. She did and his hand was freed. Then he called the person who had brought her and said to him: You have brought to me the satan and you have not brought to me a human being, so turn them out from my land, and he gave Hajira as a gift to her. She returned (along with Hajira) and when Ibrahim (peace be upon him) saw her, he said: How have you returned? She said: With full safety (have I returned). Allah held the hand of that debauch and he gave me a maid-servant. Abu Hiaraira said: O sons of the rain of the sky, she is your mother.

:w:
Reply

Malaikah
04-01-2007, 05:37 AM
Grace Seeker,

If a new Christian came to you, and lets say, was originally a Muslim, and you told her that she has to tell her family asap and endure the hardship, and then she takes your advice, and the hardship is so great on her that she leaves Christianity because of it... would consider yourself at fault? Would you give the same advice to the next Muslim girl who comes to you, wanting to convert?

format_quote Originally Posted by don532
Yes, true. The Bible portrays prophets as human. That's one reason Christians see Jesus(pbuh) as something more.
And in some cases, committing crimes that even ordinary, non-prophets won't dream of doing.:rollseyes

Muslims believe that God only gives the status of Prophethood to those who are good enough to carry it... they sin, of course, they wouldn't be human if they didn't... but their sins are only minor and they immediately regret it and repent from it, and they do not return to it.
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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 12-10-2010, 10:10 PM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-12-2010, 11:42 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-17-2009, 03:01 PM
  4. Replies: 61
    Last Post: 04-18-2009, 07:52 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-07-2008, 06:20 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!