What would Muslims think about the way I see things?

[kritikvernunft]

... should not become Muslim just because of Islam's "practical usefulness".

The essence of a religion is that it is a complete statement about what is right and what is wrong. It is not allowed within that religion to use other sources that would define right and wrong.

If it were true that you cannot join Islam because you find it useful, this interdict must be derived from the Islamic rules themselves. This basically means that the Quran itself would have to mention that forbidden behaviour. If the Quran does not mention this behaviour as impermissible, the behaviour simply is not impermissible.

In fact, the worst possible depravity that anybody could engage in, is to liberally invent new impermissible behaviours, and have the temerity to extend or enlarge the closed and final list of forbidden behaviours mentioned in the scriptures.

Only the One True God has the authority to do that. The very reason why I am joining Islam, is because I am sick and tired of the pagans inventing new forbidden behaviours. I simply have enough of that. Only the One True God can do a thing like that, and not the pagans.

You are simply not allowed to invent new laws to harass other people with. Believe me that there is nothing more utterly detestable than the pagans, and their obnoxious practice of inventing new laws.

 

[YusufNoor]

The essence of a religion is that it is a complete statement about what is right and what is wrong. It is not allowed within that religion to use other sources that would define right and wrong.

If it were true that you cannot join Islam because you find it useful, this interdict must be derived from the Islamic rules themselves. This basically means that the Quran itself would have to mention that forbidden behaviour. If the Quran does not mention this behaviour as impermissible, the behaviour simply is not impermissible.

In fact, the worst possible depravity that anybody could engage in, is to liberally invent new impermissible behaviours, and have the temerity to extend or enlarge the closed and final list of forbidden behaviours mentioned in the scriptures.

Only the One True God has the authority to do that. The very reason why I am joining Islam, is because I am sick and tired of the pagans inventing new forbidden behaviours. I simply have enough of that. Only the One True God can do a thing like that, and not the pagans.

You are simply not allowed to invent new laws to harass other people with. Believe me that there is nothing more utterly detestable than the pagans, and their obnoxious practice of inventing new laws.

Ma shaa Allah, awesome post!

be wary of Muslims, though. many, many just worship what their parents worshipped. I get called wahabi all the time, just because I practice Islam and not the cultures of additions that most have added.

A good Seerah is as important as the Qur'an:

http://www.pleasantviewschool.com/media/default.asp?q=f&f=/Seerah_an_Nabawi%20%28saw%29

Bashar's other lectures are awesome, as well. His only caveat is to state that he is not a scholar. try to make it through the 1st 3, then, it gets where it needs to!

Ma salaama!

 

[kritikvernunft]

I get called wahabi all the time, just because I practice Islam and not the cultures of additions that most have added.

There is certainly a real and relevant issue of purity in religion.

I do not think that anybody who is even just remotely familiar with the subject would claim that the problem does not exist. Of course, things may not be as simple as some people try to depict them. We know that some people will easily resort to name calling ("You are a wahabi!"). If these things were that simple, these things would obviously not even be an issue. In that sense, I understand the concerns being raised in salafi circles ("Salafists consider the term Wahhabi derogatory"). If there were no real issue, nobody would spend a minute of his time on them. So, the problem is real and it can obviously not be solved by means of simplistic name calling.

We have the Salafi view that amongst the Madhahib schools of Islamic law, the Hanafi, Shafii, and Maliki schools have grown inconsistent, and that only the Hanbali school could still possibly make sense. In fact, we are sitting here on the serious issue of real or perceived inconsistency in the existing jurisprudence (fiqh), to the point that large areas in the fiqh may now have to be considered unusable. Another major issue seems to be that the Kalam could also, possibly, have degenerated into sheer speculative theology, and therefore also unusable.

I think that it is obvious that these problems are relatively complex, and that they will not be solved any time soon, and certainly not just by name calling. The problem will obviously also not just go away simply by ignoring it. Therefore, my personal view is that these claims should be declared receivable, and hence thoroughly investigated on their merits.