Why do you believe what you do? And how did you get to that belief?

[- Qatada -]

Though don't you think that God's call to right living goes beyond Allah simply being THE authority. I mean if it is all about who is the biggest guy with the biggest stick, I guess that is one way to figure out who is in control. But I see God as wooing us, not threatening us to submit to him. He calls us to follow not for his good, but for our own. And the punishments that are in store for us, are not punishments he subjects us to if we don't toe the line, they are realities we are destined to stumble headlong, but for him acting to save us.

That's why I think the picture of hell is real, but of an evil God casting us there is not the best metaphor. It is more like we are already hell bent on our own personal and corporate destruction, but God comes offering a way out, but that way out means following his way, no longer our own.

If you've gone over the thread, you'll realise that i've explained all this in depth already.

And (remember) when your Lord proclaimed: "If you give thanks (by accepting Faith and worshipping none but Allâh), I will give you more (of My Blessings), but if you are thankless (i.e. disbelievers), verily! My Punishment is indeed severe." [Qur'an Abraham 14: 7]
​

Regards.

 

[Pygoscelis]

You're doing the exact same thing by following the 'morals' of society which aren't always morals afterall. You're a slave to society, and i'd rather be a slave to the One who created me and Sustains me than to the oppression, obedience and injustice of imperfect humans. Especially when these 'morals' are for the benefit of the ones higher in social power etc.

This is not a question of one of the other. Most often both are involved. These 'morals' of society you speak of are frequently dressed up in relgious garb.

When we let others dictate to us what is right and what is wrong, and we don't allow ourselves to question what they say, we abandon morality and replace it with obedience, and that is when we have a serious danger. It doesn't matter if the authority figure is a perceived god or George Bush.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Umm we are allowed to question in Islam so we understand what it is we are learning or accepting. There is no such thing as blind faith in Islam because it's considered dangerous.

 

[- Qatada -]

This is not a question of one of the other. Most often both are involved. These 'morals' of society you speak of are frequently dressed up in relgious garb.

When we let others dictate to us what is right and what is wrong, and we don't allow ourselves to question what they say, we abandon morality and replace it with obedience, and that is when we have a serious danger. It doesn't matter if the authority figure is a perceived god or George Bush.

That's totally true, when we let the social leaders who are supposedly democratic decide what's wrong and right, and we can't go against them - because if we do, we'll get punished right? hm.. seems like theres not much of a difference after all.


The only difference is that in Islaam - if we speak up against the people higher in authority, we don't have fear of persecution, since the leaders and the people in society are the same in the sight of God, no matter what color/race/sex they're from. Infact, the best in the sight of God are those who have the most taqwa of Him, not because of their social class or wealth etc.:

O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you with Allâh is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa [i.e. one of the Muttaqûn (pious - see V.2:2). Verily, Allâh is All-Knowing, All-Aware.

[Qur'an 49:13]

[SIZE=-1]Taqwa: piety, "God-consciousness." Taqwa involves constant awareness and remembrance of Allah, and conscious efforts to adhere to His commandments and abstain from whatever He has forbidden.


[/SIZE]​

And we leave that for God to decide only, so we don't have that 'holier than thou' attitude since that is a form of arrogance.

'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud reported that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "No one who has an atom's weight of pride in his heart will enter the Garden." A man said, "And if the man likes his clothes to be good and his sandals to be good?" He said, "Allah is Beautiful and loves beauty. Pride means to renounce the truth and to look down on people (in arrogance.)"

[Authentically Recorded in Sahih Muslim]


Allah Almighty says, That home of the Hereafter (i.e. Paradise), We shall assign to those who rebel not against the truth with pride and oppression in the land nor do mischief by committing crimes. And the good end is for the Muttaqûn [those who posses Taqwa] (pious - see V.2:2).

and the Almighty says, "Do not strut arrogantly about the earth." (17:37)
(28:83)
​

[SIZE=-1]

[/SIZE]​

Regards.

[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

 

[ranma1/2]

You're doing the exact same thing by following the 'morals' of society which aren't always morals afterall. You're a slave to society, and i'd rather be a slave to the One who created me and Sustains me than to the oppression, obedience and injustice of imperfect humans. Especially when these 'morals' are for the benefit of the ones higher in social power etc.

Not exactly , the main difference is we can change our morals, improve them as we grow. Religions often have the problem that they can not change there dogma. If say the dogma of a religion prevents someone from eating peanuts and it is named immoral "which i would hate cause i love peanut butter" it can not easily be questioned or changed even if it in actuallity is not about morality but a health matter.

 

[- Qatada -]

Not exactly , the main difference is we can change our morals, improve them as we grow. Religions often have the problem that they can not change there dogma. If say the dogma of a religion prevents someone from eating peanuts and it is named immoral "which i would hate cause i love peanut butter" it can not easily be questioned or changed even if it in actuallity is not about morality but a health matter.

First of all - no, peanuts aren't forbidden in Islaam lol. Allaah only prohibits us from what He knows is harmful for us.


Second, that exact same point can be used against people who change their morals continuouslly since one thing may be classed as totally evil at one time and later on be altered to be encouraged and liked. Therefore the people don't have a common ground to stand on together, and due to that - there is no concept of morals since everyone is always in a state of confusion to what is good or not.

This then makes the people slaves to society because they have to follow the norms of that society [which is controlled by the people higher in social class], because if they don't - they'll be looked at as a stranger and therefore the person has to go along with the false 'edited' morals in order to fit in or be accepted.



Regards.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

^^LoL @ peanuts ;D It depends in which way u change your morals. Its ok to call a half naked woman free, but a modest woman oppressed. Is this the kind of "improving" morals one accepts? As far as I see, people are not morally improving, they're unimproving. Weird...

 

[barney]

^^LoL @ peanuts ;D It depends in which way u change your morals. Its ok to call a half naked woman free, but a modest woman oppressed. Is this the kind of "improving" morals one accepts? As far as I see, people are not morally improving, they're unimproving. Weird...

I really have to find this "western" place where all the females walk about "half naked". :rollseyes
Oppression is a lack of choice. A western girl can wear a full bin-liner every day of the year if she wants, or a Crop-Top in winter...she can do as she pleases. Thats why she's free.

 

[جوري]

I really have to find this "western" place where all the females walk about "half naked". :rollseyes
.

you can find them "fully naked" in mexico at Spencer Tunnick's next photo shoot... but no telling where in the "world is Tunnick" inext shoot will be... perhaps you don't even need to travel very far..
thank you for defining being objectified as freedom we were confused about the difference ...

peace!

 

[barney]

Book me a ticket to Mexico!
Seriously however, its utterly baffeling why muslims think that western women are "oppressed" by their ability to choose freely.
Oppression is coercion to restrict behaviour or rights. It's just nonsense to argue otherwise!

 

[جوري]

Book me a ticket to Mexico!
Seriously however, its utterly baffeling why muslims think that western women are "oppressed" by their ability to choose freely.
Oppression is coercion to restrict behaviour or rights. It's just nonsense to argue otherwise!

I think if you are forced within the confines of a certain status quo as in looking a certain way being a certain body.. doing a particular job is very oppressive.. all you need to do is pick an issue of cosmo to understand what that means or bar hop a little... pls tell me do you think we (Muslims) live in complete hermitage and have no contact with non Muslims as to not be able to articulate to you what it means to be oppressed? I can use more rogue and vulgar terms to describe the scene but I choose not to!... I think Muslim women can fall under that spell too.. the key is truly uplifting yourself from having a particular image imposed on you by society or a magazine or some sort of male figure in your life.

peace!

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Umm no one actually said Western women are oppressed. They do choose to dress that way, but why? The only benefit I see out of flaunting yourself is for men getting a free look everytime. Why do women dress uncovered? You tell me? Most of the time, its for attention or acceptance is it not? No one is forcing me to cover, I chose it myself. Half the Muslim women here either wear Hijab or Niqab. Who's forcing them? Tell me please. Those who don't wear it just plain don't. My mom doesnt even let me go past my block because I wear the Hijab, but I could really care less. I'm not afraid at all.

Peace

P.S. You know what..I just realized how off we are.
*Sensing the Mods* hew

 

[Grace Seeker]

I'm sure that the women of Papua New Guinea and the Peruvian Amazon go uncovered simply to get the attention of men. I know you were talking westerner women -- I won't argue their motivations with you cause I sure don't understand them, but Christian missionaries thought that the first thing they needed to do as they traveled the world in the 1700s and 1800s was to cover naked bodies. Obviously it really was the missionaries' problem more than the people they were trying to teach. Most of them were as oblivious to their nakedness as were Adam and Eve.

Soooo, getting us back on topic. Some of this idea of what one must wear is all about what WE believe is important and how we read into other peoples' motivation. Just because a girl wears a string bikini does not mean that she is flaunting her body. It may be the case, but you would have to know her heart to know for sure.

 

[جوري]

^^^ there is dignity in clothes Gene... I am sure that was the intent of the missionaries?-- at least that is what I am hoping for--
the first thing Americans did in Abu gharib was strip the prisoners of their clothes... I think we all know why... you humiliate people and take away their dignity by uncovering them-- it is really that simple!

peace

 

[barney]

^^^ there is dignity in clothes Gene... I am sure that was the intent of the missionaries?-- at least that is what I am hoping for--
the first thing Americans did in Abu gharib was strip the prisoners of their clothes... I think we all know why... you humiliate people and take away their dignity by uncovering them-- it is really that simple!

peace

Or they might hang themselves / conceal weapons. Strip searches are standard practice the world over. The saudi's strip their prisoners so that the beatings can have full effect.
I thought they were wearing orange tank-suits anyway?
Bah..getting totally off topic.

 

[Grace Seeker]

No, PurestAmbrosia is right about why those criminals masquerading as soldiers did what they did.

What she is wrong about is that it would have the same impact on every person. While most of us would feel embarassed to be so exposed. My grandchildren have no problem running around in front of everyone with no clothes on. They have not yet picked up on our societies values with regard to wearing clothes. And if we were to raise them in some other society where such a value did not exist they likely never would. The embarrassment, dignity is cultural.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

^^But highly effective and less degrading.

 

[Pygoscelis]

No, PurestAmbrosia is right about why those criminals masquerading as soldiers did what they did.

What she is wrong about is that it would have the same impact on every person. While most of us would feel embarassed to be so exposed. My grandchildren have no problem running around in front of everyone with no clothes on.

This is exactly the case.

They know that their prisoners come from a particular culture, where shame for nudity is drilled into them. So they strip them down and make them feel ashamed and vulnerable. They may also deride holy books and deride any cutoms or rituals that the prisoners are attached to. It is quite an effective form of psychological attack, without having to call it torture.

As for the muslim woman with the veil or californian in a string bikini being opressed. Often neither are. They are each products of their culture, but I think it is usually the case that each freely dresses the way they wish to. I don't think anybody is forcing a muslim woman to wear a veil. And nobody is stopping the californian from putting one on - she simply doesn't want to.

 

[ranma1/2]

culture does seem to be one of the main influences on why we do what what we do and why we believe what we believe.

 

[Muezzin]

I believe what I believe because I choose to believe it. End of story. Yes, that reasoning is circular, yes, that reasoning is not entirely rational, but it's my answer and the honest truth.

It seems many Moslems can’t separate the notion of choice, personal preference and virtue from how one chooses to dress.

Here's a novel suggestion: virtue can't be coerced. *Conformance* can be coerced, but in order for virtue to be exercised, there needs to be freedom of action with which to demonstrate one's virtue. There's a saying that "character is determined by what one does when no one is looking". The "no one looking" part is the important part - you can get away with it, but what will you do. Being modest by *choice* is truly virtuous. Wearing a burkha because you will be physically harmed if you don't isn't virtuous. That's unfortunate because the draconian controls remove women's ability to demonstrate the virtue they have. Some don't or won't do so, but the way it is, the truly virtuous Muslim woman can't be distinguished from the rest, as they're all coerced to *appear* virtuous.

It's a paradox: virtue and character are only made manifest through choose and freedom. Pity that many can't seem to fathom this.

How utterly patronising and Orientalist of you.

Are 'Moslem' women living in democratic states feigning virtue if they choose to wear a burkha? Have you ever asked them? Didn't think so. It's so easy to jump to a conclusion without gathering any evidence. You didn't strike me as the lazy type. Unless of course you are psychic and somehow know who is and who isn't being coerced without ever asking them.

To me it seems as if you are just trying desperately to justify your hatred for and fear of Islam because it is simply 'other'. Let's just call the system itself coercion, rather than actually attempting to find out who may or may not be actually coerced within the system. Silly, silly logic.