Logic in Religion

[sameer]

Not for me....I grew up in a house where I was taught to question everything, and I do. I don't follow things just because it is said to do so- I need reasoning and logic.

ok.. thats where faith comes in. We dont need a reason right away... if there isnt an explanation..Allah would reveal it when the time is right.

Example.....there is a hadith where the prophet (saw) reccomends us not to eat and drink at the same time. Today doctors will tell u the same thing..beacause the liquids breaks down the digestry acids in the stomach and makes it more differcult to digest the food.

Example... the prophet (saw) recoomended that we should sleep on our right side of our body and not on our belly of left side. Today doctors can tell u that sleeping on ure belly of left side puts the heart under pressure.

 

[mlsh27]

I don't do the whole blind faith thing, sorry. Also, the idea of dogs replacing humans as companions is hilarious...

 

[Idris]

well they even have beauty competition for dogs...They have advz for dog food on the T.V,dog grooming,Shampoos,Bedding,Books,Feeding Bowls , Gifts, Jewelry,Toys .....ect

 

[Mohsin]

Because the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said so sister.


And we know that Allaah Almighty told us to obey His messenger (peace be upon him):

And obey Allah and the Messenger; that ye may obtain mercy. (Qur'aan 3:132)​

:salamext:

No offense, but I need more than that to follow certain aspects. For me it needs to make sense....thus the idea is illogical.

No offence either, but i would like to say reading your above post, you yourself have come accross a bit illogical, and in a way, also a bit arrogant sorry

With all due respect, who are any of us to question what allah has willed. Did you know that one of the signs of a hypocrite are one who questions the deecree of Allah

Now sister, take a minute out and think to yourself. When Allah SWT has said obey him, and his messenger, are we really in a position to question him and still say I need a reason for such and such an issue.
Look at the example of Ali RA. He was talking about logic, and he said if our shariah was based on the logic of us mere human beings, then we would wash the bottom of our feet during wudhu, as logically, this is where our feet get dirty, but rather Allah SWT has decreed according to his infinite and divine wisdom that during wudhu we are to wash the top of our feet.

Look also at the example of Umar Bin Khattab RA when he was expalining why we kiss the black stone by the Ka'bah during tawaf of it

According to Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, book of Hajj, chapter 56, H.No. 675. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said, "I know that you are a stone and can neither benefit nor harm. Had I not seen the Prophet (pbuh) touching (and kissing) you, I would never have touched (and kissed) you".

Think again before questioning the will of Allah SWT. He created you, along with this whole earth and all of the creation that dwell inside of it. Ask yourself what have you created.
God has full memory of what has occurred in the past, and knows what will happen in the future, and never errs. Ask yourself how well do you remmeber what has happened in your life, and do you knwo anything of the future
God is All-Knowing, All-Sufficient, he doesn't need sleep, nor does he eat, again ask yourself can you even go a few hours without eating

Yet, despite being nowhere near the intellectual capacity of Allah SWTs infinite wisdom, you consider yourself wise enough to understand why he has implemented certain rulings and instructed us to do certain things.

NOTE please don't misunderstand what I am saying. I am by no means trying to say we should blindly follow something. There is always wisdom behind issues in shariah, and we should ask the scholars of islam if there is any clear wisdom behind certain issues, but if there isn't any clear reason, it shouldn't prevent us from still following those rules. As Brother Ansar 'Al Adl said earlier, just because we don't see or understand a certain ruling, it doesn't mean there isn't any wisdom behind it, or any benefit to it. remeber Allah SWT has not created us perfect and all-knowing, we are weak and dependant, thus we eat and drink to keep going.

remember the story of Ibrahim AS when he was instructed to slaughter his son. He didn't think to himself "This doesn't make sense to me, so i won't do it" and nor did he ask Allah why he is to do it, but instead he simply followed what he was told, as he knew Allah SWT had decreed it and we should obey Allah SWT. Similarly, if there is proof for something from the Qur'an and Sunnah to do something, without reason we should do it, as upon examining the source, we know it is from Allah.

Please don't be offended by anything I have said, forgive me if it has come out harsh, but i feel you were in need of the reminder that we shoudln't question what allah SWT has decreed. The companions of the prophet PBUH would see him do an action, and immediately start imitating him without asking why, look at their example, and we will realise why many of them were guaranteed paradise

 

[mlsh27]

well they even have beauty competition for dogs...They have advz for dog food on the T.V,dog grooming,Shampoos,Bedding,Books,Feeding Bowls , Gifts, Jewelry,Toys .....ect

This is all down with cats as well...thus the same could be said about cats, so why aren't they haram.

 

[sameer]

This is all down with cats as well...thus the same could be said about cats, so why aren't they haram.

are u not reading the posts?
They are not haram cause the Prophet (saw) allowed them but disalowed keeping dogs as being pets.
I am having this same argument about dogs with someone else on another foroum....but he loves his dogs as childeren and visist the animal shelter etc.....he dosent visit hospitals, orphanages etc..he visists animal shelters...

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

NOTE please don't misunderstand what I am saying. I am by no means trying to say we should blindly follow something.

With respect, that's exactly what you're saying. You're saying Muslims should follow orders without question, even if they can see no logical reason for them.

Peace

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Greetings,
Muslims often like to claim this, but it's highly debatable, and, in any case, it's not the issue at hand.

This is the point. It wouldn't matter if they were logical or not; you would still follow them.

No, I didn't miss it. I'm also already familiar with the pH scale, but thanks for your explanation of it anyway.

Walking across the road is potentially harmful for human beings - probably much more so than keeping a dog. Is that prohibited in Islam too?

Peace

So basically what you're saying is: I agree with all what you said, but there's other things in life that are dangerous, even more dangerous, so Islam is wrong for advising us against this?

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

So basically what you're saying is: I agree with all what you said, but there's other things in life that are dangerous, even more dangerous, so Islam is wrong for advising us against this?

I'm not quite saying that, but I do think that if danger to human beings was a general criterion to be considered, then a sensible lawgiver would prohibit things that are more dangerous before prohibiting things that aren't hugely dangerous at all.

Peace

 

[Woodrow]

This is all down with cats as well...thus the same could be said about cats, so why aren't they haram.

I would not even begin to attempt to say I know everything the Prophet(pbuh) meant. But, looking at it in a logical manner I would say that the way some people treat cats would be Haraam.

Our fascination with pets just may be a bit extreme. In the USA alone more money is spent on dog and cat food then on Baby Food. Most people do not treat their pets properly and out of misguided affection, have actualy damaged cats and dogs as species.

Our compassion for fur babies, does distract us from providing for our own fellow human beings.

Perhaps Allah(swt) was pleased with his creation of wolves and it is wrong for us to have turned them into rat-sized apartment barkers.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Greetings,


I'm not quite saying that, but I do think that if danger to human beings was a general criterion to be considered, then a sensible lawgiver would prohibit things that are more dangerous before prohibiting things that aren't hugely dangerous at all.

Peace

Well define "more dangerous".

First of all you have to consider the time frame. Dogs have always and will always be unhygyenic throughout time as they carry these harmfull virusses. But we might not always be aware where a certain virus origenated from when a person gets sick, so it's not always clear that it is related with his dog. Whereas Crossing road have only become dangerous now since there's just so many and so fast methods of transportation.

Now let's consider the nature of their danger. The posibility of danger with dogs is by default. The danger lies in the virusses that are frequesntly found in their saliva. Even if you watch out for it there's still a risk.
Whereas crossing the roads is only dangerous when people do not follow the rules. There are stict trafic rules, and in an uthopia were everybody follows these rules there wouldn't be a problem. So they are not dangerous by default, they are dangerous because people make mistakes.

And finally let's consider necesity. Up untill recently people were unaware of this danger of dog's saliva. The ruling came to warn us about a danger we did not realise. Whereas the danger of trafic, is pretty obvious. And in a way, it is also covered by Islam, as Islamdictates that we should follow the rules of the country we are at (unless they contradict our religion).

 

[Mohsin]

Greetings,


With respect, that's exactly what you're saying. You're saying Muslims should follow orders without question, even if they can see no logical reason for them.

Peace

Maybe i wasn't clear.

Firstly we shouldn't blindly be muslims simply because we are born muslims. We should be muslims because we actually have faith in the religion having analysed it to see whether it is true or not.
Secondly what i meant to say in my last post was that although we should follow the commands of Allah whether we understand the logic behind it or not, we should still seek the wisdom behind it, not question it, just know why it is that way. If there is no evident reason, then knowing it is from Allah should be enough to know it should still be obeyed and followed

 

[DigitalStorm82]

Science always takes turns... its unreliable... Perhaps, in the future, science will discover why some animals are dirtier than others...

All we need to know is.. Angels don't enter houses with dogs and pictures....

Doubts in the commands of allah is from shataan, its best if you don't dwell too much on it without proper understanding of nature of science AND religion.

W'salaamz,
Hamid

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Well define "more dangerous".

First of all you have to consider the time frame. Dogs have always and will always be unhygyenic throughout time as they carry these harmfull virusses. But we might not always be aware where a certain virus origenated from when a person gets sick, so it's not always clear that it is related with his dog. Whereas Crossing road have only become dangerous now since there's just so many and so fast methods of transportation.

Now let's consider the nature of their danger. The posibility of danger with dogs is by default. The danger lies in the virusses that are frequesntly found in their saliva. Even if you watch out for it there's still a risk.
Whereas crossing the roads is only dangerous when people do not follow the rules. There are stict trafic rules, and in an uthopia were everybody follows these rules there wouldn't be a problem. So they are not dangerous by default, they are dangerous because people make mistakes.

And finally let's consider necesity. Up untill recently people were unaware of this danger of dog's saliva. The ruling came to warn us about a danger we did not realise. Whereas the danger of trafic, is pretty obvious. And in a way, it is also covered by Islam, as Islamdictates that we should follow the rules of the country we are at (unless they contradict our religion).

The other day I was thinking and actually found a fourth difrence. One danger is easely avoided where the other is not. You could have just as well commented, well breathing in poluted air is dangerous to, why isn't there a ruling about that? Well we need to breath 24-7, so we'll just have to deal with our own polution (or the polution of others!). Whereas keeping a dog in the house is something that is easely avoided.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings Steve,

Thanks for your copious analysis of the example I gave in comparison to the danger posed by dogs' saliva. Sadly, it was a general argument that I was looking for a response to - I could have used any example of a dangerous activity not (as far as I know) explicitly forbidden by Allah. How about playing rugby, or skydiving?

Greetings Mohsin,

Maybe i wasn't clear.

You seemed clear enough to me!

Firstly we shouldn't blindly be muslims simply because we are born muslims. We should be muslims because we actually have faith in the religion having analysed it to see whether it is true or not.

That's not the way it happens though, is it? If you're born into a Muslim family, the chances of you being Muslim in adulthood are so much greater than if you're not.

Secondly what i meant to say in my last post was that although we should follow the commands of Allah whether we understand the logic behind it or not, we should still seek the wisdom behind it, not question it, just know why it is that way. If there is no evident reason, then knowing it is from Allah should be enough to know it should still be obeyed and followed

Precisely my point:

You're saying Muslims should follow orders without question, even if they can see no logical reason for them.

Peace

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Greetings Steve,

Thanks for your copious analysis of the example I gave in comparison to the danger posed by dogs' saliva. Sadly, it was a general argument that I was looking for a response to - I could have used any example of a dangerous activity not (as far as I know) explicitly forbidden by Allah. How about playing rugby, or skydiving?

Well the 4 logical criteria I came up with might not all be apply to the same extend in these cases as they did to the crossing of roads; but I think you 'll see some of them do still apply, and perhaps there's some other things to say about this as well. I'm not going to claim that sky-diving is forbidden, but I do think we're not supposed to expose ourself to high risk situations. I don't think there's a fatwa out on this, and I don't really think there aught to be. But honestly, can you claim Islam is wrong for guiding us away from danger on the base that some thrillseekers jump out of planes?

You can question wheter or not it is required for religion to schield it's believers from danger. But to me it does seem quite obvious. I think the real underlying issue here is the following. In the free west, one of the most important values in life is freedom. And almost everything is measured according to it. In Islam, we consider ourself slaves of Allah (swt). And it's not just our consideration, because in reality we are really the property of our creator wheter we accept that or not. Now since you don't believe you obviously don't think that is true. However if in the debate you wish to prove Islam wrong based on the rules it has, then you can only argue from a pov where islam is right. Because if you start of by assuming Islam is false, then any attempt to refute Islam is circular. Now to get back on the freedom issue. Freedom is of lesser importance in Islam. The real central value is wellbeing. And I find that to be more logical to. So in the west a rule is measered by the limitations and freedoms. A trafficlight robs freedom to drive when red, but the reason we accept the rule as beneficial is because of the counterpart; the green light sets us free to drive by without obstruction. Now if you ask me, the real central standard for measuring rules should not be the limitation and freedom a rule gives; but rather the amount of welbeing it offers against the hardships it creates. Is that not the best startingpoint to get as close to utopia as possible (No it's not a paradox )

You're saying Muslims should follow orders without question, even if they can see no logical reason for them.

Tricky statement if you ask me. We can question rules, if seeking knowledge is the intention. But we are supposed to follow, regardless of the answers we might find, or not find. This might seem contradictory, but here again, the contradiction in that only exists when you assume Islam is false. Because IF Islam is false there is a posibility of finding an order with no logical reason. But on the other hand if Islam is true, then there are already a couple reasons by default derived from faith: "reward in the afterlife and a test for the believers". This default reason is why everybody here is telling you that we would inshallah (godwilling) follow rules even if they seem illogical. Next to this there's a second logical reason derived from faith: "Even though I do not see a reason for this rule , I trust in Allah (swt) and believe that this rule is set for good reasons.". I agree, these two counter-arguments are equally circular as your argument was. So in the end both of us are mostly relying on faith not logic. But I said mostly, not completely. There is a third factor. And that is that when looking into these matters, we constantly find logical reasons that are not derived from faith to! Like the Ph scale in dog's saliva. There might be some rulings were we fail to realise any wordly advantage in, but most rules make perfect sense (to me at least). Of course if we wish to continue this discussion I feel we are forced to look at every single rule in detail. Now if you ar willing to do that, well inshallah we will be able to answer you. But obviously this will be quite a lot of work; so I can't force this upon you, and I can't quite ask you to take my word on it either, since afterall, I am but an anounimous poster on the internet to you. So my suggestion would be, just keep an open mind to it, and look around. There will probably be other topics like this in the future discussing the logic behind certain rules (inshallah).

 

[MuslimCONVERT]

Re: What’s the difference between a cult and a religion?

subhanAllah, reps for you brother, wat a brilliant explenation !
JazakAllah khair wa barakAllah feekum!

Hey thanks. May Allah (Swt) reward you, me, and all believers in this life and the next insha Allah. Salaamz.

 

[scentsofjannah]

Re: What’s the difference between a cult and a religion?

Funny you should say that, to me a lot of established religions do just that. :rollseyes

i dont know what your original post was..but do read this article

Intellect and Reason in the Islamic Worldview
Babak Ayazifar


In an oratory resplendent with colorful imagery and metaphor, Prophet Muhammad defined the noble station of the intellect and reason in Islamic cosmology. It is reported that he said: “Verily, Allah (God) created the intellect from a treasured light, a light concealed within His primordial knowledge -- one that neither a commissioned prophet nor an angel of proximity [to the Divine Throne] was aware of. He then ascribed to the intellect knowledge as its essence, cognition as its soul, abstemiousness as its head, modesty as its eye, wisdom as its tongue, kindliness as its purpose, and mercy as its heart. Allah then bestowed upon, and strengthened, the intellect with ten qualities: certainty, faith, truthfulness, tranquility, sincerity, gentleness, benevolence, contentment, submission, and gratitude. Then Allah (Exalted and Majestic) said to it: ‘Retreat!’ Thereupon the intellect retreated. Then He said to it: ‘Come nigh!’ Thereupon the intellect drew near. Then Allah said to it: ‘Speak!’ Thereupon the intellect said: ‘Praise belongs to Allah, the one who has neither a foe nor a rival, neither a likeness nor an equal, neither a tantamount nor a similitude -- the one before whose splendor every creature is submissive, humbled.’”

“Then the Lord (Praised and Exalted) said: ‘By My grandeur and majesty, no creature have I originated more splendid than you, more obedient to Me than you, loftier in station than you, more eminent than you, or more exalted than you. It is through you that My oneness is acknowledged; it is through you that I am worshiped; it is through you that I am supplicated; it is through you that I am implored [by My yearning servant]; it is through you that I am desired; it is through you that I am feared; it is through you that My bondsman exercises reverent discretion toward Me; it is through you that I bestow reward; and it is through you that I apportion punishment.’”

“Upon hearing this the intellect sank to the ground prostrate, remaining in that state for a thousand years. Then Allah (Praised and Exalted) said: ‘Raise your head! And ask, so it shall be granted. Seek intercession, so it shall be accorded.’ Thereupon the intellect raised its head and said: ‘O my Lord, I beseech you to appoint me as an intercessor for whomsoever you have created me in.’ Then Allah (Majestic in His might) said to His angels: ‘I summon you forth to bear witness that I have indeed appointed the intellect as an intercessor for whomsoever I have created it in.’”

Prophet Muhammad’s narrative exemplifies the primacy that Islam accords the intellect; it constitutes a recognition of the high station of reason in the Islamic worldview. His oratory, which I have translated from the original Arabic, is found in a multi-volume compilation of his sayings, Mustadrak al-Wasa’il, under a chapter whose title is equally telling: “The Obligation to Follow the Intellect and Reason, and to Oppose Ignorance.”

Islam as a worldview is rooted in knowledge, intellectual exertion, and reason. The Qur’an repeatedly invites us to believe in Allah, the one true fashioner of the universe, by imploring us to ponder over the creation of the cosmos. In beckoning us to reflection, the Qur’an points us to two wellsprings of knowledge: the macrocosmic order of the physical universe (the “horizons” or ÂfÂq) and the microcosm of the inner reality of our selves (anfus).

We are instructed to “travel through the earth and see how Allah originated creation,” and we are given the tiding that “He will similarly produce a later creation [the Hereafter], for Allah has power over all things” (29:20). The Qur’an challenges us to probe and to reflect, asserting, “whichever way you turn, there is the Countenance of Allah” (2:115). Our inner self constitutes no less vital a facet of reality, reflecting upon which unlocks some of the esoteric marvels of the creative order. “We will show them Our signs in the universe and in their own souls as well, until it becomes manifest to them that it is the truth” (41:53). This being the case, the Qur’an then rhetorically asks: “Do they not reflect within themselves?” (30:8).

Knowledge, therefore, is sourced not only in the physical universe that envelops us, but also -- and even more important -- within our inner spiritual being. Both these fountains of knowledge contain signs pointing to the creative force that originated everything. Note how in none of the passages does the Qur’an ask us to blindly accept its message. To the contrary, only upon investigation and mental exertion are we to affirm what the Qur’an invites us to: belief in God and His oneness, and submission to His will. It is only as a corollary to this submission that we have been expected to obey Allah’s commissioned prophets and messengers throughout time.

Complementing the explicit Qur’anic statements about the importance of reflection and seeking knowledge are umpteen narratives from the Prophet of Islam and those who were heirs to his wisdom and gnosis. When asked how one arrives at the knowledge of The Real (Allah), the Prophet replied: “By knowing one’s self.” Ali ibn Abi Talib, the cousin and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad, in a vividly metaphoric narration with colorful imagery, reports that the Prophet described how Angel Gabriel came to Adam and said: “O Adam, I have been instructed to have you choose among three things; select one and leave the other two.” When Adam inquired about his three options, Gabriel offered “intellect, modesty, and religion.” “I choose intellect,” replied Adam. Thereupon Gabriel told modesty and religion to depart. However, the two stood their ground, saying that they were under instruction to remain with the intellect wheresoever it may be. “So be it,” Gabriel replied, as he ascended to the Heavens.

Islam is a religion of balance. Physical, sensory perception is not our sole endowment. Self-reflection, looking internally at our own spirit and soul, is another integral means of acquiring knowledge and arriving at The Real. In his “Critique of Pure Reason,” Immanuel Kant evidently agrees with this view. He says: “Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe, the oftener and the more steadily we reflect on them: the starry heavens above and the moral law within.” Indeed, we must be cognizant of both the macrocosmic and the microcosmic wellsprings of knowledge, for they complement each other in guiding us in our spiritual wayfaring toward Allah, the Ultimate Reality.

Islam originale is not a religion that breeds the miser, the cruel, the coward, the intellectually indigent, or the depraved; it is the religion that nurtures the benevolent, the compassionate, the brave, the enlightened, and the pious. In short, it is the religion of the emancipated spiritual elite.

Babak Ayazifar is a PhD candidate in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

 

[root]

Where is logic with the supernatural anyway!

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Why would supernatural be considered illogical?
The whole view that supernatural is illogical is flawed by the assumption that logic does not exceed the bounderies of teh current natural processes.
I mean supernational does contradict the natural. So if you assuem that natural is logic and everything else isn't well I guess tthen you would conclude that the supernatural is illogical since it contradicts the natural. But as our knowledge grows larger we find more and more events that would have been described under supernatural in the earlyer days being today described as actually being natural, albeit rarely. Like I said. The whole view that supernatural is illogical is flawed by the assumption that logic does not exceed the bounderies of teh current natural processes.