Propagation of religion other than Islam in Muslim Countries

[kadafi]

Well it has been claimed that they are the work of Umar II (Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz) not Umar I (Umar ibn al-Khattab), so they are not that much later.

Then I say, it is a flimsy claim since the Umariyyah has never been transmitted to the Muslim Ummah with an authenthic isnad. In addition to that, that so-called pact was never endorsed fully and this why Historians always highlight how the Jewish and Christians in the Islamic Empire enjoyed their religiously and wordly rights.

However these are dangerous grounds. I notice you cite them but do not give us your opinion. Caetani in particular is someone I do not think many Muslims would be comfortable endorsing.

Why should I give my opinion considering that these statements are self-explanatory. Furthermore, Caetani was quoted by Thomas Anderson if you have fully read the quote that I provided.

Contrary to what practices of the early community? Let me quote from the Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 50:

I have said this in the slave-girls thread. You cannot quote a hadeeth without adding the rest of the text as the Islaamic Law is not based on a single hadeeth. It is a fundemental rule in the jurisprudential methodology.
A non-Muslim would conclude, based on his preconceived perception from the hadeeth, that it advocates that a Muslim cannot be heavily punished if he murders an innocenent non-Muslim.

The hadeeth is referring to the qisaas (retribution). Islaam does not legislate capital punishment for the crime of murder.

Allaah (Exalted is He) says in Soorah al-Baqarah:

O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. In the law of equality there is (saving of) life for you, o people of understanding; that you may restrain yourselves.
​

Thus what Islaam does is let the victim's family decide what he shall receive. If they decide that he shall be killed in retribution, then it will be carried out. If not, then they have the option to demand blood-money or forgive the murderer.

However, the right of killing the murder (retribution) does not extend to the family of a non-Muslim. Whilst they are entitled to receive the blood money, they cannot command to the court that the murderer should be killed as retribution. Besides, murderers who are not killed (retribution) are subjected to the discretionary punishment called tazeer which is an harsh punishment. It would indicate that they would serve a lengthy prison sentence or any other harsh punishment that the court imposes.

Similiary non-Muslims were exempted from many things such as paying the alms, being drafted in military service, following the personal Muslim laws and amongst other things.


As for the policy that they have to be distinct from the Muslims (i.e. not dress as the Muslims), then this is true and has been enforced for various reasons.

• It helps them preserve their identity
• It protects them incase they do something contrary in Islaam for which a Muslim would face punishment and for which they by being non-Muslims are exempt from punishment.

Compare this to the new policy that is adopted in many non-Muslims countries where they prevent the Muslims from wearing their Islaamic clothes.

 

[HeiGou]

Then I say, it is a flimsy claim since the Umariyyah has never been transmitted to the Muslim Ummah with an authenthic isnad. In addition to that, that so-called pact was never endorsed fully and this why Historians always highlight how the Jewish and Christians in the Islamic Empire enjoyed their religiously and wordly rights.

Enjoyed some religious and worldly rights. If it has not been transmitted then there is less reason to think that it was imposed, and that Umar I treated Jews and Christians particularly well.

I have said this in the slave-girls thread. You cannot quote a hadeeth without adding the rest of the text as the Islaamic Law is not based on a single hadeeth. It is a fundemental rule in the jurisprudential methodology.

Well the simple answer to that is if I had that level of knowledge I would not be here trying to learn. I do my best. I try not to quote anything that is out of line with what Muslims believe and I am happy, delighted in fact, to be corrected as it means I learn something.

However if I was to add commentary to that, I would point out its use in doctrinal battles between Sunnis and Shia - who may have claimed Ali had a different version of the Quran. But that is a different argument (and I notice the Shia have never produced such a Quran).

A non-Muslim would conclude, based on his preconceived perception from the hadeeth, that it advocates that a Muslim cannot be heavily punished if he murders an innocenent non-Muslim.

The hadeeth is referring to the qisaas (retribution). Islaam does not legislate capital punishment for the crime of murder.

Allaah (Exalted is He) says in Soorah al-Baqarah:

O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. In the law of equality there is (saving of) life for you, o people of understanding; that you may restrain yourselves.
​

Thus what Islaam does is let the victim's family decide what he shall receive. If they decide that he shall be killed in retribution, then it will be carried out. If not, then they have the option to demand blood-money or forgive the murderer.

However, the right of killing the murder (retribution) does not extend to the family of a non-Muslim. Whilst they are entitled to receive the blood money, they cannot command to the court that the murderer should be killed as retribution. Besides, murderers who are not killed (retribution) are subjected to the discretionary punishment called tazeer which is an harsh punishment. It would indicate that they would serve a lengthy prison sentence or any other harsh punishment that the court imposes.

So a non-Muslim might assume from my quote that a Muslim could not be put to death and that kafir would be right - even you think so. I was expecting a furious denial of the traditional view and an insistence on the modern liberal version. But what do you know?

Similiary non-Muslims were exempted from many things such as paying the alms, being drafted in military service, following the personal Muslim laws and amongst other things.

And so were Blacks in the Old South of America.

 

[kadafi]

Enjoyed some religious and worldly rights. If it has not been transmitted then there is less reason to think that it was imposed, and that Umar I treated Jews and Christians particularly well.

And I repeat that it is a flimsy claim to attribute it to 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz. If it's not authentically transmitted, then we cannot trace the origin.

Well the simple answer to that is if I had that level of knowledge I would not be here trying to learn. I do my best. I try not to quote anything that is out of line with what Muslims believe and I am happy, delighted in fact, to be corrected as it means I learn something.

Citing hadeeths and claiming that is what Islaam teachings is different to inquiring about a hadeeth.


I see that you have left out some points in my previous reply.

 

[HeiGou]

And I repeat that it is a flimsy claim to attribute it to 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz. If it's not authentically transmitted, then we cannot trace the origin.

Which makes it hard to justify using it as a defense of whatever Umar I might or might not have done.

Citing hadeeths and claiming that is what Islaam teachings is different to inquiring about a hadeeth.

Where did I make any claims about what Islam teaches based on a flawed hadith?

I see that you have left out some points in my previous reply.

Probably. Anything of any importance?

 

[yasin]

i think the intolerance claims is a load of rubbish to be frank,

there are plenty of non-Muslims in Muslim countries.

Why should there be Churches in one of Islam's holiest lands?

I doubt the Mormons would be happy to have us building a Mosque in Salt Lake City!

 

[HeiGou]

i think the intolerance claims is a load of rubbish to be frank,

there are plenty of non-Muslims in Muslim countries.

A decreasing minority and decreasing all the time. Muslim countries used to be Christian and Zoroastrian countries. Every major Muslim city outside of Arabia has mosques that used to be Churches or were built on the sites of temples. The fact that persecution is not 100 percent effective is not proof that there is no persecution.

Why should there be Churches in one of Islam's holiest lands?

Why should there be a mosque in Rome? But there is. Why should there be any in Europe at all? Fifty years ago there were not, or at least not many.

I doubt the Mormons would be happy to have us building a Mosque in Salt Lake City!

I'd bet there is one though.

 

[Zulkiflim]

Salaam,

A very interesting question?

If Islam is so true why does it not allow otehr reliogn to enter it.

It is simple,BEACASUE IT IS TRUTH and every other reliogn has been proven false.
Islam expands everywhere.Muslim go to where MAN is.

Every otehr reliogn is in stagnant or growth is negligible,where as Islam spread despite war or oppresion.

Where man is ,ISLAM is..

 

[HeiGou]

A very interesting question?

If Islam is so true why does it not allow otehr reliogn to enter it.

It is simple,BEACASUE IT IS TRUTH and every other reliogn has been proven false.

If other religions had been proven to be false, they would pose no threat and hence there would be no need to prevent them from operating openly and equally. But there is such a need.

I do not accept that it is possible to prove that a religion is true or false, and I do not think anyone has done so, but it is clear that Muslims behave as if they lack confidence in the truth of their religion.

Islam expands everywhere.Muslim go to where MAN is.

Every otehr reliogn is in stagnant or growth is negligible,where as Islam spread despite war or oppresion.

Where man is ,ISLAM is..

I don't see that other religions are stagnant or their growth is neglible. It looks to me as if Catholics and Buddhists and Hindus have all done well these last 50 years or so. It is true that Islam is strongly associated with poverty and poverty is strongly associated with a lack of education and both are strongly associated with high birth rates. So most Muslim communities have very high birth rates. But that is not the same as spreading other ways.

Nor, of course, is anyone waging a war on Islam. On the contrary the only religion that uses violence is various strains of, well, can anyone guess?

 

[Zulkiflim]

If other religions had been proven to be false, they would pose no threat and hence there would be no need to prevent them from operating openly and equally. But there is such a need.

I do not accept that it is possible to prove that a religion is true or false, and I do not think anyone has done so, but it is clear that Muslims behave as if they lack confidence in the truth of their religion.



I don't see that other religions are stagnant or their growth is neglible. It looks to me as if Catholics and Buddhists and Hindus have all done well these last 50 years or so. It is true that Islam is strongly associated with poverty and poverty is strongly associated with a lack of education and both are strongly associated with high birth rates. So most Muslim communities have very high birth rates. But that is not the same as spreading other ways.

Nor, of course, is anyone waging a war on Islam. On the contrary the only religion that uses violence is various strains of, well, can anyone guess?

Salaam,

The very reason why Islam is the Truth that is why no other reliogn is needed.

May i ask if you have arm or leg that is dead and of no use,would you leave it there to becoe putrid? To kill otehr parts of the body?You wont you would cut it off.

Muslim know of TRUTH so have no need for MISGUIDANCE.It is not a lack of confidence or too much of a superiority complex,,it is just TRUTH.simple.

PErhaps you cna provide us with deatil of the number according to what you say that the other reliogn are doing well.Thanks.

By the way when i say spread i do not count the Born Muslim but rahter the i count the converts.

Islam gorws where man is.
Where man is Islam will be there.

Finally,Islam is a rleiogn from birth to death,it is life,Form war and peace,in good times and bad times.
We even have days when BEST to cutour nails.It is that encompassing.

the only reliogn that uses violence,,well really,

Let see,every heard of the KKK? or Hitler? Christiaans arent they?
Every heard of the americna who bombed an abortion clinic based on their religon ?
Every heard of the just Philiphines bombing their own goverment offices to get the president to be over thrown?

So,in all i would say,when you point your finger at toehr you've got 3 pointing back at you.

For Islam is it clear it is the TRUTH,why would we seek darkness after light.

 

[justahumane]

Salaam,

The very reason why Islam is the Truth that is why no other reliogn is needed.

May i ask if you have arm or leg that is dead and of no use,would you leave it there to becoe putrid? To kill otehr parts of the body?You wont you would cut it off.

Muslim know of TRUTH so have no need for MISGUIDANCE.It is not a lack of confidence or too much of a superiority complex,,it is just TRUTH.simple.

PErhaps you cna provide us with deatil of the number according to what you say that the other reliogn are doing well.Thanks.

By the way when i say spread i do not count the Born Muslim but rahter the i count the converts.

Islam gorws where man is.
Where man is Islam will be there.

Finally,Islam is a rleiogn from birth to death,it is life,Form war and peace,in good times and bad times.
We even have days when BEST to cutour nails.It is that encompassing.

the only reliogn that uses violence,,well really,

Let see,every heard of the KKK? or Hitler? Christiaans arent they?
Every heard of the americna who bombed an abortion clinic based on their religon ?
Every heard of the just Philiphines bombing their own goverment offices to get the president to be over thrown?

So,in all i would say,when you point your finger at toehr you've got 3 pointing back at you.

For Islam is it clear it is the TRUTH,why would we seek darkness after light.

Good to know ur views brother zulkifilms, many misconceptions about islam and muslims removed. Now I know why so called muslims dont tend to tolerate another religions. But I want to remove one of ur misconception too, its really not islam which is spreading fast, its munafiqism that is spreading and how fast? Its not ummah of the holy prophet Muhammad which is spreading, so far I know him he never had great thoughts like U.

ISLAM IS SHRINKING FAST, FASTER THAN U THINK THAT ITS SPREADING, AWAKE. look where Islam is alive in its true form? Ya u are right, its NOWHERE.

Thanks

 

[Zulkiflim]

Salaam,

In Islam to become a muslim is simple.
Say the shahadah 3X infront of 2 witnesses.

Then the trial and life trully begins.
Where every muslim must learn to be BETTER MUSLIM in the light of the Quran and Sunnah.

Becoming a muslim is the first important step but it is not the end,The end comes when you die and live agian .

Say the shahadah then learn to be better muslims.Many muslim show they are muslim but do not behave as a Islam teaches.

For that we often hear,YES HE IS A MUSLIM BUT HIS ACTIONS ARE NOT ISLMAIC"..
But he is still a Muslim till he say toehrwise or unless he break the covenat,Ther is only 1 god :Allah and Prophet Muhammad saw is a Prophet.

So again i say,for every member of the ummah including myself,before i can correct other i must correct myself first.
Before the Ummah can be strong there must be no weaknesses in the indivudal parts.
The time of the Prophet Muhammad saw was clear.

LOVE ALLAH FIRST
LOVE THE PROPHET NEXT.

But in this life and times,amy try to defend or show their love by acting unIslmaic .
As one scholar say,many born muslim or covnerts who think they have found faith are misguided .they think to show faith is take a sword ang threatne everyone for the action of otehr in Islamic countries.

So learn of Islam.
Be not a Muslim whom is hollow.
Pray to Allah for patience,for knowledge and the will to control oneself first.
But again that does not mena you are to keep quite when a brother or sister does wrong,but merely poitn out their error,Inshallah,if they fear/love Allah then surely they will understand and repent.

 

[NahidSarvy]

Salt Lake City

I doubt the Mormons would be happy to have us building a Mosque in Salt Lake City!

Except there are at least two: Masâjid an-Nûr & Khadîja.