Ijtihad (1 Viewer)

[Rami]

++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
I agree with most of what you said, Zambrota19. @ Gandalf- I know what Jihad means however, when you look at the world today, you see that there are people that understand Jihad to mean aggressive and forceful proselytization. unfortunately, it seems that there are as many Muslims that misunderstand Jihad as non-believers. so enough with the caps lock both of you-I'm not suggesting that Jihad is coercion. I was merely mentioning possible beliefs.

I think that you are right that the "fundamentalists" interpret jihad in a wrong way. You see it is not only western countries are plauged with terrorist attacks from them, we also are plauged. Eygpt in the 90's had dozens of terrorist attacks against muslims in Eygpt. Also, as I speak right now from saudi arabia we had at least 6 terrorist attacks this past year only, so believe me it is not just a western problem. From where I stand I think the problem with these "fundamentalists" (I am putting quotes around fundamentalists because of my belief that what they are doing is not fundamental Islam) that they took it upon themselves to judge who is a muslim and who is a non-muslim, which is obviously not there call. To them all Islamic and Arabic rulers are infidels because they steal their countries wealth, forgot about the palastinian issue (except for their stupid diplomatic statements), allowed USA into Iraq and myriad of other reasons. and since we public did not revolt against them, they consider us approving of the rulers action, hence we are infidels like them. twisted logic you may say, and I think also. So, we are legitamite targets just like the rulers of these countries.

@ Zambrota19
could you explain how the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has given ]alestinians a legitimate reason for Jihad?
second: I'm quoting you "first emisarries were sent to neighbouring contries with a message for their ruler to convert to islam, if they obliged then thats that. but if they didnt, an army would be sent to that country, demanding three things in order:
1-submit to islam
2-if not then, submit to the islamic country, and you will be free to practice ur religion as you wish, and will not be coerced to islam.
3- if not then, it is war"

how is that not coercion?? say the non-Islamic country in question wanted to remain independent. they would then face a war that they had neither precipitated or encouraged, yet was being forced upon them. what if the situation was reversed? the Islamic country is forced in to a war-wouldn't the fight to defend the Islamic country be called a just Jihad against infidel invaders? in otherwords, isn't the aggressor nation in the wrong? if so, then obviously if roles were reversed, the Islamic nation would be the aggressor. therefore, if that is how you define Jihad, then your arguments do not match. afterall, it is illogical to think that two countries in the situation I described could BOTH have legitimate reason for Jihad against each other.

First: I have noticed that u did not refute that the US is invading Iraq. And that resistance over there is legitamite. So if the US army stays there for 80 years would that change? after 80 years resistance will be illegitamte? The same goes in the Palastinian-Israeli conflict. Palastine has been an Arab state for 1400 years, all of its occupants are Arab Muslims with a small minority of also ARAB christians. Most of the Jews migrated in the past century or so, with the sole purpose of taking over that land. And since the Palastians resisted the jews from day one, and the british before them, what makes this resistance illegitamate now??

Second: Ok sorry I might of not added that the conditions of 2 also apply to 3. meaning, it is war and you will ALSO be free to practice ur religion as you wish, and will not be coerced to islam. So as you see their is no proselytization or coersion going on here. I would like also like to remind you that non-islamic neighbouring countries at that time were actually not countries but were Empires. (Roman and Persian empires, correct me if I am wrong cuz these names are just translations from arabic, I dont know the english names of these empires). I would not think that these empires submit to islam coercivly just to keep their Independance. True that war might be coerced onto them, but once the Muslims won the war, there was no coersion on the public to convert. It is pointless to coerce someone to another religion. Coersion to Islam will eventually create an army of hypocrits, showing Islam and conspiring againts it secretly. It is actually not wise to coerse, and Muslims at that time knew that and did what they were commanded to do from Allah (look at Gandalf's post).

I would like to tell you also that Jihad is a word assocciated with Muslims only. I mean in the case of Britain invading France, Britain is not engaging in Jihad and France is not also! so there BOTH could not have a legitamite reason for Jehad.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Rami]

++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
Gandalf: Unfortunately, there are plenty of sentences in the Qur'an that can be used to support an aggressive action by Muslims against non-believers.

Could you give us some examples??

Zambrotta19:
"Also we would have an Islamic Spain right now if coersion was the way islam spread"
that is not true. England invaded France in 1346. How much of France is under English control now? It is a fact that the English forcefuly took control of parts of France, but who has the land now? It is also true that the Moors invaded Spain in 711. The name Gibraltar is from Jabal al-Tariq, one of the Moorish generals, if I remember correctly. it is just as indisputable fact as is the Crusades. also, the fact that Indonesia (I knew it was the largest Muslim country by population-just because I'm American doesn't mean I am stupid ) was not converted through force does not in any way disprove that Islam has spread by the sword. whether or not it's encroaches were permanent is not my point.

@Juvelover: would you mind clarifying your post? not enough english for me Thanks!

Jihad's main purpose is to spread our religion, which was not the case of the English invasion of France. This invasion was sole purpose was land contrary to Jehad, so comparing this invasion to Al-Andalus is a false comparison because the purposes of both were different. "but who owns the land now?" also is not the proper criterion to this particular case. and yes the General was Tarik Ibn Ziyad who crossed gibraltar (which comes from gabl altarik...or mountin of tarik). I would like to also mention that under al-andalus rule all muslims, Jews, and Christians lived peacfully under one rule, this also proves that Islam was never coerced on anyone! Finally I mentioned in my previous post that Palastine has a minority of christians, Also other arabic and islamic countries have non-muslims in their population. Eygpt, Lebanon, Morroco, Kuwait, Bahrain, Syria and Turkey have a non-muslim population. This just means that Islam was not coerced, but in fact the massive conversion of those times was due to the belief that Islam THE TRUE religion. Also, if you look at the figures today, Islam is still the most growing religion in the world, so what makes the conversion 1400 years ago coercive, and today's conversion non-coercive??

HWIENIAWSKI by now i guess you already know that I am muslim, But if u dont mind could you tell us ur religion (or non-religion)

 

[Rami]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
Are all "Jihads" warrented?

What do you mean Andy?

 

[Slagathor]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
Are all "Jihads" warrented?

Isn't that obvious? Buildings coming down all over the place

 

[Rami]

That is not Jehad!! Have you not read all my Posts??!!! Jehad has nothing to do with killing innocents!

 

[Asma]

all of your work went for nothing,Rami!

Erik,go read this thread from the beginning..thoroughly!!!

 

[Slagathor]

Inner battle to become a better person: I know that, I was joking. I like making fun of religious people, it's a hobby of mine.

On Sundays I like to go to a very strict church down street and ask people if they want to buy condoms

 

[Asma]

smart

 

[Slagathor]

++ [ originally posted by MISS DUBAI ] ++
smart

Nor are religious people

 

[swag]

++ [ originally posted by zambrota19 ] ++
That is not Jehad!! Have you not read all my Posts??!!! Jehad has nothing to do with killing innocents!

Therein lies the rub. Many Muslims I know are dumbfounded about how someone could pervert their interpretations of the Koran into justification for killing innocents as 'jihad' (seeing far more about an internal, personal struggle). Then there are the fewer radicals who use those same verses and either twist them into what they want for their own ends or interpret them in a wholly violent way against others.

Because religious beliefs are based on faith rather than fact, this is always a risk with all religions.

 

[Rami]

These interpretations are purely wrong swag...in islam you cannot take one part of it and push it to its limits regardless of what other parts say. There is a countless verses in Quran that prohibits taking Jihad to violence and maiming innocents:

O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.


So even if these people hold some hatered against others, this verse would stop them from terrorist attacks like 911. So, if a muslim takes all the different verses of Quran and Hadeeth, there should not be any conflict.

 

[Zé Tahir]

++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
I was wondering if the Muslims (or anyone else who is knowledgeable) on this forum could give me their opinions on a couple things.

1. IJTIHAD: Did the "Gates of Ijtihad" close around the 10th century? Is it still open? If it was closed, why?


2. JIHAD: How much of Jihad is an inner struggle to become a better person, and how much is it conversion, either through coersion or other means.


NOTE: Let's keep this thread calm-no personal attacks please!

Any thing I say that is factually incorrect, please do not take offence! just correct me

here is a link to website where they answer your question about Jihad:

http://www.alislam.org/books/study-of-islam/jihad.html

http://www.alislam.org/jihad/

==http://www.alislam.org/jihad/ahmadisbelieve.html

there is also an audio clip:

http://www.askislam.com/Concepts/Jihad/Answer_655.html

And concerning Ijtehad:

http://www.alislam.org/books/religiousknowledge/sec1.html

let me know if you have any questions.

 

[Gandalf]

++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
@ Gandalf- I know what Jihad means however, when you look at the world today, you see that there are people that understand Jihad to mean aggressive and forceful proselytization. unfortunately, it seems that there are as many Muslims that misunderstand Jihad as non-believers. so enough with the caps lock both of you-I'm not suggesting that Jihad is coercion. I was merely mentioning possible beliefs.

ok.. SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS LOCK.. I WAS USING THE "SHIFT" KEY...

IMHO, Islam, unfortunately, is the most misunderstood religion in the history..!! even by most of its followers.. but, to a certain extent, these followers, considering their actions, will be considered as non-muslim by Islam itself..!! unfortunately, there must be innocent casualties.. and (I hope you don't mind underlining ) Islam is to be blamed for it.. that it is unfair..

++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
Gandalf: Unfortunately, there are plenty of sentences in the Qur'an that can be used to support an aggressive action by Muslims against non-believers.

could youy give some examples, please..??

 

[Majed]

Guys.. I haven't been around much in the last few days, but I noticed this thread. In all honesty, I haven't even read half of the posts here, but let me know if you need help or if you have questions.

 

[Gandalf]

hey, welcome back.. and thanks.. but we need you to read all of it.. it ain't much.. it's just two pages..

 

[Rami]

Ya Majed read it and give us ur input...we value it bro

 

[Dr-Juve]

I just saw this thread
couldnt read every single post
IMO u r discusing a very compicated part of the Islam and Quran and i am pretty sure that 90% of u guys (including me) doesnt know the real meaning of jihad and when it has been started and why, and to know all these things we should go back to the islam first days when Quraish (Non believers) kicked the muslims out from Mikkah and stolen every all of there properties, killed few of them stoped trading with them and they were starvingin the desert for 2 consecutive years before they got the order to go to almadinah were they got supported from the local ppl (alansar)
and after few years,during which the muslims were suffering hardly from the action of Quraish, our prophet recieved the permission to start the Jihad to get there rights and to defend there own ppl in Mikkah, and so first battle in jihad was Bader which we won with 314 muslims against 1000 of Quraish best worriors
so jihad has been permited by Allah (god) after all the paeceful efforst has been failed over 4 of 5 years
jihad means to keep the Allah rights and name above everything
jihad is to defend your self againg any kind of an isnsults and it is not against non muslime only
IMO we have to read and learn more to discuss such a major part of islam
Jihad doesnt mean killing innocent ppl
Jihad doesnt mean bombing
Jihad is not in the wars only
but our prophet tought us that working is jihad
supporting the weaks and poors ppl (Muslims and non muslims) is jihad
Studying is Jihad

 

[Dr-Juve]

++ [ originally posted by Dr-Juve ] ++
I just saw this thread
couldnt read every single post
IMO u r discusing a very compicated part of the Islam and Quran and i am pretty sure that 90% of u guys (including me) doesnt know the real meaning of jihad and when it has been started and why, and to know all these things we should go back to the islam first days when Quraish (Non believers) kicked the muslims out from Mikkah and stolen every all of there properties, killed few of them stoped trading with them and they were starvingin the desert for 2 consecutive years before they got the order to go to almadinah were they got supported from the local ppl (alansar)
and after few years,during which the muslims were suffering hardly from the action of Quraish, our prophet recieved the permission to start the Jihad to get there rights and to defend there own ppl in Mikkah, and so first battle in jihad was Bader which we won with 314 muslims against 1000 of Quraish best worriors
so jihad has been permited by Allah (god) after all the paeceful efforst has been failed over 4 of 5 years
jihad means to keep the Allah rights and name above everything
jihad is to defend your self againg any kind of an isnsults and it is not against non muslime only
IMO we have to read and learn more to discuss such a major part of islam
Jihad doesnt mean killing innocent ppl
Jihad doesnt mean bombing
Jihad is not in the wars only
but our prophet tought us that working is jihad
supporting the weaks and poors ppl (Muslims and non muslims) is jihad
Studying is Jihad

sorry for gram. and spe. mistakes
english is not my mother lang anyway

 

[sallyinzaghi]

Whatever has become of Islam today, such as the justification of killings of the innocent etc, in my opinion that's human error. Man tends to evolve things and change it here and there until we tend to forget to stick to the basic thing, the roots... Therefore it is safe and encouraged for all muslims to always check with the Koran should they face any enquiries or difficulties, because no matter what it comes back to the Koran. Although some people take one sentence from the Koran and take it as their 'proof of justification' and totally discard the rest of the sentences that would actually prevent their doing.

There's also a problem of "misinterpretation" (which to my opinion is just someone's excuse), like there is a sentence in the Quran: "there is no force in Islam" which actually means Islam prohibits any conversion to the religion by force. Some muslims like to manipulate that sentence by claiming therefore if they're muslims people cant force them to wear the hijab or pray. Which is wrong, because that sentence only implies to the conversion to Islam. Once you're a Muslim, you have accepted Islam for what it is therefore you HAVE to comply with the religion, no excuses.

If Islam is one thing, it is a religion of peace. Of course back in history and now muslims do things in the name of their religion, but is actually incorrect in Islam. Do not mistake these doings as under Islam, it is just simply a man's mistake, not the religion's.

 

[juvelover]

++ [ originally posted by sehnsucht79 ] ++
what it is therefore you HAVE to comply with the religion, no excuses.

with no forcing