Comments on: Rise up and think http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/ All that flavorful brownness in one savory packet Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: DennisTM http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107940 DennisTM Tue, 19 Dec 2006 13:03:38 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107940 <p>@ Sakshi - how do I explain? Ah! How about you look up the list of Time Magazines list of the 100 Most Inflential Men of all times. Though I personally think Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) shouldnt be compared to the rest of the people in the list... it does help in providing me with a way of explain what I mean. All I wanted to say is... He is the perfect example for the rest of the humans to follow. Explaining all this takes away the edge in that sentence! :)</p> <p>But again there is room for maneuvering... sunnah isnt compulsory. We arent expected to follow him to the dot. We should try... but not compulsory.</p> <p>I hope I am clear...</p> @ Sakshi – how do I explain? Ah! How about you look up the list of Time Magazines list of the 100 Most Inflential Men of all times. Though I personally think Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) shouldnt be compared to the rest of the people in the list… it does help in providing me with a way of explain what I mean. All I wanted to say is… He is the perfect example for the rest of the humans to follow. Explaining all this takes away the edge in that sentence! :)

But again there is room for maneuvering… sunnah isnt compulsory. We arent expected to follow him to the dot. We should try… but not compulsory.

I hope I am clear…

]]> By: MAK http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107918 MAK Tue, 19 Dec 2006 07:12:05 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107918 <p>Sin, I think you will really like the "Peace TV" brigade if you like Ghamidi. I am personally not a huge fan of Dr. Zakir Naik (He has too argumentative a stance), but people like Hussain Ye (Chinese convert) and Yusuf Eustis (Christian convert) are really good and make a lot of sense. Islamic scholars who have converted to Islam tend to make more sense. I suspect that is because they have made an effort to understand religion and not accept it at face value.</p> <p>For people who have posted comments above, I would encourage them to research Islam further. Islam, while a simple religion to understand, is extensive and requires a certain amount of research to grasp. For example, in the discussion on the issue of slavery, we all tend to confuse "slavery" in Islam with slavery that took place in the west (especially with regards to slaves from Africa). "Slavery" in Islam requires the slave owners to mete out the most humane of conduct including equivalent clothing, education, human rights and food quality to that enjoyed by the owner. In such a situation if all rich people in the world took poor people as slaves, they would actually go a long way in reducing human poverty, especially since the offspring of poor people will be better educated and healthier. For better understanding one needs to pick up a book on Islamic history and see the quality of life enjoyed by slaves during the time of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h)</p> Sin, I think you will really like the “Peace TV” brigade if you like Ghamidi. I am personally not a huge fan of Dr. Zakir Naik (He has too argumentative a stance), but people like Hussain Ye (Chinese convert) and Yusuf Eustis (Christian convert) are really good and make a lot of sense. Islamic scholars who have converted to Islam tend to make more sense. I suspect that is because they have made an effort to understand religion and not accept it at face value.

For people who have posted comments above, I would encourage them to research Islam further. Islam, while a simple religion to understand, is extensive and requires a certain amount of research to grasp. For example, in the discussion on the issue of slavery, we all tend to confuse “slavery” in Islam with slavery that took place in the west (especially with regards to slaves from Africa). “Slavery” in Islam requires the slave owners to mete out the most humane of conduct including equivalent clothing, education, human rights and food quality to that enjoyed by the owner. In such a situation if all rich people in the world took poor people as slaves, they would actually go a long way in reducing human poverty, especially since the offspring of poor people will be better educated and healthier. For better understanding one needs to pick up a book on Islamic history and see the quality of life enjoyed by slaves during the time of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h)

]]> By: sakshi http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107916 sakshi Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:39:11 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107916 <blockquote>@ Sakshi - You made a mistake in comparing Prophet Muhammed with Washington! [:)] </blockquote> <p>umm...why?..I don't have a problem with your remark...I am just curious about where you are coming from... :)</p> @ Sakshi – You made a mistake in comparing Prophet Muhammed with Washington! [:)]

umm…why?..I don’t have a problem with your remark…I am just curious about where you are coming from… :)

]]> By: DennisTM http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107914 DennisTM Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:18:50 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107914 <p>@ Sakshi - You made a mistake in comparing Prophet Muhammed with Washington! [:)]</p> <p>And the comment about beating your wife - that is for big sins that are classified as such... not because she doesnt cook food... or sleeps late... or something like that. That is the biggest problem in understand the Holy Book... there is no attention paid to the context.</p> <p>And i have this incident to relate. I was travelling in a bus which has 'islamic teachings' blaring (yes! blaring) through its speakers instead of the old bollywood songs that usually do. Now, I am a conservative muslim and I like to follow the right path. But the 'mullah' in that recording was preaching about how we should send our little daughters to these 'westernized' schools wearing little frocks. That would have been ok to ignore... but in a bus that has women and weird pathan men (I have nothing against Pathans) the mullah kept on and on about how he was traumatized by the fact that he saw this little primary school girl going off to school in a frock... with her 'tangay nangi/kaandhay nangay' (naked legs/naked shoulders) and he repeated the word 'nanga' so many times... I swore I wouldnt use the word again!</p> @ Sakshi – You made a mistake in comparing Prophet Muhammed with Washington! [:)]

And the comment about beating your wife – that is for big sins that are classified as such… not because she doesnt cook food… or sleeps late… or something like that. That is the biggest problem in understand the Holy Book… there is no attention paid to the context.

And i have this incident to relate. I was travelling in a bus which has ‘islamic teachings’ blaring (yes! blaring) through its speakers instead of the old bollywood songs that usually do. Now, I am a conservative muslim and I like to follow the right path. But the ‘mullah’ in that recording was preaching about how we should send our little daughters to these ‘westernized’ schools wearing little frocks. That would have been ok to ignore… but in a bus that has women and weird pathan men (I have nothing against Pathans) the mullah kept on and on about how he was traumatized by the fact that he saw this little primary school girl going off to school in a frock… with her ‘tangay nangi/kaandhay nangay’ (naked legs/naked shoulders) and he repeated the word ‘nanga’ so many times… I swore I wouldnt use the word again!

]]> By: sic semper tyrannis http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107785 sic semper tyrannis Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:58:21 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107785 <p>Quizman,</p> <blockquote>LOL. Reminds me a anecdote in 'Lipstick Jihad' of the question asked to a cleric on TV that went something like this; "If there is an earthquake and a man falls though his floor on top of a woman in the floor below and impregnates her, is that a sin?" Apparently, the clerics used to answer such questions on Iranian tv. :-) [I'm sure it must be sent by one single Iranian college student who ROFLs everytime his question is picked up.]</blockquote> <p>Better than The Onion!!!! If the question was truly posed by a prankster, that prankster is a comedic legend -- no, no, a comedic demi-god!</p> Quizman,

LOL. Reminds me a anecdote in ‘Lipstick Jihad’ of the question asked to a cleric on TV that went something like this; “If there is an earthquake and a man falls though his floor on top of a woman in the floor below and impregnates her, is that a sin?” Apparently, the clerics used to answer such questions on Iranian tv. :-) [I'm sure it must be sent by one single Iranian college student who ROFLs everytime his question is picked up.]

Better than The Onion!!!! If the question was truly posed by a prankster, that prankster is a comedic legend — no, no, a comedic demi-god!

]]> By: sic semper tyrannis http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107783 sic semper tyrannis Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:51:38 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107783 <p>Queenvish, I agree -- 'moderate' Islam is still way too conservative for most people's tastes.</p> Queenvish, I agree — ‘moderate’ Islam is still way too conservative for most people’s tastes.

]]> By: sic semper tyrannis http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107781 sic semper tyrannis Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:46:14 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107781 <p>Personally, I think some strong dictator/monarch like Ataturk needs to clean up with Muslim world. It's not mere coincidence that the U.S. has always favored dictators who align with U.S. thinking over democratically elected chauvanists. Picking up from where Ataturk left off, Europe is now determining how compulsory modernization ought to be for immigrants. It's a difficult question, since one side asks for respecting other cultures and providing freedom of religion, but the other side asks for respecting societal harmony and providing freedom to escape religious barbarism. The unfortunate thing is, even this Ghamidi fella' who's the poster-boy for progressive Muslim thinking would be dead-opposed to women priests and such. There are Christian churches and Hindu temples with women priests (in fact, the Hindu temple I attended in upstate NY had women priests) -- albeit women priests are still a rarity. When will there be women sheiks in mosques?</p> Personally, I think some strong dictator/monarch like Ataturk needs to clean up with Muslim world. It’s not mere coincidence that the U.S. has always favored dictators who align with U.S. thinking over democratically elected chauvanists. Picking up from where Ataturk left off, Europe is now determining how compulsory modernization ought to be for immigrants. It’s a difficult question, since one side asks for respecting other cultures and providing freedom of religion, but the other side asks for respecting societal harmony and providing freedom to escape religious barbarism. The unfortunate thing is, even this Ghamidi fella’ who’s the poster-boy for progressive Muslim thinking would be dead-opposed to women priests and such. There are Christian churches and Hindu temples with women priests (in fact, the Hindu temple I attended in upstate NY had women priests) — albeit women priests are still a rarity. When will there be women sheiks in mosques?

]]> By: Neena http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107686 Neena Sun, 17 Dec 2006 22:21:22 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107686 <blockquote>If you reject the Hadith you have to admit that the Quran was either wrong to tell muslims to take Mohammad as their example or that Allah was negligent in providing authentic hadiths. In other words you commit blasphemy.</blockquote> <p>Koran came to the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as a revelation when he was 40. So Muslims can follow his examples before forty..</p> If you reject the Hadith you have to admit that the Quran was either wrong to tell muslims to take Mohammad as their example or that Allah was negligent in providing authentic hadiths. In other words you commit blasphemy.

Koran came to the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as a revelation when he was 40. So Muslims can follow his examples before forty..

]]> By: truthseeker http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107647 truthseeker Sun, 17 Dec 2006 13:28:58 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107647 <blockquote>Does this mean that, if he had not shown that slavery was not truly Islamic, it would be okay for muslims to have slaves? </blockquote> <p>If slavery is unislamic then muslims have been disobeying Allah from the very beginning, for Mohammad and his companions were all slavers. Will Allah burn his own prophet in Hell for disobeying him?</p> <p>Fact is the Quran itself allows slavery. How Sayyed Ahmed Khan "proved" that slavery was unislamic is beyond me.</p> <p>Slavery wasnt made illegal in the birthplace of Islam, now called Saudi Arabia, until 1962. The Bible too sanctions slavery. And slavery was made illegal in christendom only in the 19th century, after the Enlightenment had introduced liberal, humanistic values to the West.</p> Does this mean that, if he had not shown that slavery was not truly Islamic, it would be okay for muslims to have slaves?

If slavery is unislamic then muslims have been disobeying Allah from the very beginning, for Mohammad and his companions were all slavers. Will Allah burn his own prophet in Hell for disobeying him?

Fact is the Quran itself allows slavery. How Sayyed Ahmed Khan “proved” that slavery was unislamic is beyond me.

Slavery wasnt made illegal in the birthplace of Islam, now called Saudi Arabia, until 1962. The Bible too sanctions slavery. And slavery was made illegal in christendom only in the 19th century, after the Enlightenment had introduced liberal, humanistic values to the West.

]]> By: truthseeker http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/12/15/rise_up_and_thi/comment-page-1/#comment-107646 truthseeker Sun, 17 Dec 2006 13:16:00 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=4032#comment-107646 <blockquote>Most moderate Muslims still rely on sharia of the Prophet. There are many problems with sharia. The first being that there really is no real record of any saying, traditions other than oral links. So, Muslim and Bukhari sat down centuries after the death of the Prophet and determined that sharia x was right because it had a strong chain and someone else knows that one too. How is this perfectly dependable</blockquote> <p>You are confusing Hadith with Sharia. Sharia is Islamic Law, and it is based on the Quran and Hadith.</p> <p>Fact is the Quran itself commands muslims to obey Mohammad and follow his example. To do that you need the Hadith. If you reject the Hadith you have to admit that the Quran was either wrong to tell muslims to take Mohammad as their example or that Allah was negligent in providing authentic hadiths. In other words you commit blasphemy.</p> <blockquote>And yet, if you don't have hadith, you're left wondering, so... it's ok for a man to beat his wife, right?</blockquote> <p>You dont need the Hadith for the answer to this question. The Quran itself commands muslims to beat their wives if they are disobedient, if words and banishment from the conjugal bed do not end the disobedience.</p> Most moderate Muslims still rely on sharia of the Prophet. There are many problems with sharia. The first being that there really is no real record of any saying, traditions other than oral links. So, Muslim and Bukhari sat down centuries after the death of the Prophet and determined that sharia x was right because it had a strong chain and someone else knows that one too. How is this perfectly dependable

You are confusing Hadith with Sharia. Sharia is Islamic Law, and it is based on the Quran and Hadith.

Fact is the Quran itself commands muslims to obey Mohammad and follow his example. To do that you need the Hadith. If you reject the Hadith you have to admit that the Quran was either wrong to tell muslims to take Mohammad as their example or that Allah was negligent in providing authentic hadiths. In other words you commit blasphemy.

And yet, if you don’t have hadith, you’re left wondering, so… it’s ok for a man to beat his wife, right?

You dont need the Hadith for the answer to this question. The Quran itself commands muslims to beat their wives if they are disobedient, if words and banishment from the conjugal bed do not end the disobedience.

]]>