Misconceptions about Islam

Society Religion & Philosophy
, ,
21

Maulana Mufti Taqi Usmani
Maulana Mufti Mohammed Zar Wali Khan

2 hanafi scholars who are qualified Muftis that I know of.

22

Just to clarify again, these two individuals are not scholars. They may be educated in Islamic studies and may be well read, but there is a program that one must complete before attaining the title of "mufti" which is an extensive 8 year program that follows rigorous teaching of the Arabic language, Qur'anic language and Islam from a lineage that is authentic and not "self-taught." ANy other person is just a ummmm, how shall we put it, an experienced speaker with a circle of influence, not necessarily "qualified" to impart authentic Islamic knowledge.

23

Re: Misconceptions about Islam

I understand your point. I have something to say for it at some point but thanks for clarifying.

Kabhi so gaya Zamana ...
24
25

Maulana Mufti Taqi Usmani has this to say;

Tujhe Pyaar MEra SAtaye ga
26

Re: Misconceptions about Islam

test01, just a clarification. You are a Muslim and you think these are not misconceptions but truths about Muslims?

27

ahmadis can cry all they want but fact that they followed dajjal mirza and hence were declared as kaffir by Muslim ummah. I don't know whether they're considered apostates or kafir from birth.


o heretic kafir, you deny the physical jihad; hence, for you any Muslim following the command of Allah Ta'ala and waging war against those, who are hostile toward Muslims or an Islamic state, is a terrorist. Why do you deny the physical jihad? Is it because you won't be able to please you supporters - the west? You wish that ayaat and ahadith pretaining to physical jihaad were never revealed. More evidence for your kufr and deviancy from Islam.

Allah Ta'ala says in His Book:And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do. [Surah al-Anfal;8:39 - interpretation of the meaning]
The Messenger of Allah (sal-allau wa salam) said:I have been commanded to fight the people until they bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and establish regular prayer, and pay zakaah, If they do that then their blood and wealth is safe from me, except by the laws of Islam, and their reckoning will be with Allah. [Bukhari and Muslim]


so what? It is the law of Allah to kill those who leave Islam and when their apostasy becomes apparent and they don't come back to Islam even after giving daw'ah and time to re-think. Are you going to deny what Allah Ta'ala has legislated for you? The Prophet (sal-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: "Whoever changes his religion, put him to death" [Sahih Bukhari]

side note: the condition put by Zakir Naik isn't found in shari'ah. There is no evidence that the apostates are to be only killed when they hostile toward an Islamic state.


if you ahmadis are considered apostates then what Dr. Israr thinks or have said regarding you heretic kufaar is in perfect harmony with shari'ah, meaning you are to be put to death in Muslim countries if you don't repent and come back to Islam.

your typical emotional ranting won't disapprove that you deny the laws of Allah!

smiley wala thread!
28

Peace brother test01

I make no claim that Islam is peaceful. Not in the sense that you want it to mean. I am merely saying that Islam does not sanction terrorism. By being anti-terrorism it does not mean we assume the diametrically opposite position of being passive walkovers.

We must stand up to protect our Deen from harms this is our obligation. It means we must be civil, we must be kind, but not accomodating to criminals and blasphemers. We have to sacrifice our own lifestyles for the sake of Islam.

Now I have watched the whole of that Dr. Israr video set and I liked the clarity in it. If you go towards the end of the 3rd video clip and the beginning of the fourth you will see where the accusation comes in. As you will see Dr. Israr is not calling for the killing of all the Ahmadis, rather he is simply saying that as a result of British rule Muslims were unable to undertake the sentencing to death for those people who accepted Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as prophet. He said that it should have happened. He is not saying that we take Ahmadis today and do any such thing with them.

Also he made reference to the fact that it was not the religious establishment that called the Ahmadi kafir as such but it was put to vote in parliament. Anyway, all of this besides he as respected as he is, is not from our top ulema.

Our top ulema tell us to clean the streets and go an cook for our neighbours. Yes they do ...

As for myself and Teggy well I'm sure he'll forgive me for speaking on his behalf but we don't attribute the qualities that we have except to our ulema who have been given this treasure from their teachers dating back to the prophet Muhammad (SAW) the Mercy to the Worlds.

I'm sorry this is making you so heated, but there is a truth that I feel is manifest and it does not reside in the courts of Ahmadiyya, not as far as I can see or what Allah (SWT) has given me tawfiq for.

29

What an audacious statement psyah.

This statement leads directly to "un-protection" of Islam.

This is precisely Muslims SHOULD NOT DO.

----- When every Tom Dick Anwar and Abdullah-diwana make it their Gad-given right to pick up sticks and stone and kill innocent people.
----- When a petty Mullah changes his name to Khalid bin waleed, and claims to "protect" Islam.
----- When pathetic and na-laiq 20 something from Saudia run away from home and end up terrorizing Pakistanis,

Islam gets destroyed by the day.

And then you go on and give this mischievous double tongued suggestion!

What the heck is civil and kind, when you or any Mullah can accuse a poor Pakistani Christian of blasphemy and then ransack the church, and get the christian locked up or worse! simply kill the poor lad?

What are you guys preaching?

Are you living in some medieval lawless era, where civilization was a distant concept, and civil behavior meant "not killing the neighbor"?

Oh Bhai,

Things have changed. We are losing our beautiful country due to these "saudi or Irani fatwas". The fatwas that tell us that a poor hindu hari is committing blaspheme for merely existing in Pakistan.

Please stop this. We have millions homeless, 1000s dead, and still this poison in the name of Islam is being doled out so freely as if there is no tomorrow.

So pathetic. So ignrant, and so hateful propaganda all in the name of Islam?

Even when our brother Teggy wants us to strive for improving the image of Islam. How's that even possible then?

30

Peace burqaposhx

I would like to deal with each of your concerns. InshaAllah you will see that there is a balance and a path towards what you want to see and what we as Muslims aught to do.

Firstly, my words may have misled you and for that I apologise. I had no intention to put across a double tongued message. To stand up and protect Islam from harm does not translate to beating people with sticks or oppressing non-Muslims. This is as you have said the very opposite of the intent of these words. However, by calming down and thinking things through the obligation is still there. Now the question MUST be asked how we are to protect Islam from harm. If we do not ask this question then we are to blame not the people promoting the protection.

So the way to protect Islam. Foremostly it means to reason with people like yourself that we are only doing what every people do for what they value the most. Then different people have different limits on their abilities to exercise action. Me as a mere mortal can but speak 'good' in the way of Islam. And if you are Muslim then you should do this too. I'm not going to get angry or try to threaten you if you don't, but I will speak out against you if what you say is harming Islam.

Then you ask what gives me the right to do that. Well being Muslims gives us the right and duty to correct each other. If you see something anti-Islamic in me then tell me and I shall pray and act to improve but we should exchange the gestures two ways. Therefore these people who pillage and oppress in the name of Islam it is the other Muslims who need to approach them and calm them down.

Then we have leaders at different levels. They have the responsibility to exercise different levels penalties. The Judge being the only Islamic authority to sentence people to death. So this beating of children etc is not the way we will protect Islam because we will be going against the teachings of Islam if we did that.

To protect Islam means to promote it's teachings.

So you see there is nothing of any concern here. Rather instead of becoming angry and blaming you should have known my intent because we have spoken on this forum long enough. And even if that was no too obvious then you could have asked what I meant instead of losing yourself in the discussion.

The major problem we have with people who openly want to dilute Islam and those who are ignorantly trying to take laws in their own hands is that they interpret Islam for themselves and do not ask how or what is meant.

You last question has stumbled into the right lines for this discussion ... we need to improve the image of Islam ... how is that possible? Well we can only try of course fighting and going crazy is not working and you have a lot to say about that ... so we need to try something else ... isn't it?

31

I did my insignificant part by sharing some of the more "known"/"general" misconceptions about Islam.

What have you done, friend? :)

Islam does not revolve around your account of injustices done to one particular group of believers, and that's just the hard truth. When someone does something constructive, learn to appreciate it instead of hijacking the thought to infuse your personal p.o.v. everywhere.

Thanks.

PS: I spoke of Islam as a whole, you made it into Ahmadi vs. Non-Ahmadi. Please learn to comprehend and distinguish what is being said. Knee-Jerk reactions are not a constructive form of protest all the time.

Food Photography
32

I don't know why both you and psyah are blaming me. If your own ulema seem to contradict your claim of those "misconceptions" then according to your ulema those misconceptions are not misconceptions but are truths. This breaks down your argument from the start. So what you are doing is really kidding yourself, no one will believe it as reality differs from claim. I was merely pointing out this fact. Should you not be talking to your own ulema and shunning them where they are wrong instead of shooting the messenger, me?

PS: You can’t claim to be peaceful religion while at the same time bitterly and officially persecuting Ahmadis as contrary to your understanding wider world still considers Ahmadis human and considers any violation of their human rights; persecution and terrorism at your end. Sorry but there is no other way out, you either mend or get credited accordingly. Your ulema have really got you in a tough spot.

Timepass - June 2013
33

No.

Thanks.

Timepass - June 2013
34

Great thread, hijacked by Ahmadis…

Ahmadiyat was a FITNA 100 years ago and it still is. The response from Ahmadis on this noble thread is an examples of that FITNA and true JUSTIFICATION of declaring them non-Muslims in Muslim Umaah of 1.66 BILLION…(I love repeating this for Ahmadis ;))

Just one clarification about World’s Muslim Population:

By even taking data from General Sources](http://www.islamicpopulation.com/source.html), like CIA Fact Sheet, we can easily establish the fact that **total Muslim Population in 2009 is **1.66 billion which is far greater than currently estimated 1.2 or 1.3 billion. Can also be checked from popular sources such as CIA Fact Sheet, HOLT,RINEHART & WINSTON](Holt Rinehart Winston World Atlas) etc.

RC

35

That's the problem psyah. You can only "try to correct" your own children. But do not treat other adults as children and do not try to correct them.

This personal Jihadi style correction is perhaps OK for primitive societies. In civilized societies, there are laws in place. If someone breaks the law, then at most you can report it and be witness in the court case. Vigilantism is mostly limited to the movies and books.

But in no condition, you should go tell others in the street that they are wrong.

Do not take the law in your own hand, and do not try to dispense draconian style medieval methods to "correct others".

36

Correction: Eloh is not God's name in judiasm. It is Yahweh.
Elohism is a concept in Judiasm, which means TAUHEED in arabic.

37

Correction:

Yahweh means "Lord" and Elohim means "God".

In other words, it's not God's name in Judaism, but a title that he is referred with.

38

It's amazing how people go out of whack to disagree with someone for the sake of argument (no real purpose, just to BAKWAAS...lol).

No where in **psyah's post **I read so called personal Jihadi style or anything about taking laws in your hands. You have to be reallllly STUPID to read what's not there to make your silly point.

I totally agree with him, as a Muslim it is our duty to protect Islam (and I am not talking about Jihad, neither is he).

;)
RC

Timepass - June 2013
39

Are you absolutely positively sure about it?
Because I kinda doubt it.

40

[QUOTE]

MISCONCEPTION #4
**Islam was spread by the sword and intolerant of other faiths. **
Many social studies textbooks for students show the image of an Arab
horseman carrying a sword in one hand and the Quran in the other
conquering and forcibly converting. This, though, is not a correct
portrayal of history. Islam has always given respect and freedom of
religion to all faiths. The Quran says: "God forbids you not, with
regards to those who fight you not for [your] faith nor drive you out
of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them; for God
*loveth those who are just. 60:8) *

Freedom of religion is laid down in the Quran itself: "There is no
compulsion (or coercion) in the religion (Islam). The right
direction is distinctly clear from error". (2:256) Christian
missionary, T.W. Arnold had this opinion on his study of the question
of the spread of Islam: ".. of any organized attempt to force the
acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any
systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion,
we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of
action, they might have swept away Christianity as easily as
*Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made *
*Protestanism ..." *

It is a function of Islamic law to protect the privileged status of
minorities, and this is why non-Muslim places of worship have
flourished all over the Islamic world. History provides many **
**examples of Muslim tolerance towards other faiths: when the caliph
Omar entered Jerusalem in the year 634, Islam granted freedom of
worship to all religious communities in the city. Proclaiming to the
inhabitants that their lives, and property were safe, and that their
places of worship would never be taken from them, he asked the
Christian patriarch Sophronius to accompany him on a visit to all the
holy places. Islamic law also permits non-Muslim minorities to set up
their own courts, which implement family laws drawn up by the
minorities themselves. The life and property of all citizens in an
Islamic state are considered sacred whether the person is Muslim or
*not. *

Racism is not a part of Islam, the Quran speaks only of human equality
and how all peoples are equal in the sight of God. "O mankind! We
created you from a single soul, male and female, and made you into
nations and tribes, so that you may come to know one another. Truly, **
**the most honored of you in God's sight is the greatest of you in
piety. God is All-Knowing, All- Aware. (49:13)

[/QUOTE]

Peace to all,

Pl dont brand me anti islamic, but I strongly feel that Islam is anything but tolrant to other religions.

Today we have only one country in the world which can be called Islamic. That is Saudi Arabia. Only they have some respects for quranic laws. We can easily explore how much they are tolrant towards other religions.

Prior to Islam sweeping whole Saudi Arabia, it was home to idolators, christians, and jews. All of them used to practise their religion there. Now it is impossible to find out any trace of any other religion except Islam in that country which gave birth to Islam. It itself speaks volumes about how tolrant first generation of Muslims had been towards another religions.

In India itself, more than 3000 temples had been demolished by muslims. And I dont blame them either. As pious muslims they were obiliged to demolish any place of worship which is not Islamic.

However forcible conversion is a topic which can only be debated and not proved, so I will prefer to leave it.

Peace.

Timepass - June 2013