According to wikipedia: Morality (from the Latinmoralitas “manner, character, proper behavior”) is a sense of behavioral conduct that differentiates intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and bad (or wrong). A moral code is a system of morality (for example, according to a particular philosophy, religion, culture, etc.) and a moral is any one practice or teaching within a moral code. Immorality is the active opposition to morality, while amorality is variously defined as an unawareness of, indifference toward, or disbelief in any set of moral standards or principles
So when we talk about behavioral conduct it is normally based on a set of norms that is generally considered amongst people of all religions, beliefs and faiths. You go see any practising Muslim, Jew, Christian: you would know that they firmly believe in :
being appropriately dressed. (nuns, priests and all practising catholics too etc)
Christianity, Hinduism, Islam Judaism , they all preach extra-marital relationships are forbidden. I wouldn’t go into the detail by quoting any scriptures but we know this is the case.
Drinking is generally considered Haram in Islam and scientifically proven too that can lead to serious diseases
Same goes for basic morals such as lying, stealing, murder, looting, rioting
Hypocrisy is disliked universally too.
All the mentioned above aren’t confined to ONE religion or ONE person’s religious thinking. But since we are Muslims and we follow Islam we already have a complete code of life to follow. So if I am following that it’s just not my thinking but rather the RIGHT way of judging somebody’s morals.
And a person who was of good behavior and values whilst in her parents supervision (but not from her heart) and she changed after she went to lie independently is an act of hypocrisy IMO and thus a question on somebody’s morals and values.
I partially agree. However Allah says that He would forgive all sins except 'Shirk'. (and that too if someone repents and sincerely makes an effort to stay away from it, Allah SWT would forgive him too.
Even the best of Muslims have some weak moments at one time or the other. Thus we have been given Surah Falak and Surah Naas to pray from Satan's shar and waswasay.
IMO I would respect a person for the act he/she is doing currently which is good. I wouldn't be concerned about their past. But if they keep going back and repeating the same thing I woud lose respect for that person eventually. Infact anyone would.
Good points. I think we need to make a distinction between Muslims who have made the wrong choice here and there, compared to living a lifestyle of sin. I have no doubt that even the best Muslims have knowingly or unkowingly sinned every day -- however we ask for Allah's forgiveness and try to avoid making that mistake again.
I am talking about those who are like the your example: living in sin with a non Muslim, all sorts of haram stuff. I don't think that person should be proclaiming their Muslimness. Just like how the terrorists don't represent me, neither do these fornicators and the drinkers.
so psyah bhai as you said someone's morality comes to light only when there is no fear of consequences and thus no danda !
So what about people ..you know just average Muslims from good families like me and other GS-ers (Alhamdullilah) who in moments of weakness do something wrong ( like it doesnt have to be a big sin - just a couple of lies, sneaking out without parents permission ) would they be considered immoral or they are generally NICE people who got caught in the wrong moment at the wrong time ?
Peace Enigmatic
Sorry I missed this question .... To clarify my position ... I didn't mean that someone's morality comes to light only when there is no danda .... rather what I meant was that if there are two people who do not steal one does not steal because he fears the consequences and the other does not steal out of sense of his principles being betrayed ... both effectively avoid evil, but one of them may steal when that threat is taken away the other one will not ... so it is argued that it is not moral "to avoid stealing" that is merely being cautious ... rather it is moral when "a person avoids stealing even if there is no fear of being caught" -
Islam views this a slightly more pragmatic way ... We are talking here about piety and the lowest form of it is "to fear God" and what He can do to us if we do evil. The next level higher is the "trading level - that we do good in order to gain reward" ... the next level higher is to do good and obey God through a sense of obligation and taking on the responsibility to honour ourselves by praising Him - through a realisation that He deserves it ... So it may still be considered good or moral not to steal ... but it is more moral not to steal when there is no immediate reward for not stealing or no immediate penalty for stealing.
Then the sinning acts and how these are related to morals - we need to understand that morality is a code with which our inner feelings and motives are attached and have to be understood ... whereas a sin can be acts done intentionally, unintentionally and so on .... for a person to steal knowing this to be bad and hates doing it but does it anyway the person would be considered weak but not immoral. If a person on the other hand urinates in public and takes pleasure in seeing others disgusted by his behaviour then he has taken for himself something that is pleasurable that otherwise would be considered offensive or evil. This is called immorality.
If a person knowingly commits a crime he is sinful but will only be immoral as well if he took pleasure in doing that sin ... the greater the pleasure in doing evil and the greater the evil being done is a greater level of immorality. If a person unknowingly does a wrong act then the act may still be a sin, but it depends how this act was instigated - if the act was instigated through good intentions which led to an absent thought which was evil then this has a lesser accountability than the one who has become habitual in his immorality that he no longer thinks about the evil he does ... In all this are the working parameters to navigate immorality with sin with accountability ...
Alas we learn from the story of Adam (AS) ... we he wronged himself he was guilty and sought forgiveness (equals moral) and we saw Iblis when he wronged himself he blamed it on Allah (SWT) and attempted to justify his act - taking what he did to be correct and hence didn't exhibit any guilt ... (equals immoral) ...
Our weakness of mind, heart and perseption will lead us to sin ... when we sin if we "enjoy it" or don't suffer any "guilt" from it ... then we are in the condition of immorality. It is possible to be selectively immoral as well ... We may dislike ever hurting a fly, but we can just as easily enjoy seeing others fall over for example.
If there is no guilt then there is no repentance ... hence morality is linked directly to our desire to seek forgiveness.
You are confusing morals with religion. Behavioral code of conduct is not solely determined by religion nor every religion have the same code of behavioral conduct. For example in a practicing muslim family a person who drinks is doing imoral and haram thing but does it make all the non muslim people who enjoy wine with their dinner immoral? I hardly think so…
Incest was not considered imoral in ancient Rome and Egypt but now the morals have changed regarding this even to the point the cousin marriages are not accepted in many cultures.
Whoever person is the topic of discussion here is simply changing her views about her lifestyle which ultimately just affects her life. She is not harming anyone, she is not infringing on another person’s right…
She may be doing imoral things in your view because of your religious values but that does not make her immoral. She probably was born in a muslim family but that does not mean she has to live all her life under that code.
Muslim families who insist of pardha and don’t allowing mingling of opposite sexes think it is immoral and a sin to do so but its their belief and does not make other people immoral.
[QUOTE]
but it is more moral not to steal when there is no immediate reward for not stealing or no immediate penalty for stealing.
[/QUOTE]
But from a religious point of view there is always a reward...leading a sin free life for a purpose of better afterlife.
What if you take the concept of sin and God out of picture? A person who has no religious affiliation and no danger of getting caught yet he does not steal what about his morality? Is he more or less moral from a person of faith?
Argh, how did I miss this thread?! I am so late. o well I will add my 2cents anyway.
I don't believe morality even exits. Let me explain why. Each person's morality is defined by his/her culture, religion, and community. I believe in consequences of my actions. Morals have been defined by religions all across the globe. Philosophers have tried to understand and explain morality. If your morals are based on fear, they are not morals. You are afraid of the consequences of your actions. The reason i have reached this conclusion is because I have seen religious and nonreligious people do bad and good things. Religion or parents shouldn't dictate morality. Once you understand the consequences of your actions, you won't do anything that will get you in trouble.
Morality was introduced by religion but religion is not a prerequisite for having morals. It scares you into doing the right thing because you know the result of your actions. I am not scared of making mistakes, I know those mistakes will cost me so I won't make those mistakes.
The so called morality (rationalism) changes with time but when you CHOOSE to stick to your morals that defined the 7th century, your morals DON'T exist in the world today.