Lot of things from arab culture became part of the religion. Prophet Mohammed never deviated from the decent part of Arab culture and that became sunna
The point is this that Sunna is not fardh, but disliking sunna (one does not have to adopt it, but one can always respect it) is a major sin
Why/how could/should culture became part of a religion? Culture has nothing to do with God, spirituality or living life as God intends us to.
Early Muslims made the Arab culture part of religion, not God. Even if Islam is the only religion with the original words of God to go by, the practice of Islam is like that of any religion - man made. These early Muslims and subesequent generations didn't want to change the practice so as to have their own identity and somehow feel they are following Gods' commands by following the culture of early Muslims.
But to say that someone, who very well have the CORRECT interpretation of Islam (not the mainstream, but the correct), believes the sunnah that relates with culture is not part of the religion is commiting amajor sin is BS. That is the narrow mindedness and myopia that has kept Muslims living the life of ancient Arabs. Not respecting Arab culture is no more sinful than not respecting any other culture. There is nothing special about that culture.
Why/how could/should culture became part of a religion? Culture has nothing to do with God, spirituality or living life as God intends us to.
Early Muslims made the Arab culture part of religion, not God. Even if Islam is the only religion with the original words of God to go by, the practice of Islam is like that of any religion - man made. These early Muslims and subesequent generations didn't want to change the practice so as to have their own identity and somehow feel they are following Gods' commands by following the culture of early Muslims.
But to say that someone, who very well have the CORRECT interpretation of Islam (not the mainstream, but the correct), believes the sunnah that relates with culture is not part of the religion is commiting amajor sin is BS. That is the narrow mindedness and myopia that has kept Muslims living the life of ancient Arabs. Not respecting Arab culture is no more sinful than not respecting any other culture. There is nothing special about that culture.
This i dont agree for sure. Shall we debate on that dugggggggh the thread is going of tangent, and for sure i am going in for a discussion.
Semi, please go ahead and do provide me with some examples because for sure you would have read it somewhere to write it down so confidently.
What are you trying to prove here, by throwing names of Non-muslims who ever grew anything more than a stubble?
If some Christain or Hindu adopts something that Islam promotes, we shouldnt be having an issue with it…in fact its something that should looked forward to.
"This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion." -- Qur'an 5:3
The cultural practices (the beard is a good example) that many consider a necessary part of the religion actually become part of Islam after this day that Allah perfected the religion*.*
"This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion." -- Qur'an 5:3
The cultural practices (the beard is a good example) that many consider a necessary part of the religion actually become part of Islam after this day that Allah perfected the religion*.*
No Semi, again you are confusing Fard with Sunna. Most of the sunna were part of arab culture
Valima, aqeeeqa, Khatnaa, Beard, Polygamy... and many others
Sunna is part of islam but you dont become non-muslim if you dont follow sunna. That hukm is for fardh only
[quote]
Sunna is part of islam but you dont become non-muslim if you dont follow sunna.
[/quote]
Ok, if that's the case then surely your statement that disliking sunna is a major sin can not true. (Unless if disliking any culture is a major sin.)
Ok, if that's the case then surely your statement that disliking sunna is a major sin can not true. (Unless if disliking any culture is a major sin.)
Quiting sunna is not sin as such, quiting because you thing that its a bad practice is consider sin. Just because that thought shows disrespect towards that routine of Prophet Mohammed
"This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion." -- Qur'an 5:3
The cultural practices (the beard is a good example) that many consider a necessary part of the religion actually become part of Islam after this day that Allah perfected the religion*.*
Semi, there is absolutely no connection between this verse and the Sunnah of beard. Chronologically this verse revealed when the Prophet SAW was not to remain among the people for long.
What people in my opinion (including the majority of muslims) do not understand is that anything the Prophet SAW did is regarded as Sunnah. To me a sunnah which is explaining something from the Quran has religious significance whereas others do not but are simply accounts of Arabic cultural practices which were not against Islam. Some were politically motivated and some were economically centric, they have some principles behind them but there application is not etched in stone. It is true at least in my opinion that muslims have taken the status of sunnah to the extreme.
I'm choking on my coke. You're telling me that Islam is tied in with world affairs? And yet, if the issue of a woman wearing jeans comes up, its people like YOU who oppose it the most. If anyone has a problem with living in THIS world, its people of YOUR SORT.
All that choking isn't good for the brain...but it makes sense now.
I'm not even going to reply to the logic being used here by comparing a woman's tight jeans revealing her figure to keeping a beard which doesn't do any evil to anyone.
Oh btw, Yes Islam has EVERYTHING to do with wordly affairs. If one doesn't know that they should gain a deeper insight into their religion.
Islam is a guide for everything, from the way you go to sleep to the way you eat, to the way you keep your appearance.
If you deny that, then ..well...what can i say then? :)
No Semi, again you are confusing Fard with Sunna. Most of the sunna were part of arab culture
Valima, aqeeeqa, Khatnaa, Beard, Polygamy... and many others
Sunna is part of islam but you dont become non-muslim if you dont follow sunna. That hukm is for fardh only
Berad is not neccesary part of Islam.
Yes, as long as you don't follow hanafi, shafi, maliki or hanbali school of fiqh...bcoz according to these four school of thought beard is wajib and shaving beard is haram. Just for your info.
What are you trying to prove here, by throwing names of Non-muslims who ever grew anything more than a stubble?
If some Christain or Hindu adopts something that Islam promotes, we shouldnt be having an issue with it...in fact its something that should looked forward to.
well, the whole point of growing the beard in a certain way is to be distinct from that other group. Now if the other group starts to resemble you -for whatever reason they do it- the whole argument of being distinct vanishes. So, then the question remains: even though a certain trait was previously distinctive between groups, do you now still have to persue it so vehemently since now it's distinctive capacities have faded?
the idea is to avoid resemblance of the majority....
come on now, use that brain Allah has gifted u and dont act like someone who hasnt got any....
so wat is the majority? 50.001% of all persons? where do we draw the line?
let alone the beard, wat about cutting nails? a large majority of non-muslims also practice this?
moreover, wat about keeping long nails for women? clearly, "Islam" says that women should not try to resemble men, and vice versa. However, by keeping their nails short, women are also resembling men, more than if they had kept their nails long.
(p.s. for the nail-example you cannot bring up hygiene as an argument to cut your nails, because similarly shaving a beard is also more hygienic than keeping one. And moreover, as a further counterargument to this, you cannot say that you have to keep you long beard clean, because similarly you could also keep your long nails clean.)
No Semi, again you are confusing Fard with Sunna. Most of the sunna were part of arab culture
Valima, aqeeeqa, Khatnaa, Beard, Polygamy... and many others
Sunna is part of islam but you dont become non-muslim if you dont follow sunna. That hukm is for fardh only
Berad is not neccesary part of Islam.
No Tariq Khan You can not complete Islam without understanding and following sunnah...
However sunnah is what prophet did logically for the betterment of humanity and Islam...
It is not what he did to carry out his daily life i.e. if he rode camel or a horse, what type of sword he used, wore a particular type or style of dress, put on a particular type of perfume, or sported a particular hairstyle or beard or put henna in to his beard...
I know a lot of people will start shouting here on my comments and I am not in any mood to discuss things over and over again...
However people generally do not understand or clearly do not define what is sunnah....Therefore end up putting cart before the horse....
well, the whole point of growing the beard in a certain way is to be distinct from that other group. Now if the other group starts to resemble you -for whatever reason they do it- the whole argument of being distinct vanishes. So, then the question remains: even though a certain trait was previously distinctive between groups, do you now still have to persue it so vehemently since now it's distinctive capacities have faded?
so wat is the majority? 50.001% of all persons? where do we draw the line?
let alone the beard, wat about cutting nails? a large majority of non-muslims also practice this?
moreover, wat about keeping long nails for women? clearly, "Islam" says that women should not try to resemble men, and vice versa. However, by keeping their nails short, women are also resembling men, more than if they had kept their nails long.
(p.s. for the nail-example you cannot bring up hygiene as an argument to cut your nails, because similarly shaving a beard is also more hygienic than keeping one. And moreover, as a further counterargument to this, you cannot say that you have to keep you long beard clean, because similarly you could also keep your long nails clean.)
why worry about other things????
the prophet (saw) ordered to differentiate in the beard so stick to it, why drag in other things....
the Quran says that u will find that the people who hate you most are the jews....
so if u find a jew that likes u, does it mean that (naoozubillah) Quran is wrong????
You are sick minded really trying to tell people quran preaches hatred…
People like you have tarnished the image of Islam in the whole world…
You should not be allowed to read quran because you obviously don’t understand it, let alone comment on it. Really you are disgusting…
Read this carefully before preaching your message of hate for non muslims or jews:
Can Non-Muslims Be Made Friends?
by Dr. Khalid Zaheer
Introduction
The tension between Muslims and non-Muslims, in particular Jews and Christians, as a result of the events of September 11, 2001 and beyond has made the world of ours far more intolerant and insecure than it was before. Many political, social, economic, and religious causes have been attributed to this alarming tendency. One important religious cause that has been justifiably claimed to have contributed in the deepening of tension between the two groups is the alleged urging to the believers in the Jewish and Islamic religious texts to treat non-believers differently because of their difference in faith. One such claim in the Islamic text is the alleged Qur’anic teaching that that Muslims cannot have non-Muslims as their friends. Since this claim of Muslim scholars is based on a few Qur’anic passages, it is important that it should be refuted on the basis of the same text or else devout Muslims would continue to consider non-Muslims as people who cannot be befriended. This paper is an attempt to show through the Qur’anic text the author’s conviction that the holy book of Muslims does not expect its followers to not consider non-Muslims for friendship because of their non-conformance with the faith of Muslims.
The Traditional Muslim Point of View
The following is a translation of one of the verses on which the popular Muslim view is based:
“O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as your protecting friends (auliya): they are only protecting friends of one another. Whoever of you disobeys this commandment will be counted as one of them. Surely God does not guide the wrongdoers.” (Qur’an; 5:51)
A respected Muslim scholar of India has explained the above-translated verse thus:
"Aulia is the plural of wali. Wali means a friend, some one who is close, and a helper. What it means is that Muslims are expected not to make Jews, Christians, and all other disbelievers (kuffar) their protecting friends, as has been clarified in Surah Nisaa1. However, to deal with them with justice, politeness, generosity, and decency is another matter. If believers feel it to be necessary, they can have agreements of peace with all disbelievers, as has been mentioned in verse 8:61.2 Justice is meant to be done in case of all humans, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. The attitude of politeness and decency can be demonstrated for those non-Muslims who are not antagonistic towards Muslims. However, as far as Muwalaat (i.e. confidence of friendship and brotherly help and support) is concerned, no Muslim is allowed to establish it with any non-Muslim."3
There is another passage of the Qur’an that is often quoted to support the above view. “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers (Kuffar) rather than believers; if any do that in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution that ye may guard yourselves from them. But God cautions you (to remember) Himself for the final goal is to Allah.” (Qur’an; 3:28)
Critique of the Traditional View
There are several reasons why, in my opinion, the traditional view on Muslims’ relations with non-Muslims is incorrect. I will mention the more prominent ones in this section.
i) Qur’an allows Muslim men to marry Jew and Christian ladies: “Likewise, marriage with chaste free believing women and also chaste women among the People who were given the Book before you is made lawful for you.” (Qur’an; 5:5). While mentioning the closeness of the husband-wife relationship, Qur’an says: “And of His signs, another one is that He created for you mates from among yourselves that you may find comfort with them” (Qur’an; 30: 21) The book of God also says “They (your wives) are an apparel for you and you an apparel for them.” (Qur’an; 2:187) It is unimaginable how a good Muslim would be able to have very close relations with his non-Muslim wife on the one hand and yet be able to maintain the caution that the conventional point of view would like him to observe with non-Muslims. A lady is either your wife or she is not.
As a result of his marriage with a non-Muslim lady, a Muslim is going to have in-law relatives. Qur’an says: “He (God) is the One Who has created man from water, then made for him blood relationships and that of marriage relationships, your Lord is indeed All-Powerful.” (Qur’an; 25:54) Should Muslim men treat all in-law relatives with the same mysterious and unclear attitude – which is neither friendly nor frank – that traditional view suggests? Moreover, as a result of the Qur’anic permission for Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women, some Muslim children will have non-Muslim mothers. In view of the conventional understanding on the issue, should the Muslims be required to not have any informal frankness with their mothers?
ii) The conventional view on the subject has not attempted to consider all verses relevant to the subject together. It is based on an atomized understanding of a few verses taken out of their context. Consider the following Qur’anic passage:
“God does not forbid you to be kind (tabarru: noun, birr) and equitable (tuqsitu: noun, qist) to those who had neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes. In fact God loves the equitable. (60:8) God only forbids you to make friends (wali) those who fought you on account of your faith and drove you out of your homes and backed up others in your expulsion. Those who will take them for friends are indeed the wrongdoers.” (60: 9)
In the verse 60:9 above, Qur’an is requiring believers not to make friends those non-Muslims “who fought you on account of your faith and drove you out of your homes and backed up others in your expulsion.” In the previous verse, Qur’an allows Muslims to be kind and equitable to those “who had neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes.” The question is: Where is Qur’an requiring Muslims not to make friends such non-Muslims who had neither fought against their faith nor driven them out of their homes? When the categorical statement made is that only those “who fought you on account of your faith and drove you out of your homes and backed up others in your expulsion” can’t be made your friends, how can we add anything else in this category. The above-quoted passage was the most appropriate occasion for the purpose of clarifying the Muslims relations with the non-Muslims. If Qur’an doesn’t clarify that Muslims cannot make even good non-Muslims their friends in this passage, then there is no reason why the assumption of the traditional view should be accepted.
If the claim that Muslims can’t make even good non-Muslims their friends was correct, Qur’an should have said something to this effect:
“God forbids you to make non-Muslims your friends. However, he does not forbid you to be kind (tabarru, birr) and equitable (tuqsitu, qist) to those who had neither fought against your faith nor driven you out of your homes. In fact God loves the equitable.” However, had that been the statement in the verse, the immediately following verse wouldn’t have been consistent with the rest of the passage: “God only forbids you to make friends (wali) those who fought you on account of your faith and drove you out of your homes and backed up others in your expulsion. Those who will take them for friends are indeed the wrongdoers.” (60: 9)
Imagine you are telling someone the following: “You can’t make thieves your friends; as for honest people, you can be good to them.” How can it be claimed that this statement is requiring that honest people too can’t be made friends? If there was another category of people who were required not to be made friends, that category should have been mentioned along with the mention of thieves.
On the basis of this understanding, I believe that the claim that Muslims are urged not to make Jew and Christian friends irrespective of the latter’s attitude towards Islam and Muslims is incorrect.
iii) Another problem I have with the traditional understanding is that if you go by what it says, Islam seems to be promoting tension and hatred amongst humans, whereas when you read Qur’an, you find that the Almighty wants humans to come close to one another as a family. If there is any differentiation in the eyes of God it is on the basis of piety. Qur’an says: “O mankind! We created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another. Surely the noblest of you in the sight of God is he who is the most righteous. God is All-Knowledgeable, All-Aware.” (49:13)
It is on the basis of the high status Islam attaches to piety and God-consciousness that Qur’an praises non-Muslims in several verses. For instance, Qur’an says:
“Among the people of the Book (Jews and Christians) there are those who if you trust them with a treasure, will return it to you; and among them there are those who, if you trust them with a dinar, will not return it to you, unless you keep standing over them.” (3:75)
“They are not all alike. Among the people of the Book there is a party who stand by their covenant; they recite the Word of God in the hours of night and prostrate themselves before Him. They believe in God and the Last Day, and enjoin good and forbid evil, and hasten to vie with one another in good works. And these are among the righteous.” (3:113)
“And surely among the People of the Book there are some who believe in God and in what has been sent down to you and in what was sent down to them, humbling themselves before Allah. They trade not the signs of God for a paltry price. It is these who shall have their reward with their Lord. Surely God is swift in settling account.” (3:199)
How can it be considered a correct view that while Qur’an is praising the people of the Book on the one hand and yet is desiring its followers to not befriend them?
iv) The following is another verse on which the traditional view is based: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers (Kafirin) rather than believers; if any do that in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution that ye may guard yourselves from them.” (3:28) The basic problem with the traditional interpretation of this verse (and many other similar verses) is that the word Kafir (plural: (Kuffar, Kafirun, Kafirin) has been understood to mean all non-Muslims. However, the correct understanding of the word Kafir is that he is a person who denies the message of God despite knowing that it is from Him. If we accept that all Jews and Christians are Kuffar, then it will have to be accepted that they are all the worst of all creatures according to Qur’an. The Book of God says: “Surely those who disbelieve (i.e. those who are Kuffar) from among the people of the Book and the Mushrikin (the polytheists) shall be in fire of hell, to dwell therein forever. They are the worst of all creatures.” (98:6) Why is Qur’an requiring Muslims to be kind and equitable to those (non-believers) who had neither fought against their faith nor driven them out of their homes, when they were worst of creatures? Why have some of them been praised so lavishly in the verses mentioned in point three above? Clearly, there is only one acceptable answer: The traditional understanding that all Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims are Kuffar is incorrect.
The Correct View
I believe that the correct view in this regard is that Muslims are required to maintain cordial and friendly relations with all good people, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, on the basis of their character and their behaviour towards Islam and good Muslims. If there are some such so-called Muslims around who are making fun of Islam, Muslims are expected not to be friendly with them too. On the other hand, if there are good non-Muslims who apart from being good humans are respectful to Islam, there is no harm in making them friends. In fact, Muslims should be friendly with them also with the purpose of bringing them closer to Islam.
Qur’an has clarified the reason why some Jews and Christians can’t be made friends in the following passage:
“O believers! Do not make your protecting friends those, from among the people who were given the Book before you and the unbelievers, who have made your religion a mockery or pastime, fear God if you are true believers. When you call for Salah (prayers) they make it as an object of mockery and pastime; this is because they are a people devoid of understanding.” (5:57-58)
It is the same instruction the Almighty has given to Muslims regarding the hypocrite fellow-Muslims as well. Qur’an says “He has already revealed for you in the Book that when you hear Allah’s revelations being denied or ridiculed by people, you must not sit with them unless they change the topic of their talk, otherwise you shall be considered guilty like them. Rest assured that God is going to gather the hypocrites and the unbelievers all together in hell.” (4:140) “What is the matter with you, why are you divided into two groups concerning the hypocrites, while God has cast them off on account of their misdeeds? Do you wish to guide those whom God has confounded? Whomever God has confounded you cannot find a way for them to be guided.” (4:88)
Thus Qur’an has mentioned the question of friendship to be decided only on the basis of the merit of an individual’s conduct and character rather than on a person’s apparent religious attachment. If a believer’s faith is in jeopardy while in the company of a bad Muslim, he should avoid his company, while if a believer’s character and faith are safe and secure in a non-Muslim’s friendship which can moreover result in that non-Muslim’s better understanding of Islam, that Muslim would do well to continue to make him his friend. The Almighty wants us to avoid the company of only such people whose “… real wish is to see that you become a disbeliever, as they have disbelieved, so that you may become exactly like them. So you should not take friends from their ranks unless they immigrate in the way of God…” (Qur’an; 4:89) The Qur’an clarifies in another passage that such devious people are only a few and not all the people of the Book. The Qur’an says: “O believers! If you were to obey a group of those who were given the Book, they will turn you back from belief to unbelief.” (Qur’an; 3:100)
Conclusion
Like in all other issues, Islam wants its followers to deal with the question of making friends too on the criterion of merit. A good Muslim can have friendship with all other good humans, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, so long as they respect his beliefs and not be a cause of threat to his spiritual and moral life4. He must avoid the company of those Muslims ands non-Muslims who have dubious character and who make fun of his religion.
The traditional Muslim understanding that requires Muslims to maintain a distance with the non-Muslims is based on an incorrect understanding of the relevant Qur’anic passages on the subject. The erroneous interpretation has stemmed from two basic mistakes committed by the traditional interpreters:
a) They have assumed that since one of the verses of Qur’an requires Muslims to stay away from making friends “the Jews” and “the Christians” (al-Yahud wa al-Nasaraa) their friends, it should be concluded that all Jews and Christians of the world were included in that category. The truth of the matter is that the context of the verse (as already explained) clearly suggests that the people referred to were a particular group of Jews and Christians. The words used for the purpose (al-Yahud and al-Nasaraa), if correctly translated, mean “these Jews” and “these Christians” i.e. who are creating the mischief mentioned in the relevant verses of the passage. The prefix “al” in Arabic is used for many purposes somewhat the same way as the definite article “the” in English. Like in a particular context the expression “the Muslim” would mean a particular group of Muslims, “the Jews” and “the Christians” (al-Yahud wa al-Nasaraa) means the particular group of Jews and Christians who were making fun of Muslims and were conspiring against them.
b) They have assumed that the word Kafir means all non-Muslims of the world. I have explained that the expression means only those people who deny the message of God despite knowing unmistakably that it is from Him. After the discontinuation of direct communication of God with man through Divine Revelation as a result of the God’s declaration that Muhammad5 is His last prophet, there is no way man can know whether or not a certain individual or group has rejected a message knowing it to be from God.
The fact is that Qur’an has declared that success in the hereafter shall be made available not only to Muslims but also to the well-meaning non-Muslims who were not Kafir: “Rest assured that Believers (Muslims), Jews, Christians and Sabians - whoever believes in God and the last day and perform good deeds - will be rewarded by their Lord; they will have nothing to fear or to regret.” (Qur’an; 2:62) How can the book that is giving the good news of everlasting success to a certain group of people ask some other people to not make them friends because they were not worthy of it?
References
Chapter 4 of Qur’an.
“If the enemy is inclined towards peace, do make peace with them, and put your trust in Allah. He is the One Who hears all , knows all.”
Usmani, Shabbir Ahmed; al-Qur’an al-Hakim; Karachi: Taj Company Ltd; 1959; p. 154.
Of course, to make friends is a matter of an individual’s personal choice. It is not necessary that all good people would make all other good humans they come in contact with their friends. The requirement of Islamic teaching is negative: A good Muslim shall not make a bad human his friend. The teachings are not – and cannot be – requiring him to make all good humans his friends by all means.
why worry about other things????
the prophet (saw) ordered to differentiate in the beard so stick to it, why drag in other things....
that is the whole point. Did he really say this? or have words been put into his mouth? and even he said it, what did he exactly mean with it? Or is our interpretation of his words influenced by our cultural beliefs?
apart from the Qur'an -as basic dogma of Islam- you can't just simple say that the Prophet said so and so, so just believe it. No! every other comment/instruction we get beyond the Qur'an is subject to the scrutiny as outlined above. And even if others have already scrutinized it before us, it still doesn't close it, because those persons scrutinizing it were just mere humans too like us.