Jump to content
Islamic Forum

Absolute truth

IF Guardian
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Absolute truth

  1. Great Freeoffice !

    Free, fast, efficient office suite with all basic features. Clear, traditional interface. Effective import and export of Microsoft formats, including password-protected files. FreeOffice consists of the three basic office apps: TextMaker, a word-processor; PlanMaker, a spreadsheet. This suite is fast, effective, and, overall, extremely well-designed. For the vast majority of users, FreeOffice does everything you need in an office suite Both MS Office and Microsoft Office deliver the most popular office programs - a spreadsheet builder, presentation maker, and a word processor. Most of the acceptable file types are interchangeable and you'll find several of the same features in both suites. There will always be features that differ in both suites, but it's hardly acceptable to sum up which is better than the other when both have such drastic yet similar abilities. Download SoftMaker FreeOffice for Windows and Linux for free. It is licensed for home and business use. After using it, you will agree that it is the best alternative to Microsoft Office. SoftMaker Office Mobile is the only office suite for Android smartphones and tablets that displays your documents exactly like they look on your PC. You can now download it for free. It reads and writes not only the old Microsoft formats DOC, XLS, and PPT seamlessly, but provides the same full-fidelity experience with the modern formats DOCX, XLSX, and PPTX that have been introduced with Microsoft Office 2007 to 2013. For windows It's Only 50 MB ! Free downloads: http://www.freeoffice.com/en/download-freeoffice-mobile-office
  2. Sadaqallah Ul Azeem

    Assalam alaikum. Here is the word sadaqa from the dictionary: صَدَق : قالَ الصّدْقَ ، كانَ صادِقاً be true ; say (tell ; sincere ; speak) the truth ; truthful صَدَق : be certain ; be confirmed ; be correct ; be definite ; be established ; be prove to be true ; be proved ; be right ; be turn out to be true http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=3&verse=95
  3. 200 Muslims Coverted As Hindus In Agra

    Nearly a dozen Indian Muslim families have fled their homes in Agra after 57 families were reportedly converted to Hinduism against their will. One slum resident, Salina, said she had no idea that it was a conversion ceremony. "During the ritual, suddenly we were made to do what the [Hindu] priest was doing. One Muslim man was even made to hold an idol in his hand. "After the ritual was over, the local activist told us that we had all become Hindus. We wanted to protest, but we were advised to keep quiet as we were told we would get a ration card and other amenities." Another resident Mumtaz, however, said that no-one had forced her to attend the ritual and that all those who attended had done so voluntarily. Ramzan Sheikh, a witness to the ritual, said there was a lot of fear in the area. "We are scared. Whatever happened, we never expected," he said. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-30429118
  4. 200 Muslims Coverted As Hindus In Agra

    Assalam alaiukum
  5. Linguistic Family Tree

    When linguists talk about the historical relationship between languages, they use a tree metaphor. An ancient source (say, Indo-European) has various branches (e.g., Romance, Germanic), which themselves have branches (West Germanic, North Germanic), which feed into specific languages (Swedish, Danish, Norwegian). Lessons on language families are often illustrated with a simple tree diagram that has all the information but lacks imagination. There’s no reason linguistics has to be so visually uninspiring. Minna Sundberg, creator of the webcomic Stand Still. Stay Silent, a story set in a lushly imagined post-apocalyptic Nordic world, has drawn the antidote to the boring linguistic tree diagram. http://bloggingtheology.org/2014/11/25/9622/
  6. The Injil - Im Confused ?

    Click here: You Have No Right to Translate Individuals’ Names! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon#Canons_of_various_Christian_traditions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Christian_biblical_canon Verses Deleted In Modern Bible Versions source
  7. Crucifiction Of Jesus

    What you say PROVE that you have absolutely no idea about the subject. ( I explained before that there is no reference in the quran whatsoever to the bible. Here is the ayat that you didn't read: 5:48 Sahih International And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ. Ibn Kathir quotes well known Qur'anic commentator Ibn Jarir Al Tabari as saying... Ibn Jarir said, "The Qur'an is trustworthy over the Books that preceded it. Therefore, whatever in these previous Books conforms to the Qur'an is true, and whatever disagrees with the Qur'an is false.'' (Tafsir Ibn Kathir,You can also see Al Tabari saying this himself in his commentary on Surah 2:41) Imam al-Tabari relates from the eminent Jurist Ibn Juraij (80-150 AH/699-767 CE) that if the people of the book quote something from their Bible that disagrees with the Qur'an then we reject it but if it agrees with the Qur'an then we accept it. Imam al-Bahgawi also quotes the opinion of Ibn Juraij in his commentary. (Tafsir Al Baghawi, 1/65) The Qur'an is the protector of the Gospel and Torah. But which Gospel and Torah? It is the original revelations sent to Jesus and Moses (peace be upon them) both and whatever of it survives today (e.g. prophecies of Muhammad peace be upon him to come) in the scriptures of the Christians and Jews today. So, what is meant here by the Gospel is the original revealed Book before it got corrupted and altered. And there is no way to judge by it except by conferring the Qur'an which is a protector over it; for it bears witness to what Allah has revealed in it and exposes what people falsely entered into and removed from it. Other commentators have stated that if the Christians judge by the Gospel then they are in a way accepting the Prophecies of Muhammad peace be upon him in the Gospel, which in turn leads them to accepting Islam. Surah 11:17 Prior to this (Quran), the book of Moses served as a guide, and was a blessing Surah 46:12 Prior to this, the book of Moses was the guide and mercy. This book, (the Qur'an) is in the Arabic language and it confirms and validates (the book of Moses). Ibn Kathir says in his commentary... This means that before the Qur'an, there was the Book of Musa, the Tawrah. (a guidance and a mercy) This means that Allah, the Exalted, revealed it to that Ummah as a leader for them and a guide for them to follow, as a mercy from Allah upon them. Therefore, whoever believed in it with true faith, then it would lead him to believe in the Qur'an as well. For this reason Allah said, (they believe therein) Then Allah, the Exalted, threatens those who reject the Qur'an, or any part of it, by saying, (but those of the sects that reject it, the Fire will be their promised meeting place.) This is directed towards everyone on the face of the earth who disbelieves in the Qur'an, whether they are idolators, disbelievers, People of the Scripture, or other sects from the descendants of Adam. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, ) We see that the Torah was meant as a guide for the people of Prophet Moses's (peace be upon him) time. However, now it is the Qur'an, which is the guide that all mankind must follow.. http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/refuting_the_argument_regarding_the_qur_an_ordering_the_jews_and_christians_to_judge_by_their_scriptures
  8. What Are The Benefits Of Islam?

    Merits of Islam
  9. Crucifiction Of Jesus

    He didn't say that at all. Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, performed miracles and invited the israelites to the same message of submission (Islaam), as did all of the prophets who preceded him. He was not God, nor was he the ‘Son of God’, but was the Messiah, an illustrious prophet of God. Jesus did not invite people to worship himself; rather, he called them to worship God, and he himself worshipped God. He confirmed the laws of the Torah which Prophet Moses taught; he lived by them, and instructed his disciples to follow them to the finest detail. http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/truejesus.htm
  10. Crucifiction Of Jesus

    Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified. It was the plan of Jesus’ enemies to crucify him, but God saved him and raised him up to Him. And the likeness of Jesus was put over another man. Jesus’ enemies took this man and crucified him, thinking that he was Jesus. God has said: ...They said, “We killed the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of God.” They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but the likeness of him was put on another man (and they killed that man)... (Quran, 4:157) Read also: http://www.missionislam.com/comprel/jesuscrucified.htm http://www.gawaher.com/topic/741407-the-crucifixion-tale-contradictions-and-problems/
  11. Crucifiction Of Jesus

    welcome to the forum This may help: http://www.gawaher.com/topic/741407-the-crucifixion-tale-contradictions-and-problems/
  12. The Injil - Im Confused ?

    There is no reference to the Bible in the Quran whatsoever. The Quran mentions the Taurat and the Injil . The Taurat is the book given to prophet Moses. This the equivalent of the Torah/Pentateuch of the Jews and Christians, since much of it was not written by prophet Moses. And the Taurat is definitely not the Old Testament since the OT includes dozens of books attributed to other prophets before Jesus. TORAH - "We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of messengers," (Sura 2:87). The Taurah of today,tells us " and moses died when..." PSALMS - "We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms," (4:163). The Psalms of today, there many Prayers from people who are not David! That proves the Psalms of today are corrupt since they have words of other men. The Injil is translated as the Gospel revealed to prophet Jesus. The Gospel given to Jesus, NOT Matthew, Luke or John. It is not that the Christians have changed the original, but rather they have the wrong book, altogether. "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the Taurah and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper. (The Noble Quran, 7:157)" "It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment be tween right and wrong). (The Noble Quran, 3:3)" "To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what God hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to God; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute; (The Noble Quran, 5:48)" "That which We have revealed to thee of the Book is the Truth,- confirming what was (revealed) before it: for God is assuredly- with respect to His Servants - well acquainted and Fully Observant. (The Noble Quran, 35:31)"
  13. Muhammad Knowledge Learned?

    There is a long and deep-rooted tradition in Western literature that views the Qur’an as the work of the Prophet. Thus, we will look at this issue, though extremely briefly, in light of well-documented historical facts, logic, as well as with respect to the Prophet’s personality, life and career. The Prophet Muhammad is perhaps the most fully documented person in antiquity and history. This fact enables us to examine closely the claim that he wrote the Qur’an himself. This is a topic of volumes, as scholars have discussed in detail hundreds of strong evidences that establish the divine origin of the Qur’an. Considering the scope of this booklet, we will mention just a few. First, it was well-known among the early Arabs of Mecca that the Prophet Muhammad did not read or write, and was not formally educated. The Qur’an itself states that the Prophet was unlettered, specifically in the sense that he could not read or write. No one in the Meccan community attempted to deny this claim of the Qur’an: “Believe, then, in God and His Messenger – the unlettered Prophet who believes in God and His words – and follow him, so that you might find guidance!” (7:158) As is recorded in his biography, when the angel Gabriel approached the Prophet for the first time at the age of 40, and revealed to him the first verse of the Qur’an, “Read!”, the Prophet’s response was that he was unable to read. Thus even at the start of revelation, the Prophet was in no position to compose a book. Indeed as the Qur’an states, the Prophet’s being unlettered was itself a matter of divine wisdom: “Never have you recited Scripture before this (Qur’an oh Prophet)! Nor have you transcribed one with your right hand. For then, the progenitors of falsehood would have had cause to doubt (the revelation).” (29:48) Second, in various instances in the life of the Prophet Muhammad where a problem arose, he was unable to find a solution until it was revealed to him by God. In many of these instances, the answer was delayed often causing the Prophet great anxiety. If the Prophet had devised the answers himself, why would he need to wait on revelation? Here are a few examples: · Once a group of people accused the Prophet’s wife Aisha of adultery. The slanderous accusations shook the community in Medina, and resulted in the Prophet separating from his wife temporarily. During this extremely difficult ordeal he did not know what to do. Finally, verses were revealed that established the innocence of Aisha and rebuked those who made the false accusations against her. · The leaders of Quraysh once asked the Prophet a few questions in order to test him and to see if he really is the Messenger of God. They asked about stories and issues, such as the Seven Sleepers, Dhul Qarnain, the nature of the spirit, etc. Weeks had passed and the Prophet would not give any answers, because he did not have knowledge of them at that time. As a result of the delay, the Prophet was accused of being a liar by the Quraysh. Finally, the Prophet received by revelation a whole chapter of the Qur’an, called the Cave (Chapter 18), as well as other verses, answering all the questions asked to the Prophet by the Quraysh. · In the early days of Islam, the Muslims used to face Jerusalem while praying. The Prophet wished and wanted to change the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca. But he did not instigate the change himself; instead, he waited for a command from his Lord, raising his head towards the heavens in anticipation. The Qur’an states: “We have seen you (O Prophet) often turn your face towards heaven…” (Qur’an 2:144). Thereafter God’s commands arrived, and Muslims immediately turned their faces towards the direction of Mecca, turning from North to South. In all of these incidents and many others the Prophet did not act until revelation came to him with an explicit answer or command. This was the case even though the delay caused him to be rebuked and accused of being a false Prophet. If the Qur’an were from the Prophet, surely he could have “revealed” the verses earlier. This shows the Quran is a revelation from God, and not from Muhammad’s own imagination. Third, the Arabs, both Muslims and non-Muslim, have testified to the high calibre and literal mastery of the Qur’an: · Umar bin al Khattab used to be a judge of the poetry festival in Mecca. His mastery of the Arabic language was superb. Nonetheless, when he heard a portion of the Qur’an, he was spellbound, and because of it embraced Islam. How could the Prophet produce such a literal masterpiece at the age of 40 when he had never shown such talent before? · Similarly, there were many others like At-Tufayl bin Amr al-Dawsi, Utbah bin Rabiha and others who had such experiences when they heard portions of the Qur’an. They would repeat statements such as, “I have heard words of such that I never heard before. By God, it is not poetry, nor magic, nor divination.” This was often their first impression. This shows that the Qur’an was something beyond the Prophet’s talent or genius, as its origin was other than the Prophet Muhammad. Fourth, there is a marked difference between the Prophet’s sayings and Qur’anic verses. The Prophet’s sayings are recorded in volumes, called hadith, which are more voluminous than the Qur’an. When he spoke, his sayings were not accompanied with any extraordinary experiences, but when he received the revelation he would often experience abnormal sensations. When verses were revealed to him, sometimes he would sweat even on cold days, his face would become red, his body would become heavy, etc. Was he just acting? Definitely not! How could he have lived such a pretentious and complicated life for 23 years? This is indeed the difference between the hadith and the Qur’an. As for the Qur’an, he received it by revelation from God verbatim, and as for the hadith, they were his own words. Another crucial point in this respect is the huge difference between the linguistic style of the Qur’an and that of hadith. A comparison of both suggests unequivocally that the author of the Qur’an is entirely different from that of the hadith. It is also recorded authentically that the Arabs themselves were surprised by the language of the Qur’an because the Prophet was not known to have composed any literal piece before its revelation. Clearly, the language of the Qur’an was not from Muhammad’s own tongue. Even non-Arabic speaking people can see this vast difference in style and language between the Qur’an and the hadith, even by reading translations. Fifth, a good portion of the Qur’an includes stories of previous Prophets and their nations. Always, the concluding remark is that the Prophet had no previous knowledge of any of those stories or historical events, and that he only knew of them through revelation, for example: · After relating the story of Moses and Pharaoh the Qur’an states: “You were not (there, O Prophet,) on the western mountainside (of Tur) when We decreed to Moses the Commandments. Nor were you (there among those) of the Children of israel who bore witness (to these events). Furthermore, We brought forth (many) generations (after Moses), such that the life spans (of heedlessness) that stretched over them grew (so very) long – (until they forgot God’s Covenant). Moreover, you were not (there with Moses when he was) dwelling among the people of Midian, conveying Our message unto them…” (28:44-45) · The Qur’an also states after the story of Jesus and Mary: “This account of something that was beyond the reach of your perception We [now] reveal unto you: for you were not with them when they drew lots as to which of them should be Mary's guardian, and you were not with them when they contended [about it] with one another.” (3:44) · It also states after the story of Joseph: “This is (but one) of the tidings of the unseen (past) that We reveal to you, (O Prophet). For you were not with them when they resolved (to execute) their (evil) affair, and while they were plotting (it).” (12:102) Verses like the above appear routinely after the stories in the Qur’an. Thus, if the Prophet had learned these stories from Jews and Christians, why should he ascribe them to God? Is he such a blatant liar? Sixth, the Qur’an severely criticized the Prophet on several issues: · The Prophet was once sitting with some of the leaders of Quraysh, inviting them to Islam. A blind man, Abdullah bin Umm Makhtum, who was already a Muslim, came to the Prophet to ask him some questions regarding Islam. The Prophet ignored him, as he was busy delivering the message of Islam to the leaders of Quraysh, hoping they would come to Islam. Thereupon the revelation came reproaching and reprimanding him: “He frowned and turned away because the blind man approached him. Yet for all you did know (O Muhammad) he might perhaps have grown in purity?” (80:1-3). · The Prophet used to love to eat honey. Once he refused to consume any honey after his wives discouraged him to do so, as a result of a quarrel they were having among themselves. God again reproached and reprimanded him: “O Prophet! Why do you, out of a desire to please [one or another of] your wives impose [on yourself] a prohibition of something that God has made lawful to you?” (66:1). · At the time of the battle of Tabuk, some hypocrites came and asked the Prophet to excuse them from participating in the campaign. The merciful Prophet accepted their excuse. Thereupon revelation came down upon him again reproaching and reprimanding him: “May God pardon you (O Prophet)! Why did you grant them permission (to stay at home) before it had become obvious to you as to who was speaking truth and (before) you came to know (who were) the liars” (9:43). There are many other incidents in which the Prophet was reproached and reprimanded by God. The logical question here is why would the Prophet make up these verses? Even if someone had revealed these verses to him, why would he retain them while having a firm belief that these verses will be recited and read throughout the ages? The logical and factual answer is that these are not the words of the Prophet, and he is not the author of the Qur’an. Seventh, one of the major themes of the Qur’an is that the source of the Qur’an is God Himself. The Prophet did not have any right to add or subtract from what had been revealed: If he (Muhammad) had dared to attribute some of (his own) sayings unto Us, we would indeed have seized him by his right hand and would indeed have cut his life-vein.” (69:44-46) If the Prophet was really the author of the Qur’an, why did he have to state these words? Was he a sheer liar to the extent that he both concocted the Qur’an and devised threats against himself? History and logic would refute this claim, especially since the Prophet was known never to have uttered a lie in his whole life. Before Prophethood, even the pagan idolaters attested to his truthfulness, and he was known as the “Trustworthy” and“Truthful” .Are we to believe that suddenly, at the age of 40, the Prophet not only began to utter a long string of lies but that these lies were against God Himself? Simply illogical! http://mercyprophet.org/mul/node/3329 Read also: http://rasoulallah.net/index.php/en/articles/article/6900
  14. Atheists Are Hypocrites

    Finnish study suggests that non-believers become emotionally aroused when daring God to harm their loved ones. This piece originally appeared on Pacific Standard. The heads and hearts of atheists may not be on precisely the same page. That’s the implication of recently published research from Finland, which finds avowed non-believers become emotionally aroused when daring God to do terrible things. “The results imply that atheists’ attitudes toward God are ambivalent, in that their explicit beliefs conflict with their affective response,” concludes a research team led by University of Helsinki psychologist Marjaana Lindeman. Its study is published in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. Lindeman and her colleagues describe two small-scale experiments. The first featured 17 Finns, recruited online, who expressed high levels of belief, or disbelief, in God. They read out loud a series of statements while skin conductance data was collected via electrodes placed on two of their fingers. Some of the statements were direct dares to a deity (“I dare God to make my parents drown”). Others were similarly disturbing, but did not reference God (“It’s OK to kick a puppy in the face”). Still others were bland and neutral (“I hope it’s not raining today”). The arousal levels of the believers and non-believers followed precisely the same pattern: Higher for both the God dares and otherwise unpleasant statements, and lower for the neutral ones. Compared to the atheists, the believers reported feeling more uncomfortable reciting the God dares. But skin conductance data revealed the underlying emotional reactions of the two groups were essentially the same. This suggests that taunting God made the atheists more upset than they were letting on (even to themselves). Of course, perhaps it wasn’t the presence of God, but rather the subject matter of the statements (such as the death of their parents) that caused the atheists’ emotional arousal. The second experiment was designed to test that hypothesis. It featured 19 Finnish atheists, who participated in an expanded version of the first experiment. It included 10 additional statements—variations on the God dares which excluded any mention of supernatural forces. For example, in addition to “I dare God to turn all my friends against me,” they read out loud the statement: “I wish all of my friends would turn against me.” The results: The atheists showed greater emotional arousal when reading the God-related statements than while reading the otherwise nearly identical sentences that omitted the almighty. To the researchers, this indicates that “even atheists have difficulty daring God to harm themselves and their loved ones.” “There are at least four potential explanations for these findings,” Lindeman and her colleagues write. The simplest and most provocative is that “atheists’ explicit beliefs may differ from the implicit reactions that exist outside of conscious awareness.” But other possibilities are equally plausible. Atheists “may have found using the word God stressful because others, possibly their friends and family, do take God seriously,” they note. Alternatively, they may have found the idea of God “absurd or aversive,” leading to the heightened emotional response. Finally, the researchers note, “although atheists did not currently believe in God, they may have been influenced by their own previous beliefs.” They point to research from 2006 that found three-quarters of American atheists were once believers. Perhaps the emotional response measured in this study is an echo of that previous belief. If so, it suggests that even for committed non-believers, it’s difficult to totally erase the idea of God from one’s psyche. http://www.salon.com/2013/04/27/do_atheists_secretly_believe_in_god_partner/
  15. Atheists Are Hypocrites

    Richard Dawkins defends “mild pedophilia,” says it does not cause “lasting harm” Dawkins highlights a weakness in Atheist philosophy. Namely, its inability to define morality outside of whatever is popular in the status quo’ By KATIE MCDONOUGH (reported in Salon) The biologist and author described the sexual abuse that occurred among his former classmates as “mild touching up” In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,” which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes “lasting harm.” Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair. “I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said. Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.” Child welfare experts responded to Dawkins’ remarks with outrage — and concern over their effect on survivors of abuse. As noted by the Religion News Service, Peter Watt, director of child protection at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, called Dawkins’ defense of sexual assault “a terrible slight” to victims of such abuse. “Mr. Dawkins seems to think that because a crime was committed a long time ago we should judge it in a different way,” Watt continued. “But we know that the victims of sexual abuse suffer the same effects whether it was 50 years ago or yesterday.” http://thedebateinitiative.com/2014/06/04/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-says-it-does-not-cause-lasting-harm/
  16. Boko Haram In Africa

    “Boko Haram” and the Culture of Coercive Disapproval By Asadullah Ali “Boko Haram” is some group somewhere in Africa doing something wrong while claiming to be Islamic. That’s about as much I knew or cared to know when I heard the news of some school girls being kidnapped. Not that I’m unsympathetic, but I didn’t much think it had anything to do with me or what I believed — naturally then, my interests would go no further than thinking this a horribly immoral act and hoping justice would be delivered by the proper authorities in the region. However, much to my dismay, I and the rest of the Muslim world are routinely called upon to denounce acts of violence in the name of Islam, for no other reason than the fact that we are somehow responsible. And this is why I refuse to speak out; I should not be held responsible in any way for the actions and beliefs of others simply because we share the same label. By proxy, I refuse to give in to a narrative perpetuated by a culture of coercive disapproval, which threatens to place me in the same camp as extremists simply because they do not happen to hear my voice of opposition every time the media decides to highlight another act of violence in the middle east or elsewhere. Every time I stand up and say “that’s not me”, I am implicitly giving in to the idea that I am never free to define myself; I am never free of guilt. Always having to defend myself is not indicative of a free identity, but of a person on trial, whose jury doesn’t operate on the principle of “innocent until proven otherwise.” The fact is, that while there are certainly many acts being perpetuated in the name of Islam, Islam has little to nothing to do with much of anything in this day and age: whether positive or negative. The truth is out there for all to see. The Islamophobes and the critics will continuously point to the “Islamic countries” and their problems, claiming that “Sharia” is what rules over those populations, but anyone with a bit of common sense and Google will see otherwise: Sharia rules over nothing. All “Islamic countries” are governed by civil law; even the supposedly strictest nations, Saudi Arabia, a juristic monarchy, and Iran, a Platonist styled philosopher king republic, are concepts unheard of in the history of a traditional Islamic polity. “One-law-for-all” was never a concept that the Sharia applied, nor was voting ever something implemented on a mass scale. The Sharia was also always tied to a specific madhab (school of thought), whereas in Saudi Arabia, jurists bypass many rulings in favor of corporate-cratic kings who prefer holding hands with Western power elites in exchange for petro-dollars. This fact also exposes another truth that Islamophobes and liberalist fascists might find shockingly embarrassing: for the most part, secular principles rule this world. Calls to “police” or otherwise control our own fellow Muslims are calls to vigilantism; the very thing these “vanguards of freedom” often chastise terrorists and insurgents for. Most Muslims are civilians under a secular state; the only people who need to do policing are the police. Apparently, this logic isn’t enough for the phobes and fascists to understand, because it’s unworthy of justifying scapegoating people for their own problems– faltering economies and over-inflated military industrial complexes hell-bent on importing democracy to the rest of the world at the expense of thousands of lives and domestic grievances. Perhaps it would be overkill to mention that these same polities, considered as beacons of civilization, are the ones funding the very countries that produced the cave-dwelling terrorists to begin with; black gold and the Sauds luxuries are apparently worth more than the 3000+ lives taken on September 11, 2001. In the end, the people who should be speaking out and running checks on their own societies, are those that believe in “a government by the people, for the people”. Boko Haram is not my government, nor is it part of my government, but I can think of many governments and its people that make Boko Haram look far more appealing.
  17. Boko Haram In Africa

    They are misguided.
  18. Any Source To Reply To Atheist ?

    salam alaikum on..
  19. Tour With The Darwinists !

    This topic is for miscellaneous darwinism-related information in sha Allah.. Don't you understand how microbes turned to humans ???!!!! You need to educate yourself on biology... Wait ! http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v496/n7446/full/496419a.html Philip Ball’s opinion piece in this week’s Nature, the most popular science magazine in the world, is news not because he stated that we don’t fully understand how evolution works at the molecular level, but because he urged his fellow evolutionists to admit it. On this 60th anniversary of the discovery of the DNA double helix, Ball reviews a few of the recent findings that have rebuked the evolution narrative that random mutations created the biological world. But it’s a Fact Anyway ?!
  20. Atheists Are Hypocrites

    The megapixel count of the eye is still a rough estimate, it does not take into consideration many other factors such as the focal length, the dynamic range, light sensitivity, stability etc. Which no doubt prove the eye far superior than any other camera. Incomparable. Glory be to Allah the creator.
  21. Tour With The Darwinists !