Ummah.com Forum - Islamic Content

[Mark Corrigan]

Still, the Medieval Caliphate was different than 7th-century Arabia...the greatest era of Islam was by far among the least "pure".

They're idiots who don't understand their own religion.

Oh, clearly. But idealising the past is something common to all reactionary fuckwits.

 

[Online Violence]

Oh, clearly. But idealising the past is something common to all reactionary fuckwits.

Exactly, they understand their religion perfectly, just not it's history. It's like this Moroccan dude who was trying to tell me Averroes was a great muslim philosopher and one of the ways the lowly barbaric Europeans got a bit of Roman knowledge transferred to them. And I asked him you realize the only reason we know the works of Averroes is precisely because of Euro's conquering back the Spanish peninsula? All of his works were condemned as haram and he was pursued as a heretic. Why is he known only through his translations and not his original works? It's a bit like claiming Galileo as a christian intellectual. It's accurate but it doesn't tell the whole story. Don't even get me started on Avicenna.

There are differing opinions on the fading away of the Islamic golden age, most bringing up the Mongol invasions as the final death knell. I say the real culprit is the closing in of the muslim mind on itself, ironically exactly the same impulse driving the fanatics of today. Al-Ghazali is probably one of the most important figures in muslim history and one of the figure-heads of this movement, this ideal of returning to properly muslim values without the taint of godless kufr philosophies. The Incoherence of the Philosophers, a properly orwellian masterpiece of a title, and the Asharite philosophy it championed are like a list of reasons explaining how the Islamic world managed to stagnate intellectually for hundreds of years while the West surged ahead, despite Islam's relative headstart.

Is it REALLY that important for people to be a certain religion in order to be something? That's flawed reasoning. I'm Muslim too, but I don't go forcing people to convert. Whether you want to convert or not, more power to you. In the end, it's not my business to deal with.

Ah yes, the old "there is no compulsion in Islam". Do you really believe that?

 

[StarvingAutist]

Oh, clearly. But idealising the past is something common to all reactionary fuckwits.

StarvingAutist's Law:

All reactionary groups and movements are virtually identical under the hood. The only difference is the coat of paint.

 

[Internet War Criminal]

Ah yes, the old "there is no compulsion in Islam". Do you really believe that?

There's no compulsion in Islam, you can perfectly live your life as you wish even if you are not a Muslim when you live in a Muslim country that follows Sharia you just pay exorbitant taxes and live in humiliating conditions with restrained religious rights




well unless you're an idol worshiper because then yeah its Islam or death.

 

[Mark Corrigan]

Ah yes, the old "there is no compulsion in Islam". Do you really believe that?

In the Umayyad caliphate days, conversions to Islam were discouraged because they meant less tax revenues.

 

[Internet War Criminal]

In the Umayyad caliphate days, conversions to Islam were discouraged because they meant less tax revenues.

Not just tax revenues but also to keep Islam a mainly Arabic movement. There was a major caste system, and in many ways there still is one (look at the biggest Muslim countries in the world, and compare where the power centers of the religion are located by contrast)

 

[FlamingPie]

Exactly, they understand their religion perfectly, just not it's history. It's like this Moroccan dude who was trying to tell me Averroes was a great muslim philosopher and one of the ways the lowly barbaric Europeans got a bit of Roman knowledge transferred to them. And I asked him you realize the only reason we know the works of Averroes is precisely because of Euro's conquering back the Spanish peninsula? All of his works were condemned as haram and he was pursued as a heretic. Why is he known only through his translations and not his original works? It's a bit like claiming Galileo as a christian intellectual. It's accurate but it doesn't tell the whole story. Don't even get me started on Avicenna.

There are differing opinions on the fading away of the Islamic golden age, most bringing up the Mongol invasions as the final death knell. I say the real culprit is the closing in of the muslim mind on itself, ironically exactly the same impulse driving the fanatics of today. Al-Ghazali is probably one of the most important figures in muslim history and one of the figure-heads of this movement, this ideal of returning to properly muslim values without the taint of godless kufr philosophies. The Incoherence of the Philosophers, a properly orwellian masterpiece of a title, and the Asharite philosophy it championed are like a list of reasons explaining how the Islamic world managed to stagnate intellectually for hundreds of years while the West surged ahead, despite Islam's relative headstart.

...

1. Unfortunately, while Averroes was certainly less tight-assed than your regular Muslim philosopher, he still embraced Plato's endorsement of the censorship of literature.

2. Not surprisingly, one of Avicenna's critics was Al-Ghazali himself, who wanted to tax the shit out of Avicenna's followers.

 

[Chemical snorfare]

I've been trying to find a cartoon I saw years ago.

It was specifically about Muslims but could be used for any religion.

I couldn't find the cartoon so I'll try to describe it

Panel 1: Muslim is reading a website that says "there are 50 differing interpretations of Islam"

Panel 2: He thinks "this is crazy, I am going to research the true origins of the faith and bring these disparate ideas together into one true faith".

Panel 3: Website now reads "there are 51 differing interpretations of Islam".

 

[ActualKiwi]

I've been trying to find a cartoon I saw years ago.

It was specifically about Muslims but could be used for any religion.

I couldn't find the cartoon so I'll try to describe it

Panel 1: Muslim is reading a website that says "there are 50 differing interpretations of Islam"

Panel 2: He thinks "this is crazy, I am going to research the true origins of the faith and bring these disparate ideas together into one true faith".

Panel 3: Website now reads "there are 51 differing interpretations of Islam".

Sounds like a modified XKCD comic. This one in particular:

 

[Emperor Julian]

I've always seen the issues of Islam as a larger critique of Abrahamic Monotheism. The idea of a single unified perfect truth being channeled through a mind as fallible and subjective as a human will inevitably lead to sectarian divisions. It's a principle which is devastating in the long run because it genuinely matters that you think the other guy is wrong.

 

[AnOminous]

It's a principle which is devastating in the long run because it genuinely matters that you think the other guy is wrong.

That doesn't seem to be bad in and of itself. What's bad is the lack of a principle that "it's okay for someone else to be wrong."

 

[Pigeon On A Stick]

That doesn't seem to be bad in and of itself. What's bad is the lack of a principle that "it's okay for someone else to be wrong."

In fact, the Ten Commandments represented in the Torah state that "Thou shalt not kill", whereas the ones in the Koran state that "Thou shalt not kill without cause".

 

[Internet War Criminal]

In fact, the Ten Commandments represented in the Torah state that "Thou shalt not kill", whereas the ones in the Koran state that "Thou shalt not kill without cause".

No, the Ten Commandments say 'Thou shall not murder'. There's a big difference.

 

[Emperor Julian]

That doesn't seem to be bad in and of itself. What's bad is the lack of a principle that "it's okay for someone else to be wrong."

This is true, you have to strike a balance between moral absolutism and nihilism and take into account that you might be the one in the wrong while still arguing your position with the conviction which comes from critically viewing your own beliefs. which is frankly, hard.

 

[The Great Chandler]

Next thing you notice, they'll interpret Islam as anarchy.

 

[AnOminous]

In fact, the Ten Commandments represented in the Torah state that "Thou shalt not kill", whereas the ones in the Koran state that "Thou shalt not kill without cause".

The Hebrew for that is closer to "Thou shalt not murder" than simply killing, though it would also cover other kinds of mayhem that don't necessarily involve killing.

After all, the Torah is full of all sorts of other commandments not just to kill, but to commit what would today be called genocide.

The gist of the commandment is essentially the same, not to engage in socially proscribed, unjustified mayhem. The Jews of the Bible were about as far from pacifists as you can get.

 

[Tranhuviya]

I kept reading the "rep power" below each user's username as "rape power".

 

[Internet War Criminal]

I kept reading the "rep power" below each user's username as "rape power".

That'd be like a messageboard for fish announcing 'breathes under water' under usernames

 

[HG 400]

No, the Ten Commandments say 'Thou shall not murder'. There's a big difference.

The Hebrew for that is closer to "Thou shalt not murder" than simply killing, though it would also cover other kinds of mayhem that don't necessarily involve killing.

After all, the Torah is full of all sorts of other commandments not just to kill, but to commit what would today be called genocide.

The gist of the commandment is essentially the same, not to engage in socially proscribed, unjustified mayhem. The Jews of the Bible were about as far from pacifists as you can get.

afaik when the bible was first translated to ye olde english, the word 'kill' specifically meant murder, and it's since strayed from that definition but a bunch of fag denominations refused to update their bibles because they like it better this way or w/e

 

[Internet War Criminal]

Can you blame them for holding on to the past like that though?

I mean things were a lot simpler and it was legal to hunt the welsh for sport and discriminate against the Irish. Sounds good to me