Sorry for the free thoughts interuption, but this seems to me to be important that people should understand, so I went for max exposure.

Islam is a deen. (http://www.islam1.org/khutub/Defn__of_Deen_&_Islam.htm)

I am personally disgusted by religion, but a "deen" takes my disgust for religion and maxes it straight out.

A deen, according to the link - is literally translated as subjegation.

The word Qur’an translates as total submission and obediance.

Islam makes no bones about it by its very definition:

It is about power.

And the brokership and seeking of power for power's sake, is the most disgusting, loathsome aspect of humanity IMO (though a necessary evil).

Certainly one can argue "no, it's about sprituality" - to which I call "bullshit". An individual can make it so, and it can be sold to the indivual for its "spiritual value", but Islam itself is clearly about power.

While religions are arguably the same way, they sugar coat it to some extent - flirting with the idea that Islam takes to the extreme.

So in some ways I respect Islam more than religions, as at least it's not fucking around. That's also what makes it so dangerous and just straight up sickening to me.

Either way, I think people should try to understand the difference between a religion (limited to one's spiritual side, as determined by themselves) and a deen, (all encompassing).

Comments?

*sigh*

I wish Allah's Mathematic's / Ghassan Khanafani still came here.

Islam is not about power or spirituality, it is about refined individualism.

Deen is literally translated as authority or dominance.

Islam is the derived from the root word Salima which means peace.

Islam is the religion of submission to the authority of God.

Why submission? Because there is no intercession, and no one is accountable to another, all are answerable or accountable only to God. There is no shouldering of another's sins or piety. You are, literally, on your own.

Qur'an is literally translated as recitation, it is not meant to be read but recited.

The authority of God is 3 fold:

1. His creation, a continuous, changing phenomenon.

2. His natural laws, which control the universe.

3. His moral laws, which define ideal behaviour.

A Muslim, or one who submits to deen (the authority of God), is one who explores and utilises the creation of God within the bounds of the natural and moral laws.

PS. I hope you realise that anyone can publish on the internet and *gasp* may be ill-informed or even *choke* have no actual idea about the religious philosophy, even if he/she is *gag* a Muslim.

Did you even bother to read the link, or notice from whom it orginated?

It was an imam.

(Friday speech was delivered by Imam Mohamed Baianonie at the Islamic Center of Raleigh, N. C., on December 27,1996)

While religions are arguably the same way
I argue that many of them do the same thing, isn't it just semantics? Was Koresh any less subjugating?

Islam is not about power or spirituality, it is about refined individualism.

?

Power.

Deen is literally translated as authority or dominance.

POWER.

(subjegation is the result of dominance and authority)

Islam is the derived from the root word Salima which means peace.

Peace through power.

Islam is the religion of submission to the authority of God.

No, it is a deen.

Why submission? Because there is no intercession, and no one is accountable to another, all are answerable or accountable only to God. There is no shouldering of another's sins or piety. You are, literally, on your own.

That is not a reason to submit, but whatever. Not here to argue about god.

You are subject to islamic law, no? If so, you're not on your own at all, but subjegated by imams and holy dudes and such.

Qur'an is literally translated as recitation, it is not meant to be read but recited.

So you're saying the quoted translation is just wrong? I'll see if I can get some more input on that one.

The authority of God is 3 fold:

1. His creation, a continuous, changing phenomenon.

2. His natural laws, which control the universe.

3. His moral laws, which define ideal behaviour.

Okay.

A Muslim, or one who submits to deen (the authority of God), is one who explores and utilises the creation of God within the bounds of the natural and moral laws.

Who established the moral laws? It is said that god does it? Okay, but "as recorded in the Qur'an? Which has to be interpreted by people, who assert their authority by wrapping themselves in the power of the deen?

PS. I hope you realise that anyone can publish on the internet and *gasp* may be ill-informed or even *choke* have no actual idea about the religious philosophy, even if he/she is *gag* a Muslim.

I hope YOU realize your condescending tone negatively impacts your chances of communicating anything of value.

I argue that many of them do the same thing, isn't it just semantics? Was Koresh any less subjugating?

The difference seems to me to be of scope, but certainly since they cover similar grounds the scope can be pushed or retracted to overlap of definitions. I need to think about it a bit more to hypothesize if the difference is fundamental.

Perhaps the scope is a result of the empowerment afforded by the influx of oil revenue?

The scope of US power (now in the hands of apocolyptic evangelical Christians) is also global, just by comparison.

So you think cheney is an apocolyptic evangelical christian?

I think he's the spawn of Satan.

?

Power.



POWER.

(subjegation is the result of dominance and authority)

.

Peace through power.

Like the government? Islam is a social religion, with indications of possible resolutions for every conceivable instance. There are no hard and fast rules, as it is supposed to be applied with the use of reason, a faculty sadly lacking in the majority.



No, it is a deen.



That is not a reason to submit, but whatever. Not here to argue about god.

You are subject to islamic law, no? If so, you're not on your own at all, but subjegated by imams and holy dudes and such.


Yada yada;

There are two major concepts in Islam, deen and duniya.

Literally, God and the world.
One either lives for the pleasure of faith in God (i.e. following his authority) or for the pleasures of the world (i.e. materialism and self-interest to the exclusion of interests of the world and its inhabitants).

So what is deen?

2.177 It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards the East and the West*i.e. in prayer*, but righteousness is this that one should believe in Allah and the last day and the angels and the Book and the prophets, and give away wealth out of love for Him to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and the beggars and for (the emancipation of) the captives, and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate; and the performers of their promise when they make a promise, and the patient in distress and affliction and in time of conflicts-- these are they who are true (to themselves) and these are they who guard (against evil).

That's it.

Imams do not make the law. The government makes the law, even in Islamic countries; and they are free to pick and choose.


So you're saying the quoted translation is just wrong? I'll see if I can get some more input on that one.

Yup



Who established the moral laws? It is said that god does it? Okay, but "as recorded in the Qur'an? Which has to be interpreted by people, who assert their authority by wrapping themselves in the power of the deen?

Same way the governemnt "interprets" the law etc etc.



I hope YOU realize your condescending tone negatively impacts your chances of communicating anything of value.

Wasn't meant to be such; just surprising how many people don't realise that there is no qualification for being a Muslim and even a goat herder who regularly conducts prayers in the desert can be called an imam (literal meaning leader, vernacular religious leader, or one who leads in prayer). And there are no qualifying exams for posting religious opinions on the net. And don't even get me started on the vested interests of fundamentalists.

Imam:
http://lexicorient.com/e.o/imam.htm

The congregational prayer performed in the mosque is supposed to have a leader, and this person is called "imam." In the standard interpretation, being imam is not a profession, nor is it a qualification: The imam is imam only as long as he is leading the prayer.
Any respected Muslim who is normally well-trained in leading prayer, as-Salat, can be an imam. In general, it is the most learned and most respected person in the assembly who is offered the honour of being imam.
However, in modern times, many mosques have made their imam into something more: an employed leader of the congregation, a counterpart of a priest, nothing less. The imam may be a spokesman for the members of the congregation and an adviser in all questions that relate somehow to religion.

Sam, you make 22 posts per day? That must be some kind of record.

Sam, you make 22 posts per day? That must be some kind of record.

More actually, its the only way to kill time in the lab between experiments. :)

I'm here from 8 to 10 or 12. I have no life at present, until Dec maybe :(

I do the same thing.

I do the same thing.

Does it get any better than this? :D

Islam is not about power or spirituality, it is about refined individualism.

Mohammedanism is about control and subjugation. Mecca was a perfect example.

Islam is the religion of submission to the authority of God.

If that were the case anyone could simply walk away from Mohammedanism without fearing for their lives.

The authority of God is 3 fold:

1. His creation, a continuous, changing phenomenon.

"Then He turned to the heaven, which was only smoke at that time. He said to the heaven and the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." -- Sura 41:11

Have not the disbelievers seen that the heavens and the earth were one piece and We parted them?
And we made every living thing from water. Will they not then believe? -- Sura 21:30"

Aside from the fact those two tenets contradict one another, the universe was not created from smoke.

2. His natural laws, which control the universe.

Natural laws break down in black holes.

3. His moral laws, which define ideal behaviour.

"Now when you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks until you overcome them fully..." (47:4).

"O you who have attained to faith! Fight against those unbelievers who are near you and let them find you adamant, and know that God is with those who are conscious of Him" (9:123).

"O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be adamant with them... " (66:73).

"Slay the pagans wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place..." (9:5).

Mohammedanism is about control and subjugation. Mecca was a perfect example.



If that were the case anyone could simply walk away from Mohammedanism without fearing for their lives.


Been through this before; eat four almonds every morning and drink a glass of milk. It's an old wives therapy for improving memory. Dunno if it works for old whines.


"Then He turned to the heaven, which was only smoke at that time. He said to the heaven and the earth: "Come ye together, willingly or unwillingly." -- Sura 41:11

Have not the disbelievers seen that the heavens and the earth were one piece and We parted them?
And we made every living thing from water. Will they not then believe? -- Sura 21:30"

Aside from the fact those two tenets contradict one another, the universe was not created from smoke.


Since I'm not an expert on astronomy or creation, I could not say. However, I'm assuming that since the disbelievers came after the heavens, both the events could have separate chronologies and might refer to two completely different events.

And you know as much about the origin of the universe as this guy here:

click (http://proliberty.com/observer/bush-finger.jpg)

Natural laws break down in black holes.

I believe the natural laws are relevant only where we are to encounter them.
I doubt we'll be visiting many black holes.

"Now when you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks until you overcome them fully..." (47:4).

"O you who have attained to faith! Fight against those unbelievers who are near you and let them find you adamant, and know that God is with those who are conscious of Him" (9:123).

"O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be adamant with them... " (66:73).

"Slay the pagans wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place..." (9:5).

Take 8 almonds. Four may not be enough.

Been through this before; eat four almonds every morning and drink a glass of milk. It's an old wives therapy for improving memory. Dunno if it works for old whines.

Since I'm not an expert on astronomy or creation, I could not say. However, I'm assuming that since the disbelievers came after the heavens, both the events could have separate chronologies and might refer to two completely different events.

Old wives tales and relgious propaganda appear to be the only things you're an expert.

I believe the natural laws are relevant only where we are to encounter them.
I doubt we'll be visiting many black holes.

Hence the problem, you "believe."

Homines quicquam credent.

Homines quicquam credent.

I believe (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060724-110410-8309r.htm) you.

003.004

Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.

003.004

Then those who reject Faith in the Signs of Allah will suffer the severest penalty, and Allah is Exalted in Might, Lord of Retribution.

Surah al-Imran (3:3-4)

It is He who sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat and the Injeel (Torah and Gospel), aforetime as a guidance to mankind. And he sent down the criterion (of judgement between right and wrong). Truly, those who disbelieve in the Ayats ( which can mean proofs/evidence/verses/lessons/signs/revelations) of God, for them there is a severe torment; and Allah is Almighty, All able of Retribution.

Imran was the name of Mary's (mother of Jesus or Esau as Muslims call him) father; this is the chapter on Imran's family and is a direction that the Quran is a confirmation of the Torah and Bible. The surah is directed towards the Christian people in Medina (where this verse was revealed). It goes on to talk about past events (like the Pharoah) and talks about the importance of the spiritual over the material.

Everyone knows I'm no fan of the Abrahamic religions, but I don't see a lot of reason to single Islam out for special flaming. Islam originated about six hundred years later than Christianity and it's been tracking about six hundred years behind Christianity in its evolution. A clique of spirituality, a corrupt bureaucracy, a matter of personal piety, they've both gone through the same phases. Take a good look at the Christendom of the 15th Century and you'll find that the details are different but the overall effect of their presence on this planet is just about the same. Those are the people who obliterated two entire civilizations. So far the Muslims have only wiped out one (Egypt).

According to that calendar Islam is just about due for its Reformation.

Surah al-Imran (3:3-4)

It is He who sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat and the Injeel (Torah and Gospel), aforetime as a guidance to mankind. And he sent down the criterion (of judgement between right and wrong). Truly, those who disbelieve in the Ayats ( which can mean proofs/evidence/verses/lessons/signs/revelations) of God, for them there is a severe torment; and Allah is Almighty, All able of Retribution.

And if they do not know of Allah, but are not tormented?

Doesn't the above define them as tormented rather than making a judgement based on observation?

Imran was the name of Mary's (mother of Jesus or Esau as Muslims call him) father; this is the chapter on Imran's family and is a direction that the Quran is a confirmation of the Torah and Bible. The surah is directed towards the Christian people in Medina (where this verse was revealed). It goes on to talk about past events (like the Pharoah) and talks about the importance of the spiritual over the material.

It also goes on to instruct one to smite the necks of the unbelievers.

Everyone knows I'm no fan of the Abrahamic religions, but I don't see a lot of reason to single Islam out for special flaming.

I mostly started it because I find the idea of the deen vs. religion, quite interesting. Then I started thinking about how the deen is religion in pure form. Then I started thinkign about how the details of the religion don't really matter, as it's really just stuff that people use to justify their bullshit.

Then, other stuff. Blah *snore*.

And if they do not know of Allah, but are not tormented?

Since they were Christians, they did.

Doesn't the above define them as tormented rather than making a judgement based on observation?

It's a scriptural verse not a newspaper article. The verse directly addresses the Christians of Medina to say that the Quran is a reminder that follows the Torah aand Injeel. What observation are you talking about?

It also goes on to instruct one to smite the necks of the unbelievers.

Its a topical verse. The Jews and Christians are not considered disbelievers. The pagans (of the Qureysh tribe), who transmuted the religion and worshipped 300 idols are.

Al-Imran:

The chapter was revealed in Medina and is either the second or third in Medinan revelation. Almost all of it also belongs to the 3rd year of the Hijrah with the possible exception of verse 61 which mentions Mubāhalah and therefore might have been revealed during the visit of the Najrān Christian deputation which was occurred in the 10th year of the Hijrah. Evidence for that theory is, however, scant. This chapter primarily focuses on the departure of prophethood from the Mosaic dispensation.

The Sura has two major messages each discussed in one of two sections. The first section, 3:1-120, guides as to how to resist temptation and immorality stemming from external sources and affirming the faith. Examples: 3, 14, 84 and 120.

The second section, verses 3:121-200, guides as to how to resist immorality from within. Examples: 103, Asking to unite and not hate and Culminating with 200.

wiki

Its a topical verse. The Jews and Christians are not considered disbelievers. The pagans (of the Qureysh tribe), who transmuted the religion and worshipped 300 idols are.

Topical? In that Mohammed demanded belief in Islam or die?

Jews and Christians ARE considered disbelievers of Islam, or have you some other definition for 'disbeliever?'

Religon is nothing but a Death Cult. Buddism is the only one that makes sense to me. To bad it's a very depressing Religon though:(

Indeed, eastern religons make more sense because they emphasize on logic among humans beings,nature and the universe.

Topical?

Jews and Christians ARE considered disbelievers of Islam, or have you some other definition for 'disbeliever?'

Islamic scholars generally divide the sections and verses of the Qur'an into two groups: the verses revealed in Mecca, and the verses revealed in Medina.

The Meccan verses generally preach peace and accommodation, leaving it to God and the Day of Judgment to separate the believers from the unbelievers.

The Medina verses focused, among other themes, on the topic of self-defense. These verses take place after Muhammad and his follows had taken refuge in Medina and taken up the sword against the Meccans who had taken the lives of many of the Prophet's companions and also purportedly injured the Prophet on a number of occasions. The verses instruct fighting against the unbelieving oppressors. It is important to note that the Qur'an directs Muslims to fight against militant aggressors in a formal war and these verses cannot be used during peace or against civilians, the elderly, women or children, or to harm livestock, farms or trees. Muslims may not declare war, but they must defend their lives and property.

Are you taking the almonds? It's irritating to go over the same stuff ad infinitum.

I have no problem with submission to GOD...

but if someone.. like a muslim, trys to force me to do it his way....
ill stab him in the face.

being islamic..... means nothing IF IT IS FORCED UPON YOU.

IN islamic countries.... you cannot convert from islam to anything else, ,or they will kill you.

that is 'forced faith', and so it is '''''meaningless''''... and cannot have the respect it desires from GOD.... because the individual must have the means to sin, if the fact that he does '''not''' sin is to have any real signifigance.

islam forbids alcohol.... thats great... and no muslim should drink it.

but an islamic gov't... foces this on all the people, regardless of their faith.
and that IS NOTHING BUT RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION.

FORCING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE, DOES NOT MAKE THEM BELIEVERS.
they will believe... because IF THEY DONT SOME MUSLIM WILL KILL THEM.

THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH ISLAM.

-MT

Islamic scholars generally divide the sections and verses of the Qur'an into two groups: the verses revealed in Mecca, and the verses revealed in Medina.

"Invented," not revealed.

The Meccan verses generally preach peace and accommodation, leaving it to God and the Day of Judgment to separate the believers from the unbelievers.

Funny how Muslim men appear to take on the role of gods in that regard.

The Medina verses focused, among other themes, on the topic of self-defense. These verses take place after Muhammad and his follows had taken refuge in Medina and taken up the sword against the Meccans who had taken the lives of many of the Prophet's companions and also purportedly injured the Prophet on a number of occasions.

Purportedly, but that is not the case. Muhammed conquered Mecca and killed everyone who would not take Islam as their religion and divided the spoils of his conquest amongst his followers.

The verses instruct fighting against the unbelieving oppressors.

No, the unbelievers.

It is important to note that the Qur'an directs Muslims to fight against militant aggressors in a formal war and these verses cannot be used during peace or against civilians, the elderly, women or children, or to harm livestock, farms or trees.

Of course, the hypocrisy of the Quran condoning war continues to elude you.

Muslims may not declare war, but they must defend their lives and property.

Muslims can declare war.

Are you taking the almonds? It's irritating to go over the same stuff ad infinitum.

Well, since you've admitted to be ignorant on a great many subjects, except your self-professed expertice of Islam, I would have to say that your argument is based from a standpoint of ignorance. If you bothered to learn something, perhaps your irritation would subside.