Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State

Offline Wakas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
    • What does The Quran really say?
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #15 on: April 14, 2017, 02:55:14 AM »
peace Hamzeh, all,

Re: capitalising "I" in islam

It is and it isn't a big deal. You seem like an intelligent brother hence I was surprised at your usage, that's all. Let me explain...

"Islam" with a capital "I" is a title (or proper noun) - however that is NOT its primary signification.

It is primarily an ordinary Arabic noun/word with a meaning (~submission/peacemaking), just like thousands of other ordinary Arabic nouns.

Before Al Quran was revealed all the words used in it already existed, including "islam". There is nothing special about the word "islam", thus does not require capitalisation.
Unfortunately, it has become common practice to give ordinary Arabic words special religious significance and capitalise them into titles, e.g. islam, muslim.

islam is an ordinary word meaning peacemaking/submission, and it is an inclusive word that can encompass various monotheists under its banner.
Islam is the title of a religion, which may or may not reflect the original word meaning, and commonly refers to an exclusive religion.

This capitalisation of islam/muslim can lead to a few issues:

it helps conceal the original meaning of the word

it leads to the contradictory statement that one be Muslim but not muslim

Potentially conflicts with The Quran's universal message, e.g. many messengers used the equivalent word to "muslim" in their own language prior to Quran [2:128, 2:131, 3:67, 3:52, 5:111, 10:72]. Think about whatever word they used in their own languages - would you also class these as special words requiring capitals? The meaning of the word is important, i.e. do you embody the meaning of the word?.
Also, it implies other monotheists cannot be muslim when they could be classed as such according to its original Arabic meaning, which makes sense with various verses, e.g. 2:62.

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Nazarenes, and the Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear upon them, nor shall they grieve. [2:62]

In other words, it doesn't matter what one labels themselves as, labels/titles are not important, it's what you believe in and what you do is important.

Background:
http://www.misconceptions-about-islam.com/more.htm
https://free-minds.org/mumins

The only counter-argument to this is 22:78, but this is fine as long as one appreciates its primary signification is in its meaning not as a title.

Again, I don't consider it a big deal as long as one appreciates in your usage it's bit of a misnomer.


Offline Amira

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
    • oceanswereink
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #16 on: April 14, 2017, 07:35:23 AM »
Interesting note about capitalization, but let's not deviate from the topic at hand.

From what I can tell, if idolaters peacefully spread their religion and cause Muslims to convert, that's said Muslims' problem, and would not be considered an affair requiring the intervention of state authority.

If peaceful dialogue is encouraged in the Quran, it seems that public religious proselytizing would be acceptable. If truth stands clear from error then there's no need for the state to prevent ideological expression.
“Narrated Buraydah ibn al-Hasib: I heard the Apostle of Allah say: In eloquence there is magic, in knowledge ignorance, and in poetry wisdom”

“Historically, what is or isn’t mainstream (in Islam) has always been a function of power, not of truth.” (Iyad El-Baghdadi, Arab Spring activist)

Offline relearning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #17 on: April 14, 2017, 07:05:39 PM »
amira i personally may support your view but could you bring some ayats to support that both muslims and pagan can live peacefully both spreading their religion from quran.

Offline relearning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #18 on: April 14, 2017, 08:03:21 PM »
" If truth stands clear from error then there's no need for the state to prevent ideological expression." i have an objection to this. For example in internet can a state allow some news group to spread fake and false news although it is true that truth stands clear from error these kind of spreading erroneous news or information would not be tolerated even within secular states. so if one god is truth and paganism is error and deserves punishment then i dont believe (personally may support) an islamic country would allow this based on quran teachings which is threatining idolatry.

Offline relearning

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #19 on: April 14, 2017, 08:45:37 PM »
9:28 O you who have believed, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after this, their [final] year. And if you fear privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Wise.

9:29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

Offline Hamzeh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
    • View Profile
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2017, 11:14:47 AM »
Asalamu Alykum

Dear Good logic

I agree with relearning statement and that you have confused the question a bit.

"i am not assuming there is no idolworship in an islamic society. But i am not relating any sect to idolworship it seems unfair to me. But your points distracts my frame of question to another level dear friend.


Dear relearning

I agree with Amira in her statement

"From what I can tell, if idolaters peacefully spread their religion and cause Muslims to convert, that's said Muslims' problem, and would not be considered an affair requiring the intervention of state authority.

If peaceful dialogue is encouraged in the Quran, it seems that public religious proselytizing would be acceptable. If truth stands clear from error then there's no need for the state to prevent ideological expression."


You had asked
Quote
amira i personally may support your view but could you bring some ayats to support that both muslims and pagan can live peacefully both spreading their religion from quran.


In my first post on this thread I had quoted some verses from the Quran

18:29 And say, "The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve." Indeed, We have prepared for the wrongdoers a fire whose walls will surround them. And if they call for relief, they will be relieved with water like murky oil, which scalds [their] faces. Wretched is the drink, and evil is the resting place.

2:256 There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.



What can you grasp from these verses dear relearning? Is God not telling that whoever does not want to believe then let him disbelieve? It certainly does. Also no compulsion in religion. This is clear. How many people want to join the unbelievers that is up to them. Even in a country that chooses to uphold an Islamic law should not enforce religion. However any dangerous ideology or and unjust religion that would cause corruption and mischief in the land should not be tolerated. Even today many western countries would not tolerate this while giving freedom of religion to a point.

Please keep in mind that whenever there is a transformation from one successors to another successors in a land, they are the rulers of the land. They can draw up their own constitution and implement their own rules. This has been the way the world works.

Had it not been for the grace and mercy of the Lord, the weak would always be weak and the strong will always be strong even if they were evil. But it is God who replaces by His will.

God does check one group of people for others when He wants.

22:40 (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is Allah". Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).

When prophet Muhammad and the believers became the successors in the land, the were expected to enjoin in God's ways. God's ways can be extracted from the Quran. One will notice that no compulsion in religion is to be enforced. One also will realize that there is laws that apply to the believers and the non-believers. God's laws actually give freedom of religion, but they do not give freedom to cause injustices.

Verse 9:28-29 which you quoted seem to have been revealed now at the point where the muslims are gaining power and control. Those that do not believe in God and the Day of Judgement and those that do not abide by the new laws of the land which are the things God has forbid by His messenger and from the people of the Book who do not follow their religion correctly these were to be fought against until they submit to the law of the land and accept and pay the penalties. They should live now under the new constitution while they still may belief in whatever they want in peace.

The law of the land gives freedom of religion. The law of the land also forbids injustices and certain things that are for society.

Please note that fighting in self defense had made them victorious by God's will (9:40). If you noted the verses in the beginning of the chapter 9:4-6 fighting was only against those who broke treaties. Those who did not break treaties were to be taken into security. There is a transformation in society at this point. But by no mean there is no compulsion in religion.

88:21-26 also shows that ones belief is not to be dictated or forced. This is something God will judge and handle.

88:21-26
So remind, [O Muhammad]; you are only a reminder.
You are not over them a controller.
However, he who turns away and disbelieves -
Then Allah will punish him with the greatest punishment.
Indeed, to Us is their return.
Then indeed, upon Us is their account.



Peace


Offline good logic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 519
    • View Profile
Re: Public vs. Private Sin in an Islamic State
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2017, 06:50:07 PM »
Peace Hamzeh.
Thank you for your views.
My concern is "Islam" as a state of mind and being towards GOD, It has become a "religion" to most and there is a big misunderstanding among today s generation about "Islam".
What we call "islamic state" is also a big misconception .
We simply cannot know the inner thought of different individuals,hence we can only speculate who is a "muslim to GOD" .
Had relearning put the question to involve "believers" and disbelievers" ,that would have made sense in view of Qoran..
GOD bless you.
Peace.
Total loyalty to GOD
In GOD i TRUST.
https://total-loyalty-to-god-alone.co.uk/?page_id=197