A question for Muslims

[Al Gunn]

The reason muzzyz have no pictures of Mo is because he was a very scary dude going around raping 9 year olds. Not really the kind of dude you're going to hang on your daughter's wall.
Plus they can't draw. Have you seen their writing? It's barely above a squribble.
Plus I don't think Allah allows pencils. Or independent thinking. Or changing out of your PJs.
Kalam, you a PJ wearer with a towel wrapped around your head?

 

[amrchaos]

I agree and at one time the Muslim world was very advanced in mathematics as well, but as Islam has spread the Muslim world has fallen behind the rest of the world in arts and sciences. I do not believe that correlation to be a coincidence.

You believe that the Islamic world would be more advanced if it was smaller and more isolated? I'm not sure that I know what you're saying...

I believe that the Muslim world would be more advanced, enlightened if you will, if the religion they choose to follow was not so repressive and the Islamic governments not so oppressive and all types of creativity and free thinking were encouraged not forbidden.

The iron fist of Islamic governments has reduced not enhanced that region of the world.

There was a time when Baghdad, and Lebanon were compared to Paris as cultural centers of art, science and commerce. Certainly Islam and Islamic governments have had a hand in the demise of these once great cities.

I think you are mixing the relgion with the ones that misuse religion for their own devices, Skull.

In Truth, the muslim world went through many social periods like all regions, From periods of high scientific progress and openness as seen at the Height of the Ottoman empire, to the present situation after the fall of their major kingdoms. The religion "repression" you see may be reactive response and not the religion itself

 

[editec]

I still do not get the engraven image forbearance.

It's graven images, BTW.

What you apparently don't get (or refuse to acknowledge for purposes of advancing the disacussion?) is that the prohibiton is ONLY about the image of the Prophet

Does that mean TV is forbidden, because human images are carved in light??

Obviously not.

Also, does something need to be alive in order to be an idol or an engraved image of something holy?

No.

Mt Fuji is considered Sacred in Shinto, The Pyramids for the ancient Egyptians, are images of these things forbidden, or treated like regular mountains and stones.

No

Finally, is this just for the Prophet muhammed?

Yes

There are images of muslim leaders, prominent citizens, and artistic recreations of Ancient Heros and rulers of the region like Giligamesh, Cyrus the Great and so forth.

You get it, but apparently you forget it right after you acknowledge having gotten it.

Why?

 

[Red Walker]

Howdy...

I've not personally been inside the home of a Muslim... but I have seen the news which have shown the inside of homes of Muslims which did indeed show both pictures and paintings of a family member...

Is there any difference if the person is dead? I've seen many pictures of supposed ''martyrs'' at memorials..

What about the terrorist who is Muslim? Haven't they made and distributed video of those that they viciously beheaded? Which is the greater sin? The vicious beheading or the making of the video?

What about Al-Qaida? Don't they make videos and audio tapes of Osama?

Thanks

 

[Skull Pilot]

You believe that the Islamic world would be more advanced if it was smaller and more isolated? I'm not sure that I know what you're saying...

I believe that the Muslim world would be more advanced, enlightened if you will, if the religion they choose to follow was not so repressive and the Islamic governments not so oppressive and all types of creativity and free thinking were encouraged not forbidden.

The iron fist of Islamic governments has reduced not enhanced that region of the world.

There was a time when Baghdad, and Lebanon were compared to Paris as cultural centers of art, science and commerce. Certainly Islam and Islamic governments have had a hand in the demise of these once great cities.

I think you are mixing the relgion with the ones that misuse religion for their own devices, Skull.

That's kind of a cop out. Christianity oppressed women for centuries or was it people who misused the religion as you say?

Religion is part of culture. The Muslim culture is one of repression. Islamic governments and the religion of Islam are bound in the fabric of their culture. It is not surprising to me that a repressive government evolved from a culture embracing a repressive religion.

In Truth, the muslim world went through many social periods like all regions, From periods of high scientific progress and openness as seen at the Height of the Ottoman empire, to the present situation after the fall of their major kingdoms. The religion "repression" you see may be reactive response and not the religion itself

We may have to agree to disagree

 

[chanel]

Muzzyz don't allow pictures of people because the women are all scary ugly (thus the sheets over their heads), and the men think that they themselves look foolish with their itchy scratchy beards and the diaper on their head.
As for Mo, he never allowed pictures of himself because he was a wanted pedophile.

RFLMAO!

 

[PoliticalChic]

I believe that the Muslim world would be more advanced, enlightened if you will, if the religion they choose to follow was not so repressive and the Islamic governments not so oppressive and all types of creativity and free thinking were encouraged not forbidden.

The iron fist of Islamic governments has reduced not enhanced that region of the world.

There was a time when Baghdad, and Lebanon were compared to Paris as cultural centers of art, science and commerce. Certainly Islam and Islamic governments have had a hand in the demise of these once great cities.

That's kind of a cop out. Christianity oppressed women for centuries or was it people who misused the religion as you say?

Religion is part of culture. The Muslim culture is one of repression. Islamic governments and the religion of Islam are bound in the fabric of their culture. It is not surprising to me that a repressive government evolved from a culture embracing a repressive religion.

In Truth, the muslim world went through many social periods like all regions, From periods of high scientific progress and openness as seen at the Height of the Ottoman empire, to the present situation after the fall of their major kingdoms. The religion "repression" you see may be reactive response and not the religion itself

We may have to agree to disagree

I've read all of your posts in this thread, and it is clear to me that you have the most perceptive view of this cult, and have identified the basically repressive nature of its ideology.

As in so many totalist ideologies, there is an attempt to dissolve human individuallity, and the desire on the part of people to seek happiness. The appeal of love, happiness, creativity are so strong that Islam must use punishments and death to subvert them.

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”

To feel that their faith is superior, and yet to view the amazing benefits of Western life, must result in terrible, terrible rage.

 

[Sunni Man]

A respected Imam from Saudi Arabia gave a ruling that TV and video are allowed for muslims to have and veiw, because the images move and are not stationary.

But photos are haram (not allowed)

 

[Anguille]

What you apparently don't get (or refuse to acknowledge for purposes of advancing the disacussion?) is that the prohibiton is ONLY about the image of the Prophet

Not according to Sunni Man. But then ... he's his own kind of Muslim.

 

[Anguille]

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”
.

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

 

[Sunni Man]

The vast majority of Muslims are Sunni Muslims, who regard six authorized collections of hadiths as the highest written authority in Islam after the Qur’an. The hadiths are records, often very detailed, of what Muhammad taught and did. We give multiple quotations to show that these teachings are not confined to just one writer/collector, but are spread throughout the different hadith collections.

Where multiple trustworthy hadiths agree, Sunni Muslims will take this as binding.

Pictures of Muhammad are "not exactly" forbidden in the hadiths either. The hadiths do not single out Muhammad’s picture. Rather, in the hadith we find the prohibition of ALL pictures of people or animals, which would include pictures from a camera.

For example, Sahih Muslim vol.3 no.5268 (p.1160) says, "Ibn ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said: Those who paint pictures would be punished on the Day of Resurrection and it would be said to them: Breathe soul into what you have created.2519"

Notice that the prohibition was not just against idolators who made pictures, or even Muslims who made pictures for other reasons, but for anyone who made pictures.

Sahih Muslim vol.3 no.5271 (p.1161) gives a little more detail: "This hadith has been reported on the authority of Abu Mu’awiya though another chain of transmitters (and the words are): ‘Verily the most grievously tormented people amongst the denizens [inhabitants] of Hell on the Day of Resurrection would be the painters of pictures.2520..."

"Narrated ‘Aisha: Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The painter of these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them, Make alive what you have created.’" Bukhari vol.9 book 93 no.646 p.487. no.647 p.487 is the same except it is narrated by Ibn ‘Umar.

No pictures of people or animals according to Bukhari vol.4 book 54 no.447-450 p.297-299.

Conclusion: It is clear that the hadiths prohibit pictures of animals or people, especially in homes. There is no focus on pictures of Muhammad per se.

ALL pictures of people and animals are forbidden.

Are Pictures of Muhammad Really Forbidden In Islam?

 

[Anguille]

A respected Imam from Saudi Arabia gave a ruling that TV and video are allowed for muslims to have and veiw, because the images move and are not stationary.

But photos are haram (not allowed)

Nonetheless, moving images are just as likely to lead to idolatry so that ruling doesn't explain why TV and video would be allowed by these fundamentalist sects if still images are not.

In fact, moving images can be more seductive. Why do you think people go crazy for certain movie stars?

 

[Anguille]

The vast majority of Muslims are Sunni Muslims, who regard six authorized collections of hadiths as the highest written authority in Islam after the Qur’an. The hadiths are records, often very detailed, of what Muhammad taught and did. We give multiple quotations to show that these teachings are not confined to just one writer/collector, but are spread throughout the different hadith collections.

Where multiple trustworthy hadiths agree, Sunni Muslims will take this as binding.

Pictures of Muhammad are "not exactly" forbidden in the hadiths either. The hadiths do not single out Muhammad’s picture. Rather, in the hadith we find the prohibition of ALL pictures of people or animals, which would include pictures from a camera.

For example, Sahih Muslim vol.3 no.5268 (p.1160) says, "Ibn ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said: Those who paint pictures would be punished on the Day of Resurrection and it would be said to them: Breathe soul into what you have created.2519"

Notice that the prohibition was not just against idolators who made pictures, or even Muslims who made pictures for other reasons, but for anyone who made pictures.

Sahih Muslim vol.3 no.5271 (p.1161) gives a little more detail: "This hadith has been reported on the authority of Abu Mu’awiya though another chain of transmitters (and the words are): ‘Verily the most grievously tormented people amongst the denizens [inhabitants] of Hell on the Day of Resurrection would be the painters of pictures.2520..."

"Narrated ‘Aisha: Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The painter of these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them, Make alive what you have created.’" Bukhari vol.9 book 93 no.646 p.487. no.647 p.487 is the same except it is narrated by Ibn ‘Umar.

No pictures of people or animals according to Bukhari vol.4 book 54 no.447-450 p.297-299.

Conclusion: It is clear that the hadiths prohibit pictures of animals or people, especially in homes. There is no focus on pictures of Muhammad per se.

ALL pictures of people and animals are forbidden.

Are Pictures of Muhammad Really Forbidden In Islam?

When were these hadiths written? Must have been after cameras were invented.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A respected Imam from Saudi Arabia gave a ruling that TV and video are allowed for muslims to have and veiw, because the images move and are not stationary.

But photos are haram (not allowed)

so you can watch porn, you just can't look at the magazines?

 

[PoliticalChic]

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”
.

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

"In his 1989 book The Closed Circle, Pryce-Jones examined what he considered to be the reasons for the backward state of the Arab world[4] A review described the book as more of an "indictment" then an examination of the Arab world[5] In Pryce-Jones's opinion, the root cause of Arab backwardness is tribal nature of Arab political life, which reduces all politics to war of rival families struggling mercilessly for power[6] As such, power in Pryce-Jones's view is consists of a network of client-patron relations between powerful and less powerful families and clans[7] Pryce-Jones considers as an additional retarding factor in Arab society the influence of Islam, which hinders efforts to built a Western style society where the family and clan are not the dominant political unit[8] Pryce-Jones argues that Islamic fundamentalism is a means of attempting to mobilize the masses behind the dominant clans[9]"
David Pryce-Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you made no point, I'm wondering if you would like to contend that " no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy..." is untrue.

Further, consider that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers, but more books are translated into Spanish in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last millennia.

Do you see any significance to this fact?

 

[Sunni Man]

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”
.

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

Pryce-Jones considers as an additional retarding factor in Arab society the influence of Islam, which hinders efforts to built a Western style society

Typical western arrogance

This guy is saying that western society is the pinnicle of all human culture.

So all of the brown people of the world must copy the society and culture of the west to be considered a success?

Isn't this the same mind set that led to the almost total genocide of the American Indian?

 

[Anguille]

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”
.

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

"In his 1989 book The Closed Circle, Pryce-Jones examined what he considered to be the reasons for the backward state of the Arab world[4] A review described the book as more of an "indictment" then an examination of the Arab world[5] In Pryce-Jones's opinion, the root cause of Arab backwardness is tribal nature of Arab political life, which reduces all politics to war of rival families struggling mercilessly for power[6] As such, power in Pryce-Jones's view is consists of a network of client-patron relations between powerful and less powerful families and clans[7] Pryce-Jones considers as an additional retarding factor in Arab society the influence of Islam, which hinders efforts to built a Western style society where the family and clan are not the dominant political unit[8] Pryce-Jones argues that Islamic fundamentalism is a means of attempting to mobilize the masses behind the dominant clans[9]"
David Pryce-Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you made no point, I'm wondering if you would like to contend that " no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy..." is untrue.

Further, consider that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers, but more books are translated into Spanish in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last millennia.

Do you see any significance to this fact?

I see significance to your obvious hatred of Arabs.

Is David Pryce-Jones a pal of Ann Coulter?

 

[Sunni Man]

As British author David Pryce-Jones has stated: “In the years of independence, the Arabs have so far made no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy.” How fitting that OBL, in his videotape of October 7, 2001, spoke of “humiliation and disgrace.”
.

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

Further, consider that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers, but more books are translated into Spanish in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last millennia.

Do you see any significance to this fact?

Point #1) about 90% of the worlds muslim are NOT arabs and do not speak arabic

Point#2) Basically, every arabic country was a colony of one of the european countries.

So most arabic people also speak a second european language.

All higher education schools forced the people to use the colonial power's language for instruction.

Thus there is No need to re-copy the books in arabic, because they were already available in the second language of the different arab nations.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

"In his 1989 book The Closed Circle, Pryce-Jones examined what he considered to be the reasons for the backward state of the Arab world[4] A review described the book as more of an "indictment" then an examination of the Arab world[5] In Pryce-Jones's opinion, the root cause of Arab backwardness is tribal nature of Arab political life, which reduces all politics to war of rival families struggling mercilessly for power[6] As such, power in Pryce-Jones's view is consists of a network of client-patron relations between powerful and less powerful families and clans[7] Pryce-Jones considers as an additional retarding factor in Arab society the influence of Islam, which hinders efforts to built a Western style society where the family and clan are not the dominant political unit[8] Pryce-Jones argues that Islamic fundamentalism is a means of attempting to mobilize the masses behind the dominant clans[9]"
David Pryce-Jones - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you made no point, I'm wondering if you would like to contend that " no inventions or discoveries in the sciences or the arts, no contribution to medicine or philosophy..." is untrue.

Further, consider that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers, but more books are translated into Spanish in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last millennia.

Do you see any significance to this fact?

I see significance to your obvious hatred of Arabs.

Is David Pryce-Jones a pal of Ann Coulter?

So, using your crystal ball?

I see no hatred, merely a far greater understanding and knowledge than you evince.

Since you, for some unknown reason, dislike Pryce-Jones, try Dalrymple, or Glazov:
Dr. Glazov, in “United in Hate”states: “The inhabitants of this culture suffer an excruciating dissonance: while convinced that their values and way of life are superior to those of the West, they must witness, in every facet of human existence, a contrary reality.” Theodore Dalrymple reminds us that OBL himself is dependent on the West for his weapons, communications, travel and funds.
And, from Dalrymple: “You can’t believe in a return to 7th century Arabia as being all-sufficient for human requirements, and at the same time drive around in a brand-new red Mercedes, as one of the London bombers did…An awareness of the contradiction must gnaw in even the dullest fundamentalist brain.”

The direction indicated is that this very backward faith results in severe limitations on the talents and abilites of a billion people, and sentences them to a primitive, nihilistic, and dangerous existence.

Try to exchange views rather than casting aspersions.

Claiming that I "hate" is a very weak argument as a counter to the points above. Try harder.

 

[Anguille]

I've never heard of this David Pryce-Jones and am not sure why you would you would consider him a reliable expert on Arabs but I would like to point out to you that not all Muslims are Arabs nor or all Arabs Muslims.

Further, consider that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers, but more books are translated into Spanish in a single year than have been translated into Arabic in the last millennia.

Do you see any significance to this fact?

Point #1) about 90% of the worlds muslim are NOT arabs and do not speak arabic

Point#2) Basically, every arabic country was a colony of one of the european countries. So most arabic people also speak a second european language.

All higher educition schools used the colonial powers language for instruction.

Thus there is No need to re-copy the books in arabic, because they were already available in the second language of the nation.

Good points, Sunni.
PolChic still has not made it clear if it's Arabs or Muslims she is talking about. I think she is unaware that lots of Arabs are not Muslim. There are Arab Jews, Arab Christians, Arab Atheists and probably even Arab Buddists.

I also really have to question her statement that there that there are about as many Spanish speakers as there are Arabic speakers.