Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Ads by Muslim Ad Network


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 71
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Girl Female
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2

    Regarding Western orientalists...

    I was looking for some books about Islamic history, the topic I have started to be interested in, and I have found the introductory book by some Western orientalist. Lured by the price I bought an e-book and started to read. The author in very first chapters discussed the credibility of basic Muslim sources, that is Quran and hadiths – in his opinion, based on many other books produced by orientalists, both are prepared at eighth and ninth centuries, so they can’t show a true picture about origins of Islam. There were other horrible biases and lies, like that of Satanic Verses and others. For example, campaigns of Prophet Muhammad were considered as aggressive attacks due to gain political power.

    I know lots of very good books about defending our Faith but their lies are still very popular and authors of that books are very respected due to their academic degrees. I have always been thinking they could speak things they are sure about and we could believe them, as they have devoted to their work all of their lives. So why do they write such lies, half-truths, and biases? Forgive me, but I am very shocked.

  2. #2
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    When you reject the truth then what are you left with except falsehood...?

  3. #3

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    I was looking for some books about Islamic history, the topic I have started to be interested in, and I have found the introductory book by some Western orientalist. Lured by the price I bought an e-book and started to read. The author in very first chapters discussed the credibility of basic Muslim sources, that is Quran and hadiths – in his opinion, based on many other books produced by orientalists, both are prepared at eighth and ninth centuries, so they can’t show a true picture about origins of Islam. There were other horrible biases and lies, like that of Satanic Verses and others. For example, campaigns of Prophet Muhammad were considered as aggressive attacks due to gain political power.

    I know lots of very good books about defending our Faith but their lies are still very popular and authors of that books are very respected due to their academic degrees. I have always been thinking they could speak things they are sure about and we could believe them, as they have devoted to their work all of their lives. So why do they write such lies, half-truths, and biases? Forgive me, but I am very shocked.
    Which book? Was it written or based on the work of Patricia Crone (what a name)?

    The idea of dismissing all islamic sources as unreliable and using all hostile non-muslim sources as "authentic" source method was first used by her I think.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Girl Female
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Spicen View Post
    Which book? Was it written or based on the work of Patricia Crone (what a name)?

    The idea of dismissing all islamic sources as unreliable and using all hostile non-muslim sources as "authentic" source method was first used by her I think.
    I don't remember very clearly, but probably yes (I have deleted the book from my laptop and cleared the bin). I am not sure if she wasn't first but the method based on rejecting Islamic sources gets more and more popular.

  5. #5

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    I don't remember very clearly, but probably yes (I have deleted the book from my laptop and cleared the bin). I am not sure if she wasn't first but the method based on rejecting Islamic sources gets more and more popular.
    On the last sentence:

    It's not possible to change people's mind, just let them read or believe what they want.

    It's kind of similar to how these so-called scholars are trying to prove that Isa(A) never existed. Infact the majority of "scholars" have actuallty reached a conclusion regarding this if I'm not wrong.

  6. #6
    Odan
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    9,016
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Quoted
    949 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    546

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Islamic Awareness has refuted much of the Orientalist claims

    They only "study" Islam to attack it

    The strategy is to attack everything

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    I was looking for some books about Islamic history, the topic I have started to be interested in, and I have found the introductory book by some Western orientalist. Lured by the price I bought an e-book and started to read. The author in very first chapters discussed the credibility of basic Muslim sources, that is Quran and hadiths – in his opinion, based on many other books produced by orientalists, both are prepared at eighth and ninth centuries, so they can’t show a true picture about origins of Islam. There were other horrible biases and lies, like that of Satanic Verses and others. For example, campaigns of Prophet Muhammad were considered as aggressive attacks due to gain political power.

    I know lots of very good books about defending our Faith but their lies are still very popular and authors of that books are very respected due to their academic degrees. I have always been thinking they could speak things they are sure about and we could believe them, as they have devoted to their work all of their lives. So why do they write such lies, half-truths, and biases? Forgive me, but I am very shocked.
    Try reading ‘No God But God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam’ by Reza Aslan. Its meant to be read as a history novel book and thus, like all novels, can be quite theatrical but it does give a pretty good insight of Islam and the societies and cultures of pre and post Revelation of the Quran to Prophet Muhammad SAW. It also highlights the hardships, misconceptions and rejections that the Prophet SAW faced in conveying God’s Final Revelation to the people.

  8. #8
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    Try reading ‘No God But God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam’ by Reza Aslan. Its meant to be read as a history novel book and thus, like all novels, can be quite theatrical but it does give a pretty good insight of Islam and the societies and cultures of pre and post Revelation of the Quran to Prophet Muhammad SAW. It also highlights the hardships, misconceptions and rejections that the Prophet SAW faced in conveying God’s Final Revelation to the people.
    Stay away from Reza Aslan. He is not reliable at all when it comes to Islam.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    Stay away from Reza Aslan. He is not reliable at all when it comes to Islam.
    I heard of that too. In fact, I personally don’t think Reza Aslan is a true practicing Muslim eventho' he said he's now a Muslim !! BUT, have you read that particular book ?? At the end of the day, any book you read about Islam or Prophet Muhammad SAW, you have to apply your logical validation of that book with the Quran and authentic hadiths. If what is written is clearly against the Quran, then you should reject it BUT if it support the Quran, then you should accept it, even if its written by non-Muslims.

    I don’t reject books based on their authors but I reject what was written if they are against the teaching of the Quran and authentic hadiths.

    Salam.

  10. #10
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    I heard of that too. In fact, I personally don’t think Reza Aslan is a true practicing Muslim eventho' he said he's now a Muslim !! BUT, have you read that particular book ?? At the end of the day, any book you read about Islam or Prophet Muhammad SAW, you have to apply your logical validation of that book with the Quran and authentic hadiths. If what is written is clearly against the Quran, then you should reject it BUT if it support the Quran, then you should accept it, even if its written by non-Muslims.

    I don’t reject books based on their authors but I reject what was written if they are against the teaching of the Quran and authentic hadiths.

    Salam.
    How can you trust someone with the truth if you doubt they follow or even believe in that truth?

    If you are blessed with the knowledge and ability to read Qur'an and ahadeeth at that level then you don't really need any other books anyway.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    How can you trust someone with the truth if you doubt they follow or even believe in that truth?
    Its not a question of trust but it’s a question of what he said or wrote.

    As I said before if he said or wrote something which agrees with the Quran, why should I reject with what he said or wrote ??

    Similarly, I don’t trust the Bible because its now a Book of truths and lies BUT that does not mean I should deny the verses in the Bible that support the Quran, now should I ?? Else, how can I debate with the Christians effectively if I don’t even accept the verses in their scriptures that agree with the Quran ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    If you are blessed with the knowledge and ability to read Qur'an and ahadeeth at that level then you don't really need any other books anyway.
    Well, I wouldn’t say that. Even if someone is blessed with the knowledge and ability to read and understand Qur'an and ahadeeth (not saying I am), that does not mean he/she don’t need to read any other books on Islam as different books will open up your mind in different ways.

    Similarly, you cannot say you have understood the Quran because you have read the whole Quran once as the more you revise the Quran, the more you learn about the truth of Allah.

    Salam.

  12. #12
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    Its not a question of trust but it’s a question of what he said or wrote.

    As I said before if he said or wrote something which agrees with the Quran, why should I reject with what he said or wrote ??

    Similarly, I don’t trust the Bible because its now a Book of truths and lies BUT that does not mean I should deny the verses in the Bible that support the Quran, now should I ?? Else, how can I debate with the Christians effectively if I don’t even accept the verses in their scriptures that agree with the Quran ?...
    It is a question of trust. You learn from people you trust - you don't learn 'directly' until you are competent enough. If you're reading up on subject as a layman then by default you are not competent enough to go directly to the sources.

    ...Well, I wouldn’t say that. Even if someone is blessed with the knowledge and ability to read and understand Qur'an and ahadeeth (not saying I am), that does not mean he/she don’t need to read any other books on Islam as different books will open up your mind in different ways...
    Yes, but we are talking about learning Islam and history from non-Muslims. Why would a student of knowledge go to a non-Muslim to learn about Islam? Everything would have to be cross-checked so there'd be no point.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    It is a question of trust. You learn from people you trust - you don't learn 'directly' until you are competent enough. If you're reading up on subject as a layman then by default you are not competent enough to go directly to the sources.

    Yes, but we are talking about learning Islam and history from non-Muslims. Why would a student of knowledge go to a non-Muslim to learn about Islam? Everything would have to be cross-checked so there'd be no point.
    I think you misunderstood my point. I am NOT saying you should seek Islamic knowledge primarily from non-Muslims BUT I am saying apart from learning and gaining Quranic and Islamic knowledge from the Muslim Quran experts and Islamic scholars, which, by the way, should be your PRIMARY sources of knowledge, you should also not ignore other sources of Islamic knowledge too, even if it was written by non-Muslims as long as they did not contradict the Quran.

    Most of the Islamic documents on Islamic history, origin, etc are written by those (mainly Muslims and few non-Muslims) who are professionals in their works and they are solely interested in the facts. Of course, there are those who wrote to mislead the masses about Islam but, you can spot them just after reading a few pages of their works.

    The key criteria is, as you correctly pointed out, everything have to be crossed-checked. Even if that information came from a Muslim source, it does not mean it’s 100% Quran or authentic hadiths verified, as nowadays, there are too many Muslim experts and scholars !

    As for Reza Aslan’s book ‘No God But God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam’, I find it, in general, a good read as apart from the insights, it does address a lot of the ‘points’ that anti-Islam groups like to bring up to degrade Islam and our Prophet Muhammad SAW. Then again, its my personal take and not meant to replace those true Islamic sources of knowledge.

    Salam.

  14. #14
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Non-Muslims can never be a source for knowledge on Islam. The fact that everything would have to be checked reflects the reason why.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Girl Female
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Spicen View Post
    On the last sentence:

    It's not possible to change people's mind, just let them read or believe what they want.

    It's kind of similar to how these so-called scholars are trying to prove that Isa(A) never existed. Infact the majority of "scholars" have actuallty reached a conclusion regarding this if I'm not wrong.
    Yes. It is impossible to change their way of thinking. For some of them, there is no holiness - they only trust to their scientific methods. According to these "scholars" who claim that Isa (A) never existed, they are atheists and attack religion in general. I don't know if the majority of them reached any conclusion, to be honest, just because there is strong Catholic (and Christan in general) opposition to be found. What is interesting, many of Catholic priests and theologians are historians too, and they even created "biblical archeology" based on finds in Israel.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talwaar View Post
    Islamic Awareness has refuted much of the Orientalist claims

    They only "study" Islam to attack it

    The strategy is to attack everything
    This is true. But I am curious why. Firstly, they have spent all of their lives at studying it. Secondly, what business have they in attack everything, especially Islam?

  16. #16

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    Yes. It is impossible to change their way of thinking. For some of them, there is no holiness - they only trust to their scientific methods. According to these "scholars" who claim that Isa (A) never existed, they are atheists and attack religion in general. I don't know if the majority of them reached any conclusion, to be honest, just because there is strong Catholic (and Christan in general) opposition to be found. What is interesting, many of Catholic priests and theologians are historians too, and they even created "biblical archeology" based on finds in Israel.

    This is true. But I am curious why. Firstly, they have spent all of their lives at studying it. Secondly, what business have they in attack everything, especially Islam?
    Did you read about it? You know that the findings have been controversial. Both jewish and evangelical Christians found nothing about the Kingdom of Solomon in their archaeological projects. According to them the migration of Musa(A) and jews never happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    Secondly, what business have they in attack everything, especially Islam?
    Agenda.

    Europeans have always hated Islam. It's a 1,400 year old enmity.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Girl Female
    Posts
    61
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Spicen View Post
    Did you read about it? You know that the findings have been controversial. Both jewish and evangelical Christians found nothing about the Kingdom of Solomon in their archaeological projects. According to them the migration of Musa(A) and jews never happened.


    Agenda.

    Europeans have always hated Islam. It's a 1,400 year old enmity.
    No, I didn't. I have heard only about some tablets with the name of king David (A) on it. I assume that evangelical Christians have got a problem then. They interpret the Bible literally. According to your second point, I wonder why they hate Islam so much. Is it the matter of lifestyle or something in the temperament of Europeans?

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    Non-Muslims can never be a source for knowledge on Islam.
    Even if the non-Muslims’ views do not contradict the Quran and agree with the views of the Islamic scholars ??

    Consider these views on our Prophet Muhammad SAW by these non-Muslim personalities:

    Michael H. Hart, Professor of Astronomy, Physics and the History of Science.

    "My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level." [The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, New York, 1978, p. 33]

    Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948) Indian thinker, statesman, and nationalist leader.

    • "....I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These, and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble." [Young India (periodical), 1928, Volume X]

    Annie Besant (1847-1933) British theosophist and nationalist leader in India. President of the Indian National Congress in 1917.

    • "It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great Prophet of Arabia, who knows how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel whenever I re-read them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher." [The Life And Teachings Of Muhammad, Madras, 1932, p. 4]

    Now, are you saying these views on our Prophet SAW, which many Muslim scholars agreed, are nonsense because they are the views of non-Muslims ??

    The fact of the matter is when a non-Muslim wrote something on Islam or the Prophet SAW which is in total agreement with the Islamic Book and the views of the Islamic scholars, THAT is the sign of confirmation and acknowledgement on the truth of Islam and the Prophet SAW.

    So, why should you reject their works when they acknowledged the truth of Islam and the Prophet through their writings ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    The fact that everything would have to be checked reflects the reason why.
    Yes, ‘everything’ here would also mean readings from Muslim source too.

    Salam.

  19. #19

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    No, I didn't. I have heard only about some tablets with the name of king David (A) on it. I assume that evangelical Christians have got a problem then. They interpret the Bible literally. According to your second point, I wonder why they hate Islam so much. Is it the matter of lifestyle or something in the temperament of Europeans?
    Well Europeans view muslims as a sort of Orcs and Islam being orcish culture whereas they are some gloious paladins who will slay these beasts. It's a bit of good vs evil thing.

    And till date Islam is the only force in human history that has come closest to defeating European. They also hold grudge over this.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    564
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    341 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    No, I didn't. I have heard only about some tablets with the name of king David (A) on it. I assume that evangelical Christians have got a problem then. They interpret the Bible literally. According to your second point, I wonder why they hate Islam so much. Is it the matter of lifestyle or something in the temperament of Europeans?
    Islam and Christianity are in fierce competition for what we could call "world domination". The reason why Christians are often hostile to Islam is because Islam, unlike other religions, is considered to be real competition. At Hinduism and Buddhism, Christians rather laugh. They consider these religions to be undangerous. They find it relatively easy to strip these religions from their believers and convert them to Christianity. Achieving conversion from Islam to Christianity, however, is considered to be a sheer impossible task. Christians may sometimes hate Judaism because it has a few original sources that mention Jesus in an unflattering way.

    You can find the official position of the Catholic Church on Islam in this link.

    Without religious scripture, you have no starting point from which you can reason and derive morality. Since even atheists will still have to produce moral determinations, without agreed starting point, these determinations will simply be arbitrary. Concerning the choice of religion, my personal position as a monotheist (tawhid) is that you cannot do this alone. Your environment will then just enforce rules that are not necessarily your choice. Since we have to make a choice, I clearly prefer Islam which is provable from the Quran, to Christianity which does not even try to be provable from the Bible. I do not even refer to any superior claims that would make either of both religions the superior one, because there is not even a need for that. Islam is superior already by its form alone.

    Competitors will never really like each other. At best, they will show respect. If Christians are somewhat hostile towards Islam, that is somehow what you should expect. They will not frequently be disrespectful, however. Christian churches generally condemn that kind of behaviour:

    Pope Francis on free speech: ‘You cannot insult the faith of others’

    My point of view is that you cannot expect more than that from a competitor.

  21. #21

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by pronorah View Post
    Islam and Christianity are in fierce competition for what we could call "world domination". The reason why Christians are often hostile to Islam is because Islam, unlike other religions, is considered to be real competition. At Hinduism and Buddhism, Christians rather laugh. They consider these religions to be undangerous. They find it relatively easy to strip these religions from their believers and convert them to Christianity. Achieving conversion from Islam to Christianity, however, is considered to be a sheer impossible task. Christians may sometimes hate Judaism because it has a few original sources that mention Jesus in an unflattering way.

    You can find the official position of the Catholic Church on Islam in this link.

    Without religious scripture, you have no starting point from which you can reason and derive morality. Since even atheists will still have to produce moral determinations, without agreed starting point, these determinations will simply be arbitrary. Concerning the choice of religion, my personal position as a monotheist (tawhid) is that you cannot do this alone. Your environment will then just enforce rules that are not necessarily your choice. Since we have to make a choice, I clearly prefer Islam which is provable from the Quran, to Christianity which does not even try to be provable from the Bible. I do not even refer to any superior claims that would make either of both religions the superior one, because there is not even a need for that. Islam is superior already by its form alone.

    Competitors will never really like each other. At best, they will show respect. If Christians are somewhat hostile towards Islam, that is somehow what you should expect. They will not frequently be disrespectful, however. Christian churches generally condemn that kind of behaviour:

    Pope Francis on free speech: ‘You cannot insult the faith of others’

    My point of view is that you cannot expect more than that from a competitor.
    Christianity is more or less a dead religion.

    Europe's new religion is atheism mixed with values like Freedom, democracy, etc

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    564
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    341 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Spicen View Post
    Christianity is more or less a dead religion.
    I also believe that. It just keeps degenerating ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Spicen View Post
    Europe's new religion is atheism mixed with values like Freedom, democracy, etc
    A religion is systematic. It has a core set of beliefs. Atheism does not even have a core set of disbeliefs. Atheists do not accept a common position on anything, except for not wanting to use religion as their starting point for morality. However, they also do not have a systematized alternative. If nothing is assumed, nothing can be concluded. Therefore, atheists are fundamentally invested in non-morality, but that is still not an equivalent for morality. It is actually the opposite. Since atheists are incapable of referring to a common atheist ground for morality, you do not even need to debate them. Let them debate each other, and let them aggressively sink each other's arguments, and then you can possibly have a look at the rubble that they have left behind. Atheism is absolutely useless. If you say: "I support the following theory", they answer by saying: "I have no theory." From there on, the only valid reply becomes: "Since you've got nothing to say, why don't you just shut up?"

  23. #23

    Account Disabled

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    8,215
    Mentioned
    252 Post(s)
    Quoted
    6163 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by pronorah View Post
    I also believe that. It just keeps degenerating ...

    A religion is systematic. It has a core set of beliefs. Atheism does not even have a core set of disbeliefs. Atheists do not accept a common position on anything, except for not wanting to use religion as their starting point for morality. However, they also do not have a systematized alternative. If nothing is assumed, nothing can be concluded. Therefore, atheists are fundamentally invested in non-morality, but that is still not an equivalent for morality. It is actually the opposite. Since atheists are incapable of referring to a common atheist ground for morality, you do not even need to debate them. Let them debate each other, and let them aggressively sink each other's arguments, and then you can possibly have a look at the rubble that they have left behind. Atheism is absolutely useless. If you say: "I support the following theory", they answer by saying: "I have no theory." From there on, the only valid reply becomes: "Since you've got nothing to say, why don't you just shut up?"
    Europe's atheism which I like to call occidental atheism so as to avoid confusing it with marxist atheism foes have a common set of beliefs.

    You only need to look at the beliefs of French revolutionaries or the french philosophers to understand their belief.

    They believe human rights (***) , complete freedom which thy value greatly, democracy and the belief that the people(***) are true masters of their country, rights for queer people(***), etc.

    *** when Europeans talk about people and humans they actually only refer to white europeans not other third world people.

  24. #24
    Abu-Tawheed Saif-Uddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    34,013
    Mentioned
    194 Post(s)
    Quoted
    5057 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    908

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Talwaar View Post
    Islamic Awareness has refuted much of the Orientalist claims

    They only "study" Islam to attack it

    The strategy is to attack everything
    http://www.islamic-awareness.org

    Yes that's true, Orientalist Nutjob Kuffar and their arguments are always a laugh,

    http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

    "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

    – Imam al-Shafi’i (Rahimahullah)

  25. #25
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    Even if the non-Muslims’ views do not contradict the Quran and agree with the views of the Islamic scholars ??...
    In which case why would you go to non-Muslims? Think about it.

    ...Yes, ‘everything’ here would also mean readings from Muslim source too.
    Not necessarily. If you trust someone then everything wouldn't need to be checked based on that trust.

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    In which case why would you go to non-Muslims? Think about it.
    You still did not get my point as you STILL make it sound as if I am saying you should seek Islamic knowledge PRIMARILY from the non-Muslims, which is not what I am saying.

    Maybe I did not make it clear enough and I apologize for that. So, let me try it again -

    In Post#13, I said “I am NOT saying you should seek Islamic knowledge primarily from non-Muslims BUT I am saying apart from learning and gaining Quranic and Islamic knowledge from the Muslim Quran experts and Islamic scholars, which, by the way, should be your PRIMARY sources of knowledge, you should also not ignore other sources of Islamic knowledge too, even if it was written by non-Muslims as long as they did not contradict the Quran.”

    What that mean is that your primary source of Islamic and Quran knowledge should come from the Muslim Quran experts and true Islamic scholars. However, should you come across articles or reviews on Islamic history or on the Prophet SAW written by non-Muslims and they agree with the Islamic scholars’ views and they do not contradict the Quran, then, you should not reject it.

    As an example, I did not go to non-Muslim sources to solely search for the views on our Prophet SAW by non-Muslim personalities which I gave you in Post#18, but I happen to stumble across them in the Muslim site - https://www.al-islam.org/ while browsing for any Islamic articles to increase my general knowledge on Islam. So, no one is talking about going to non-Muslim sources primarily to gain Islamic knowledge here. Hope that clears the air.


    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    Not necessarily. If you trust someone then everything wouldn't need to be checked based on that trust.
    True, but we are talking about Muslim sources in general, NOT specific trusted Islamic sources.

  27. #27
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    You still did not get my point as you STILL make it sound as if I am saying you should seek Islamic knowledge PRIMARILY from the non-Muslims, which is not what I am saying...
    I got the point. I'm saying that you should ignore non-Muslims when it comes to learning about Islam. No exceptions.

    ...True, but we are talking about Muslim sources in general, NOT specific trusted Islamic sources.
    Who learns from teachers deemed to be untrustworthy? Nobody. If you comes something new then you're still going to get it checked out by someone you trust. If the 'new' source is reliable then he/she may become another trustworthy teacher. If not you will most likely avoid them.

    In the case of non-Muslims, you avoid them altogether.

  28. #28
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    ...So, why should you reject their works when they acknowledged the truth of Islam and the Prophet through their writings ??...
    They 'acknowledge' the truth yet reject it. Does that sound like someone that should be followed?

  29. #29
    Odan
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Gender
    Girl Unspecified
    Posts
    2,165
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1415 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungMuslimah78 View Post
    I was looking for some books about Islamic history, the topic I have started to be interested in, and I have found the introductory book by some Western orientalist. Lured by the price I bought an e-book and started to read. The author in very first chapters discussed the credibility of basic Muslim sources, that is Quran and hadiths – in his opinion, based on many other books produced by orientalists, both are prepared at eighth and ninth centuries, so they can’t show a true picture about origins of Islam. There were other horrible biases and lies, like that of Satanic Verses and others. For example, campaigns of Prophet Muhammad were considered as aggressive attacks due to gain political power.

    I know lots of very good books about defending our Faith but their lies are still very popular and authors of that books are very respected due to their academic degrees. I have always been thinking they could speak things they are sure about and we could believe them, as they have devoted to their work all of their lives. So why do they write such lies, half-truths, and biases? Forgive me, but I am very shocked.
    Then prove what they say is lies. Presumably it's an easy matter.
    As a muslim you are obliged to believe everything in the koran and hadith and early Islamic history is completely true. Nonmuslims do not share your belief. They might accept some claims as possible and credible in themselves, but other claims - made with equal certainty - about unverifiable entities such as jinn, that Mohammed split the moon in two and reunited it, for example, or that he rode from Mecca to Jerusalem and back in one night are... unacceptable, to put it politely... to nonmuslims. They are like a clock that strikes thirteen. It isn't just that we disbelieve these claims, but the doubt inspired covers every other claim made and such claims cannot be accepted without other confirmatory evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    Even if the non-Muslims’ views do not contradict the Quran and agree with the views of the Islamic scholars ??

    Consider these views on our Prophet Muhammad SAW by these non-Muslim personalities:

    Michael H. Hart, Professor of Astronomy, Physics and the History of Science.

    "My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level." [The 100: A Ranking Of The Most Influential Persons In History, New York, 1978, p. 33]

    Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948) Indian thinker, statesman, and nationalist leader.

    • "....I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These, and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble." [Young India (periodical), 1928, Volume X]

    Annie Besant (1847-1933) British theosophist and nationalist leader in India. President of the Indian National Congress in 1917.

    • "It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great Prophet of Arabia, who knows how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel whenever I re-read them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher." [The Life And Teachings Of Muhammad, Madras, 1932, p. 4]

    Now, are you saying these views on our Prophet SAW, which many Muslim scholars agreed, are nonsense because they are the views of non-Muslims ??

    The fact of the matter is when a non-Muslim wrote something on Islam or the Prophet SAW which is in total agreement with the Islamic Book and the views of the Islamic scholars, THAT is the sign of confirmation and acknowledgement on the truth of Islam and the Prophet SAW.

    So, why should you reject their works when they acknowledged the truth of Islam and the Prophet through their writings ??



    Yes, ‘everything’ here would also mean readings from Muslim source too.

    Salam.
    Nonsense, no. Yet it is noteworthy that none of them became muslims. Michael Hart's claim that Mohaamed "was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level" is not a claim that he revealed the truth, just that he founded and established a religion and an empire. Equally, Gandhi does not ascribe Mohammed's success to his beliefs but to his personal qualities and character. Even Besant who called him "one of the great messengers of the Supreme", claimed that there would be a greater, final prophet yet to come. Their praise was for Mohammed as a person, not as the last and greatest prophet.
    Last edited by Sceptic; 15-08-17 at 08:49 PM.

  30. #30
    Odan
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Gender
    Girl Unspecified
    Posts
    2,165
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1415 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by pronorah View Post
    I also believe that. It just keeps degenerating ...

    A religion is systematic. It has a core set of beliefs. Atheism does not even have a core set of disbeliefs. Atheists do not accept a common position on anything, except for not wanting to use religion as their starting point for morality. However, they also do not have a systematized alternative. If nothing is assumed, nothing can be concluded. Therefore, atheists are fundamentally invested in non-morality, but that is still not an equivalent for morality. It is actually the opposite. Since atheists are incapable of referring to a common atheist ground for morality, you do not even need to debate them. Let them debate each other, and let them aggressively sink each other's arguments, and then you can possibly have a look at the rubble that they have left behind. Atheism is absolutely useless. If you say: "I support the following theory", they answer by saying: "I have no theory." From there on, the only valid reply becomes: "Since you've got nothing to say, why don't you just shut up?"
    You know some very odd atheists. If you say: "I support the following theory", they answer by saying "What is the evidence that supports that theory?" In fact - beginning with Epicurus and Epictetus - there is a long tradition of atheistic moral theory. It just doesn't rest on the claim that "God says X is good or bad, so that settles it and anybody who disagrees deserves to be killed."

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    I got the point. I'm saying that you should ignore non-Muslims when it comes to learning about Islam. No exceptions.

    Who learns from teachers deemed to be untrustworthy? Nobody. If you comes something new then you're still going to get it checked out by someone you trust. If the 'new' source is reliable then he/she may become another trustworthy teacher. If not you will most likely avoid them.

    In the case of non-Muslims, you avoid them altogether.
    Ahh, now I see why you STILL cannot get the point.

    Your understanding of ‘learning’ is only confined to a ‘teacher-student’ environment, which is a kind of mentoring and therefore, if its about learning Islam, one should not seek a non-Muslim mentor or teacher. Of course, I agree with you on that, BUT I am not even talking about mentoring, I am talking about acknowledging someone when what he/she said is true, even if that someone is a non-Muslim.

    So, when a non-Muslim admired and praised the Prophet SAW, you are not going to acknowledge that because the person who said that is a non-Muslim ??

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    They 'acknowledge' the truth yet reject it. Does that sound like someone that should be followed?
    They acknowledged would also mean they did not reject it – they, however, just cannot accept it…..yet.

    Again, no one is talking about following or being mentored by a non-Muslim here.

  33. #33
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    Ahh, now I see why you STILL cannot get the point.

    Your understanding of ‘learning’ is only confined to a ‘teacher-student’ environment, which is a kind of mentoring and therefore, if its about learning Islam, one should not seek a non-Muslim mentor or teacher. Of course, I agree with you on that, BUT I am not even talking about mentoring, I am talking about acknowledging someone when what he/she said is true, even if that someone is a non-Muslim.

    So, when a non-Muslim admired and praised the Prophet SAW, you are not going to acknowledge that because the person who said that is a non-Muslim ??
    I do get the point but it's seems lost on you.

    If you have to get everything checked out then the source isn't one you should be learning from. My understanding is not limited to a 'teacher-student' environment so you're wrong there as well.

  34. #34
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    They acknowledged would also mean they did not reject it – they, however, just cannot accept it…..yet.

    Again, no one is talking about following or being mentored by a non-Muslim here.
    Gandhi and Besant are dead so what do you mean by 'yet'?

    Learning from = following (teachings)

  35. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Sceptic View Post
    Nonsense, no. Yet it is noteworthy that none of them became muslims.
    Nonsense ?? Because none of them became Muslims ?? Grow up, please !

    I personally know a non-Muslim who has been very positive about Islam and the Prophet SAW since age 23 (or earlier) but only became a Muslim recently at age 38. As a Muslim, you should know whether they become Muslim or not, is not something for us to frown down on as only Allah SWT can open their hearts to Islam, NOT you, NOT me. However, for them to say the right things about the Prophet SAW, is a step in the right direction. Insya Allah.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sceptic View Post
    Michael Hart's claim that Mohaamed "was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level" is not a claim that he revealed the truth, just that he founded and established a religion and an empire.
    So, the Prophet SAW "was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level" and “founded and established a religion and an empire” is nothing great to you ??

    Quote Originally Posted by Sceptic View Post
    Equally, Gandhi does not ascribe Mohammed's success to his beliefs but to his personal qualities and character. Even Besant who called him "one of the great messengers of the Supreme", claimed that there would be a greater, final prophet yet to come. Their praise was for Mohammed as a person, not as the last and greatest prophet.
    So, what’s wrong if they praised Prophet Muhammad SAW as a person ?? You mean what they said of Prophet Muhammad SAW as a person and Besant calling the Prophet SAW as “one of the great messengers of the Supreme" are nonsense to you ??

    So, Besant claimed that “there would be a greater, final prophet yet to come” after Prophet Muhammad, errrr.. let me ask you.. is there something stopping you from rejecting that particular claim ??

    The fact that they praised the Prophet SAW as a person IS a step in the right direction. Will they revert to Islam ?? Only Allah SWT knows.

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    I do get the point but it's seems lost on you.

    If you have to get everything checked out then the source isn't one you should be learning from. My understanding is not limited to a 'teacher-student' environment so you're wrong there as well.
    What point did you get ??

    If I can recall correctly, you are the one who said everything need to be checked !! Now you are saying "If you have to get everything checked out then the source isn't one you should be learning from". So, there's no source you can learn from ??

  37. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    Gandhi and Besant are dead so what do you mean by 'yet'?

    Learning from = following (teachings)
    True, my bad. So, they died as unbelievers.. they acknowledged the truth about the Prophet SAW but they refused to accept it...sad.

    And your definition of 'learning' is still confined to a 'teacher-student' environment.

  38. #38
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    What point did you get ??...
    Your point is that the truth should be followed no matter who/where it comes from.

    ...If I can recall correctly, you are the one who said everything need to be checked !! Now you are saying "If you have to get everything checked out then the source isn't one you should be learning from". So, there's no source you can learn from ??
    Everything about Islam from a non-Muslim needs to be checked. Therefore, if everything needs to be checked then that source (non-Muslim) isn't one you should be learning from. Very simple.
    Last edited by Abu 'Abdullaah; 16-08-17 at 02:50 PM.

  39. #39
    SUFI HANAFI
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    42,177
    Mentioned
    498 Post(s)
    Quoted
    8563 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    795

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by JerryMyers View Post
    True, my bad. So, they died as unbelievers.. they acknowledged the truth about the Prophet SAW but they refused to accept it...sad...
    It literally has their date of birth and death in your quotes. -_-

    ...And your definition of 'learning' is still confined to a 'teacher-student' environment.
    No it isn't. Reading a book isn't a 'student-teacher environment'. However, the 'student-teacher environment' is what enables you to learn at all in the first place.

  40. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Gender
    Boy Male
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quoted
    322 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Regarding Western orientalists...

    Quote Originally Posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post
    It literally has their date of birth and death in your quotes. -_-

    No it isn't. Reading a book isn't a 'student-teacher environment'. However, the 'student-teacher environment' is what enables you to learn at all in the first place.
    Yes, I know it has their date of birth and death...like I said, my bad..guess I was more interested in what they said rather than when they were born and died.

    Reading a book can be a 'student-teacher' environment especially if you favor all the books of that particular author only.

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:49 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.7 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com

MPADC.com Islamic Web Hosting | Muslim Ad Network | Islamic Nasheeds | Islamic Mobile App Developement Android & iPhone | Islamic Web Hosting : Muslim Designers : Labbayk Nasheeds : silk route jilbab: Hijab: : Web Islamic Newsletter: Islamic Web Hosting

Students of Arabic Forum | Hijab Shop