/fringe/ - Fringe

This thread will be an open discussion for those that wish to discuss the faith of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, Islam.

In this thread you are free to criticize any esoteric teaching outside the Islam faith and laws based on the teachings in the holy book.

If anyone else want to write this original post better, with reference links and good information, just make an attempt to write a better post and then I will make it the OP.

Shitposting about Islam outside of this thread will be subject to warnings and shitposting rules.

I think that dude left anyways lol.

Anyways my favourite version of the quran is

The Message of The Qur'an

Book by Muhammad Asad

It's banned in Saudi Arabia so you know it's good

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Message_of_The_Qur%27an

>>6441

>I think that dude left anyways lol.

Wrong, I'm still here.

>Anyways my favourite version of the quran is

The Message of The Qur'an

Book by Muhammad Asad

Why is this?

>It's banned in Saudi Arabia so you know it's good

Edgy. Is this the only reason why?

>>6458

No it's cause it's logical. Read the wiki, and then read the wiki intro on Muʿtazila

>>6460

>Muʿtazila

That is a deviant sect.

>>6458

>>6460

"Logical"

You want to interpret what Allaah's Messenger (peace be upon him) was sent with using the method of the philosophers? Rather, you want to interpret the Qur'aan in a way that was never done by Allaah's Messenger (peace be upon him) or his Sahabah or those who follow them.

Aqeedatuh Wasitiyyah

by Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah

http://legacy.quran.com/

(Muhsin Khan Translation)

>>6460

I've read what Ibn Jawzi has written about them in Talbis Iblis

>>6463

http://www.khalidzaheer.com/qa/248

Better make a Christian general too.

Don't forget the Pagan general.

You are going to kill this site you morons

>>6467

Ibn Jawzi writes in Talbis Iblees , section 4 regarding the deviation in creed by the Umma

The Qur'an is Allah's Words and Not a creation

of His

'Ali Ibn Abi Talib (ratf!JAl!tihu 'anhu) said: "By Allah, I did not

apply the judgment of a creation, I applied the judgment of the

Qur'an." People listen to the Qur'an, Allah said:

�1�c.:-:·1J;.

"so that he may hear the words of Allah"

[al-Taubah (9): 6]

and people write it in the Mufpaf.

"In parchment spread open"

[al-Tur (52): 3]

We should not dwell into these verses based on our personal opinions.

Al:imad Ibn J:Ianbal used to forbid for someone to say: "My pronunciation

of the Qur'an is created or uncreated" because this might

cause him to deviate from the way of the Salaf (righteous predecessors).

'Amr Ibn Dinar said: 'I met nine of the Companions of Allah's

Messenger (;I), all of them said: 'whoever believes that the Qur'an

was created is a kdfir (disbeliever)."

>>6468

And who is Khalid Zaheer and why should I read his opinion?

>>6467

Talbis Iblis

>>6471

Have you heard of the Ad Hominem fallacy?

You should take information and judge it based on it's merits, where it comes from should not matter if you are knowledgeable enough to make judgement

>>6467

According to wiki

>Mu'tazilites —are best known for their denying the status of the Qur'an as uncreated and co-eternal with God,[2] asserting that if the Quran is God's word, logically God "must have preceded his own speech".

>for their denying the status of the Qur'an as uncreated

i.e. they believe it is created using "logic" and because of this they are kuffar if they hold these beliefs according to the sahabah.

This is kufr as stated by the Sahabah

>>6473

>Ad Hominem fallacy

Stop beating around the bush and answer the question. Because then you are falling into taqlid of an unknown individual and his credentials or knowledge.

>You should take information and judge it based on it's merits

This is not the method of those who follow Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him), this is the method of the people of ignorance and desires and innovations.

>where it comes from should not matter

It does, and this is a well established FACT in Islaam.

>if you are knowledgeable enough to make judgement

Knowledgeable enough to not fall into self-deception, assuming I am not going to be decieved by a cunning liar or ignoramus.

>>6473

From this point on, the only thing you will be arguing with is arrogance and pride.

It's best to abandon that deviation and adhere to those who know, not random no bodies.

>>6473

Adhere to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and his companions and those who follow them.

Not Khalid Zaheer or whoever tries to justify that which contradicts the statements of the salaf of this Umma.

>>6473

>>6473

The Noble Qur'aan 3:7

>It is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book; in it are verses [that are] precise - they are the foundation of the Book - and others unspecific. As for those in whose hearts is deviation [from truth], they will follow that of it which is unspecific, seeking discord and seeking an interpretation [suitable to them]. And no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah . But those firm in knowledge say, "We believe in it. All [of it] is from our Lord." And no one will be reminded except those of understanding.

>>6473

3:31

>Say, [O Muhammad], "If you should love Allah , then follow me, [so] Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

>>6472

>>6476

>This is not the method of those who follow Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him), this is the method of the people of ignorance and desires and innovations.

citation needed

>It does, and this is a well established FACT in Islaam.

citation needed

>i.e. they believe it is created using "logic" and because of this they are kuffar if they hold these beliefs according to the sahabah.

If your citation was these pictures

>>6472

>>6479

That hadith cannot be found anywhere else and is likely to be false

>>6463

>"Surely, In the creation of the heavens and the earth; in the alternation of the night and the day, in the sailing of the ships through the ocean for the profit of mankind; in the rain which Allah sends down from the skies, with which He revives the earth after its death and spreads in it all kinds of animals, in the change of the winds and the clouds between the sky and the earth that are made subservient, there are signs for rational people." (2:164)

The expression used towards the end of this verse in Arabic is "liqaumin ya'qilun", which means those who use their intellect, those who are rational etc. This verb has been used in the Qur'an at least fifty times. There are several other verbs which mean much the same thing are in addition to it.

While mentioning one of the proofs of the truthfulness of the claim that Muhammad, alaihissalaam, is the messenger of Allah, the book of Allah says:

>"O Muhammad, you have never read a book before this nor have you ever transcribed one with your right hand. Had you done either of these, the quibblers could suspect it." (29:48)

Which human faculty is the above verse appealing to?

The fact of the matter is that the entire message of Islam is primarily addressed to human intellect.

In ahadith it is mentioned that

>"…there are three people whose actions are not recorded: a lunatic till he is restored to reason, a sleeper till he awakes, and a boy till he reaches puberty." (Abu Daud)

In other words, we responsible to follow the shari'ah only because we have intellect. The one who doesn't possess it is not even responsible for his actions.

>>6483

You have no argument.

>That hadith cannot be found anywhere else and is likely to be false

Which hadeeth? Have you read all the books?

Do you know better than one of the major scholars of Islaam, Ibn Jawzi? Arrogance is truly a disease, but I suppose, it deceived you into believing it is "logic"…shaytaan really blinds people and they are unaware.

>>6484

I know this is a chopped copy and paste from the link you posted, but Khalid Zaheer is not a know scholar. Ibn Jawzi is.

That argument has failed abd has been refuted 100's of years ago.

>>6484

Regardless of what he says, if it contradicts the belief and statements of the Salafus Saaleh, the Pious Predecessors (first 3 generations of Islaam), and those who follow them in belief and righteousness until Yawmul Qiyyamah, then it is blatant deviation, which is rejected and destined for Jahannam.

Introducing this sort of thinking is basically claiming you know better. You don't.

>>6485

I cannot find it anywhere on the internet. How can I know that book isn't just making things up or mistranslated?

>>6488

Go read it in Arabic.

>>6489

Where is it in arabic??

Also your Ibn Jawzi guy is Hanbali, I'm Hanafi. Why should I read anything by him???

>>6488

If you don't know Arabic, go learn it and stop wasting time.

>the internet

this is how the ignorant go astray. They refuse teachers and rely on their ignorance to guide them, and of all places, on the internet.

>How can I know that book isn't just making things up or mistranslated?

By studying the deen but this argument of yours is false. If you really felt this way, why cling and post Khalid Zaheer, and unknown article writer. The safest position is to stick with a known scholar if you do not know.

>>6490

>Where is it in arabic??

http://waqfeya.com/

>Also your Ibn Jawzi guy is Hanbali,

In fiqh, not aqeedah, just as Imam Abu Hanifa, they were both salaf (or salafee since they followed the Salafus Saaleh)

I'm Hanafi. Why should I read anything by him???

>I'm Hanafi

Pure taqleed.

Because he was a scholar. Abu Hanifah was not as arrogant to deny the scholarship of contemporaries, nor was he a Hanifi. You people make sects from these men and then go into the extremes.

>Why should I read anything by him???

Abu Hanifah was not all knowing. What was his madhhab?

>>6490

What was Abu Hanifahs mothers madhhab, or his grandparents madhhab?

>>6491

Do you know what ijtihad is? I am understanding it for myself and making my own viewpoints. I've argued with a scholar before, he was not even able to prove that weed is haram. Because if it is, then so is caffeine and he was not ready to let go of his precious chai.

Do not follow scholars blindly, understand it for yourself.

>>How can I know that book isn't just making things up or mistranslated?

>By studying the deen but this argument of yours is false. If you really felt this way, why cling and post Khalid Zaheer, and unknown article writer. The safest position is to stick with a known scholar if you do not know.

No it has nothing to do with who the writer is. I found his webpage and considered what he had to say. He posted verses from the quran and those are verifiable. He posted a hadeeth that I found immediately after searching. I do not need to care for the auother when I can make my own ijtihad using the surah and hadeeths myself.

>>6494

>>6493

I only mention the hanbali bit because you go on and on about trusting scholars when when what they say cannot be verified. There is literally no reason to trust anyone if I cannot verify what they say with an actual source for myself.

>>6495

>I am understanding it for myself and making my own viewpoints

With no knowledge

>I've argued with a scholar before, he was not even able to prove that weed is haram.

"Scholars"

>weed

The Noble Qur'aan 2:219

>They ask you (O Muhammad SAW) concerning intoxicants and gambling. Say: "In them is a great sin, and (some) benefit for men, but the sin of them is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they ought to spend. Say: "That which is beyond your needs." Thus Allah makes clear to you His Laws in order that you may give thought."

Khumr is anything that intoxicates and marijuana is undeniably an intoxicant.

The Noble Qur'aan 5:90-91

>O you who believe! Intoxicants, gambling, Al-Ansab, and Al-Azlam (arrows for seeking luck or decision) are an abomination of Shaitan's (Satan) handiwork. So avoid (strictly all) that (abomination) in order that you may be successful. Shaitan (Satan) wants only to excite enmity and hatred between you with intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah and from As-Salat (the prayer). So, will you not then abstain?

Sunan An-Nasai'

>It was narrated that Ibn 'Umar said:

"Every intoxicant is Khamr and every intoxicant is unlawful."

Saheeh Hadeeth.

>Because if it is, then so is caffeine and he was not ready to let go of his precious chai.

Caffeine is not an intoxicant. No one gets high with caffeine, and Allaah knows best.

>Do not follow scholars blindly, understand it for yourself.

Yea, you did this and it lead you believe in and follow your desires and deviation. Clearly no one believes anyone blindly except the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him), but you have no knowledge to "understand it" yourself, and your own statements make that clear.

>when I can make my own ijtihad

Technically, but you only deviate from the way of Allaah's Messenger (peace be upon him), that's your choice, and remember, whoever you teach this method to and they go astray due to ignorance, you carry their sin and your sin.

>using the surah and hadeeths myself.

You have really been infected by the way of the ignorant kuffar and deviants in Islaam. You cannot teach yourself what you do not know. But this makes sense since you were probably raised in a Hanafi household. They are blind followers tot he extreme, the deoband and the sufees, and they love to tell stories.

>There is literally no reason to trust anyone if I cannot verify what they say with an actual source for myself.

Learn Arabic and study the deen according to the manhaj of the salafus saaleh. Any other method is astray from them.

>you go on and on about trusting scholars

Because these men are KNOWN for their scholarship. Also, they are the inheritors of the prophets

Jaami at Tirmidhi

>Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al-'As:

that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Indeed Allah does not take away knowledge by removing it from the people, but He takes away knowledge by taking the scholars, until there remains no scholar and the people begin to ask the ignorant leaders, so they give their verdict without knowledge. They will go astray and lead the people astray."

Saheeh Hadeeth

Tirmidhi

>Narrated Abu Umamah Al-Bahili:

"Two men were mentioned before the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). One of them a worshiper, and the other a scholar. So the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'The superiority of the scholar over the worshiper is like my superiority over the least of you.' Then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Indeed Allah, His Angels, the inhabitants of the heavens and the earths - even the ant in his hole, even the fish - say Salat upon the one who teaches the people to do good.'"

Hasan hadeeth

Ibn Maja

>Amr bin Shu'aib narrated that:

His father said: "Mu'awiyah stood up to deliver a sermon and said: 'Where are your scholars? Where are your scholars? For I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: The Hour will not begin until a group of my Ummah will prevail over the people, and they will not care who lets them down and who supports them."

Saheeh Hadeeth

Bukhaaree

>Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "(Religious) knowledge will be taken away (by the death of religious scholars) ignorance (in religion) and afflictions will appear; and Harj will increase." It was asked, "What is Harj, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)?" He replied by beckoning with his hand indicating "killing." (Fath-al-Bari Page 192, Vol. 1)

Tirmidhi

>Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "The world, with all that it contains, is accursed except for the remembrance of Allah that which pleases Allah; and the religious scholars and seekers of knowledge."

>>6495

>who are the scholars?

Those who call to the Qur'aan and Sunnah, those who call to knowledge of Aqeedah, Tawheed.

>>6496

if weed is an intoxicant than so is tea, caffiene.

>Caffeine is not an intoxicant. No one gets high with caffeine, and Allaah knows best.

Caffeine is a drug. It's a mind altering substance and with enough dosage you will be inebriated from it.

What desires and deviation did I follow???

>Technically, but you only deviate from the way of Allaah's Messenger (peace be upon him), that's your choice, and remember, whoever you teach this method to and they go astray due to ignorance, you carry their sin and your sin.

that's my problem and my responsibility.

>You have really been infected by the way of the ignorant kuffar and deviants in Islaam. You cannot teach yourself what you do not know. But this makes sense since you were probably raised in a Hanafi household. They are blind followers tot he extreme, the deoband and the sufees, and they love to tell stories.

your opinion means nothing. try developing ijtihad and sharing your understanding, that will be meaningful. This is what is meant by using logic BTW

And learning arabic is not enough. The arabic used today is much different from the arabic 1500 years ago. There are disagreements even today, like on the word khamr. and btw the hadeeth you used of ibn'umar apparently involves drinking, so it's dubious if it also affects smoking. I'm trying to find the original meaning of, I think the relevant word is ?? It seems another translation is that "Every wine is intoxicant and every intoxicant is unlawful." is similar to the word sugar and sweet so it's unlikely that it means intoxicant. Khamr itself does mean intoxicant but just the english word that could mean only things that are toxic. Of course we want the arabic, as it is used in the quran.

Here is every usage of the word khamr in the quran

http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=xmr#(2:219:3)

I think more investigating is required, but suffice to say the meaning is not clear.

Anyways caffeine is a mind altering substance. it's science.

>Also, they are the inheritors of the prophets

Aha so is anyone named Syed. I know many syed's who fornicate and claim to be athiests. I myself have seen a family tree with myself and cousins that goes all the way up to mohummad pbuh. I wouldn't say it means anything.

>>6497

you are misqouting I didn't say that…

>>6498

oh you can't post arabic here.

https://translate.google.ca/#ar/en/%D9%85%D9%8F%D8%B3%D9%92%D9%83%D9%90%D8%B1%D9%8D

That should work

>>6499

https://translate.google.ca/#ar/en/%D8%AE%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8C

Double clicking on the arabic word allows you to see multiple definitions and from which you can isolate

https://translate.google.ca/#auto/en/%D9%83%D9%8F%D9%84%D9%91%D9%8F%20%D9%85%D9%8F%D8%B3%D9%92%D9%83%D9%90%D8%B1%D9%8D%20%D8%AE%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8C%D8%8C%20%D9%88%D9%8E%D9%83%D9%8F%D9%84%D9%91%D9%8F%20%D9%85%D9%8F%D8%B3%D9%92%D9%83%D9%90%D8%B1%D9%8D%20%D8%AD%D9%8E%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8C%D8%8C%20%D9%88%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%8E%D9%86%D9%92%20%D8%B4%D9%8E%D8%B1%D9%90%D8%A8%D9%8E%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%92%D8%AE%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8E%20%D9%81%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8E%20%D9%88%D9%8E%D9%87%D9%8F%D9%88%D9%8E%20%D9%8A%D9%8F%D8%AF%D9%92%D9%85%D9%90%D9%86%D9%8F%D9%87%D9%8E%D8%A7%20%D9%88%D9%8E%D9%84%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%92%20%D9%8A%D9%8E%D8%AA%D9%8F%D8%A8%D9%92%20%D9%85%D9%90%D9%86%D9%92%D9%87%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%8C%20%D9%84%D9%8E%D9%85%D9%92%20%D9%8A%D9%8E%D8%B4%D9%92%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A8%D9%92%D9%87%D9%8E%D8%A7%20%D9%81%D9%90%D9%8A%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%92%D8%A2%D8%AE%D9%90%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A9%C2%BB

>>6498

>Caffeine is a drug. It's a mind altering substance and with enough dosage you will be inebriated from it.

If you have made caffeine haram for yourself and believe this, don't take anything with it, simple as that, and all success is with Allaah.

>that's my problem and my responsibility.

Yea, I know. I wont be questioned for it. I have my own sins and flaws to deal with.

>And learning arabic is not enough.

True, but without it, you know even less than those who know it.

>The arabic used today is much different from the arabic 1500 years ago.

That is why you learn Arabic from Qur'aan. Fushah.

>There are disagreements even today, like on the word khamr. and btw the hadeeth you used of ibn'umar apparently involves drinking, so it's dubious if it also affects smoking

Yes, different opinions in FIQH issues, NOT AQEEDAH.

Smoking is Haram.

Khamr means all intoxicants, and that is the strongest opinion but you are free to follow what you want.

>"Every wine is intoxicant and every intoxicant is unlawful."

Yes, specifically speaking when the verse was revealed, it a addressed a specific intoxicant but khamr is not limited to just alcohol. it encompasses all intoxicants.

In Islam khamr is anything that intoxicates.

>toxic

inTOXICant

>I think more investigating is required, but suffice to say the meaning is not clear.

It is not clear to you. To me it is. I am not looking for any loopholes to take intoxicants. to me anything that intoxicates is haram and that is the opinion I follow.

>Anyways caffeine is a mind altering substance. it's science.

Okay, I am not arguing against this. But I have not been given proof to suggest that what you say is true.

>Aha so is anyone named Syed. I know many syed's who fornicate and claim to be athiests.

What?

>I myself have seen a family tree with myself and cousins that goes all the way up to mohummad pbuh.

>I wouldn't say it means anything.

But you felt the need to share it? It definitely means nothing to me. They are just comments and "claims"…how many people say this? Even the Raafidah say this…

>you are misqouting I didn't say that…

I didn't attribute that to you. It is what I am saying.

>>6500

>>6499

Google translate…sorry but no.

I do not take my knowledge of Arabic from Google translate.

Arabic is NOT that simple.

>>6500

http://islamic-dictionary.tumblr.com/post/4669148477/khamr-arabic-%D8%AE%D9%85%D8%B1-the-word-khamr-which-is

>>6503

I said there are disagreements in the very definition of words themselves

and I bring up the syed comment because you said

>>Also, they are the inheritors of the prophets

what does this mean? who can say who is the rightful inheritor of the prophets? I thought you meant bloodline, for there is no other objective definition, and all other definitions would be subjective

>>6504

I was showing you the arabic text, the point was not to translate

>>6505

I already posted

http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=xmr#(2:219:3)

and this is enough information to begin an investigation.

>>6503

and I don't take intoxicants. one is supposed to follow the law of the land also, and it's illegal everywhere so it would still be haram. I'm almost surprised you didn't say that

this was just an example to show that the meaning of the quran, no one can be sure. one should gain knowledge through their own jurisprudence by the process of ijtihad. There is no reason to follow what a scholar has said without first understanding it, that is taqleed and is forbidden in the quran

>>6507

>I said there are disagreements in the very definition of words themselves

Regardless, the strongest opinion is the best one.

>what does this mean? who can say who is the rightful inheritor of the prophets? I thought you meant bloodline, for there is no other objective definition, and all other definitions would be subjective

This was in reference to knowledge, not lineage. Abu Lahab is from the family of Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) and he is cursed by Allaah and is in Hell, so is the Prophets father…

>I was showing you the arabic text, the point was not to translate

It still isn't that simple.

>and this is enough information to begin an investigation.

if you are just looking at that one word in a limited context. The word khamr though, is established as anything that intoxicates.

Like I said, I am not going to sit here and try to find loop holes for weed or any other drug.

>>6508

>I'm almost surprised you didn't say that

This whole time I have been saying that all intoxicants are haram, the Qur'aan and the Shari'ah trump all law so to mention the law of man is irrelevant in this case.

>this was just an example to show that the meaning of the quran, no one can be sure. one should gain knowledge through their own jurisprudence by the process of ijtihad.

You do that. I won't.

>There is no reason to follow what a scholar has said without first understanding it, that is taqleed and is forbidden in the quran

There is no reason to deny the scholars and reject what they say (especially when the hadeeth regarding them is clear), that is arrogance and pride, and speaking without knowledge is forbidden by Allaah.

You contradict the Sunnah if you want. I am not going to play that game. From an Islaamic pov, that is pure foolishness.

>>6509

> strongest opinion

subjective

>perception of knowledge

subjectve

>established

by whom?

> the hadeeth regarding them is clear

how can a hadeeth be made for people who are born after the fact?

>>6511

Like I said, you go on your way. The only one you are convincing is yourself. I am already on my way, and seeking to learn more and I am not arrogant enough nor foolish to think I am self-sufficient. I would rather learn from an actual scholar, a teacher who is known for his knowledge, you want to take the internet as your teacher, and whoever suits your desires, whether someone else, or your own wayward nafs, whatever.

>>6512

You came to argue here I was just giving my responses. Anyways good riddance

>>6511

A student is there to learn, not blindly follow. How many students have exceeded their teachers in life? Many.

>>6513

You are the only one arguing against the people of knowledge, blindly following yourself, and ignoramus.

>>6514

A student is able to explain their understanding. A blind follower simply provides qoutes and names of people for others to also blindly follow

>>6515

I'm explaining my logic, how my ijtihad got me here, if I'm wrong you are free to actually explain.

>>6516

>A student is able to explain their understanding. A blind follower simply provides qoutes and names of people for others to also blindly follow

Personal opinion. Not a universal truth.

>I'm explaining my logic, how my ijtihad got me here, if I'm wrong you are free to actually explain.

This is why the statements of the scholars exist. Because your "ijtihad" lead you to what is incorrect and this has been addressed byt the scholars with proof but since your refuse to take from people way more knowledgeable than you (due to your blinding arrogance and pride) you have no idea and wander blindly thinking you are knowledgeable. Self-deception.

>>6517

No that's pretty universal. It's not even subjective in meaning at all unlike your definition of learing and exceeding their teachers. it's very clear to see when someone is explaining themselves, or when someone is simply redirecting to someone else

What proof? Badly translated verses and hadiths is not proof.

>>6518

>redirecting to someone else

redirecting to those with MORE knowledge.

Your pride refuses to allow you to recognize your arrogance, which in turn hinders your from uprooting your disease.

>Badly translated

Coming from someone using Qur'aan corpus and google.

You are just arguing for no reason.

>>6500

I am cross referencing your post: >>6439

The word nafs is referred to 295 times just as a noun. If there's much knowledge on this topic and even an ideal state (an-nafs al-muṭmaʾinnah), it's quite ironic how Salafee is a complete slave to the first nafs of Pride while citing surahs of "truth".

No one dared to ask if ego was a thoughtform, so the idea does not even exist. But the very same conversation you can have with your ego, you can have with any other thoughtform.

The double slit experiment is a test where the observers' observing of the experiment actually affects the outcome of the experiment. To such a degree that we have to question what observing can do to something observed. And perhaps the most interesting part: the particles reverses themselves back to it's source, just to show us the tennis ball ejection of one particle at a time, whispering: "You are not allowed to see the secrets of wave physics in me".

Itjihad is explained as being the ability to individual reasoning pertaining the reading and following of Surahs. Where does it state how the prophet saw Gabriel in the cave and what is this ability called?

The absurdity that man was given ability to reason, judge and logical thinking, only to follow written text in a book claiming that thinking outside the box is against the doctrine holds very well for cults. What are followers of a philosophy but mere followers if they are not expected to think for themselves?

>Ah but you see, each intellectual and expressive muslim thinks for themselves while following the heavy rules put upon them by the prophet.

Yes, so how will they ever know Satan, djinns, demons, drugs, war and political corruption if they're not allowed to face it? The only jihad any man should be fighting is the Jihad Akbar, this goes for every philosophy and religion available.

>>6521

Are you Muslim?

>>6521

that is impressive research.

I'm too sleepy to talk about this now. discussion on QM would be irrelevent to thread so maybe in new thread we can talk about the wave function collapse and different interpretations in science of what it can mean and our opinions of which one is most likely

as for the other stuff I can't begin to talk now, but am confused about the green text

>>6521

> Where does it state how the prophet saw Gabriel in the cave and what is this ability called?

This is not stated but the nature of things are explained and figuring this out would require inferring from what is already explained.

Angels are made of light, Jinns are made of (smokeless) fire and humans are made of clay though this all very metaphorical. Angels do not have free will but Jinns do. In case you don't know what Jinns refer to, they are the entities and extra dimensional beings that we all love to talk about on this board.

So according to the analogy that nonphysical beings *with free will* are made of fire, and without free will they are made of light, already it is very interesting to think of the implications of this analogy regarding the free forming nature of fire and the very rigid straight nature of light.

Personally when I think of nonphysical entities without free will, what makes sense to me are archetypes. Angels are the personifications of archetypes coming to us.

Another note to consider is that God is the one that sent the angels, yet at the same time God does not interfere in the matters of the universe, because if he did it would go against our free will.

The way I see it, how someone puts in an equation into a graphing calculator, God put in a sort of dynamic equation, where some points were fixed but what happens between them (and when they happen) are variable. Just that they happen. Or perhaps simply put, God put out these sort of contingency plans.

This specific contingency was to make sure the word of god would be uncorrupted. The whole point of Islam is that the holy book came with a guarantee that it would not be corrupted, and almost 1500 years later there is still only one text reproduced everywhere. Personally I have issues with the order of the text (and even localization of the arabic which opponents to islam sometimes bring up how there are like 30 different versions of the arabic text, with very minor variations in pronunciations apparently due to the different dialects of arabic. I'm quite sure the original can easily be trace but haven't bothered with that research yet), but I suppose that wasn't part of the guarantee, just that the contents of the text would not be corrupted.

Honestly I would say that the word of god isn't really even required since we have our intellect and are able to reason out anything we need ourselves. It's kind of a bonus, this miracle is a favor to us in all it's cryptic glory, just to make sure no one can cry that there's no proof of god when really none is even needed.

Jesus was part of a different, much more important contingency to bring Christ/unity Consciousness or Taqwa and of course to lead the children of Israel.

I could go on and on with theories of what one can possibly infer, but to keep it short the prophet went to the caves to meditate and met all the conditions of the contingency thus allowing the archetype to manifest and deliver the word of god

>>6522

No, but I am surrounded by them daily.

>>6536

Surely it's important to know about the astral deceit prior to exploring astral subjects. You wouldn't tell a child how to make fire without telling it what destructive power fire has.

There are jinns and demons in the astral pretending to be angels and messengers of god, such is the way of deception. If you'd spend some time with them you'd learn how easy it is to spot and distinguish them. But those of weak heart and mind will fall for their tricks and sell their soul for the quick fame and gain.

The Amish people have a rite their teenagers have to go through when they grow up. They must leave the settlement for a week up to a month and visit the world outside the tribe. Some teenagers learn a great deal from this as they will see their Amish life style is free from sin, slavery and obsessions. 90% of the teenagers that leave on Rumspringa comes back to the group.

I say: when you are at your fullest conscious mind, aware of everything and ready to test yourself, try a psychedelic substance and see how your true personality is without memory and ego. Remember that everything can deceive you, even humans, and use this knowledge to filter out everything sinful. If you come back, your mind will have expanded greatly.

Everyone can follow rules, but who dares to break the veil of possible reality?

>>6548

Why does that even matter? If someone gave me information I'm not going to check if they are a good or bad person, I'm simply going to assess the information myself. Analyze the book yourself for it's logic. Ever heard of Ad hominem fallacy?

>>6436

>following an abrahamic religion

Is it even possible to be more cucked?

ebin simply ebin

>>6978

time to leave /fringe/

>>6978

godamn that spam was weird eh

>>6548

Also I've takin psychedelics 3 times, a different substance each time and I still value Islam.

Ego death is an amazing thing, but you don't need drugs to acheive it.

In fact the sufi's have a term for this called Fana.

There are versions of this in all religions, apparently called Samadhi in hinduism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fana_(Sufism)

Also to note is the word for meditation in arabic is Muraqaba, very similar to the kabbalah term Merkaba.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muraqaba#Gnosis_of_the_universe

The sections on gnosis are also quite interesting in that page

I'm not sure what else to respond with since I can't pick up on all the implications that your posts seem to be teeming with.

>Everyone can follow rules, but who dares to break the veil of possible reality?

That's essentially the purpose of sufism (since it is of course the esoteric version of Islam)

what do you guys think of extremists?

think they're puppets, just idiots, or?

>>7384

All islamic terrorists follow the ideology of Wahhabism aka Salafism

The governing bodies that also follows this ideology is Saudi Arabia along with the other Arabian nations as all of them are of the same family tree of the House of Saud.

They came in power when they helped the British undermine the Ottoman empire and received Arabia as a prize along with protection from western nations as long as they gave oil/money in return

>>6436

So are we now going to have a thread about every single fucking religion in the world?

Here is my christcuck and illuminati-ism thread?

Fuck your thread and its gay shit. This board is for esoteric wizardry, not mundane sandniggers and their false ideology.

>>7389

>shitty opinion

>>7389

Would you rather have the followings posts:

>>6145

>>6146

>>6149

>>6214

>>6254

>>6255

>>6257

>>6259

>>6260

>>6261

>>6309

>>6315

>>6317

>>6318

>>6322

>>6331

>>6332

>>6343

>>6344

>>6346

>>6365

spam every thread on all boards telling you that black magic is haram or would you rather have it all in here so that you can willfully ignore the thread with two clicks?

People that complain should go read the https://fringechan.org/fringe/res/6129.html#6129 thread.

>Why contain it?

Islam is a scourge upon the world. It was created by a thieving bigotted pedophile, rapist, and war criminal. It's very name is anathema to the idea of a free people and a thinking society.

In other words, evil. Fuck muhammad, pig shit be upon him.

>>7693

Great opinion you have there, try backing it up somehow though.

>>7693

now hold on, modern islam may be just inbred shit but that doesn't mean Islamic mysticism should be automatically disregarded.

Tbh honest it should just be apart of a thread on a thread with Judaism and Christianity.

Islam doesn't deserve it's own thread just because a mod may be a Muslim.

>>7696

Considering whether or not people are retarded or if they want to give off the absolute observable expression of being retarded.

Let me fix the OP.

>>7697

Are you saying I'm retarded?

Sure I fucked up a sentence but I was half paying attention when I was writing it.

>>7709

Let me break it down to you.

>>7696

>Islam doesn't deserve it's own thread just because a mod may be a Muslim.

The thread came into existence as a means to contain Islam shitposting that was spreading onto other threads and derailing some and not because the mod is a Muslim because he isn't.

>Tbh honest it should just be apart of a thread on a thread with Judaism and Christianity.

Feel free to create such a thread.

So yeah, your post was totally retarded.

>>7710

Mossa is a fucking muslim what the fuck disinfo are you spreading newfig?

Fuck off

>>7709

>…I was half paying attention when I was writing it.

There's your problem. Pay attention.

>>7713

Well meme'd.

Do I have to write out every little trivial detail on why this thread exists because you can't figure it out yourself based on the context of the situation?

Enough meta discussion. OT or out.

What are the origins of the Kaaba?

>>6436

If I somehow ascend to a god, while I be able to fuck allah in the ass? Or is she more the scat type of gal?

>>8257

You cannot become greater than Allah (swt) as Allah is the greatest. He is the source everything came from.

My uneducated impression of Islam is that, like Christianity, it started off as an imperfectly grasped revelation of truth which soon became ossified and dogmatised, and which has done some good but has also acted a an obstacle to understanding. I also infer from Mohammed's biography that he was considerably less enlightened than Jesus.

Am I wrong? Further, can anyone explain what Islam does better than any other system, or what unique contributions it has made to humanity? No appeals to authority, please.

>>6491

It is not best to stick with known scholars, if you had lived and researched long enough, you would realize the foolishness of such a statement.

> a fool speaks like an arrogant leader using circular logic as his only source.

>>8438

There is no allah, only the lies of a child molesting, lieing sack of shit who stole everything he ever had. Fuck muhmad, pig shit be upon him.

https://www.google.com/#q=muslim+rape

>>10852

Just gonna put this out there. Exterminate all mudslimes.

>>10512

>>10852

>>10853

Wow, thanks guys! No, really. It's not like we've all seen this stuff a thousand times before. It's not like it's totally irrelevant from a /fringe/ point of view. Thank for keeping this thread at the top of the catalog.

>Linking to a Google search

Great research fam.

>>10854

Linking to a search too difficult for you? Why is there even an Islam thread here?

Shia is okay because it's basically just Zoroastrianism with judaism mixed in. Once the arabs are genocided in Iran and the Persians convert back to Zoroastrianism Islam will die.

>>10891

Zoroastrianism is as degenerate as anything else. They're just persians trying to be jews, without he jewish lore. All they did was pick a main god and label all the foreignors as devils.

>>10989

Yeah but Persians are white. At least as white as greeks.

And as we know white=right.

>>11000

They were never as white as the greeks. Further, everyone in their society worth a fuck, left when islam took over. Most of he sages went to tibet. Zoroastrianism is degenerate and simply retarded.

>>10989

>They're just persians trying to be jews, without he jewish lore. All they did was pick a main god and label all the foreignors as devils.

According to whom? Zoroastrianism is what Christianity should have been.

>>11032

>degenerate

Opinion discarded

>>10989

http://escholarship.org/uc/item/14b43599

>>11040

>Contradictions and Vile Utterances: The Zoroastrian Critique of Judaism in the Shkand Gumanig Wizar

>critiquing Zoroastrianism based on anything other than Zarathustra

>no actual vile utterances

>the author even admits that the parts of this text that have supposedly vile utterances might not even be critiques about Judaism

lol'd