 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
 Posted - 23 May 2009 : 15:47:34
|
I started writing this last night, so it is incomplete.
The Distorted History of Islam by the Orientalist By Suntou Touray
The perceptions we have of each other is such that, genuine dialogue is stifle and tugged away in some stinking lock room.
Since every society, community, tribe, race or religious group take sides. We each stand behind our own barricade and think, perceive or assume that we can detect in the action and response of the opponent terrible faults we can use to tarnish them in every given opportunity.
The values of us talking about what really matters get lost in the peddling of erroneous information. Yet our communications, comprehensions and information transmission don’t occur in a vacuum. It has become a habit of many to wilfully distort facts and refuse to see things in the right context and perspective, yet this people still wish people to take their wrongful and deliberate analogies serious. They have coined all sorts of criminal terminologies ready to tag the opponent with it even though they are hardly free from the crimes they label at others. Amazingly, a one world ideal is what is being promoted behind all the debates for peace and togetherness.
The western image of the others is neatly constructed by the orrientalist whose main aim was to help shape the cultures and religion of others. The strategy of the orrientalist has always been hiding behind scholarly and academic works usually formulated out of context to slowly destroy the other.
Wyn Davies accurately observer that, “in a ‘western’ secular world where religion is relegated to personal preference and minor matters of conscience and where God has been killed, people who takes their religion seriously appear not only out of step with modern times but quite abnormal.”
She went on to state that, the action of religious people are “judge against the backdrop of a bloody conflict between organise religion and forces of reason and liberty that has nothing to do with their own history.”
The views of Muslims are disregarded by the ultra-secularist who use their dominance over the Christian religion to ridicule and held every other religious person with contempt and abhorrence.
Sensible readers and observers should be able to see the continuation and peddling of cynical and contemptuous views by those who agree whole heartedly with the dangerous works advanced by the western historian who elevate their legacy above all others. The west through its institutions of learning has fashioned intellectual cultural tools with which they attempt to explain Islam and Muslims. Academic Institutions like the University of London’s SOAS were created just for that. In fact google the reason why SOAS existed and you will see what i discussion here. The role of SOAS is to educate eminent British men who are to assume the role of ruling the colonies. ‘Know about them before you go to them’. They also try to pick and choose collaborators among the colonised subjects and make them think like the masters. In simple terms ‘brain washing’.
The imagination of the average westerner is distorted even before encountering a single Muslim.
Sarden Sarder observe a pertinent conflict of interest on the western orrientalist intentions, the claims that, they the orrientalist are at an objective position to write about Islam and that their views should be the only true held account of Islamic history. Yet Sarder further analysed that “to make a quarter of mankind voiceless appendages to their own history and identity is to invite conflict. To consign a fourth of humanity to the dustbin of erroneous history is a lunatic action that invites catastrophe.” This is what Tamsier has been doing here anytime he commented on an Islamic topic. The readers that are affected with apparent illness from distortion take the response from Muslim as intolerant to dissenting views.
I will accept and confides that no society or community today is exempt from the western influences in some way. But for a sincere and genuine Muslim, his beef is not with the west in toto, but ideas that are overtly and covertly attempting to make Islam criminal, and therefore offer the Judo-Christian ideals as an alternative.
We have in Islam the purity of believe, of understanding God without going into any funny rigmaroles. Islam is a continuation of prophet tradition that ended after the death of the noble Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
The west and some lazy Muslim takes the western view of tolerance to mean accepting everything the west throw at us, any questioning and rejection borders on intolerance and fanaticism. The cherish universal notion of fair play, equality and justice is lost in misinformation of bias coverage’s. How can those who hold the power to declare war and suffering on you lecture you on rights and justice? How can they tell you about suffering and inequality in mundane issues whilst ignoring the monumental aspects of fair trade, food security, utility and other fundamental human needs?
Muslims have to careful in the historical accounts of the orreintalist whose main aim is to rewrite the Qur’an and entire Islamic history according to their well-planned objective of distancing the believers from the true message of Islam. You will hardly find one of them ready to debate on faith and believe, all they want is to confuse and thus create doubts in the minds of fringe believers. Islamic ideals are based on the paradigm of the Qur’anic teaching, the prophet tradition, the salaf or rightly guided predecessors and cultural practices that do not go against the message of Islam. Believing in only one God without associating any heads or tails to it.
Orrientalist- western writers on non-western cultures, believes and history.
To be continued God-wiling.
|
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2009 : 16:40:12
|
Nice read Uncle Suntou!
As I am sipping on my coffee on break, I am lubricating my throat for this one. May Allah swt give us its blessings..amen! |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
 |
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
557 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2009 : 19:11:17
|
Santanfara,
I am shocked by you. Whilst I am responding nobly to your posting under - ‘Islam beyond’ - [originally posted by Dalton1], expressing my respect for you, you have open another topic trying to crucify me.
Frankly, I do not care about the majority of the content of your posting, it is only three issues that I am concerned about.
I will quote your words in red if you don’t mind.
The role of SOAS is to educate eminent British men who are to assume the role of ruling the colonies. ‘Know about them before you go to them’. They also try to pick and choose collaborators among the colonised subjects and make them think like the masters. In simple terms ‘brain washing’.
You are right about the history of the School of Oriental and African Studies, that - it was to educate eminent British men to assume the role of ruling the colonies. My issue with you here is that, you said ‘they also try to pick and choose collaborators among the colonised subjects and make them think like the masters. In simple terms ‘brain washing’.
Even if you are right, didn’t Islam in Africa did the same? How do you think Tafsir Alhaji Omar Taal and his protégé Tafsir Amat Jahou Bah and others first got their resources in order to mount jihads in Senegambia and our frontiers in the 19th century? They were backed by the Arabs when they made their hajj to Mecca, that was why they were made Xalifa of the Western Sudan. Alhaji Omar himself who was -initiated in the Tijaani brotherhood was invested upon him 'Xalifa' by the head of the Tijaani - Mohammad Al Ghali Abu Talif.
What did they do when they came back, they also tried to ‘brainwash’ others [to use you’re your phrase] into conversion and killing other people whose only crime was being pagans, who until then were their neighbours, relatives, friends etc.
'Yet Sarder further analysed that “to make a quarter of mankind voiceless appendages to their own history and identity is to invite conflict. To consign a fourth of humanity to the dustbin of erroneous history is a lunatic action that invites catastrophe.” This is what Tamsier has been doing here anytime he commented on an Islamic topic. The readers that are affected with apparent illness from distortion take the response from Muslim as intolerant to dissenting views'.
How, when or where have I not rightly consigned anyone to the dustbin of erroneous history?
All of my rebuts of Islam are based on the sources provided by the Quran, Islamic Scholars, non Islamic scholars and verifiable historical evidence. If I am discussing with a Muslim and they either do not know the history of their own religion or they try to taint it to suit their propaganda of Islam and I duly point this out to them, does that mean I have wrongly consigned them to the dustbin or erroneous history? Please explain that to me, because I find your posting rather offensive.
‘You will hardly find one of them ready to debate on faith and believe, all they want is to confuse and thus create doubts in the minds of fringe believers’.
I hope I am not one of those, because I have no intention of confusing anyone. I have held open debate with you and others on this very site regarding Islam.
|
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 23 May 2009 20:59:12 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2009 : 10:42:52
|
Tamsier, what you are forgetting is that each and every system tries to program or brainwash. Islam through the second of the five pillers institute a programming mechanism, that is observe your duty to God whereever you are and then continue on your world material endevours. So Sallah is appropraite define by Dr Naik as brainwashing or programming.
Just like all ideas do.
now coming to the actions of some the sufi orders and their leaders, yes, indeed some did engage in violence, i wouldn't deny that. but what you continue not to realise is that, the activities of some the tarigas was done in the context and circumstance they found themselves in. i understand your frustration with issue of them converting pagan masses to islam. But in any case, the masses cannot be force to accept islam by anyone. they will leave when situations changes, the french were on hand to fight islam and sufi masters with more advance means, yet the people remain muslims.
i am held up now, later i will elaborate. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
557 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2009 : 15:37:02
|
'Tamsier, what you are forgetting is that each and every system tries to program or brainwash. Islam through the second of the five pillers institute a programming mechanism'
At least that settles my first question.
I am still waiting for you to justify what you've accused me off.
'the masses cannot be force to accept islam by anyone. they will leave when situations changes, the french were on hand to fight islam and sufi masters with more advance means, yet the people remain muslims'.
If you are referring to France interference in our region [i.e Senegambia], I hope you do not mind me correcting you. Before most of the Islamic like leaders Maba Jahou Ba and others started to fight the French or the British, they were already working with them. When the French tried to put a stop to their pillaging of lands they controlled, and when they went back on the treaties they signed with the french that's when Islamic leaders began to form a recentment against the colonisers. Previously, even the French governor Faidherbe had said 'islamic influence on the negro people is a good thing'. Even he [Faidherbe], was a great supporter of Islam. We should not forget that shortly before the death of Maba at the battle of Fandane-Thioutiougne [commonly called Somb - 18 July 1867] against King Kumba Ndoffene Famak, Maba signed a treaty with the then British governor [Darcy]. The propose of that treaty was for the British governor to give protection to his son {Sait Matti] if he ever came under attack from the Serere pagans or the French. After Sait Matti’s defeat at the Battle of Kumbof 1886 by King of Saloum - Gedal Mbooj [Sassy Kumba Daga Mbooj] and future King of Saloum - Semou Jimit Joof whose family have hunted Sait Matti since 1884, he fled to Albreda in the Gambia. When he arrived in arrived in Albreda, he sent a letter to Kara Samba [grandfather of the late Alhaji Babou Samba] - who was a respected elder in Banjul and friend of his late father [Maba]. The purpose of that letter was for Kara to speak to the British governor {J.S Hay} on his behalf. Kara accompanied by the Imam Gorr Mak negotiated with the British governor for Sait Matti to seek refuge in Gambia. The Governor had no choice but to honour the treaty at Njie-Kunda signed between Maba and his predecessor. This is how Sait Matti got into the Gambia after his defeat, he then began to lodge with different Gambian elders before finally moving to Bakau.
To assume that the Islamic leaders did not do dealings with the colonisers is a big mistake or shall I say naïve. There are several instances I can give especially about Maba [the biggest double crosser of them all] but I will leave that for another day.
|
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 24 May 2009 15:39:39 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 25 May 2009 : 17:42:24
|
Tamsier, the traditional rullership you are bent on defending were the ones whose activities caused the people to side with upcoming relgious activist like Maba and co.
It is ironical that you can support the actions of killers like the many soninke rulers who were doing nothing but harassing and forcing the people into many kinds of unjust activities.
I will respond in full to all the points you continue to distort in the coming days God-willing.
You are also confuse about tolerance and intolerance. Islam never advice anyone to put their hands down and let injustice happens to them, Not under the cover of any system. If you are disgusted becus of that, you shall continue to be unhappy sir.
Also, why did the West use us for their springing grounds before their industrial revolution? How did the west acquire the human capital that eventually was to propel their factories, banks, and commercial enterprises to what it ended up today?
i will comments on those issues later inshalah. Our traditidonal rullers in different parts colaborated with western traders to exploit us, by gaing raw materials from our lands on the cheap, when the rullers started causing noise, the west then decided it will be much cheapers and safer to have the Africans do the work for them for free on their own soil, this is how slavery started. Yet, you see no wrong with those crimes. The Chatholic church was blessing ships sailing to Africa for slaves regularly. In fact Britain never abandon slavery becus of human rights, tell us why?
Now coming to Islamic history. the fact is clear tamsiers, It was muslim historians who wrote about Islamic history. The west were what they termed as the dark ages when Islam was florishing and the history was recorded. The west later translated the works of Muslim historians and distort the areas they thought could serve their purpose of misinformation. The same misinformation you are trading on here as facts.
Yes, indeed, each system or religous idea tries to make those who accept it practice it as it should be. That is brainwashing. whether you are mechanic, a dentish, historian etc. This is why people follow a methodology of doing things. I meant brainwashing in that sense.
In the army, young men/women are brainwash to be professional killers. they obey and then complian, is that not brainwashing good man?
do you have any problem with that? if you do, then write about those apparent injustice as well. As i said earlier, i am not defending the actions of some muslims who acted wrongly by their own free will. Their actions like every human being will be judge by God who never wrong anyone. And you with your intellence reject God and think that, our ancestors never did any wrong in their kingdoms. It is the foriegn muslims who came and massacar them, and change them. what a load rubbish. people accept islam for the same reason free men/women in western universities are accepting it for. Clear teaching and no ambiquiety in the relevant religous matters. No one forces Yusus Islam and the many others. If you cannot differenciate the action of a man and the teachings of his faith, then it is futile to engage you.
Do we blame communism for the massive deaths the Russian empire inflicted on people? which court would you prosecute Communism? the American massacar of the Veitnamise, is that not due to the fight against communism, what idea or believe are the American promoting? can we prosecute democracy and secularism for the crimes of secular people or secular leaders?
The French when it serves them sided with the Islamic leaders, but they were only doing that for strategic reason, the French efforts againsg Islam suppasses that of all western country. That is a fact, eminent writers like Voltaire and his ilks were harden Islamaphobes like yourself. The Sufi muslims leaders that emerged after some of the traditional rullers were defeated, were not using Islamic methods to rule or rule the people, infac they wre ruling according the their own inventions. Seriegn Bamba faces countless injustices from the French for being law abiding
indeed i am lacking time. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2009 : 00:26:01
|
The contiunation
Part 2 The Argument of Pro-Traditionalist Against Islam In Senegambi:
It is evident that, some proud black Africans are bitter about the prevalence of the Islamic religion in some part of Africa, especially the SeneGambia region. Their grievances are based on the argument that, the Muslim expansionist soldiers over-ran the peaceful and successful traditional rulers and force convert people to Islam.
Indeed Islam came to Senegambia and other parts of the world, but not mainly by the military means that is so blown out of proportion by critics. The Senegambia region witness what historians classified as peaceful preaching (Thomas Arnold 1896). Traders did the preaching, they were not in any position to force convert people. Accepting that argument is akin to ridiculing the social fabrics that existed with our ancestors. It is like saying that, our ancestors were so weak; a couple Arab with swords knots on their doors and force them to accept Islam. This is a baseless argument.
The historian De Lacy O’leary quiet clearly expose the untruth against the religion of Islam by those who only condemn the religion as a fanatical and sword wielding faith.
De Lacy in his book ‘Islam at the cross Road’ page 8 states that “history makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated.”
The main teaching of Islam forbids the use of force to convert people. Allah the Almighty states about Prophet Muhammad that, “if you were harsh and hard hearted, all those who come around you will have abandon you”. The statement here convey multiple of messages, one being that if the Prophet Muhammad was mean and ruthless to his people, they would have ran away from him and join forces with those promoting idolatry.
Islam with all its tolerance and softness stand firm against the promotion and open committing of evil and sinful shameful actions. It’s enforced strict codes of ethic against social immorality and the decadence in society. That firmness also triggers claims of injustice and tyranny against the Muslims, yet the general query of civilise society today and that of politicians in particular is to bring in harsh laws against the many crimes and social ills.
Muslim did went into Spain and rule it for close to 700 years, the sword wasn’t use to convert people. In fact Jews came to Spain to be under the rule of Muslim, but when the Crusader King ordered the overthrow of the Muslims, no single Muslim was spared, you either leave or die.
In Egypt and other Arab countries were Islam is the major religion, there are over 14 Million Coptic Christians who inherited the religion from generation to generation bearing testimony to Islam not being a sword wielding religion. Those Coptics could have been forced to abandon their faith or die if that was the main reason of the Muslim rulers.
In India more than 80% of the population is non-Muslim, yet that country was ruled by Muslims for over 600 years. Why didn’t they killed or forced convert every one?
I keep citing Indonesia and Malaysia on many occasion, because it is the two countries were Arabs have little connection with. Yet Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world. No single Muslim army went in those countries with or without a sword. The Japanese tries to subjugate them and kill their spirit but couldn’t, the British tries also to make them change their faith and life style but couldn’t succeed just like the early Missionaries did in the Gambia.
Many promising young Muslim pupils were coaxed to enter Christianity to gain scholarship and higher education. Some of this Muslim pupil accepted the offer, only to later recant Christianity. Among this people are David Jawara (DK), Andrew Camara (Hasan Musa), Paul Bah, and many others.
Thomas Carlyle, the historian and biographer who wrote the book, ‘Heroes and Hero worship’, made it clear that, the misconception about Islam is deliberate. He said:
The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believe it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.” Thomas Carlyle.
How can the sword be use by a minority against the majority? In Senegambia as well, the Islamic activist that ended up revolting against the traditional rulers did that because of the continuous injustices by the traditional rulers. People always when given the opportunity support uprising against tyrants.
The main reference book for Muslims, the Qur’an speaks against forcing people to accept Islam. In fact forced conversion is tantamount to no conversion in shariah. The Qur’an Chapter (2:256) states that “let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stand out clear from error.” Islam which means complete submission to will of God should not be done under duress.
The Qur’an extols muslims to engage in intelligent discussions in matters of religion with those who erroneously attack Islam on false pretext. It recommends dialogue in chapter 16:125 “invite all to the way of your lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.”
But since Islamaphobes aren’t interested in clear statements like the two verses above, they practiced what is now commonly referred to as ‘taking verses out of context and joining them with others verses’ to provide a wrongful meaning, thus deliberately creating misconception.
This is why Dr Adam Pearson made the statement that, “people worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fails to realise that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day Muhammad (pbuh) was born”.
The key labels against a section of the Muslim community:
It is no secret that role the media plays in fanning the war of words against Muslims. Some experts states that, the global media power house is control by 8% of conglomerates across the world, mainly shadowy influential people. This people have an agenda which must not be underrated. The culture of twenty four hours news demands events of shocking magnitudes to liven the various news networks.
Fundamentalist:
That word is very important statement in every profession. Dr Zakir Naik eloquently stated that, in every profession, practitioners must follow and adheres to the fundamentals of the “doctrine or theory” of that profession. A good doctor, lawyer, teacher, accountant, engineer etc all must follow, adhere to the fundamental principle and ethics of their chosen profession.
Now when the debate falls in religious arena, eyebrows are raised. Fundamentalism is categorised as the same in the media and security circles. This means fundamentalism in religion is straight forward bad and frowns upon. The debate usually swift back and forth in western circles to include phrases like, ‘they hate our freedom, they hate our democracy, they hate our life style, our development etc.’ who hate who and why? The labelling and discussion is sounded so loud, no one has the time to ask, who hates who and why?
Just like George Bush said in 2000, you are either in support of the definitions advanced from their angle or you don’t. No middle ground. Is this how prosecutions exist in civilise law courts? Harden criminals are accorded the liberty to defend themselves in front of a judge and the notion that ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is entitled to murderers, rapist, paedophiles, corporate bandits, drug dealers, etc. Yet people of religion are blanket-ly tagged extremist and fundamentalist on superficial grounds lacking clear definitions.
Definition of fundamentalist:
Oxford dictionary defines the words as ‘the strict maintenance of ancient or fundamental doctrines of any religion, especially Islam.’ This definition provided the impetus for all to see only Muslims as fundamentalist.
In fact, the Webster dictionary refers the word to 20th century protestant Christian movement in America, which occur due to the reaction to modernity. Their stance is based on the notion that the bible is infallible in all areas of life and that it is the literal word of God. Aren’t these types of Christian around today? Aren’t they the now ‘born again’ evangelist groups or more appropriately ‘televangelist’ performing miracles and redeeming souls, so they claim?
When it serves the media and politicians, they give different tags to the same actions. People using war to fight for liberations are either freedom fighters or rebel and now the terrorist bandwagon is more commonly used. The American war of independence was duped acts of terror by the British but the American populace refer to the fighters as ‘patriots’.
Similar statements applies to the Moa Moa movement in Kenya, the South African fight for equality. Mandela was branded a terrorist by both Reagan and Thatcher, yet we Africans called him a freedom fighter. The Indian struggle for independence also triggers the British to call the resistant fighters terrorist whilst the Indians duped them hero’s.
However, the contrast in the use of words demarcate at the reasoning behind each conflict situation. The fight on secular basis and with secular agenda is different fighting on a religious front and a religious slogan. Mandela is a secular politician, Washington was a secular leader, Ghandi was a religious figure but his doctrine discourages violence etc.
Is all the negative terms against Muslims the broader struggle of a secularisation of the worlds? Or is it what some writers referred to as the ‘Whiteman’s burden’.
Part 3, 4, 5 to come later. the idea is to reach the point hwre the marabouts and soninkes clash in the senegambia in part 3 or 4 |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
toubab1020
12312 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2009 : 00:40:22
|
Good Night everyone,sleep tight, I await the next chapter of this complicated subject tomorrow. |
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
Edited by - toubab1020 on 28 May 2009 00:41:57 |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
557 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2009 : 21:54:17
|
Santanfara,
My apologies for replying to your postings late. I have been busy.
Your words are in red and my responses to it in blue.
'Tamsier, the traditional rullership you are bent on defending were the ones whose activities caused the people to side with upcoming relgious activist like Maba and co.'
I am not bend on defending any traditional rulers and as evident before in a previous discussion you and I had a while back, I have repeatedly told you the old kings were just as bad - and gave you an example were the Mbooj and Joof family for example used their pagan religion to reinforce their power. I am not defending anyone but only relating the facts of history.
'Our traditidonal rullers in different parts colaborated with western traders to exploit us, by gaing raw materials from our lands on the cheap, when the rullers started causing noise, the west then decided it will be much cheapers and safer to have the Africans do the work for them for free on their own soil, this is how slavery started. Yet, you see no wrong with those crimes. The Chatholic church was blessing ships sailing to Africa for slaves regularly.'
I couldn’t agree more, and again, I have never defended some of the activities of the old pagan kings as explicit in my previous discussions with you. However, you and several Senegambian Muslims seems to believe that Islam freed people from slavery. This is utter nonsense. Even the great Alhaji Omar Taal kept slaves. Maba of course kept slaves during his jihads. When he conquered Rip, pagans were given two choices:
The shaving of the head - the beginning of conversion or death. Many of course choose death. Those who choose to convert were treated as slaves. They will become slaves until they become long lasting disciples or prove their valour in his army. Until then, their slave tag will remain. I urge you to visit the national archive du Senegal were you will also find a letter from Maba Jahou to the Lamtoro of Futa begging him for support. In addition to this, people were also taken in as slaves.
'Now coming to Islamic history. the fact is clear tamsiers, It was muslim historians who wrote about Islamic history. The west were what they termed as the dark ages when Islam was florishing and the history was recorded. The west later translated the works of Muslim historians and distort the areas they thought could serve their purpose of misinformation. The same misinformation you are trading on here as facts.'
Santanfara, even if I accept this point, you failed to acknowledge that not only can I read and translate [Arabic] - ok I may not be as fluent as some of you, nevertheless, I have read the original sources and the source interpreted by Muslim scholars themselves. As I have said on several occasions, I do not take one scholar’s work as ‘the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’, I also have a habit of cross-referencing things. Unless you are telling me Arabic scholars like Ibn Battuta, Al Umari, their predecessors and their modern day successors - Islamic scholars are fabricating the facts against their own religion, I find that argument extremely ‘beautiful'.
'Yes, indeed, each system or religous idea tries to make those who accept it practice it as it should be. That is brainwashing. whether you are mechanic, a dentish, historian etc. This is why people follow a methodology of doing things. I meant brainwashing in that sense.
In the army, young men/women are brainwash to be professional killers. they obey and then complian, is that not brainwashing good man?
do you have any problem with that? if you do, then write about those apparent injustice as well.'
Oh! Believe me I have. I have talked about those in the past even slavery in Mauritania and other parts of the world. Not only have I talked about this particular issue [i.e. slavery] but I have also joined forces with respectable organisations to ensure this ghastly, selfish and unjustifiable treacherous act seizes to continue.
The reason why I am here talking about Islam is because we are talking about Islam. It is appropriate in this instance and other discussion hence the reason I talk about it. When it is appropriate to talk about other injustices, oh! Believe me I certainly will talk about them.
'And you with your intellence reject God and think that, our ancestors never did any wrong in their kingdoms. It is the foreign muslims who came and massacar them, and change them. what a load rubbish.'
Again, I have never said our ancestors did no wrong. My stance is and has always been the case: ‘religion is one of the greatest divider of people’. People lived more peacefully than they lived in when this foreign religion landed on our shores. Although I accept that different tribes had different names they called their gods, there was nevertheless a sense of respect and tolerance before this religion [Islam] took its hold in masses on our shores.
Even women were respected and allowed to be queens - something that appalled the Islamic chronologist - Ibn Battuta ‘women are allowed to be queens and kings take their mother’s name as middle names… in my land women are domesticated’. I have already explained previously why kings took their mother’s names as middle names. Again, it was to show pure royal descent [on both sides of their parents]. In addition to the gueno [paternal bloodline] and their meen/tiim [maternal bloodline] - it enabled kings to show that they are of pure royal stock who can trace royalty on both sides of their parents. The title ‘Garmi’ was bestowed on such persons [regardless of whether they were kings or not] - they were members of the royal family. This was seen as a right to rule.
As regards to foreigners bringing the foreign religion, I have already discussed with you previously the fall of Ghana, in the 11th century who did not only wanted to convert people, to their religion, but to steal the Awdaghost trading post [I refer you to al Umari - you will find him in the history section where I laid out what he has to say about the matter. By the way he was an Arab -Muslim and not a ‘European who wanted to distort Islam’]
You accuse me of talking rubbish. To assume that Islam did not use the sword to spread its religion is naïve or shows lack of knowledge of your own faith. Not only has this been proven in history - [Byzantine - just in case you didn’t know or you’ve forgotten - see history and religious section], but it is also imbedded in the very holy book of the Muslims - the Quran - all originating from the ‘holy book’:
Bukari: v5bb59n369 ‘Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Kab bin Asraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Mohammad bin Mas lama got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet said, ‘Yes,’ Mas lama said, ‘Then allow me to say false things in order to deceive him.’ The
Prophet said, ‘You may say such things.’
Not only is killing accepted by Islam against non Muslims or non believers as they would say, going against your oath is also permitted never mind telling tales as evident from the above passage. I give you two more passages from the Ishaq were going against your oath is allowed:
Ishaq:519 'Haj-jaj said to the Apostle, ‘I have money scattered among the merchants of mecca, so give me permission to go and get it.’ Having got Muhammad’s permission, he said, ‘I must tell lies.’ The Apostle said, ‘Tell them.’
And
Ishaq:365/Tabari VII:94 'Muhammad bin Mas lama said, ‘O Messenger, we shall have to tell lies.’ ‘Say what you like,’ Muhammad replied. ‘You are absolved, free to say whatever you must.’
This is justified on the following grounds:
Bukhari:V7B67N427 'The Prophet said, 'If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.'
'If you cannot differenciate the action of a man and the teachings of his faith, then it is futile to engage you.'
Oh believe me I certainly can.
'The French when it serves them sided with the Islamic leaders, but they were only doing that for strategic reason, the French efforts againsg Islam suppasses that of all western country. That is a fact, eminent writers like Voltaire and his ilks were harden Islamaphobes like yourself.'
Or to put it another way [the true way] when it serves the Islamic leaders, they sided with the French. As when evident at Ngaye after the brutal assassination of Buur Kumba Ndama Mbooj - when people committed suicide by answering the calling of Wally Nyang rather than face dishonour by converting to Islam. Also as evident when they go against their treaties signed with the French. Just so that you know, Alhaji Sekou was a great friend to the French whom have supported him on several occasions before they ultimately turned on him.
'The Sufi muslims leaders that emerged after some of the traditional rullers were defeated, were not using Islamic methods to rule or rule the people, infac they wre ruling according the their own inventions.'
It seizes to amaze me when Muslims try to distance themselves from other Muslims who perpetrate certain acts they do not deemed politically correct, by 'saying Islam does not permit it' when in fact the Quran states those acts are justified. You see this in modern day terrorism etc.
'It is evident that, some proud black Africans are bitter about the prevalence of the Islamic religion in some part of Africa, especially the SeneGambia region.'
I am an African, and very proud of my African ancestry [of course some may argue how can you be proud of something like that which was only an accident of birth, I take that point as well] -; nevertheless I am still proud of my African lineage [the reasons are of course personal to me]. I can assure you I am not bitter about the prevalence of Islam in some parts of Africa, I only wonder.
‘Indeed Islam came to Senegambia and other parts of the world, but not mainly by the military means that is so blown out of proportion by critics. The Senegambia region witness what historians classified as peaceful preaching (Thomas Arnold 1896).'
Peaceful preaching! What period is this Thomas Arnold talking about and what is the title of his book. Is he talking about the 11th century when the Almoravids landed on our shores? I can tell you that was not peaceful. The Almoravids who formed a movement ravaged Asia even Europe as well as The Ghanian royal family who they have never forgotten for their seizure of the Awdaghost post from their hands a century earlier. - See Umari ‘book of roads and kings’. I can go on and on about that period and the battles on our soil in the name of Islam but I have already mentioned those elsewhere [history and religion section].
Or perhaps you are talking about the late 19th century, - judging by your title - ‘Thomas Arnold 1896’.
May I refer you to the battle of Somb, the massacre at Kerr Ngorr, the invasion of saloum, the ravage of Badibou which led to the fatal death of Matt Jaka, etc. All of these in the name of Islam. What peaceful preaching are you talking about or should I ask what peaceful preaching is this Scholar talking about? The only peaceful conversion happened in the 20th century after the Muslims have acquired their wish the in the previous century. Even in the early 20th century, those whose grandparents had converted in the last century just adopted what it was simply passed to them [Islam].
'Accepting that argument is akin to ridiculing the social fabrics that existed with our ancestors. It is like saying that, our ancestors were so weak; a couple Arab with swords knots on their doors and force them to accept Islam. This is a baseless argument.'
I think I have answered this issue before, regarding the battle of sali 1035 AD [see history sections]. In that battle, the rabel king - War Jabi who had converted invited the Arabs on his land and formed a coalition against the pagans. That battle went on for years before the pagans were finally defeated. Oh no! does that seem like the actions of weak people? I don’t think so.
‘De Lacy in his book ‘Islam at the cross Road’ page 8 states that “history makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated.”
Where is his evidence?
Perhaps you or him can explain these passages to me:
Ishaq:548 'By Allah, the black mass has spread. Abu Bakr said, 'There is not much honesty among these people nowadays.’
Koran 5:41 'Whom ever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.'
Who are the black mass that Allah wants to disgrace and then torture?
‘The Qur’an extols muslims to engage in intelligent discussions in matters of religion with those who erroneously attack Islam on false pretext. It recommends dialogue in chapter 16:125 “invite all to the way of your lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.”
If that is the case, justify these:
Bukhari:v2b24n555 'I heard the Prophet say, ‘Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.’
Koran 5:101 'Believers! Do not ask questions about things which if made plain and declared to you, may vex you, causing you trouble.'
Koran 5:102 'Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account they lost their faith and became disbelievers.'
'But since Islamaphobes aren’t interested in clear statements like the two verses above, they practiced what is now commonly referred to as ‘taking verses out of context and joining them with others verses’ to provide a wrongful meaning, thus deliberately creating misconception.'
Is this your insurance policy, because you know I was going to come up with sources from your holy book?
I swear I did not make them up, they are from your holy book.
If anything, I respect your opinion. I respect your devotion to your religion and how you try to use sources [although most of them flawed] to justify your opinions without resulting to insult of my religion without grounds just because your are cornered, which cannot be said for others on this site. I hope I have afforded you the same respect. You do not have to justify to me certain acts of our forefathers. We all know their wrongs. Rise above the old kings and look beneath the ordinary people my friend - the people who really matter, and there you will find great tolerence and love. Before, Senegambian’s mass conversion to Islam in the late 19th century, the Geweel caste would risk their own lives and personal wealth by buying many slaves [regardless of tribe]they can afford before they [the potential slaves] boarded the European ships. These slaves were then set free - thereby freeing them from that ghastly trade. This in addition to war captives given to the geweel of the king by the king to do as he wish [walli geweel] is the origin of the term ‘Jami - geweel’ - whose origin means a slave bought or given to a geweel who is about to be set free. This is the reason why the descendants of those potential slaves still to this day give thanks to the descendants of the geweels in memory of that tie - who ancestors saved their ancestors from slavery. This is the reason why you will always hear jami - geweel but will never ever hear jami -geer. During mass conversion of the 19th century, all this old principle was put aside as many geweel converts themselves kept slaves during their jihads.
|
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 29 May 2009 23:43:53 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 17:05:14
|
Thanks Tamsier. I am a bit engaged but since i wrote all the accounts, i cannot comment on your full response now but will do in due course.
Part 3
The Rise Of Islam in the Gambia
Historians documented that, the rise of the Marabout terminology in the Gambia occurred in the nineteenth century. Marabouts are people who follow the Islamic religion, the term was use to refer to the clerics of North Africa, whilst the Soninke is equivalent to a Pagan or an unbeliever.
The starting point in describing people as Marabout or Soninke can be based on the mere consumption of Alcohol. All alcohol drinkers are term Soninke whilst non-drinkers are marabouts. The soninkes consist of the traditional aristocracy and their loyal supporters.
Traders coming and going from North Africa preach Islam and some muslim faithful journey to spread the word of God in different kingdoms. The Portuguese explorer valentine Fernandes, a 15th century traveller observed that, Muslim advisers were established in the courts of some traditional rulers in Tukrur and some states along the Gambia River.
However, Dr Charlotte Quinn (1972) in her thorough historical research to the Gambia and going through records maintained that Dyula or caravan traders from then centre of the Manding Empire Mali “systematically introduce Islam to the Gambia in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries...” It is natural after some time natives that had adopted the religion will also start to teach it or spread it to neighbours and other localities. It is observed that, the preaching of Islam by Gambians to Gambians happen around the 17th century.
The traditional rulers were well aware of the potentials for a change to their power structure by the Muslims. As a precaution, they barred Muslims from holding positions of power and political positions apart from advisers. Although Muslim clerics were accorded a good welcome into local communities, this was due to the skills of the marabouts in educating, the practice of what now refer to spiritual doctoring or magic and medicine. Even non-believers do utilises some of the expertise of the travelling clerics (marabouts).
The art of marabourism started as far back as when Mungo Park was journeying through west Africa. Park (1795) discovers leather amulets worn by both animist and Muslims alike as protection against evil spirits and for self-defence. Hacquard (1855) also reported that, the Mansa of Jarra have his special marabouts who manufacture all sorts of amulets for him, which he wear on important occasions. Even though Soninke or pagan rulers did not accept Islam, they value the prayers of the marabouts when in distress political situations.
Oral history reports that, the rulers of Kwinella in Kiang sort the prayers of marabouts for the attainment of successes. Jobson 1851 a missionary reported seeing marabouts according prayers to cattle caravans crossing the river Gambia. Berenger-Feraud (1879) found the practice of Qur’anic writings on wooden boards and the washing of it for medicine purposes common. Captain Washington (1838) narrated an account one young Muslim boy Muhammad Ceesay who travels from Niani Maru to Darsilame in Wulli, currently Sandu in search of Qur’anic teacher. He further narrated the master had several children who he taught and tended to. Again Mungo Park elaborated on an Islamic school he visited at Kamalia a mandingo village were children from pagan origins are taught Islamic knowledge and ceremonies are held for them after completion of certain stages.
The existence of Muslim among the Gambian communities living and coexisting peacefully was further supported by a map that J.M. Gray (1940) said was drawn in 1751 detailing “six morro kunda” (Muslim Villages). The villages of the Muslims were found in Niumi, Tomana, Niani, Eropina, Jarra, Kombo, Salum and Badibu. Also in 1850 the Mandingo and Torodo community living among the trading communities in Jokadu, Badibu, Niani and Fula travellers from Futa Jalon called themselves Marabouts.
Islam was the minority religion up to the mid of the nineteen century, and Hecquard explained that the Jola and Serere tribe remain animist when some other tribes were entering into Islam through travelling traders. O’connor (1853) wrote that in 1850, the biggest mosque was said to be in Sabejy (Sukuta) Kombo.
Part 4 and 5 to come lat |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2009 : 01:52:55
|
The distortion is all about politics and we have related issues from Obama's speech under Bantaba World Politics topic; http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7635
"As salaamu alaikum!" 
The ultimate is all about PEACE & HARMONY! SALAAM IS NOTHING BUT A PRAYER FOR PEACE. Interprets as; "MAY PEACE BE ONTO YOU!" |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2009 : 11:36:26
|
Tamsier, much respect to you for your responses.
Again, you misunderstood a clear pattern in history which is, that many writing interpolated among authentic records is what you have been quoting non-stop.
Even the most harden enemies of Islam would agree that, lying is the most hated habit anyone can have. It is the same repeation of the distorted errors salam Rushdy did. Trying to say Ibn Ishaq said this, Bukary said that.
Tamsier, it is easy to google many of this errors you repeated. The prophet of Islam’s one keynote speech is “say the truth even if it is against your soul”. “say the truth however bitter it it may be”. Now you are repeating a complete fabrication and lie passing it off as evidence. Amazing.
I am not disputing your apparent understanding of the Arabic language, but being able to cut and paste and understanding a statement are two different things. The quran was reveal in stages, and each ayah or verse address issues in there right context. What you are doing is like a doctor trying to apply a treatment with the wrong diagnosis.
Ibn Batuta was a travelling historian who has his feelings and understanding of events according to his social background. His records are highly respected, but he too wasn’t immune to being misquoted by translators.
I made it clear to you that, the expansionist muslim rulers were strengthening their position of power just like the European and other African rulers were doing. Islam have little significance in that pursuit.
One being a Muslim and following what Islam preaches are two different things. You continue to try to make a person and a teaching one and the same thing. I would have hope you will not be making such blatant errors.
Now coming to the Senegambian traditional rulers and their successors the Muslim jihadist, you are distance yourself from the traditional rulers, whilst inherently, you support them and feel for them. You try to relive that past legacies.
Now quoting you directly:
“I am not bend on defending any traditional rulers and as evident before in a previous discussion you and I had a while back, I have repeatedly told you the old kings were just as bad - and gave you an example were the Mbooj and Joof family for example used their pagan religion to reinforce their power. I am not defending anyone but only relating the facts of history.” Tamsier
You see Tam, you don’t have to make that open. It is detectable in your narratives here. And yes, i have followed your misconception of Islamic history in here and the history section. To be frank you are not on your own.
“I couldn’t agree more, and again, I have never defended some of the activities of the old pagan kings as explicit in my previous discussions with you. However, you and several Senegambian Muslims seems to believe that Islam freed people from slavery. This is utter nonsense. Even the great Alhaji Omar Taal kept slaves. Maba of course kept slaves during his jihads. When he conquered Rip, pagans were given two choices:
The shaving of the head - the beginning of conversion or death. Many of course choose death. Those who choose to convert were treated as slaves. They will become slaves until they become long lasting disciples or prove their valour in his army. Until then, their slave tag will remain. I urge you to visit the national archive du Senegal were you will also find a letter from Maba Jahou to the Lamtoro of Futa begging him for support. In addition to this, people were also taken in as slaves.” Tamsier
I have written a bit on the activities of the likes of Umar Taal. They like the former rulers were interested in replacing the tyrannical traditional rulers. I agree, people were taken as slaves by the Taal and Maba, that was what they found. They didn’t intend to change that status quo. Again, my next response will highlight that.
“Santanfara, even if I accept this point, you failed to acknowledge that not only can I read and translate [Arabic] - ok I may not be as fluent as some of you, nevertheless, I have read the original sources and the source interpreted by Muslim scholars themselves. As I have said on several occasions, I do not take one scholar’s work as ‘the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’, I also have a habit of cross-referencing things. Unless you are telling me Arabic scholars like Ibn Battuta, Al Umari, their predecessors and their modern day successors - Islamic scholars are fabricating the facts against their own religion, I find that argument extremely ‘beautiful'.” Tamsier
Tam, being able to read and write in Arabic is not enough to make one free from prejudice. In fact most of the orrientalist are expert Arabic speakers. They learn it to twist the facts, just like i mention about SOAS.
The damage to mislead others about Islamic history commences during the translation process. Islamic scholars were cited out of context and misinterpretation took precedence over accuracy and truth.
“Oh! Believe me I have. I have talked about those in the past even slavery in Mauritania and other parts of the world. Not only have I talked about this particular issue [i.e. slavery] but I have also joined forces with respectable organisations to ensure this ghastly, selfish and unjustifiable treacherous act seizes to continue.
The reason why I am here talking about Islam is because we are talking about Islam. It is appropriate in this instance and other discussion hence the reason I talk about it. When it is appropriate to talk about other injustices, oh! Believe me I certainly will talk about them.” Tamsier
Time will tell on that. Injustices can be committed by anyone, be it religious or not. There are muslim who are active too fighting different forms of injustices, those that make them bad too simply for being Muslim? It is sad that, all you see in a great religion of islam is the negative action of the very few. If life is all about finding faults, there will be no human standing.
“Again, I have never said our ancestors did no wrong. My stance is and has always been the case: ‘religion is one of the greatest divider of people’. People lived more peacefully than they lived in when this foreign religion landed on our shores. Although I accept that different tribes had different names they called their gods, there was nevertheless a sense of respect and tolerance before this religion [Islam] took its hold in masses on our shores.
Even women were respected and allowed to be queens - something that appalled the Islamic chronologist - Ibn Battuta ‘women are allowed to be queens and kings take their mother’s name as middle names… in my land women are domesticated’. I have already explained previously why kings took their mother’s names as middle names. Again, it was to show pure royal descent [on both sides of their parents]. In addition to the gueno [paternal bloodline] and their meen/tiim [maternal bloodline] - it enabled kings to show that they are of pure royal stock who can trace royalty on both sides of their parents. The title ‘Garmi’ was bestowed on such persons [regardless of whether they were kings or not] - they were members of the royal family. This was seen as a right to rule.” Tamsier.
The way you portray our ancestor is such that, they were forced and wrong. They weren’t forced by Muslim in total. Yes some part of African witness muslim armies expanding their control. That was political reason. What Thomas Arnold did was separate the activities of politician and that of missionary Muslims. you on the other hand is busy mixing up the two. I know we all have to justify our reason for detesting things, but honestly you barricade all muslims in one room and define them the same.
Another area you are found wanting on the issue of women. It is the quran that gave women rights of inheritance, rights to own their own properties and also three chapters in the Qur’an are dedicated to women. The prophet Muhammad use to sort the opinions of his wives in important decisions. In fact, during the Ottoman periods, women use to own their estate which interestingly was a surprise to western navigators. I hope you came across such records as well.
“As regards to foreigners bringing the foreign religion, I have already discussed with you previously the fall of Ghana, in the 11th century who did not only wanted to convert people, to their religion, but to steal the Awdaghost trading post [I refer you to al Umari - you will find him in the history section where I laid out what he has to say about the matter. By the way he was an Arab -Muslim and not a ‘European who wanted to distort Islam’]” Tamsier.
Yes, i read about that during my history lessons. Again, i refer you above. The actions of politicians doesn’t represent the religion they belong. As i said to you in an earlier response, we cannot prosecute communism for the actions of communist, neither can we prosecute facism for the actions of racist. Some North Africans bent on acquiring Gold went on an adventure, that was their aim. Islam states that, “whatever reason a person migrated for that is what he/she gets”. “actions are judged according to the intentions”. The intentions of those expansionists are territorial and material acquisition. We analyse them according to that, not their faith.
“You accuse me of talking rubbish. To assume that Islam did not use the sword to spread its religion is naïve or shows lack of knowledge of your own faith. Not only has this been proven in history - [Byzantine - just in case you didn’t know or you’ve forgotten - see history and religious section], but it is also imbedded in the very holy book of the Muslims - the Quran - all originating from the ‘holy book’:” tamsier
Or yeah, islam was spread by the sword. I guess so was western civilisation and Christianity, communism, facism, Zionism, etc. A religion cannot be spread by force Tamsier becus, religion is about believe. Just like you and I can agree to disagree, even if either of us is under pressure, we will only pretend. So i cited earlier, the quran forbid forced conversion. In the right context, when the pagan Arab use to attack muslims in medina, the muslims will respond and engage them. In a battle field, it is forbidden to kill a believer, it that case, when a Pagan declare that he accept Islam, he is let go. So verses were reveal to that respect. Those verses are a favourite misquotation by anti-muslim writers.
“Bukari: v5bb59n369 ‘Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Kab bin Asraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Mohammad bin Mas lama got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet said, ‘Yes,’ Mas lama said, ‘Then allow me to say false things in order to deceive him.’ The
Prophet said, ‘You may say such things.’ “ tamsier
This is the most absurd lie i ever read. The prophet of Islam is accuse here of allowing a companion to lie? I guess, it is all ok to peddle the misquotes and lies.
“Not only is killing accepted by Islam against non Muslims or non believers as they would say, going against your oath is also permitted never mind telling tales as evident from the above passage. I give you two more passages from the Ishaq were going against your oath is allowed:
Ishaq:519 'Haj-jaj said to the Apostle, ‘I have money scattered among the merchants of mecca, so give me permission to go and get it.’ Having got Muhammad’s permission, he said, ‘I must tell lies.’ The Apostle said, ‘Tell them.’” Tamsier
My friend killing is not accepted in islam for fun. Indeed when a person commit murder, and he is found to be guilty, Islam have several option for such people. One of those is to allow the family to forgive the killer and allow him to compensate. The way you put forward the conjecture here are very impressive Tamsier. Islam categorises lying as sign of a hypocrite. The Qur’an state that the “hypocrites will be punish in the lowest dept of the hell fire”. This is why i respect you. You are open about your misconception of Islam, you write them and accept them as truth. Unlike some who will hide behind every reason to lie about islam and fabricate ideas. Lying is categorise as a major sin in islam. It is count as the leeway to many other vices. Lying is not something accepted in islam. The prophet of islam says “ say truth even if it is against your soul”. Under no circumstances as the statement you made happen. Those are part of the lies and fabrication interpolated in some hadith which has been exposed by all scholars.
The Haj haj episoud you mention is sort of a fairytale. Never happen. It is like the salman Rushdy fabrication. This are the kind of lies Muslim scholars are exposing each and very day. In fact, there are hundreds of website peddling this kind of lies.
“Ishaq:365/Tabari VII:94 'Muhammad bin Mas lama said, ‘O Messenger, we shall have to tell lies.’ ‘Say what you like,’ Muhammad replied. ‘You are absolved, free to say whatever you must.’” Tamsier
Again you are quoting Ibn ishaq, he is the most misquoted writer among muslim writers. Fascinating. Not true.
“This is justified on the following grounds:
Bukhari:V7B67N427 'The Prophet said, 'If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.” Tamsier
so what is wrong with expiating an oath?
“Or to put it another way [the true way] when it serves the Islamic leaders, they sided with the French. As when evident at Ngaye after the brutal assassination of Buur Kumba Ndama Mbooj - when people committed suicide by answering the calling of Wally Nyang rather than face dishonour by converting to Islam. Also as evident when they go against their treaties signed with the French. Just so that you know, Alhaji Sekou was a great friend to the French whom have supported him on several occasions before they ultimately turned on him.” Tamsier
that is not the fault of Islam, it the action of a single muslim. Why blame islam for that?
“It seizes to amaze me when Muslims try to distance themselves from other Muslims who perpetrate certain acts they do not deemed politically correct, by 'saying Islam does not permit it' when in fact the Quran states those acts are justified. You see this in modern day terrorism etc.” Tamsier
It is just like when a serere man burgles other people, we don’t blame the whole serere community for that crime. Likewise when a mandingo man commits rape, we don’t blame the entire mandingo tribe for that. That is why Muslims distance themselves from actions of criminal elements. The same way western whites distance themselves from the atrocities of the fascist governments and the racist actions of the Apartheid government who use the bible for their actions etc.
I am an African, and very proud of my African ancestry [of course some may argue how can you be proud of something like that which was only an accident of birth, I take that point as well] -; nevertheless I am still proud of my African lineage [the reasons are of course personal to me]. I can assure you I am not bitter about the prevalence of Islam in some parts of Africa, I only wonder. Tamseir.
We share the love of Africa Tamsier. I am equally proud of my ancestry. There is no reason to wonder Tamsier. The people then knew about their existing believes and that of Islam. They chose the later, it was their choice. They know dancing to the trees and rivers and venerating stones and woods were a waste of time. those things are their own creations. They accepted the believe that man is a vicegerent on earth, a time bound creature who will answer to his maker one day. It doesn’t matter whether one accept that God exist or not. It is just like the british government will careless if a couple of people think the government doesn’t have merit or doesn’t exist. All that the rulers want is for you to obey the laws of the land. The judges don’t care whether you think the law is useless or not, if you break it, you get punish. Similarly, God wish mankind to worship him and obey his commands. If you think that is ridiculous, well it doesn’t matter, you will face the music.
Or perhaps you are talking about the late 19th century, - judging by your title - ‘Thomas Arnold 1896’. Tamsier
Arnold wrote during that period. I know you knew that Tamsier. He like other historians wrote about the actions of the almoravids and the barbers. But what makes his work different is that, he distinguish between the expansionist rulers and Islam. He and other western writers who were honest and truthful in their accounts knew, islam reach many through trade and mutual respect. Your problem is intertwining two separate episode. It is like if we mix the Bush wars and the evangelist activities in Kuddishtan. They are two different things. Although some American soldiers are found distributing bibles in Afghanistan, that was not their main aim. The aim is to spread democracy, secure oil pipelines and find the elusive Osama. Christianity comes last. People are more impress with the behaviour of the people before accepting their words. Force cannot make anyone a muslim. Islam is internalising the believe in one God, which should be done with peace of mind and clear understanding.
It is interesting you keep making reference to us not knowing our history. That is arrogant on your part, just becus we know which account are accurate and those that are base on fallacy doesn’t mean we are ignorant of deceptive ploys. Many here avoid religious section becus, they see religion as a personal issue. That doesn’t mean they cannot respond to you much better than me.
“shaq:548 'By Allah, the black mass has spread. Abu Bakr said, 'There is not much honesty among these people nowadays.” Tamsier.
Ibn ishaq again. I told you. He is the one writer that misquoters’ like citing. In fact the sentence doesn’t make sense. And again a fabrication.
“Koran 5:41 'Whom ever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.” Tamsier.
The chapter is Suratul Maida. Again you have taken words out and left others. The verse was addressing the prophet Muhammad. Clicking on Quran explorer will sort out the out of text quotation.
“Bukhari:v2b24n555 'I heard the Prophet say, ‘Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.’
Koran 5:101 'Believers! Do not ask questions about things which if made plain and declared to you, may vex you, causing you trouble.'
Koran 5:102 'Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account they lost their faith and became disbelievers.” Tamsier
As for the hadith of Buhary, i am sure many people here hates irrelevant questionings. Becus asking valid and important questions brings important answers. People asking about things they already knows is futile. You cannot give meanings to hadith that it doesn’t convey my friend.
Again suratul maida 5:101 is translate with a twist. Vex. Huh. That verse was also an incomplete translation. the verse deals with those people who think by asking endless questions will make them good Muslims. it is an advice to those people. I wonder what relevant that has on solidifying your query against islam. You are not an a scholar in Islam, and your misunderstanding of the verses and statement from the Qur’an does not in any way give credence to errorneous assumption. By misquoting and taken statements out of context is an age old trick, even the Catholci church that use to specialise in that have abandon that game. The late Pope john paul apologised for all those blatant misconceptions. I don’t have any problem with your believe that, your ideas are superior to that of Islam, that you don’t belief in revelation etc, but when you make efforts to transmit errors and unfounded claims, that is something i have a problem with.
The D-Day celebration is under way, where hundreds of young men were killed in trying to defeat a dictator, yet that dictator was pursuing an atheistic philosophy, a philosophy you promote and upheld. Can even compare the deaths caused by atheistic agendas to that of religious ones? Just becus the media fan and magnify religious problems doesn’t make them any bigger than the troubles big businesses, racist agendas etc based on the denial of God and the day of judgement. Religion is not divisive, people are. People divide each other according to race, language, culture, country and nationality, and many other sections.
Finally Tamsier, i respect your opinion and acknowledge your love the serere history. I would love to know about it and add it to my interest in history.
|
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
557 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2009 : 22:04:10
|
Santanfara,
As usual you rebut my citations as being misquoted or as being part of an anti Islamic Mafia whose goal is to bend the truth of Islam as evident in some of your posting some of which:
‘Again, you misunderstood a clear pattern in history which is, that many writing interpolated among authentic records is what you have been quoting non-stop.’
‘The damage to mislead others about Islamic history commences during the translation process. Islamic scholars were cited out of context and misinterpretation took precedence over accuracy and truth.’
‘Ibn Batuta was a travelling historian who has his feelings and understanding of events according to his social background. His records are highly respected, but he too wasn’t immune to being misquoted by translators.’
‘Those verses are a favourite misquotation by anti-muslim writers.’
“Bukari: v5bb59n369 ‘Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Kab bin Asraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Mohammad bin Mas lama got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet said, ‘Yes,’ Mas lama said, ‘Then allow me to say false things in order to deceive him.’ The
Prophet said, ‘You may say such things.’ “ tamsier"
‘This is the most absurd lie i ever read. The prophet of Islam is accuse here of allowing a companion to lie? I guess, it is all ok to peddle the misquotes and lies.’
‘The way you put forward the conjecture here are very impressive Tamsier. Islam categorises lying as sign of a hypocrite. The Qur’an state that the “hypocrites will be punish in the lowest dept of the hell fire”
‘Under no circumstances as the statement you made happen. Those are part of the lies and fabrication interpolated in some hadith which has been exposed by all scholars.’
‘Again you are quoting Ibn ishaq, he is the most misquoted writer among muslim writers.’
“This is justified on the following grounds:
Bukhari:V7B67N427 'The Prophet said, 'If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.” Tamsier
so what is wrong with expiating an oath?
The key phrase here is ‘something else better’. A criminal for example, may try to expiate an oath, just to save his own skin - ‘something else better’.
I tend to get this a lot from Muslims like you who refuse to acknowledge the flaws of Islam, but instead accused us of lying or misquoting your book [Quran] - as evident above.
‘made it clear to you that, the expansionist Muslim rulers were strengthening their position of power just like the European and other African rulers were doing. Islam have little significance in that pursuit.
One being a Muslim and following what Islam preaches are two different things. You continue to try to make a person and a teaching one and the same thing. I would have hope you will not be making such blatant errors.’
There is no error. Islam permit’s the killing of innocent people. It permit’s the killing of ‘none believers’, it permits rape, it permits enslavement, it permits all those bad things descent and reasonable people would find appalling. The Muslims you try to distance yourself from do these things because it is allowed by the Quran:
9:5 ‘Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. Take them captive…’
47:4 ‘When you meet unbelievers, smite at their necks at length, and when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly.’
‘Now coming to the Senegambian traditional rulers and their successors the Muslim jihadist, you are distance yourself from the traditional rulers, whilst inherently, you support them and feel for them. You try to relive that past legacies.’
How many times do I have to tell you I do not support certain old kings/royal families. If there is any doubt in this I advice you to re-read my previous last paragraph. Notwithstanding, not all of them were bad, many fought and died in the name of honour to preserve the people’s way of live be it against Islam or colonisation. So to blatantly group them as all bad is utter nonsense. By the way, I am not trying ‘to relive the past legacies’ .
‘I have written a bit on the activities of the likes of Umar Taal. They like the former rulers were interested in replacing the tyrannical traditional rulers. I agree, people were taken as slaves by the Taal and Maba….’
For once someone does not hold Tafsir Alhaji Omar Taal and Amath Jahou Bah on a pedestal and acknowledge their enslaving acts, compared to many Senegambian Muslims who hold these two as some form of mahdi and who encouraged mass conversions in the 19th century.
What do you mean by ‘They like the former rulers were interested in replacing the tyrannical traditional rulers.’
‘There are muslim who are active too fighting different forms of injustices, those that make them bad too simply for being Muslim? It is sad that, all you see in a great religion of islam is the negative action of the very few.’
Name me one descent and respectable Muslim organisation that is fighting injustices. There may be some, but I don’t know of any. Please enlighten me.
Yes! it is indeed sad that all I see in Islam is negative actions because I don’t know of any good deeds this religion has ever done - 1400 years since its birth. Please enlighten me.
‘Yes some part of African witness muslim armies expanding their control. That was political reason……. I know we all have to justify our reason for detesting things, but honestly you barricade all muslims in one room and define them the same.’
Only if they refused to acknowledge the flaws of their religion.
‘Thomas Arnold 1896’.He and other western writers who were honest and truthful in their accounts knew, Islam reach many through trade and mutual respect.
Ah! Of course you and some Muslims are willing to accept any Western historian as long as they serve the Muslim course and reject the works of others [be they westerners, Arabs, etc] as gross ‘interpolation of authentic records.’
‘It is interesting you keep making reference to us not knowing our history. That is arrogant on your part’
Whom have I accuse of not knowing their history on this particular topic?
You seem to be accusing me of lots of things these days.
‘Many here avoid religious section becus, they see religion as a personal issue. That doesn’t mean they cannot respond to you much better than me.’
Many here accuse me of being anti Islam and tend to insult.
“shaq:548 'By Allah, the black mass has spread. Abu Bakr said, 'There is not much honesty among these people nowadays.” Tamsier.
Ibn ishaq again. I told you. He is the one writer that misquoters’ like citing.
Here we go again. Of course you will say that. Why do Muslims like you always say ishaq is misquoted. I can understand misquoting someone [anyone] once or even twice. But misquoting an entire book! Come-on that is ridiculous.
Am I also misquoting Ishaq with this?
Ishaq 65279; 243:
‘I have heard the Apostle say whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nab - tal. He was a black man with long flowing hair, inflamed eyes, and dark cheeks.... Allah sent him down against to doom those who annoy the Prophet’
Or perhaps:
9:61: ‘Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, if a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey's heart.'
This seems to indicate that, if you are a black Muslim no matter how good your deeds are, you will never ever enter paradise. I find this fascinating. What this religion thinks about the African race is further imbedded in:
Quran 39:60 ‘On the day of judgment, those who told lies against Allah - their faces will turned black’
Quran 3:106 ‘On the day of judgement, some faces will be white and some faces will be black, to those whose faces will be black will be told - you rejected the faith, now taste the penalty for rejecting the faith."
This religion has no respect for the pure African race and their descents. It is a religion based on hate and instead of the so called African/black Muslims accepting the Quran in its original form rather than believing the nonsensical omissions quoted to them by imams or written, they will never get anywhere. This religion’s hatred of the Jews is legendary and no one should be surprised what it really think about the African race and to believe otherwise is either foolish or stupid. Thank the gods the Sereres of old Sine put a stop to this foreign religion landing on their land.
According to Bukhari, ‘Muhammad used to call his black slaves : Pug-nosed raisin-heads.’ To condone or justify this racism makes anyone as bad / as ghastly as Hitler.
‘As for the hadith of Buhary, i am sure many people here hates irrelevant questionings. Becus asking valid and important questions brings important answers. People asking about things they already knows is futile.’
Who is to decide whether they know it or not? Even if so, does it really matter? A religion which denies its followers or none followers the right to ask question indicate somethin is wrong with that religion.
‘You are not an a scholar in Islam…’
Thank the gods for that. Apart from showing the flaws of this religion - what it really stands for and its history, I have no interest in this religion.
‘Another area you are found wanting on the issue of women. It is the quran that gave women rights of inheritance, rights to own their own properties and also three chapters in the Qur’an are dedicated to women.’
Really! What about:
Quran 4:34 ‘As to those women who disobey [disobey men], reprimand them, refuse to share their beds, beat them…’
Quran 4:34 ‘Men are the managers of the affairs of women because Allah has preferred men over women and women were expended of their rights.’
Quran 4:3 ‘Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you will not be able to deal justly with them, then only one, or a captive [i.e. a slave].’
Fascinating. Again! encouraging slavery. |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 07 Jun 2009 15:26:44 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2009 : 01:26:06
|
Tamsier, in as much you try you cannot win in peddling errors and msiquote. I will continue to hit that home each time becus that is what you are calling your evidence. the reason i made it clear that Ibn ishaq is always misquote and his words taken out of context is that, Ibn Ishaq's writings are not among the authoritative hadith collections. It is hadly cited by islamic scholars. so for you an avid anti-Muslim, you would ofcourse like errors that have no bearing on islamic teachings and ethic. so i am not even wasting my time responding the same errors all over again.
"There is no error. Islam permit’s the killing of innocent people. It permit’s the killing of ‘none believers’, it permits rape, it permits enslavement, it permits all those bad things descent and reasonable people would find appalling. The Muslims you try to distance yourself from do these things because it is allowed by the Quran:
9:5 ‘Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. Take them captive…’
47:4 ‘When you meet unbelievers, smite at their necks at length, and when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly.’Tamiser
There is error all over your explanation. i stated in my response to you that, taking verse out of context and leaving out continuing veres is what folks like you are good at. it is like some one narrating an incident and leaving relevant parts and saying things he wish to say. in a court of law such statements are thrown out. read suratul Tawba 9:5 onward instead of leaving out the whole text. you aim is to comveny a misleading a statement, which many with sound minds can detect.
Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the verse you are refering are talking about a battle field. when the pagans who harassed and killed muslims for no reason aim to continue inflcintig harm on the beleivers, God advice them to defend themselves. That don't be afraid, when you find them kill them, becus they will kill you. I am sure any sane person will defend himself from death if the person can. May be you will not.
Islam is base on the peace that one attain from the relationship he/she has with God the one. Peddle all the erros brother man, that wouldn't change the truth one bit.
The verses on men and their relationship with women are also in a context. the life of the prophet Muhammad prove that he has never lay his hand on any of his wives. we as muslims accept polygamy. we don't however accept one wife a countless girl friends. The prophet hadith continue to mention a good wife to a man is half of his religion. That paradise lies under the feet of the mother. That people should care for their mother three times more than their fathers. caring for one's parent is second after believeing in God the one without any partners.
Tamsier, the quran like other scriptures were reveal among societies where certain practices taking place need replacing. doing that means a stage by stage social reforms. that reform can't happen at once, so some verse were abbrogated after people's faith get stronger and they understand religion better. So for you, you can't even realise that, before quoting a verse and say-- it meant A and B, you should look into the reason for it revelation. i guess, you might be just in many of your judgement but sadly with Islam, you are deadly mislead. Good night.
|
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
557 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2009 : 15:15:39
|
Santanfara,
I shall highlight your quotes in red as usual.
‘read suratul Tawba 9:5 onward instead of leaving out the whole text. you aim is to comveny a misleading a statement, which many with sound minds can detect.’
‘Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the verse you are refering are talking about a battle field. when the pagans who harassed and killed muslims for no reason aim to continue inflcintig harm on the beleivers, God advice them to defend themselves.’
Um! Interesting that Muslims like you now change the literal meaning of the verse in order to suit your argument. Why would the pagans who have no overall objective to convert others to their faith [unlike Muslims and Christians] want to harass and kill Muslims? The pagans of the East had no choice but to defend their way of living when this religion {Islam} came into force and advocated jihad. They were accused of idol worshipping and if they did not convert to Islam, they will die by the sword and many did [remember Byzantine?]. Santanfara! I appreciate you want to defend your religion but I urge you to speak the truth. Don’t get me wrong, I am not accusing you of deliberately lying, I hope I will never do that, but I think you either do not understand the true meaning of the verse or you have naively believed what had been feed to you without question. This is exactly what it says:
Quran 9:5 ‘Fight and kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. Take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.’
Better?
‘The verses on men and their relationship with women are also in a context. the life of the prophet Muhammad prove that he has never lay his hand on any of his wives.’
Here we go again. As far as Muslims like you are concerned, everything is taken out of context, misquoted etc regarding the Quran.
May be Mohammed never laid his hands on any of his wives or may be he did. I don’t know and neither do you. Therefore, you cannot simply say ‘the life of the prophet Muhammad PROVE that he has NEVER lay his hand on any of his wives.’ In fact, going by your holy book [the Quran], it subjugates women, encourages men beating up women if they do not obey and encourages slavery [see above]. Since these things are encouraged in the Quran, it is not unreasonable to say that Mohammed encouraged it as well. I did not make it up it is in your holy book.
It is interesting as usual you have avoided my citations from the Quran [above] regarding what this foreign religion {Islam} really think about the African race.
Oh perhaps you have not been taught that yet. When you finally chooses to reply to this question, please refrain from citing - Al hujurat -13:
‘We have created you from a single male and female and made you into nations and tribes so that you may know each other. The most honourable of you in the sight of Allah are surely the righteous.’
This is the favourite citation of Muslims when defending the racist overtones of the Quran and hadiths. We all know this is utter nonsense and an addition. In spite of its lame attempt to address Islam’s racist and sexist ideology, it cannot left behind its past. Take a good look at the last sentence: ‘The MOST HONOURABLE of you in the sight of Allah are SURELY the righteous.’
Question: Who are the most honourable of you in the sight of Allah?
Answer: Surely it is the Arabs [inventors of this religion] - and this is evident in Islamic custom law.
I can see we will never agree about Islam.
Peace.
|
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 07 Jun 2009 15:24:37 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jun 2009 : 00:36:02
|
Tamsier, sorry for the delay is replying. i shall have more time next week God-willing. here is my brief response to you.
“Um! Interesting that Muslims like you now change the literal meaning of the verse in order to suit your argument. Why would the pagans who have no overall objective to convert others to their faith [unlike Muslims and Christians] want to harass and kill Muslims? The pagans of the East had no choice but to defend their way of living when this religion {Islam} came into force and advocated jihad. They were accused of idol worshipping and if they did not convert to Islam, they will die by the sword and many did [remember Byzantine?]. Santanfara! I appreciate you want to defend your religion but I urge you to speak the truth. Don’t get me wrong, I am not accusing you of deliberately lying, I hope I will never do that, but I think you either do not understand the true meaning of the verse or you have naively believed what had been feed to you without question. This is exactly what it says:” Tamsier
This is typical of anti-Islamic writers like you. As usual you pump up your chest with hot air and convince yourself that you know what you are talking about whilst all you have been doing is repeat bogus distortions.
Tamsier, if pagans are not interested in convincing people to their way of life, why are you bothering then criticising Islam with wrong accounts? This is another trick, pagans as well as those who believe in God all try to convince mankind that their way is the correct one. Even homosexuals are out you there promoting their life styles. That is why must fashion design companies are headed by gays. Their life style is reflected in their work.
I once encourage you to tell us the alternatives belief or life style you are promoting if you feel Islam has nothing good to offer, but you cannot provide anything. Human beings require both material and spiritual inputs; it is arrogance and pride that make some to feel that they are independent of God. Anxiety is the biggest medical condition around costing billion of pound each year to treat, what is the cause of that medical condition?
You lie here over and over by repeating lies. I have read and research Islam all my life, so if a cocky pagan like you feel that you more intelligent than us, then sir, stick with that confuse pride.
“Quran 9:5 ‘Fight and kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. Take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.’Better?” Tamsier
The reason why i refrain from quoting the Qur’an to you is simply due to the fact that, it will make no difference. It is like what the Mandingo singer would say “the futility in buying a dress for a plank of wood”. That verse above i stated earlier is reveal during a truce which was repeatedly broke by the pagans. They kept attacking the muslims and abusing them over and over. God the almighty open the door for them to defend themselves. Islam is a proactive religion. We don’t sit and wait to be wiped out. You can give any meaning to that verse you want. The commentary to the verse is applicable to war time situations. And if you read the verse 5:6-7, you find out that Allah is telling the Muslims, “if the disbelievers wish peace then provide them that” and if the muslims capture any disbeliever and that person intends peace, he should be escorted to a place of safety. Didn’t you see that verse expert Tamsier?
Which commander in our current recent history would treat POW’s like that? Not the Japanese, the Germans, The Dutch, The Americans, neither the British.
When arrogance is combined with ignorance, a cocktail of lethal misconception is the outcome. I am not in any way under estimating your quest to make your errors you call history believable, but what i take from them is the fact that, it is those lies and untruth that led many in the west into Islam. The sense of research and fact finding, collaborating statements, visiting the main sources and combining all the records, that is what serious researchers do. This is why, the majority of new Muslims are from the university campuses. The hate filled lecturers by political science professors, anthropologist, orrientalist and now the new field of global studies and diplomacy and peace resolution makes the students wonder, what the alternative views are. Those views make them open the Qur’an for themselves, with serious translations by real scholars. Not the mambo jumbo out of place Arabic-English translation giving whatever meaning the writer intends.
What has come out of your venomous postings are an ignorance which is pervasive, intrinsic and deep rooted, it is will be impossible to cure, becus your intention to even increase that gullibility. Your so-call expert knowledge of the Qur’an is short off a busker trying to judge a music talent show. It made me laugh when i keep coming across your boastful comments about me not coming across certain meanings.
Any serious reader of the Qur’an would come across numerous number of instructions for the reader to ponder, reflect, think, doubt and make a free choice. Becus the notion here that man is free to chose between good versus evil. The decision is his, and in the day of judgement, he shall be brought to account. In fact the common Islamic statement that “know me before you worship me” can cited by even infants in the street of Cairo to you.
Unfortunately, the many western translators of the qur’an allowed their racialist side of them got the better of them. Their agenda was to proof that the Arab, the black, the Asian is incapable of ruling himself, managing his affairs without the aid of the white man. They presume that, the Semitic people, like the black are inferior, in that case, all civilisations, believe system, thoughts and ways of life should be dictated by the white ruling minority. Islam which on some occasion go counter to the Judo-Christian believes system and ways of explaining religion was single out for special attention. This special attention never died out, originally it was open hostility, an attack of unimaginable abuse. From the Prophet Muhammad top down. Everyone was insulted, racially abused, etc. Then they tune it down a bit trying to change the meanings of the Qur’an to make muslim less prone to accepting the whole of the Qur’an. When that fails, they decided to colonise the muslims lands. There they created what is now regarded the “self-hating brown and black sahibs”. These are people who will do anything to make their masters happy. Even after the end of colonialism, the brown and black sahibs are whiter than the whites themselves. They ridicule everything black, Asian, Arab or Indian. They wrote books, stories, plays, etc everything to please the whites and ridicule their own. These kinds of writers are still around. It is easy to detect them, but now they hide behind secularism and modernity to disregard our cultures and traditions.
To get an accurate Qur’anic translation into English, especially those interested in the notion of Islam from the west, you have to scan many before the real meaning surfaces.
“Here we go again. As far as Muslims like you are concerned, everything is taken out of context, misquoted etc regarding the Quran. “ tamsier.
When you desist from deliberate distortion, then i will stop exposing you. Any serious researcher or commentator will balance his/her comments but you, what a loaded chronicle of bias!
“May be Mohammed never laid his hands on any of his wives or may be he did. I don’t know and neither do you. Therefore, you cannot simply say ‘the life of the prophet Muhammad PROVE that he has NEVER lay his hand on any of his wives.’ In fact, going by your holy book [the Quran], it subjugates women, encourages men beating up women if they do not obey and encourages slavery [see above]. Since these things are encouraged in the Quran, it is not unreasonable to say that Mohammed encouraged it as well. I did not make it up it is in your holy book.” Tamsier
What you need knowing is that, Muhammad embodied the Qur’an. He was a teacher as well a role model for us Muslim no matter how much pagans like you hate to hear that. So his conduct, his sayings, his manners is what interprets the verses of the QUR’AN for us. If any man beat his wife, that woman has the right to seek justice on such matters. The quran instruct the beating at a time when men were doing far worst things to their women. But the conditions of that allowance is unattainable by any man. So to correct a deep rooted injustice, there are concession which scholars interpret as the solidarity between a husband and wife, the love and care would transcend any hate and anger. Again the Prophet advice that, “men shouldn’t be finding faults with their partners” he said “the good in them far outweigh the minor short comings” each and every one of us if scrutinise will be found wanting in one or two issues. The prophet even advice “a husbands should not interrupt his own wife’s in their house”. Scholars further explain this to mean, when a man travels, he shouldn’t suddenly return to surprise his wife. This are all safe guards against injustice to women. The respect Islam accord women cannot be found in any system. This is why one third of all new converts to Islam are women. Tamsier we know everything about the life of Muhammad. We have all the accounts of it that is why we are today able to emulate him, even in eating and drinking. So be sad again. He has never laid a hand on his wives. In fact he said “a strong man is not the champion wrestler but someone who can control his anger”
Even in the U.K and America, many reform prisoners are converting into Islam in prisons. The impact of islam on the life of sincere followers cannot be analysed by you.
“It is interesting as usual you have avoided my citations from the Quran [above] regarding what this foreign religion {Islam} really think about the African race.
Oh perhaps you have not been taught that yet. When you finally choses to reply to this question, please refrain from citing - Al hujurat -13:
‘We have created you from a single male and female and made you into nations and tribes so that you may know each other. The most honourable of you in the sight of Allah are surely the righteous.’” Tamsier
Don’t make me laugh. The liberative nature of Islam makes it appealing to black who are conscious of true freedom. Freedom from the shackles of manmade injustices to the freedom one find in God. What you conceive as freedom is nothing but disguise slavery.
Islam showed the way on how man should attain freedom. Many acts of major rewards in Islam are related to freeing a slave. Slaves are encourage during the coming of Islam to free themselves by working to pay back the amounts pay on them.
Islam came into a world where slavery was practice in every corner of the world. No society was free from it, including the pagan ones you are promoting. The true nature of Islam teaching the liberation of men is the reason why The like of Malcom X and many black Americans choose Islam.
I quoted a hadith and you are openly playing tricks with that, pathetic brother man. For example, on how occasion can one say thank you to another person? When one is assisted, when one is offered things etc. So open your closed mind and see the plain fact.
The prophet use the best among you for many good actions. So the Qur’anic verse you mention is not unique in relating the best character of men. Righteousness can be use for nearly all good deeds, that verse is just one in many. I thought you as an expert would have known that.
“This is the favourite citation of Muslims when defending the racist overtones of the Quran and hadiths. We all know this is utter nonsense and an addition. In spite of its lame attempt to address Islam’s racist and sexist ideology, it cannot left behind its past. Take a good look at the last sentence: ‘The MOST HONOURABLE of you in the sight of Allah are SURELY the righteous.” Tamsier
This last statement has expose your double standard and real intentions. You just mention Suratul Hujurat above talking about the equality of men, yet you are talking about Islam allowing racism? What a joke.
The prophets last sermon in Macca is a blue print for universal brotherhood anywhere. “White is not superior to black, an Arab is not better than a non-Arab...”. hey i am just wasting my time. you are hell-bent of pleasing the anti-Islamic fan club, go on men, this is good. It is a good thing because many free minds are just looking for writers like you to allow them to compare and contrast for themselves.
Question: Who are the most honourable of you in the sight of Allah?
The sincere servants who do all their actions for the pleasure of God. This include righteous men and women. Who speak against evil and call to good. They perform their prayers, give alms, fast for the sake of God, perform Hajj and many more good actions. Caring for one’s parents, being sad when one commit evil and glad when a good deed is done. Taking ones religion seriously and accepting islam wholeheartedly. Not joking with ones faith.
Answer: Surely it is the Arabs [inventors of this religion] - and this is evident in Islamic custom law. Tamsier
I always knew you have some racist agenda against the Arabs, you will find them in their countries, go tell them. Islam is a universal religion which is not own by Arabs or black. So your silly trick again wouldn’t work. We has intelligent people chose to live an Islamic life. We are educated in secular and Islamic way, we use what modern world offered us and also worship our god along the way knowing full well that, one day we will perish. You can be arrogant and claim your super man status, that is until age caught up with you. Your statue, beauty, wealth and fame shall all depart away from you man. Even your mind which is something you have little control over shall one day be playing tricks with you. Go on, redicule God and people who believe in him.
Islam cannot be stopped or defeated, it cannot be slowed down Tamsier. You will suffer in sadness in vain.
Now it is your turn to tell us about the paganism you so much wish to promote, becus it is incomprehensible for one to attack another’s faith without providing an alternative life style.
|
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
