Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Islam for non-Muslims
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Islam for non-Muslims
Message Icon Topic: All this talk about...(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
Page  of 3 Next >>
Author Message
Anatolian
 
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 12 September 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 67
bullet Topic: All this talk about...
    Posted: 08 October 2007 at 1:21am
....the rules of war and how captives should be treated, as stated in the
Quran. Is that really really necessary? Why not follow true peace and not
seek revenge? What is the purpose of having guidelines to war. By doing so
the Qu'ran is ok with it just as long rules are applied to it.

Does anybody feel the same way here? If Islam truly is peace then why not
preach it?
IP IP Logged
Hayfa
Female  Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 June 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2370
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 3:41am

Well the question is are all people peaceful??? Have they ever been throug time? We are given limited free will are we not?

If so then bad things happen to good people. And therefor we are given guidelines to help guide us. Take for instance, if your family was murdered by a seriel killer, what woud you do? Whati s "peace" in this instance? Do we just forgive? What happens with this person?  War is a larger scale of, often wrongful actions. Not all war is wrong? Was the efforts by many countries to stop Hitler a wrong action? Were those countries not justified in going to defend themselves?

I became a Moslem and am a very peaceful person. And what are the guidelines to be used if someone attacks me, attacks my home? What should I do. What I like about Islam is that it is clear you have the right to defend yourself, against oppression, against injustice.

I grew up in one of those "turn the other cheek" households. And you know what, then they hit the othe cheek and they keep on hitting. There are bad people out there. And they don't have the same rights as if they abuse mine or anyone elses.

Rules, in my mind, are there to help everyone and to make it clear. 

When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi
IP IP Logged
peacemaker
Male Islam
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 29 December 2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3058
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 10:47am
This thread will be moved to "Islam for non-Muslims section."
Then which of the favours of your Lord will ye deny?
Qur'an 55:13
IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 11:33am

Perhaps its just practical.  Men wage war.  War is sometimes necessary.  The Bible says, "There is a time for peace, a time for war."

The Quran states that war is against oppressors and to free the oppressed.  Thus, it also stipulates how war is to be conducted.

Its easy to say preach peace, but where has that gotten the Tibetans.  Or the Buddhists of Myanmar. 

To fight against oppressors is a divine cause, to fight for freedom and security of the weak. However, if there is no rules, then there is only slaughter and the just side can easily begin taking revenge and become unjust in their dealings.

 

IP IP Logged
Anatolian
 
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 12 September 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 67
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 3:21pm
War has always been part of the human psych. Don't make me out as an
unrealistic person who believes in the unbelievable and impossible. I am
very real and intune and I know personally that defending yourself is of
upmost importance and one must not lay down to any invader or
occupier. Shouldnt religion keep us sane through all this? Shouldn't it give
us an alternative? Reason? Islam had given it's faithfull a rule book of war
obviously warfare is of major importance "Dar el Harb" (Land of War" or
"Non Islamic States") is a huge factor in Islam and it didctates to many
Muslims how one is suppose to live in these lands and not to
acknowledge the land's actual laws.

Muslims were the first to attack the Byzantines and ever since then it's
been on a march reaching Vienna and according to the Ottoman Sultan
(Who at the time happened to be the leader of the faithfull) to: "rest his
horses in the Vatican"...Just as he did in Hagia Sofia. This does not seem
to be a defensive stance but an offensive one which had begun in mid 7th
century Arabia and has continued, albeit in a non physical form in our
modern times but in a political and social level. Bring up the Crusades as
much as you like the difference is the Crusades had no religious motives
at all except a few bastard european princes who inheritted nothing
decide to inherit the Mid East by force. No Christian theology ever served
basis to what those men commited there.

You can use Tibet and Myanmar as an example of peacefull protests gone
wrong but you happen to ignore Ghandi and the British Empire in Sub-
Asia... Picking and choosing I see.
IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 3:52pm

Ghandi was a rarity... and I wish all would be as successful as him.  However, the Ghandi's of the world are charismatic saints.  The Dalai Lama is working towards this same kind of peaceful change.  But, what is it about Ghandi that made him succeed where the Dalai Lama fails. 

The Dalai Lama has the political backing, he has the internet and satellite TV to reach his followers around the world.  Yet, he's not been able to affect that great change.

I have seen many people point less to Ghandi and more to the over-extended British Empire.  The difference between Ghandi and the Dalai Lama is the focus given by the occupiers.  The British were thousands of miles from home and unable to hold a colony.  The Chinese are right on top of the Tibetans and able to put more troops and resources into the oppression.  The Chinese government is able to move troops faster than the British.  The success of the Indian independence movement comes AFTER the Second World War and after the British had been pounded on by the Germans, not once but twice.  They were no longer able to keep up their Empire.  And a country who just freed so many other countries from occupying forces was having a hard time justifying its own conquests.

So, did pacifism work?  Or was it a combination of social and political pressure coupled with the depleted resources of the oppressive empire.  People like to simplify the successful non-violent bid to gain independence, however, its not that simple.  A number of factors converged to make it a possibility. 

As for your claim that the Crusades had no religious motives.  You obviously have not read very much about the Crusades.  When the Pope ordered the Holy Land reclaimed from the Infidels, his objective was to secure the place of the Savior's birth from unbelievers.

There were waves of Crusades each with their own purposes.  I will give you that not all the Crusades were given a religious objective, but many of them were called on by the Church for religious reasons.  The want to secure the Holy sites. 

Now, as for the Dar el Harb.  I have done a search on this book of yours.  It seems I can only find it referred to on anti-Islamic websites.  I could not find any references supporting it on Islamic websites.  I wonder why that is. 

Of course, if you want to know about Mormons, ask an anti-Mormon.  If you want to know about the Jews, ask a Nazi.  If you want to know about the Muslims...trust the millions of websites dedicated to unveiling it.

The Quran states very specific rules for when someone can go to war.  Self-defense and to throw off an oppressor.  It really doesn't matter what any other reference says.  In Islam, the Quran is the only perfect law.  They believe that war is wrong, but sometimes necessary.

If any one slew a person - unless it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people - Quran 5:32

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. - Quran 2:190

And in a hadith narrated by Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As, God Told Mohammed :

You are neither hard-hearted nor of fierce character, nor one who shouts in the markets. You do not return evil for evil, but excuse and forgive. - Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 362

 

IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 4:00pm

Oh and on the Ottoman thing... if you are giving the Crusades a pass on the religious thing by arguing that justifications were only excuses.  Then you must understand that the Ottoman Turks too were not necessarily attacking Constantinople for religious reasons, but using religion as ....yep that's right...a flimsy excuse.

The KKK uses perversions of the Bible to excuse their racism.  The Terrorists pervert religion (including the IRA) for their own purposes.

 

IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1804
bullet Posted: 08 October 2007 at 5:06pm
Angela said:

"Now, as for the Dar el Harb.  I have done a search on this book of yours.  It seems I can only find it referred to on anti-Islamic websites.  I could not find any references supporting it on Islamic websites.  I wonder why that is."

Well said.  Anatolian seems to think that he can learn about Islam by relying on non-Islamic sources.  Has he ever read the Quran or the Hadiths?  I think not. 

Anatolian, I challenge you to bring forth any ayat or hadith which backs up your claim about "dar al harb".  This is just for argument's sake, since I know that you will be unable to meet this challenge.

With regard to the Byzantines, I need to correct you.  The Muslims did not attack the Byzantines.  Rather, it was the Byzantines who struck first.  After Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) sent ambassadors to different heads of state, Heraclius included, with the mission of calling them to Islam, many heads of state responded in hostile fashion.  One such person was Shurabil, who was the governor of Busra.  He was a Christian, who murdered the Prophet's envoy Harith ibn 'Umayr in cold-blooded fashion.  Furthermore, he was under the protection of the Byzantine Empire.  Naturally, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was ticked off at this act of war and subsequently dispatched an army of 3,000 men led by Zaid ibn Haritha to punish Shurabil.  Now, if the Byzantines were truly interested in peace, they would have distanced themselves from Shurabil and removed their protection of his domain.  They did not.  Instead, they sent an army against the Prophet's forces.  Some estimates put its strength as high as 100,000 men.  Who was the aggressor here?  The Muslims?  No, no, no, no.  It was the cowardly, Christian Byzantines.  The Byzantines were arrogant; they were insolent.  They saw in the emerging Muslim nation an easy target. How wrong they were!   They picked a fight against an enemy they did not understand and they lost big time.  The world's mightiest empire fell to it knees in the face of Islam, and it was not Islam that started the fight.  But Islam fought back.

Now that you understand the historical events which led up to the Byzantine-Muslim war, I was wondering if you could answer a few questions:

1.  What kind of Christian was Shurabil in murdering a foreign envoy?  Why don't you Christians condemn his behavior, instead of making him the victim?

2.  What kind of Christian was Heraclius in not punishing Shurabil for murder, but instead sends a large force to attack the Muslims, who were only seeking justice in avenging the cold-blooded murder of one of their own?

3.  What kind of religion do you follow in conjuring up lies and deceitful statements?

4.  Have you ever, in your entire life, studied the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)  (This one actually has already been answered)?
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Page  of 3 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com