Do not take Jews or Christians as your wali...

[GeoffP]

On basis of the pictures you posted, it seems that hair coverings were already well established. The face veil is merely a leap from there. Seems clear it had little to do with the Christian religion, and more to do with the culture of the region.

 

[S.A.M.]

Not at all, hair coverings are common in India too. Face coverings are only seen in the areas flanking the north west. Did you think the Byzantinians only influenced the Muslims?

 

[GeoffP]

Those darn Byzantines. They seem to have spread their vicious persecution of women all over the Islamic world. Is no heinous act beneath them? Next thing you know, they'll be stoning and beating women for impropriety.

I think the Sam round up is about done. Thanks for your best shot.

 

[S.A.M.]

They did, stoning women was also a Byzantinian custom.

but that just adds to my questions

 

[GeoffP]

Rather, to your predetermined conclusions.

Good day.

 

[S.A.M.]

Rather, to your predetermined conclusions.

The irony.

 

[The Esotericist]

Once again, my question is, the Christians and Jews obviously do not believe in these scriptural edicts anymore [there are some interesting interpretations out there to justify that], but Arab Muslims are still continuing the customs which were not theirs to begin with [see representation of Arab women from sixth to sixteenth centuries]

Why?

Christ's representative on Earth is the Pope, what he says is law. Ask him.

 

[GeoffP]

The irony.

I know: I just get used to it.

 

[GeoffP]

Christ's representative on Earth is the Pope, what he says is law. Ask him.

Law for whom, these days?

 

[Michael]

Actually, legend has it that Muhammad personally smashed all three-hundred sixty idols himself after conquering the city of Mecca. Later in Ramadan, he ordered three close friends of his (including Khalid bin Walid) to destroy other key idols worshipped by Arabs of the time. It must have been a powerful sight to behold: the reclaiming of the house Abraham and his son Ishmael built centuries ago.

There may be some video on Youtube of the TNT destruction of the 2500 year old Buddha's in Afghanistan by the Taliban (a place many Buddhists consider their "Mecca"). I'm curious, do you suppose the destruction of these ancient and important symbols of Buddhism were also a powerful sight to behold?? Or do you think it was a disgusting act of vandalism?

the city's defenders were overwhelmed by Muhammad's ten thousand strong force.

This is called terrorism Slysoon and it's actually wrong. At least the way I see it. If I were in the city, and it was invaded, then I'd feel terrorized. Especially if I saw this jerk-off smashing the symbols of my religion. If I saw blood stained swords and heard how defenders were murdered - I'd feel pretty sick I think.

Imagine if someone came up to you house, said their dad used to live there, and with his 10 thug-buddies smashed everything that had anything to do with Islam - and then burned your Qur'an. Oh, and for good measure they carted off any Muslims in your house not willing to convert to whatever their belief was and ran a knife into you. Surely you can see this is wrong??!

Most of the resistance occurred on the outskirts of Mecca, as Arabs of the time (and even long before Muhammad's time) forbade fighting in Mecca.

I'm sure to the people who were murdered defending their city it was a bit more real and important than your quick summery of their deaths.

Before Islam, in Mecca alone, there were multiple feuds and battles which saw a change in leadership and established a new guardian of the Ka'bah. After Ishmael's time, the Jurhumites forcefully established themselves as rulers of Mecca (during which time they introduced the Ka'bah and the greater city to stone idols). They were eventually overthrown by the Kuza'ah, a Yemeni tribe which migrated northwards, who brought with them Hubal (which they received as a gift from another tribe, and so the story of Hubal began). Later, after a fierce battle, Qusayy of the Quraysh established his tribe as the rightful rulers of Mecca. And then there is Surah 105 of the Qur'an which describes the story of The Elephant. During the time when Yemen was under the control of Abyssinian Christians, an Abyssinian leader named Abrahah sought to build a cathedral in San'a in hopes of winning over Mecca's pilgrims and establishing a new House of Worship in Arabia. When the cathedral was defiled by a tribe which was on good terms with the Quraysh, Abrahah swore revenge and gathered an army and an elephant to destroy the Ka'bah. As they arrived on the outskirts of the city, the elephant was commanded to proceed to Mecca. However, the elephant would only kneel when in the direction of Mecca and would not budge forward. When commanded to retreat, it complied; when reordered to go forth in the direction of Mecca, once again the elephant knelt. Soon the sky grew black, eclipsed by birds; each bird had three pebbles, which it dropped fiercely on the invading army below, slaying all but the elephant.

It's an interesting story. It too bad that who ever made up these storied didn't make up a story where Mohammad was welcomed throughout Arabia and never harmed a person as he spread his message of peace.

Arabs were no more peaceful before Islam than after; the only significant difference is, they were organized well enough after Islam to involve themselves in serious campaigns against neighbouring empires rather than frequent and savage quarrels amongst themselves.

And this is a good why exactly? I mean, is it good? Maybe not? I can't tell. Did the Arabs stop "quarreling among themselves". When?

Who knows, if it weren't for the Islamic Crusades the Europeans would have never tried to circumvent their trade routes, the age of discovery and of colonization may not have occured and countless billions of people would still enjoy their cultures today - including Arabs. Europeans probably have more to thank Mohammad for than Arabs - if it wasn't for him they'd probably never become the superpowers they are today.... history is funny like that.

 

[Michael]

Are you denying the Byzantinians invented the face veil and the Islamic world adopted it from them? Or that circumcision is not mentioned in the Qur'an? Or that stoning is not prescribed in the Qur'an?

What?

Is there a difference between wearing a silk veil and a hood with an eye-slit? I can't ever remember reading Xians wore Burka?

As for circumcision Roman historians wrote about how Arabs circumcised their children - well before Islam.

 

[Michael]

They did, stoning women was also a Byzantinian custom.

but that just adds to my questions

Was it? If so I'd say it was a Christian custom. How were adulterer women and men dealt with prior to Christianity and after? What about in Arab societies before and after Islam?

 

[flameofanor5]

I've been thinking about this statement and what it means. Wali is accurately translated as leader or guide.

The religion of Islam was brought to the Quraish as a guidance and to correct some of their practices [female infanticide, legal injustice, slavery and idol worship] which were oppressive to the common man. Islam was to help them to understand that everyone regardless of race or colour or gender had rights and these rights were inviolate because no man could intercede between another man and God.

Many of the problems we see in Muslim societies today, especially regarding the status of women, veiling, following of old laws, dictatorship and the apathy of the ummah and clergy are all practices not mentioned in the Qur'an or derided as wrong. Even circumcision [male and female] does not appear in the Qur'an although it is widely practised by Muslims.

Is this because Muslims have set aside the Qur'an and allowed the practices of Christians and Jews to dominate their religion?

Should there be a return to Islam? Why do Muslims follow these practices?

Circumcision is practiced among Jews, whereas Christians often do it, although they are not specifically told to. It still takes place among Christian cultures, for supposed health reasons. I personally don't care either way.

 

[mike47]

Christ's representative on Earth is the Pope, what he says is law. Ask him.

I always wondered why would people follow a man who is not married, has no kids, works for church and dictates to them what is good and bad in every aspect of life . It is plain weird and non sense . If you want to follow someone at least follow someone with a decent life and decent views .
Even condoms are sins........:shrug: .

 

[(Q)]

I always wondered why would people follow a man who is not married, has no kids, works for church and dictates to them what is good and bad in every aspect of life .

Like Muhammad?

If you want to follow someone at least follow someone with a decent life and decent views .

Why follow?

Even condoms are sins........ .

Is it the shape of the condom or what it's made of that is a sin? Maybe it's just that you tire of always having to put it on your partner all the time?

 

[fedr808]

Is it the shape of the condom or what it's made of that is a sin? Maybe it's just that you tire of always having to put it on your partner all the time?

The guy that made the rule is allergic to latex...

 

[iceaura]

Are you denying the Byzantinians invented the face veil and the Islamic world adopted it from them? Or that circumcision is not mentioned in the Qur'an? Or that stoning is not prescribed in the Qur'an?

I'm denying that such considerations have anything to do with whether or not dress as prescribed by Muslim clerics and enforced under sharia law and justified by reference to the Quran is Islamic dress.

I am also denying that Byzantium culture represents Christianity in general, btw. That Mediterranean stuff never did sit well with the branch of Christianity my ancestral roots fed.

I merely asked why the Muslims are following social customs from biblical or Christian societies

The last Muslim to pick up that kind of custom from their other-religion neighbors died hundreds of years ago.

If you rephrase your question to make more relevant sense, and ask why fundie Abrahamic religious types put so much effort into prescribing appropriate dress for women, all of it limiting, hampering, troublesome, and more so than the dress prescribed for men, then the answers might be of more relevance than historical trivia about veils.

 

[GeoffP]

Originally Posted by Slysoon
Actually, legend has it that Muhammad personally smashed all three-hundred sixty idols himself after conquering the city of Mecca. Later in Ramadan, he ordered three close friends of his (including Khalid bin Walid) to destroy other key idols worshipped by Arabs of the time. It must have been a powerful sight to behold: the reclaiming of the house Abraham and his son Ishmael built centuries ago.

Odd. When Christians do this to 'pagans', Sam and the other 'usual suspects' usually get quite irate. They seem to think it's somehow shameful or wrong, Abrahamics oppressing other people's religions. Not so much as a word here though. Why is that?

(Personal disclaimer: I think it's wrong in both cases. Just for clarity's sake.)

 

[GeoffP]

I always wondered why would people follow a man who is not married, has no kids, works for church and dictates to them what is good and bad in every aspect of life . It is plain weird and non sense . If you want to follow someone at least follow someone with a decent life and decent views .

Like killing or subjugating everyone who doesn't agree with you? You have a strange conception of "decent".