All Saudis are born Muslim. For a Saudi to change his or her faith is an offense punishable by death in the Kingdom. Proselytizing is also against the law and can be an offense punishable by death. So what if a resident of the Kingdom is not Saudi and not Muslim and wishes to practice his or her faith? What can they do?
Saudi Arabia has a high percentage of expat (guest) workers in the Kingdom from all parts of the world. As a result there are Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Hindus and individuals of other faiths here in the Kingdom. They also believe in their chosen faith and take it seriously. But they cannot openly practice their faith. Instead, they must practice in the privacy of their home. There are no churches or other public centers where they are allowed and welcomed to go as a group and practice their faith. In some cases there may be small gatherings for various worship services but only inside the protected Diplomatic Quarter. Attempts to do so outside of the Diplomatic Quarter could result in an outcry with arrests. It should further be noted that Bibles and other Holy books (other than the Quran) are prohibited in the Kingdom and if found say during an airport inspection, would be confiscated.
Now with July’s World Conference on Dialogue which took place on Madrid and placed an emphasis on bringing together individuals of all faiths, it makes one wonder whether the Kingdom will in turn become more tolerant towards religions other than Islam in the Kingdom? When I asked this question myself among scholars, what I was told is that one should consider the entire state of Saudi Arabia as a holy state like the Vatican where only Catholicism is practiced. I responded that I could understand such laws applying to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina but not the whole country, particularly with all the expat workers present. Nevertheless, among scholars this is the prevailing view, which further supports why no other faiths will be allowed to practice openly in the Kingdom.
Filed under: Saudi Arabia, islam, religion
This brings only 1 question to mind. Whatever happen to people of other religions thriving under Islamic rule? This is an argument I’ve heard many muslims make.
“All Saudis are born Muslim.”
I believe that you still have a lot to learn about the country you live in. I know what I will share here may not be accepted by many Saudi’s, but this is a false statement. Do you know we have Saudi-Jewish (yes, I know this sound like an oxymoron) families to this day living in Saudi Arabia? Do a little bit of research on the Jewish families in Madinah. Many travel to Israel, via Turkey with full knowledge of the government to this day. The total number, from some accounts, is numbering over 5,000.
As to your other question. I really have no issues of non-Muslims practicing their faith openly. Of course, I have no interest in the likes of Christan evangelists trying to convince others that, if they do not believe in Jesus as the son of God, I’m going to hellfire or whatever other angle they come up with. This is where the problem will come forth. This is the very reason the government is not letting non-Muslims openly practice their faiths. We have enough issues at hand and the last thing we need is an uproar from the religious conservatives. All it will take is one fatwa and bang, even the not so religious Muslims will be in the streets.
Much as we like to believe Saudi Arabia is country following Islamic teachings, sadly it is not. I have a great deal of respect for our King but he is not alone in making decisions. The ultra-conservatives hold us all at bay.
Here is the latest controversy:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=113092&d=20&m=8&y=2008
S.H. – thanks for the comment. I am aware of the area beyond Medina that was built and founded by the Jews. That Jews are still active in Saudi is indeed news to me and I guess for many reasons, it would be kept very quiet.
SimplyMe – you ask a tough question!
Thanks to both of you again for your interesting comments.
Interesting post Carol.
I have one comment about the Bible issue. My husband and I collect bibles and when we moved here there were some that we didn’t want to give away and we chanced it and brought them in the suitcase with us. We were not inspected, and we got them thru. I’m talking multiple bibles here.
I know that the guards at the airport have every right to confiscate them, but we got lucky.
So, if I were a practicing christian or jew or member of any other faith, I would personally try to bring one because it’s possible.
My husband’s friend from work managed to get him an Arabic translation of the book of mormon into the country also. So, good luck to anyone who wants to chance it.
I have a question for you about the “Islam only” policy of Saudi Arabia:
Did that rule exist when this land was only known as Arabia? I know that is has been the standard in Mecca and Medina, but what about the whole of Arabia?
S H’s link enforces my beliefs about so called “Mufti’s” and “scholars” of Islam. Some of them want to ban anything, ANYTHING related to fun and enjoyment, others don’t seem so harsh. Where the hell do you draw the line on these supposed authorities in Islam??? No wonder there are so many extremists blowing things up and hardliners in Saudi supporting the Muttawa and other craziness. They just choose which “scholar” to listen to. Heres me thanking God every day that I’m not a part of any of these man made religions.
(rant over)
S H you posted an arabnews article that started off with:
is what he said false? If so kindly provide your authentic texts from this [Islam] Religion?
Umm Sumayah regarding your question of ‘Islam only’ policy at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
The prophet (peace be upon him) said:
If you look up the definition of “pagan” this is what you might find:
1. heathen: a person who does not acknowledge your god
2. a person who follows a polytheistic or pre-Christian religion (not a Christian or Muslim or Jew)
One might argue that it does not include Christians or Jews. But Muslim scholars state that [from a Muslim's perspective] due to the adoption of Jesus (peace be upon him) as the son of God… and the concept of trinity emerging after the time of Jesus (peace be upon him) the Christians could no longer be considered a monotheistic religion. Similarly with the Jews…
You have to understand that as Muslims we believe in the Qur’an and do not doubt it as not being the word of Allah… Allah subhanaho wa ta’ala says:
And the Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh’s Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth![] (At-Tawbah 9:30)
So as Muslims we believe in the authentic teachings (both Qur’an and Sunnah). Now what is considered ‘progressive’, ‘correct’, ‘equal’, etc… by standards set by man in different parts of the world are irrelevant when dealing with a nation that dominantly believes in Islam.
I heard that when King Abdullah was asked regarding building churches in the Kingdom… he replied along the lines of “when we can build Masaajid in the Vatican”. Truly a wise answer. And as Muslims in the Arabian peninsula we “try” to rule our lands according the teachings of our religion.
I truly hope that no one interprets this comment in seeing myself or other Muslims as people who do not respect other human beings of other faiths… we respect our brothers and sisters in humanity… we welcome dialog… we protect our guests in our lands so long as our laws are respected in return… So as a Monotheistic believers in one God, we are given the task of preserving this belief and protecting it from influence because we believe it to be RIGHT… not because we just do it for the sake of hating the world or anything ridiculous like that. We respect that people have different beliefs… he / she may practice in private… but keep it to yourself. That’s basically the laws of the Kingdom. Forgive me for the long comment… Allah knows best…
Peace be unto you
Ali
salam alaykum, how are you Carol.
I am allowing myself to add a small comment to your post, regarding Saudi customs and Bible. The regulations allow you to bring one Bible – for personal usage, but bringing more Bibles is not allowed, as it can be understood as a proselytizing. Of course, even one Bible could be confiscated, as not all employees of customs sections are aware of regulations or do not want to be aware. Also, you can access any translation of the Bible through the internet.
Worth to add, it is allowed in islam to posses the Bible and read it, but the Quran is the final revealed Book for Muslims.
Narrated Abu Huraira: “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah’s Apostle said (to the Muslims). ‘Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’ ‘
Christians may also wear crosses which are symbols of their religion, but again – rather not exposed, which is not against the rules of christianity itself. So, as long as you are not preaching nor organizing mass prayers in public, you are free to practise your faith in the privacy of your home, as you mentioned.
Expats of other faiths do gather at their Embassies or compounds for religious/traditional celebrations of their holidays.
I believe there are different issues connected with ban of public practise of religions other then islam in Saudi Arabia, but it is a long topic.
I am appreciating all the comments and the good questions. Thankfully others with much more knowledge than me on these subjects are responding and for that I am appreciative.
Ali,
The Qur’an requires Muslims to protect synagogues and churches BEFORE mosques are protected. It would seem that your hadith, if you relate it to Christians and Jews, certainly goes AGAINST The Qur’an and it’s spirit.
So there are two options here, either the hadith doesnt mean Christians or Jews, or the Hadith is false because it goes against The Qur’an.
Take your pick, either way that means there is no Islamic issue with churches and synagogues in Saudi, outside of Mecca and Medina.
Besides, practically speaking, there are churches and synagogues all over the Arabia Peninsula, just not in the Kingdom.
Abu Sinan,
The argument or debate is not whether there can or cannot be churches or synagogues in the Kingdom per Hadith or Quran. It is the government as well as the culture which does not allow churches or places of worship other than mosques here.
Carol,
But that is all based on the supposed ban by the Prophet. One cannot talk about one without talking about the other.
In this case we could talk about which came first, or which is more important, but they are both a part of each other.
Ali realised this and made the religious argument FOR the ban, I am simply making the religious argument AGAINST the ban.
At the end of the day the discussion will center around the ban’s merit under Islamic law.
Have you seen or heard an argument promoting the ban that didnt relate back to the religion? I never have.
Ali’s comment sounds reasonable to me. Why should anyone object if a country wishes to exclude the public observance of more than a single religion?
A country is like a family; it has the right to establish its own religion within its own home, and to exclude others.
I think this is one of those times I am going to sit back a while and just read and learn from the comments!
Marahm,
But it isnt in the spirit of Islam. Besides which, if that is the case Muslims in the West need to stop whining, they are in CHRISTIAN countries.
I find it insane that Muslims demand and expect the freedom to practice their religion in the West and then think they can ban religious practices in their countries.
You are right Marahm, they do. Then everyone else that lives in this world would be correct in thinking whatever negative thing they would like about that country and the people living in it.
Now, what happens when that ‘family’ finds itself with someone who doesn’t feel the same as they do and wants to follow a different religion?
I know I said I’d be quiet here but do wish to respond that it is not all Muslim countries which ban the practice of faiths other than Islam…Most muslim countries (and not just those in the Middle East/Arab world) do allow practicing of different faiths whether Christianity, Budhism, Hinduism, etc.
The other Muslim countries don’t ban other faiths but some do make apostasy illegal and require you to have your religion on your ID card and refuse to change it from Muslim yet eagerly change others TO Muslim.
I wonder if there is a list somewhere which advises what countries have restrictions pertaining to religion and practice?
Abu Sinan:
You stated: >>The Qur’an requires Muslims to protect synagogues and churches BEFORE mosques are protected. <<
Where is this in the Qur’aan? can you please provide the verse?
Abu Sinan, thank you for commenting so eagerly… but I’d like to start with clarifying your first sentence before going on to the rest of your comment.
Could you please share with us the verses that state that from the Qur’an? Just so as to remove any doubt when speaking about the religion… it’s always best to speak with evidences from Allah and His messenger (peace be upon them) rather than from our own intellect (as we are deficient at times).
Thank you,
Ali
“I have no interest in the likes of Christan evangelists trying to convince others that, if they do not believe in Jesus as the son of God, I’m going to hellfire or whatever other angle they come up with. This is where the problem will come forth. This is the very reason the government is not letting non-Muslims openly practice their faiths”
But why then do muslims have no problem with muslim dawahists or whatever they are called going around preaching about Islam. Egypt for instance has organizations devoted to converting copts and you will even be paid by the government upon conversion but the reverse is illegal. So why are all these double standards necessary?
It really gives the impression that practioners of Islam are rather insecure about their faith. Not to mention its rather ridiculous to see muslims who imigrated to Europe/US etc demanding freedom of religion and all the rights of the majority religion yet “back home” most of them are perfectly content with the status quo of inequality and will actually defend it. I’m sorry but that’s pathetic and sheer hypocrisy I say
What is Vatican City? A palace for the pope, a few shrines, and handful of apartments and barracks. Total population: about 800.
No one actually lives there in the sense of raising families – it’s a place for tourists and the administration of the Catholic Church. Why should Vatican City be a valid comparison with Saudi Arabia? Why can’t one compare V.C. with the Kaaba instead?
Another comparison would be all Italy with S.A. Italy used to be exclusively Catholic. If it was still that way today and someone asked King Abdullah when churches could be built in S.A. would he not reply, “when we can build Masaajid in Italy”? Yet mosques are built in Italy today and there still isn’t a single church in S.A.
In short, the comparison isn’t valid, and King A’s answer lacks credibility.
Carol,
You have chosen quite a hot topic here and now you can see why the government becomes quiet. Interesting, no one has dared commented on the earlier part of my post and only the second part.
Ali,
You have made a lot of valid points and I do not disagree with you on except a few. My simple question to you is this, is Saudi Arabia an Islamic State? By that, also please define if it follows the sharia, as an Islamic State should?
When you do some research, also please look at the earlier Islamic history of how minorities were treated.
On the part of celebrating birthdays and other occasions. Well, I never had a birthday celebration until I was a student in the US. I never took this or other celebrations seriously for, I am thankful to Allah for everything, each day and do not need a reminder to do this. We have a direct relationship with God and do not need religious scholars to debate a subject, which in my view is not needed. Do we not have more pressing issues in life which these scholars can contemplate and advise Muslims upon?
I still believe that non-Muslims should be allowed to practice their faiths in the Kingdom. The only two cities in the Kingdom that non-Muslims are not allowed in are Makkah and Madinah, and in that, I have no issue with and as Muslims we cannot even debate upon. Bottom line, non-Muslims should be respected and they also should be respectful of our beliefs as well.
My views are mine alone and I ask God to forgive me, if I am in error. Neither am I advocating that others follow, what I believe in.
And God knows best!
“[22.40] Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah’s repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah’s name is much remembered; and surely Allah will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.”
Here The Qur’an is making it clear God himself protects churches and synagogues, yet some want us to believe the He commands that they be torn down or never built?
Comparing the entire country of Saudi Arabia to the Vatican is lame. I have no issue with Mecca and Medina being holy cities for Muslims, but to ban other religions in the entire country? It is unIslamic.
@Lynn,
I hope you are no supporter of Israel, because religion is mandated on their ID cards. They also make it VERY hard when it comes to conversions, even deciding who is and isnt a Jew.
@ Anon,
Please read what I stated in my posts. No, I am not insecure in my faith. You are being a bit arrogant by your statements.
The issue is not what I believe in, these are policies by the government.
regards
coba aja n optimis
Abu Sinan
“Besides which, if that is the case Muslims in the West need to stop whining, they are in CHRISTIAN countries.”
Which Western country is Christian (apart from South American, where there isn’t a sizable Muslim population anyway)?
“when we can build Masaajid in the Vatican”
I found this comment above a little ‘off’. I can’t imagine (or would hope not) that any christian would demand to put a church in mecca or medina. And this is the closest relation to the vatican KSA has. If there are mosques in ITALY, then it’s reasonable to ask for one church in Saudi Arabia. But barring a religion from an entire COUNTRY (yes, I know what the vatican is considered…) of the size of KSA or Italy, is different. I don’t see his comment as being so very wise.
JUST an opinion, not trying to argue!
“Which Western country is Christian (apart from South American, where there isn’t a sizable Muslim population anyway)?”
I could ask the same thing about the middle east, Pakistan, and Indonesia. The only thing that makes these countries “Muslim” is the fact that they have muslim majorities. Same deal applies to the “Christian” west.
argh.. someone already said this..sorry to repeat a point already made, I didn’t read far enough down to Solomon2..
“No, I am not insecure in my faith. You are being a bit arrogant by your statements. ”
To SH, I never said you were insecure in your faith. I said that it gave the impression that practioners of Islam were insecure with all their double standards and what not. I was commenting in generalities and notice the word “impression”. If you feel that was directed at you than so be it.
And just like to state for the record, I can’t stand prosteltyzers (sp?) of all faiths, whether they be christian, muslim, jewish, whatever. So I’m not trying to advocate for missionaries running around the world. Just figure that if one country thinks its acceptable to have their peoples going around trying to convert everyone than they should allow others to do the same in their country.
Anon already answered Abid. The West, as a whole, are entirely Christian with the exception of some large Muslim populations in countries like Germany, France and the UK, and even there they dont come close to a majority.
If Muslim countries want to start banning religious worship Muslims shouldn’t cry when they feel persecuted in Christian countries. This would be the actions of a hypocrite and hypocrisy is one of the worst sins in Islam. The Qur’an and the Prophet of Allah rail against it constantly.
I say this as a Muslim, but I am a convert and I havent bought into all of the cultural rubbish (bid’ah) that is often sold as “Islam” today, nor do I have a cultural and societal inferiority complex compounded by centuries of colonial rule.
I just believe in freedom of religion as is guaranteed in The Qur’an.
Why should Saudi Arabia allow churches in its country simply because mosques are allowed in Italy?
How is the country disrepecting its non-Muslim residents by not allowing churches or other buildings of worship other than mosques? All residents are free to practice whatever religion they wish in the privacy of their homes. We’re talking about about public display here, not private conviction.
The spirit of Islam does not always permeate the policies of Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia does not pretend to equality of opportunity regarding religion, as does the United States. Therefore, Muslims in the West should indeed stop whining, not because of their difficulties, but because they are allowed to address those difficulties.
Marahm,
I would say that churches should be allowed in Saudi because they dont want to be hypocrites, but I had to back off that one. The country, from top to bottom is founded on hypocrisy, so it would be a waste of time.
The reason why Saudi should let churches and synagogues into the Kingdom is because it is the ISLAMIC thing to do. I know Islam never stopped anything from happening anyway, and there is a 1,400 year precedent of Muslim countries, inluding the Caliphates, allowing religious minorities GREATER rights in the Islamic lands than they or Muslims got outside of it.
I think Saudi Arabia should cease and desist calling itself an Islamic country if it is going to continue to act in such a manner which is SO unIslamic.
You also miss the point, look at the outrage in the Muslim world when hijabs were banned in France. France has a clear policy about religion staying out of the public sphere, it didnt stop the entire Muslim world from whining about it, yet these same hypocrites would BAN any open signs of Christianity in Saudi Arabia.
This is exactly why Islam gets such a bad name in the West, because often they ask for double standard treatment.
???? waht happens ????
@ Abu Sinan,
KSA is a kingdom (monarchy) and calling it “Islamic” is a fallacy. People from hijaz to this day still do not accept being called Saudis (are we slave the house of Saud?).
I am not going say more, for I do not wish to get Carol into trouble. We are going way off topic here.
Regards
@SH,
I dont think we are going off topic here. The issue is should open display of religions besides Islam be allowed in Saudi Arabia.
I agree with you 100% otherwise. My wife is Hijazi and really dislikes being called “Saudi” because is not not from that tribe, she is not from the region that dominates everything in the country and feels like they do not represent her or where she comes from.
@ Abu Sinan,
Well, you do know freedom of speech is not allowed… just joking with you.
KSA is changing and I do have hopes that King Abdullah will lead the country to a better direction. I am hijazi as well from Madinah now living the USA.
For me and many others, the USA is a great country and no matter of the problems some we have faced, this is by the best place to practice one’s faith. I have learned more about Islam living here than I could back home.
I do pray better understanding and dialogue is reached with non-Muslims. I hope we can show the same kindness as the King of Abyssinia showed to the Muslims who migrated from Makkah. We all seem to forget our own Islamic history.
Spot on SH! Thanks.
with July’s World Conference on Dialogue which took place on Madrid and placed an emphasis on bringing together individuals of all faiths, it makes one wonder whether the Kingdom will in turn become more tolerant towards religions other than Islam in the Kingdom?
Doesn’t King Abdullah want to establish an Interfaith Dialogue Institute or something? It’s tough to believe that such an institute could make much of an impact unless it is both located on Saudi soil and has a multi-religious staff. Worship facilities would have to be included, if only for training purposes. So doesn’t it follow that the Saudi gov’t must endorse the building of churches and synagogues, at least in this case, lest the royal will be thwarted?
It would be interesting to see how Saudi Arabia transforms in today’s world in the next couple of years. I understand they are under Sharia Law and obviously take it very, very seriously. However, you must wonder how this fast-growing, ever-globalizing nation will be in the future. I have a high respect for Islam, just like with any other religion. But, I can’t help thinking that Saudi Arabia will change soon, not just economically (they have been for quite some time), but politically and socially. American Bedu, how would Saudis react to such a change if it were to happen?
anon
“The only thing that makes these countries “Muslim” is the fact that they have muslim majorities. Same deal applies to the “Christian” west.”
No, the only thing that makes them Muslim is because they are legally and constitutionally Muslim.
For example the constitution of Saudi Arabia:
“Chapter 1 Article 1
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign *Arab Islamic state* with *Islam as its religion*; God’s Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God’s prayers and peace be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital.”
What Christian countries have a constitution like this?
“What Christian countries have a constitution like this?”
Thank God, none. There are no countries today that rule with Shariah laws. When Saudi Arabia does so than I will agree with you and say it is indeed a true Islamic/Muslim country. But until that happens I will keep my same opinion and say that it is a muslim country in the same way that the US/Canada are Christian countries.
And Abusinan stated something about it being Islamic to allow other places of worship in public. I’m not muslim, but I have continually read articles by muslims trumpeting how in the olden days people of all faiths were free to practice their religions complete with churches, synagogues, etc blah blah. So how can you say a country is Islamic and use this as your justification when it seems to be going against virtually every rule set up for it in its own book of rules no less. Don’t you actually have to follow muslim rules in order to be considered a muslim country? Apparently you just have to state that is which makes it true.
So to conclude, Saudi ARabia and the rest of the muslim countries are not Islamic or Muslim (with a capital M), despite what any of their unjust and rather pathetic constitutions may say. They kept as much cultural stupidity as humanly possible and dealt away with any benefits true Islamic rules and the Quran may or maynot have had to offer. Maybe this is why most muslim countries are cesspools of corruption and intolerance. (Than again, the US is sounding kind of similar since Bush has been in office lol. Explains the great friendship between the Prez and the SA king)
And my rant is now complete Thankyou
Tulip – I do not believe Saudi Arabia is alone in following and practicing Shariah law.
How would Saudis react to political and social changes? Of course it depends on exactly what kind of changes and there would be varied reactions depending on whether a Saudi is viewed as ‘open minded’, Wahabi, extremist, etc. King Abdullah is smart and he’s not going to make any instant radical changes in order to maintain some sense of equilibrium. I believe any changes will take place in the form of baby steps.
Hmm.. this is a very tough topic Carol.
What the scholars say – I can see where they are coming from: the Quran is the final word and it is a muslims duty to uphold its teachings and spread the faith… so in doing that, it would be a direct contradiction to allow open practice of other religions alongside with Islam in a predominantly Islamic state.
That is why muslims have no issues with “dahwa-ists” – to answer Tulip – it has nothing to do with muslims being insecure in their religion. Rather, it’s the complete opposite of that.
So, I tend to agree with Ali when he says what anyone wants to do in their private homes is no one’s business, and there should be no issues or restrictions on that.
I also agree when he says, “Now what is considered ‘progressive’, ‘correct’, ‘equal’, etc… by standards set by man in different parts of the world are irrelevant when dealing with a nation that dominantly believes in Islam.”
As far as treatment of disbelieving minorities goes, here’s a quotation from the Quran, (33:48): “And obey not the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and harm them not (in revenge for their harming you till you are ordered). And put your trust in Allah, and Sufficient is Allah as a wakil (trustee, or disposer of affairs). ”
’nuff said!
Thanks for your perspective, Riyadh Mom.
I believe that when living in a foreign country, we must abide by the policies of that country. We may not agree with their policies, but just because freedom of religion exists in the United States doesn’t mean that the rest of the world is going to follow suit. As Americans, we may think that freedom of religion is the best thing for society, but that is because we are influenced by the American culture and way of thinking. It is difficult to clearly define what is right or wrong because it is all subjective.
Ah… I remember when a similar issue arose here some months ago.
It always seems to bring out the best bigotry in people.
And it was really not that long ago when one was limited or prohibited from practicing religion in China, Russia (former Soviet Union era), North Korea….to name a few.
However the primary point of my choosing to post on such a topic is to inform. The longer I am in the Kingdom the more I meet expats who have come here without a strong knowledge on the customs and culture and laws of the Kingdom. In my own way, I try to address the various issues.
Don’t worry…tomorrow’s post will be a totally different topic but don’t let the comments and dialogues here stop!
Muslims are free to worship Allah in Brazil. But since Christians are not free to worship Jesus in Saudi Arabia, Brazil should legally give Saudi Muslims in Brazil the same rights Saudi Arabia gives to Brazilian Christians.
Wow… and my original question was rhetorical. Good shot, Carol! If I ever decide to martyr myself for my faith, I know which country to come to! For now, I’ll simply pray for all and rest in the knowledge that God knows the truth, even if we may argue over it.
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” – Jesus Christ
God bless!
Correct me if I’m wrong but the protection of the people of other faiths were when Muslims conquered non-Muslim lands. Saudi Arabia is an established Muslim country. It would be going backwards to alllow non-Muslims to build places of worship if they do not already exist.
Also the verse Abu Sinan mentioned about Allah’s name being mentioned in Churches and Synagues is referring to when Jews and Christians were monotheis. When they actually followed the correct teachings of the Prophets sent to them. Once they deviated they no longer mention Allah’s name. Rather they slander Allah and say he had a son and call on this supposed son as Their Lord. And Allah Knows Best.
I wish one day you are free to practice your religion in Saudi as freely as I practice my Islam here in Canada. My prayers do not diminish or harm the faith of my Christian neighbour and I have enough faith in Islam to know it won’t be troubled if you built a church in Saudi.
Actually replying to Ummadam’s comment it is wrong to say Christians or Jews of today dont believe in the same thing as Christians and Jews of Prophet’s time.
The christians believed in trinity and God being one of three even at that time and this is proven from the Quran.
I would like to make a point about freedom of religion. In the US and most of Europe, the governments are based on secularism, so no religion is theoretically favored over another. True, the majority of people are Christian but there is no official government policy promulgating Christianity as official policy. So the West is not providing Muslims any particular favors in letting them practice their religion and build mosques. It is simply adhering to its policy of secularism. Muslims that emigrate there understand this.
Saudi Arabia is different. The country’s government and constitution is supposedly based on Islam. It believes that Islam is the truth and wants no other religion or views contrary to Islam espoused. I think it is within a country’s right establish its own message and goals for its citizens. Expats that go there are not emigrating there, know they cannot be citizens, and understand the situation before they go.
Saudi Arabia clearly states that Islam is the state religion to expats. You might not agree with it but expats know this before coming.
Interesting topic Carol. I tried to stay away from commenting because there are so many to respond to. Oh well I cannot resist, just a warning this will be long. I will try to break it into bullets so it does not sound like an unorganized rant.
- I see a pattern for developing excuses and blaming all the problems in Saudi on society: The fact is Saudi society was very diverse and had many tolerant regions (and still does in many parts). The country was united under the Saudi family from disparate parts. The Saudi government chose to align with the most conservative religious elements they can possibly find and supported them with money and power. All other types of religious thinking, which i may add was more credible across the Muslim world, was eliminated. This has went on for 75 years. Hence, the country started with religious intolerance even against other Muslims. It was not the society, it was the government that made that choice. Many Saudis would like that type of religious rule to be taken away and replaced with diverse schools of thoughts.
- There is always this notion that the Saudi government cannot change things quickly and is helpless: This is a fallacy that has been propagated for decadess. The Saudi government can change things very quick when it wants to and round up every person that goes against that overnight. If the king is serious about religious tolerance he can force it on all religious conservatives. He pays them, he protects them and he gives them power. Yes he will take a risk by breaking the alliance, but that is what leaders do, especially the ones in such strong position. It has been 7 years since 911, so at least for the general public it has been a long time (the problem was known much before that). Also, note Saudi had Christian and people of other faiths for decades. So I think this progressive change idea is just an acrobatic act of justification.
- There is always this interpretation of Islam that incorporates the least tolerant ideologies: In Islam you can find text that justifies many different approaches to issues. If you take the most stringent Hadiths, you can make an enemy with every one on earth including other Muslims that do not subscribe to your own thinking. And if I may add, good luck in trying to sort through all the seemingly contradictory hadiths. The alternative is to understand the right approach of how we can function in a world where ease of travel and communications makes the interaction between people of different religions commonplace. We can find a framework in Islam that fits this situation and allow for real coexistence. Any other approach just takes us into the weeds of looking at the details and building barriers.
- Saudi Arabia is part of the UN and has accepted certain responsibilities for that: These rules that Saudi accepted also allowed the country to spread Islam across the world through donations to major projects in almost every country. This is good for Islam with the exception that Saudi has not done the same in return. Even offering our guests basic freedoms to worship is not available. Forcing people to pray in hiding is not religious freedom and anyone that supports that idea is delusional and needs to think what that would mean to him or her living in a place like the US and not allowed to go to a mosque. Sorry to be so blunt, but those of you that carry these ideologies, quit fooling yourself and blindly defending such notions.
Many here ended their comments with saying “end of rant”. I do not think you are ranting nor am I. It is “what is right”. Everyone in the world should be offered the dignity to practice his/her religion without interference, just like I am allowed to in a predominately Christian society. I will end this with the words
“End of being rational”.
“End of being rational”
LOL Uh oh, seems you’ve been in the US a bit too long!
The Saudi government should not be confused with an Islamic state. There are no true Islamic states in the world today. In an Islamic state, non-Muslims would have freedom of worship, trade, etc. and would have a mini-state within the Islamic state with their own courts etc. We definately have not reached this point yet.
I’ve never been to KSA, but I did live in Kuwait for quite a time in the mid ’90s. There were two Christian churches there that held weekly services that were open, if not to the public (I don’t know) at least to expat workers. There were also services available at Camp Doha, which had the added benefit of allowing you to shop at the PX after you attended a service. We went to church several times on base (hypocritically) so that we could buy a pound of bacon afterward.
Whoa! All this talk about who is right and who is wrong, it is making my head spin like a dervish dance and me completely crazy. As a Christian I could lose my head for practicing in SA or any other Muslim country!
wow… all of this because of my comment (#6)? Unfortunately I really do not have enough time to study all the comments and questions posted to me specifically to give this subject its worth.
I’m not sure if there truly is anymore benefit in the comments on this post. There clearly are two groups forming based on the comments… those who flat out want any religion to set up public centers in the Kingdom with the argument of “Religious Freedom”, which would include potentially satanists as they too have known centers in “progressive” nations such as the U.S… and the other side which states that only Islam should be displayed.
Again I would like to note that the latter is not enough as said… non-Muslims may practice their religion in the privacy of their own residences. You believe in Hinduism? Christianity? etc… practice your beliefs just not in public.
Do you believe that under Muslim-ruled Arabia at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them) that Christians would be able to walk in and build a church to “freely” promote a Creed that is contradictory in principle to that which the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) was teaching? Concept of Trinity vs. Monotheism?
If we truly accept “Religious Freedom”, we would ‘allow’ hindus to openly display (and possibly influence our brothers and sisters) with the concept of polytheism…
You believe in 1, 2, 199 Gods? Believe it in private… do not promote it in a land ruled by Muslims dominantly. All the prophets and messengers (peace be upon them all) came with the message of monotheism, the message of “There is no Diety worthy of worship but Allah”.
I believe this will be my last comment on this topic… may Allah guide us ALL (Muslims & Non-Muslims) to the truth… Ameen.
your brother
- Ali
It is easy to see how many wars have been started and fought over religion just by the diverse comments and points of view which have been given. Thankfully we are able to provide the comments in a non-confrontational manner where we can exchange views.
The comments also make me think on which countries in addition to Saudi Arabia can really be classified as Islamic states where Shariah law leads … to the best of my knowledge, I come up with Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. Am I mistaken or missing any? Egypt also follows Shariah law but not to the same extent as the aforementioned countries.
I know that Pakistan however does have individuals of other faiths who have been able to openly practice (and at times for a price). I’m not sure about Afghanistan or Iran.
One thing the comments have also made me think about is because there are no other religions openly allowed to practice in Saudi Arabia, how many Saudis may choose to visit another kind of place of worship out of curiosity when outside of the Kingdom? Does this happen?
In conclusion, thank you all for your comments and please do continue.
Abu Sinan,
Allaah says in Surah Hajj verse 40:
الَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا مِن دِيَارِهِمْ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ إِلَّا أَن يَقُولُوا رَبُّنَا اللَّهُ وَلَوْلَا دَفْعُ اللَّهِ النَّاسَ بَعْضَهُم بِبَعْضٍ لَّهُدِّمَتْ صَوَامِعُ وَبِيَعٌ وَصَلَوَاتٌ وَمَسَاجِدُ يُذْكَرُ فِيهَا اسْمُ اللَّهِ كَثِيراً وَلَيَنصُرَنَّ اللَّهُ مَن يَنصُرُهُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَقَوِيٌّ عَزِيزٌ
((Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: “Our Lord is Allah.” For had it not been that Allah checks one set of people by means of another, Sawami`, Biya`, Salawat, and Masjids, wherein the Name of Allah is mentioned much, would surely have been pulled down. Verily, Allah will help those who help His (cause). Truly, Allah is All-Strong, All-Mighty.))
You can read the english rendering of the Tafseer of Ibn Katheer on this verse here:
http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=22&tid=34266
So my question to you is… where are the existing churches and synagogues in Saudia for them to be pulled down?
After the clear evidence of Islaam has come, you want that the Saudi government should promote Kufr and Shirk by allowing it to be spread in the land?
What are we to say about that type of methodology? That after being guided to Islaam we allow that Kufr should be spread?
So where does the belief of Enjoining the good and forbidding the evil come into play if you allow that ‘Eesaa alaihis Salaam is being worshiped in public in a land of Islaam?
This suggestion to allow churches and the likes of this promotes a corruption in the ‘Aqeedah of Islaam.
As Muslims we should stop looking at things in the perspective of “everyone’s opinion” and look at it in terms of Allaah is the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth and He ordered that we worship Him.
Where does it stop if you allow churches? Suppose the Satanists ask for their Church to be opened? Would you support that? Ok then what is the difference between them and the one who worships a man? It’s both Shirk? Where is ‘Aqeedah of لا إله إلا الله?
Aboo Redundant,
“After the clear evidence of Islaam has come, you want that the Saudi government should promote Kufr and Shirk by allowing it to be spread in the land?”
The goverment will not be promoting Kufir or Shirk by allowing people to practice their religion. They will be promoting tolerance and love for others. That is a good thing. You have to get over your animosity towards others to realize goodness in that.
Most Arabic and Muslim countries allow the open exercise of religious duties for other faith. Good examples are Malaysia, Indonesia, Tunisea, Syria, and even neighbors like Kuwait and Qatar. Saudi is one of the rare exception. I do not see many of their citizens converting, do you? The fact is Muslims have strong convictions and there are very rare cases of conversions. We are doing more harm to the reputation of the country and Islam by such hypocritical positions on religious tolerance. That is not for the benefit of Muslims. You should look at these issues in a more rational way and consider all the different aspects of tolerance. Do not assume the world does not see this mistreatment and in the long run that will not be good for Saudi.
great points Aboo Redundant… Jazak Allah Khair
Saudi in US – I do agree with you that the strict laws and lack of tolerance in the Kingdom does further promote mistrust and fear of Islam…and this is so sad considering that the Kingdom is also viewed as the heart of Islam.
One of the reasons which I converted was due to the peace and tolerance of Islam (and no; I did not convert due to marriage like many foreign wives have done) yet sadly since coming to the Kingdom I have seen more abuse of Islam and its practices than anywhere else. Let’s hope with Ramadan coming it will make many stand up and take stock of how they are practicing!
Carol,
Sadly you are not the first person that told me this I have heard the same from many Muslims of different nationalities, who visited the kingdom. I hope people pay attention to outsiders observations. Intolerance does not help Islam, it makes others view it in a bad light. Constructive criticism is what inspires people to change.
Ali your fundamentalist belief that non-muslims should never practice in public in a muslim majority country is backwards, arrogant and from many opinions expressed on here, against the teachings of islam. Im not a muslim so I wouldnt have a clue what the teachings of islam are but I can’t comprehend (nor would I ever accept) a world in which every muslim majority country bans any other religion in public. This is a typical extremist-wahabi-Saudi-4th century belief.
Carol,
When you say that Saudi Arabia is alone in following and practicing Shari’a law I would have to disagree. They follow a strange and cruel mixture of Islamic law, culture, and some nonsense that it is not clear where it comes from. Either way, it CLEARLY is not Shari’a law.
@Riyadh Mom,
Can you point out anything in The Qur’an that forbids the practice of Christianity or Judaism in Muslim countries? A helper………there isnt anything. You quote 33:48, but you assume that in talking about “disbeleivers” they are talking about non Muslims. The fact is not all Muslims think this way. The way I take it is that a “disbeliever” is someone who doesnt believe in Allah. Christians and Jews, as “People of the Book” most certainly DO believe in Allah.
Ummadam,
There were other places of worship in Saudi Arabia, they were destroyed, but certainly NOT by the Prophet of Allah nor his companions.. It is not going backwards to follow The Qur’an. What IS going backwards to follow the backwards/tribal bid’ah innovation that passes for Islam in Saudi Arabia today.
Also, if you think all Christians believe in the trinity, you are WAY out of touch with Christians. As to Jews, they have always been our brothers in monotheism, and still are. Dont drink the kool aid sold in Saudi, it will poison you!
Aboo Redundant “So my question to you is… where are the existing churches and synagogues in Saudia for them to be pulled down?”
They have already been pulled down because Muslims did NOT follow the words of Allah. Time to rebuild them and follow The Qur’an.
Saudi in the USA,
The Saudi government is one of the biggest impediments that Islam has in the world today. Sad that they, and so many who support them, seem to think they are doing something good for Islam.
All I can say is that all of the Muslim who think Saudi is the Islamic heaven on earth ought to move there and see if they can say the same thing 5 years from then.
Saudi in the USA,
Allowing Kufr to be practiced openly is not tolerance of the Sharee’ah of Allaah. Christians can practice their faith, so can Jews and anyone else. They’ve all been in Saudia decades practicing, but not openly building their churches and temples. So what if a satanist decides to build a church of satan in Saudia. Would you promote this due to the sake of tolerance?
There is no separation of church and state in Saudia. The law of Saudia is the Qur’aan and Sunnah.
Alhamdulillaah they promote Tawheed, and to allow Kufr to be practiced is from the Nawaaqid of Tawheed.
Abu Sinan,
The churches and synagogues were removed from the Arabian Peninsula centuries before the rulership of Aal Sa’ood.
So you desire to rebuild places of Kufr? That’s a worse disobedience to Allaah as we’re told to enjoin the good and forbid the evil. Whilst here you’re saying we should “rebuild” the places of Kufr which is enjoining the evil.
Why are we taking the matter of Shirk and Kufr so lightly?
The Prophet salallaahu alihi wa salam spend how many years calling to Tawheed? The Qur’aan is the embodiment of Tawheed! Yet it all goes out like a candle being blown out.
How can one sell out their ‘Aqeedah for “Tolerance”? We aren’t saying prevent the Christians from entering, we’re saying prevent the manifestation of Kufr.
So when are you going to start saying “Let the Satanists and Magicians open their temples and churches”
Oh but wait.. it can go further in the name of “tolerance”… “When are we going to open bars for the alcoholics? It’s their rights!”
If you say “well alcohol is prohibited in Islaam” then know that Kufr and shirk is far worse than sin.
Aboo Redundant,
Funny, and I dont think you realise it, but you have made some of my points for me. Of course churches and synagogues were removed before the tyrany of the al-Saud family forced their version of Islam upon the rest of what is now known as “Saudi Arabia”. However, during the time of the Prophet and his companions, there were churches and synagogues all over Saudi Arabia and the wider Arabian Peninsula. That is a FACT. The prophet and his companions could have removed them and forced Jews and Christians out of the Middle East and Arabia, they choose not to. THAT is the example that should be followed.
I desire to rebuild the places that ALLAH has commanded the Muslims to protect. It is in The Qur’an, yet you argue against it? Your ignorance of history and The Qur’an is what is the problem here.
Your talk of Satanists and other things is just a red herring meant to distract people. No one is talking about Satanists, only you. Besides the fact, as I would be in favour of banning religions outside of those of the People of the Book, I would hardly be considered tolerant by many in the West, but that is fine.
God protect us, Islam and the world from people like this! Ameen.
Ryan,
It’s not really my style to converse in such a tone. You do not have to agree with my beliefs nor I yours, but please try to present yourself with manners and proper etiquette when dealing with people.
Although, you didn’t really offend me when you said things like “Wahabi” whatever that means… if you mean I follow the teachings of people like Sheikh Muhammed Ibn AbdulWahab then thank you? haha cause I do…
4th Century? Actually the further back you go in time… the purer our following of Islam was… so again… if I have the traits of 4th Century Muslims, then thanks again…
Fundamentalist?
Definition of Fundamentalist: One who reduces religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts.
Reduces religion? Well if it means that I strictly interpret religion based on CORE or ORIGINAL texts (i.e. authentic texts) then thanks again…
Try not to focus too hard on FOX NEWS terminology without really understanding them…
Thank you,
Ali
@ Aboo Redundant,
You may want to reconsider this statement:
“If you say “well alcohol is prohibited in Islaam” then know that Kufr and shirk is far worse than sin.”
Then I ask you, how come it is so readily available in KSA?
I will not argue with your statements for you a lot you say is the truth. The problem has been that people do not follow Islam correctly. The topic here is if non-Muslims should be allowed to practice their faith openly. If we can allow the non-Muslims to live and work in KSA, what is the issue of these people practicing their faiths? Is it not better to have “God loving and fearing” people than those that do not believe in a Creator of all beings? The impact on the society will be healthy and will build better dialogue with non-Muslims.
This is not an issue of being weak. The best daawa is ones’ behavior.
I live in the West and in no way, having church’s or whatever faith temples has had an impact on what I believe in as a Muslim. I participate in dialogue with non-Muslims in many ways. Starting from being kind to my neighbors, co-workers and also participating in interfaith dialogue with Christians, Jews and many others here. This has greatly helped in dispelling misunderstandings about what non-Muslims think of us Muslims. I do not try to preach to people that they should accept Islam. People see our behavior and from that change occurs. Allah alone can change what is in the heart of man and if they wish to accept Islam. Trite has this phrase goes, in Islam there is no compulsion for others to accept the truth. Only God can open hearts of man to accept this truth.
May God guide us all and let us all be kind to each other. In these times, this is so much needed, this kindness and better understanding between mankind.
And God knows best!
Ali,
You write “4th Century? Actually the further back you go in time… the purer our following of Islam was… so again… if I have the traits of 4th Century Muslims, then thanks again… ”
Then why is Saudi so far away from the teachings of the prophet? There were churches and synagogues in what is known as Saudi Arabia today, in the time of the prophet. It would seem that as time goes on we get farther and farther away from the prophet, including many who THINK they are following the “real deen” but seem to think it is represented in the tribal/bedu culture of Saudi Arabia. This couldnt be farther from the truth!
SH,
It isnt just alcohol that one can get in Saudi, even though at one point alcohol was brewed UNDERNEATH the KABBAH. You can get heroin yards from the Grand Mosque, there are prostitutes in Mecca. Saudi culture is one that is geared towards appearance, not substance. So as long as everything LOOKS okay, that is what is important.
Like you said, the best Dawa is the way people live their lives. Some people, who think they are following the “real Islam” are the same people who give the WORST dawa. They live their lives in a way no one would want to live like, they have no manners and they are rude. Too bad it is these people that are pointed to when people look at Islam.
If someone has real respect and love for Islam in their heart it doesnt matter if they live next to a church, or actually live in a synagogue. The real issue here is that these people feel Islam, as a religion, is SO WEAK, that it must be protected from all man made enemies. If, as I believe, Islam is the religion given to us by God, it doesnt need to be protected, we have God on our side! }:>) For these people Islam is a religion for the weak, for the dispossesed. It cannot defend itself or stand on it’s own merits, so they must “protect it”.
They really need to take a look at their deen and how they really view it. These people devalue Islam.
Aboo Redundant,
I do not think you read anything I said, because you just repeated everything you said earlier in your reply to me (has something too do with the name I guess
.
No one is advocating allowing open bars and alcohol in any of the arguments. These are assumptions you made, wrongly I may add. Actually, no mainstream religions promotes drinking. Now unless your understanding of Catholics drinking wine at ceremonies makes them drunk from 1 sip
.
You always go into this discussion about satanic religions and witchcraft. Now this is falling into the propaganda that you hear every day of the West being pray to cults. Those religions are not common in the west as some may want you to believe. Yes they exist, but in very small numbers and they capture a small set of disenfranchised people. It is the propaganda machine of the clerics that feeds you misinformation everyday. People get disenfranchised all over the world including Saudi and may do something stupid like join a cult or do drugs. Society should work to fix these problems. Burying your head in the sand will not solve it.
Please make your arguments real. Mentioning fringe religions as a reason to prohibit mainstream religions is just not a valid argument.
Have confidence that Muslims believe in their religion and would not be looking for another faith, because that is reality. Also, read my comments from earlier if you have not and reply on whether, it is better for us to show tolerance to others or close our minds and have the world view us as unjust religion and society.
I believe that if you believe your faith is the true and proper one…then you practice it and get on with your life. Even if you think the faith of others is not the correct choice..why forbid them to practice it openly…what exactly is it taking from you? The fact that Saudis have spread their brand of Islam all over the globe…and yet do not allow others to do the same is the epitome of hypocrisy…not to mention to fits they throw when their religious rights are stepped on…sheesh. How shallow can a culture get…we are right and you are wrong…no more questions or complaints allowed….about sums it up.
[...] living in Saudi Arabia, asks the question: “I’m not Muslim. Can I practice my faith in Saudi Arabia?” Posted by Ayesha Saldanha Print Version Share [...]
Sorry but the following might come across as provocative, or for some even worse….
It’s always interesting to see people from the same faith discuss the content (or meaning) of their faith, as there always are and will be two sides to a discussion (otherwise there wouldn’t be a discussion).
Saudi Arabia is a special thing, it was not a Kingdom until 1926, and talk about bloodshed in unifying it.
As far as I understand a Mosque is a building for worship, and also as far as I know it is always allowed for a non Muslim to enter (with proper respect of cause). The Vatican does not ban non Catholics from entering….
There are many reasons why Saudi Arabia is such a closed society, and as a westerner it can be difficult to understand, why educated people can be so not-understanding (or embracing) especially when one can understand that their faith tells them otherwise.
One factor can be that the ruling people in Saudi Arabia is following (or is being hold hostage by people) a conservative reformist call of Sunni Islam called Wahhabism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabi) – in my words it would be an ultra orthodox sect.
I was reading a book lately by Robert Baer: “Sleeping With the Devil”, which explains many things, but it does not make it easier to understand.
Years back, I was told that a person who is insecure about his/hers faith, is also a person who is not open towards people following different faith – quite the opposite of what is being taught in Islam.
Casper
Thanks for your comments, Casper.
While non-muslims can enter some (not all) mosques it is similar to let’s say how only Mormons can enter their temples in Salt Lake City or Maryland. Makkah and Medinah are holy sites where only muslims can enter and go inside the two Holy mosques.
With all respect, Robert Baer’s “Sleeping with the Devil” is not a good reference point to learn about Saudi Arabia. I would not want anyone to take anything of his as being a good reference.
Just to best understand the primary point of your comment, are you saying that you believe no faith but Islam is allowed to be openly practiced because the Muslims of Saudi Arabia who can make such rulings are not secure in their faith or perhaps confident of their people?
but i have read that muhammad ordered in his deathbed christians jews etc. to be expelled from arabia:
“Jews, Christians and polytheists should be expelled out of Arabia”
though there’s no reference to any hadith. does anybody know details? and whether this is authentic or not?
also i remember reading that muhammad exhorted no two religions should coexist in arabia.
if these are authentic, then there is no reason to be surprised as saudi arabia is a country whose government and constitution are nothing but muhammad’s teachings.
LDS is a different discussion, not even all Mormons are allowed into the temple in SLC, their local priest determine if they have the right to enter.
I do not (I hope) say that Robert Baer is a good reference on Saudi Arabia, but he have some points which should be considered, in trying to understand Saudi Arabia.
It normally only take 10 people in a group of 1000 to make all these 1010 people look bad. So if you take the influential Mullahs in Saudi Arabia and then look at the issue where women are beaten if they go outside of what they are allowed to do (like driving a car, or even worse be with a man whom she is not married to – like in the same room with out anyone else there). In my world that show that the people putting these kinds of rules in place are insecure (what would happen if women got the same rights as men, well that must never happen) – that they hide behind their interpretation of their faith show that maybe they do not feel that secure. The few have always rules the masses.
I think that most people from Saudi Arabia could not care less if there was a church or two in the country, but as in many societies it better to keep the head down. I for one would not like to go to Utah an suggest a Mosque next to the temple….. Even though I find it a good idea.
In many Muslim societies in the world women have the same rights as men to dress, to work, etc. There are exceptions but that is more down to tribal ideas than religion.
But the more I think about this, the more I get to think of something, looking at the US, and other countries in the west, it looks like we are heading in a direction where people put more weight on religion, and “normal” liberties are being limited.
I always try to respect people for what they are, in the sense of I do not really care for what religion they follow as long as they are nice people, and until now that have worked out just fine. But one can always find the one person who puts ones belief in other people to the test.
Back to the subject at hand, I think why we discuss Saudi Arabia so much is that so many non Muslims live there, if it wasn’t because of the oil, then Saudi Arabia would just be another middle east country – yes Mecca and Medina would be there but so what (no disrespect, but that is also how I feel about Jerusalem, and other places which are important for Christians). I would like to see Mecca and Median one day, but as a non-Muslim that is not possible – maybe that will change one day.
The problem in today’s world is that we can always find people who are ready to hit each other in the head with a book – especially their interpretation of the book. We need more respect and openness, unfortunately we have reached the point where two kids are throwing stones at each other – we think we know who started it but it started so long ago that everyone more or less forgot.
This whole thing about Islam vs. other religions is such a huge subject that it is very difficult to either agree or disagree. There is almost 1600 years of history to consider, and for some people it is very difficult to forgive things which happened in the past.
Casper
Thanks for your comments, Casper.
As I mentioned in an earlier comment, I wrote the post simply to state the facts and not debate on religion but nevertheless such a topic inevitably leads at a minimum to heated exchanges of views.
I think it is good to have the various views and perspectives shared and discussed in a mature and non-confrontational manner.
Saudi in the US:
I did read your reply however you missed my point. My point is “Where will you draw the line with ‘tolerance’”.
Ok you’re talking about satanism being “fringe” religion, fine. Then what about the hordes of Hindus in the country? What if they want to build a temple to worship a lingum? What are you going to do then? Why allow Churches but not Hindu Temples? The amount of hindus are higher than the Jews in Saudi Arabia. Should you not be “fair” in your tolerance?
Your argument states that the Muslims are safe in their deen so they wont look to other religions. That’s not the concern. The concern is the allowance of the manifestation of Kufr and Shirk.
Did not the Prophet salallaauh alaihi wa salam order that the statues be destroyed? Then what about the statues of “Jesus” in the churches? Were we not ordered to break the cross? What about the Crosses worshiped in the Churches?
We have enough problems in the Muslim world without the need for manifested Kufr to spread.
SH, my statements still hold fast. We’re not talking about the existence of Alcohol as the law is prohibition. Likewise many Christians gather together in compounds and hold their mass and other than this.
I just cannot fathom why a person who believes in Allaah and the Last day would be comfortable in saying that we should “assist” the Kuffaar in Kufr. Leaving the churches alone is one thing, but we arent leaving any alone… we’re talking about building and allowing as such.
ABU SINAN,
As for you, then statements like: “Your ignorance of history and The Qur’an is what is the problem here.” only display a weakness and fault in your argument. Taking attacks at a persons level of knowledge without even knowing the person or having any interaction with the person besides 2 post exchanges on the internet is a weak debate established in debate methodologies.
You spoke about history saying it’s a fact that churches remained in Saudi Arabia during the time of the Sahaabah, but then if you look into some of the actions of the Khulafaa, they removed the churches from Hijaaz. There werent many in the rest of Arabia.
So putting aside satanists, what about the very large population of Hindus? Should they be allowed to build their temples?
If I have the time, I can probably look it up in al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah of Ibn Katheer or other than that from the books of Taareekh and mention the position of the Sahaabah on the issue.
But until then, I urge you to lighten the aggressiveness in your responses. You don’t know the slightest thing about me or my knowledge, so you have no right in making a comment about that in such a fashion. I remind you to fear Allaah and be mindful of your speech.
I do apologize to the owner of the blog for taking up the space in these comments, however I feel the need to make my position clear.
Allaah says:
“Help you one another in Al‑Birr and At‑Taqwa (virtue, righteousness and piety); but do not help one another in sin and transgression”
(Surah al-Maa’idah, verse 2)
Without doubt Shirk and Kufr is the worst of Sin and Transgression.
So by building churches are we having Ta’aawun (aiding) in righteousness or transgression? We’re aiding in the worship of other than Allaah by building places of worship for the Kuffaar!
Ibn Taymiyyah said:
أو أعانهم على فتحها ; أي : الكنائس ، وإقامة دينهم ; واعتقد أن ذلك قربة أو طاعة فهو كافر ، لتضمنه اعتقاد صحة دينهم
A rough translation: ((Or if he helps in opening it (meaning the Church), and establish their religion, and believes that this is an act of worship or obedience (to Allaah), then he is a kaafir (Disbeliever), because this belief implies that their religion is valid. ))
The Sahaabah did not leave the Churches and Synagogues remaining in the Arabian Peninsula as Abu Sinan claims.
Aboo Daawood as-Sijistaanee said in his Sunan that Ibn ‘Abbaas radhiallaahu anhu said: لا تكون قبلتان في بلد واحد
((There cannot be two Qiblah’s in one land))
And this was reported with other Alfaadh (wordings) as well.
Imaam Ahmad reported in his Musnad (see Musnad of ‘Aa’ishah radhaillaahu anhaa) that ‘Aa’ishah radhiallaahu anhaa reported that the Messenger salallaahua laihi wa salam said : لا يترك بجزيرة العرب دينان
((Do not leave two religions in the Arabian Peninsula))
And this was the well known position of Ahlul Hijaaz during the time of the Taabi’een as it was reported by as-Subkee and other than him.
al-Bayhaqee reported that Abee ‘Ubaydah said: لا يبقين دينان بأرض العرب
((Do not leave two religions in the lands of the ‘Arab))
And by this the Sahaabah did not allow for the spreading of the Churches and in fact during their time and the time of the Taabi’een they ordered the destruction of the Churches and Synagogues in the Arabian Peninsula.
‘Abdur-Razzaaq reported in his Musannaf that Wahb bin Naafi’ said: كتب عمر بن عبدالعزيز إلى عروة بن محمد أن يهدم الكنائس التي في أمصار المسلمين، قال: فشهدت عروة بن محمد ركب حتى وقف عليها ثم دعاني فشهدتُ كتابَ عمر وهدْمَ عروة إياها، فهدمها
((‘Umar bin ‘Abdul-’Azeez wrote to ‘Urwah bin Muhammad to destroy the Churches in the regions of the Muslims. He said: I witnessed ‘Urwah bin Muhammad riding until he stopped at it and called me and I witnessed the writing of ‘Umar and ‘Urwah destroyed them.))
‘Abdur-Razzaaq reported a number of narrations similar to this from the earlier generations proving that this was from their methodology, I can provide you with the asaaneed if you want to verify them (they are authentic). But this one is worthy of paying attention to: Al-Hasan al-Basree who was from the major scholars of the Taabi’een and known to be from one of the best of the students of the Sahaabah said: من السنة أن تُهدم الكنائس التي بالأمصار القديمة والحديثة
((From the Sunnah is to destroy the churches that are in the regions (of the Muslims) the old and the new))
And this is the Ijmaa’ of the Ulemaa of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah. Muhammad ash-Shaybaanee reported this position that no churches or places of worship of the disbelievers should be present in the lands of the Muslims from Aboo Haneefah. It was also reported by Maalik bin Anas and ash-Shaafi’ee reported it (I believe in his Kitaab al Umm but I have to double check). It was also reported from Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal. Ibn Qudaamah reported the same in his Mughnee and Ibn Taymiyyah reported Consensus of the scholars since the time of the Sahaabah in his Risaalah Qubroosiyyah, and likewise Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyyah reported Ijmaa’ on the issue.
So very simply I can quote you the major scholars of Islaam reporting consensus on this issue in the prohibition of building places of worship of the Kuffaar and the destruction of the churches in the Arabian peninsula.
And these scholars were the most knowledgeable of the Qur’aan. Unlike us, we sit here reading the Qur’aan thinking we’re able to give out Tafaaseer without knowing the Qira’aat or the Tafseer of the Sahaabah or the Asbaab an-Nuzool or the Ahadeeth and their riwaayaat pertaining to the issue.
And this is not an issue of the “Saudi scholars” or the “Saudi interpretation” or a “Hardliner view”. This is the view of the scholars of the earlier generations. Major scholars of the religion like Ibn ‘Abbaas, ‘Umar, ‘Aa’ishah, Aboo ‘Ubaydah radhiallaahu anhum and al-Hasan al-Basree, ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul-Azeez, ‘Ikrimah, Mujaahid and many others from amongst the Taabi’een.
masha’Allah brother aboo redundant… truly beautiful to see the use of the words of those who matter (the words of Allah, the Prophet sallalahua alaihi wa sallam, and the companions may Allah be pleased with them), rather than the intellect of individuals in the 21st century.
Jazak Allah khair… if we truly returned to the ways of the Sahabah, Allah would make us victorious in the affairs of this life… Allahol mosta’aan… may Allah guide us all… Ameen
Aboo Redundant,
“I did read your reply however you missed my point. My point is “Where will you draw the line with ‘tolerance’”.”
I did not miss your point. I just happen to disagree with it and told you why. You have to realize I heard your argument 100’s of times and you repeating 3 more times does not make it more compelling. All of these long replies are just repeats of older ones. You have not addressed any of the questions I posed to you. You keep asking the same questions over and over. You cannot have a dialog if you only hear yourself. I guess you do not have respect that others have an intellect and can understand your view from the first time. LOL
“What if they want to build a temple to worship a lingum? What are you going to do then? Why allow Churches but not Hindu Temples? The amount of hindus are higher than the Jews in Saudi Arabia. Should you not be “fair” in your tolerance?”
So what, we have hundreds of Hindu temples in the US. It has not made a dent in the amount of people that follow Christianity. Note allowing people to practice their religion is not the same as promoting it. You have to understand that difference as it is a simple concept really!!
Again what is your fear here? Why do you think Muslims will convert to Hinduism? Answer one question for once.
Also, think what if the Hindus took your example and started burning mosques and stopping Muslims from praying in India. They are a huge majority and they certainly can make that happen if they took your radical views.
Sorry to say this, but I call it as I see it. You have stuck yourself in a tight box of very narrow interpretations and have not considered the changes that happened over the past 100 years of evolution in ease of travel/communications, cooperation between nations, globalization of trade and industry, etc. The world is a different place where peace and coexistence requires we have to respect the believes of others.
Islam is a religion that can compete with others and gain converts, there is no reason for us to be fearful and shield ourselves from the realities of the world.
Other nations have made the transition and accepted that the Muslim minority can practice their religion in peace. The simple case is that it is our turn to respect their believes. Isn’t that fair?
By the way I am looking for what you think, not some scholar’s idea, as I hope I am talking to a person not a library!
Reuters chose to pick up and carry this post:
http://www.reuters.com/article/blogBurst/entertainment?bbPostId=B6kcqoGH9Pf8Bzn7nRZ5sNNoB8Hqa0pDlhuVB95ddW2riA9M
After all is said and even though I dont agree with Saudi laws preventing worship of any other religion than Islam, ultimately I really don’t care, just as long as that ultra conservative attitude doesn’t spread to the rest of the modern world, IE let the crazies have their kingdom. After all, if we were all like Saudi, we’d all be walking around in 1 of 2 available colours with the inability to socialise with each other properly!
Casper makes a good point, if there weren’t so many westerners working in Saudi, who here would really give a hoot about how they choose to run the place??
or rather…if Saudi did not have its oil who woud give a hoot about how the Kingdom is run….
Saudi in the USA,
You said it. It really gets boring hearing the same things over and over again. It almost seems sometimes that they cut and paste this stuff.
Never an original thought in their mind, no critical thinking at all. This is EXACTLY why the Muslim world puts out so many engineers but trails the world in innovative technology. They can master the rote routine of the maths, but the ingenuity of the Islamic world died out about 500 years ago and we have been left with people like this.
This is why the Muslim world is backwards, not because of churches in Kuwait and UAE.
Ali and “Aboo” can do their best to go back to the time of the companions, meanwhile whilst they are busy riding on their camels, living in tents, the rest of us can get on doing our best to bring something to this earth besides hate and division.
Some of us realise you can be modern, tolerant, and a good Muslim all at the same time.
Saudi in the US:
I have not evaded your questions, I’ve answered them but again by your reply you seem to be missing my point of argument.
You’re centering around the theme: “How will it affect Muslims, they wont convert”
Whereas my argument is:
“Not aiding in establishment of Kufr”
You stated:
“I guess you do not have respect that others have an intellect and can understand your view from the first time”
I honestly don’t understand why you are so quick to jump to assessing me when you continually mistook my statements and then turned this into an issue of me not viewing others with a capability of intellect.
In your first reply to me you stated:
“They will be promoting tolerance and love for others. ”
And I disagreed with that saying:
“Allowing Kufr to be practiced openly is not tolerance of the Sharee’ah of Allaah.”
Your central thesis in that post was aligned around this defense:
“I do not see many of their citizens converting, do you? ”
However my argument has always been centralized on this:
“Alhamdulillaah they promote Tawheed, and to allow Kufr to be practiced is from the Nawaaqid of Tawheed.”
Then your next reply to me stated I “repeated the same argument”, however you did not respond to the core argument. Instead you just took an example I used and said:
“You always go into this discussion about satanic religions and witchcraft.”
A few points concerning this:
1) To use the term “Always” you would need more than the 2 posts I made with that example
2) The example is not the main body of the argument, you centered around the example rather than the point itself which is: “Where do you draw the line with tolerance?”
Re-instating the argument: If you allow churches and synagogues, then should you not allow other religions or cults to enter into public worship no matter how manifest and evil their Shirk is? You can replace Satanist with Hinduism, Budhhist, or the worshipers of Sai Baba or any other belief.
Your central defense was:
“Have confidence that Muslims believe in their religion and would not be looking for another faith, because that is reality”
And this is hardly a viable response to my underlining argument.
My statement is simple: Why would you allow the spread of Kufr and Shirk after being upon Tawheed?
And I dont mean by this that Muslims convert out of Islaam, I mean by this that you have a responsibility when you are upon Tawheed and that’s to eliminate the worship of the Tawaagheet is that not correct? Then how do you allow, nay promote, the worship of the Tawaagheet and then claim you are upon Tawheed?
My evidences for this were the verses I supplied.
Then you go on to say:
“I just happen to disagree with it and told you why. ”
But then your responses do not substantiate a refutation of my claim. In fact, my replies are a Shar’ee point of view. And you came with a response that was not substantial to the issue, you went into branches rather than roots.
Then after saying you understood my argument but disagreed and all this, you came back with the same faulted response:
“So what, we have hundreds of Hindu temples in the US. It has not made a dent in the amount of people that follow Christianity.”
It’s not about conversion, we have more problems with Muslims turning to aspects of Shirk such as Isti’aana and Istighaatha with the dead than Muslims turning to Christianity or Judaism.
It’s about the allowance of Kufr to be openly practiced, this becomes Ta’aawun ‘ala Ithmi wal ‘Udwaan.
However you brought this valid statement:
“Note allowing people to practice their religion is not the same as promoting it. ”
Allowance of practice of their religion is already occurring in Saudi Arabia. But aiding them by opening Churches and Synagogues whilst you are in power becomes promotion. This is something agreed upon by the People of Knowledge in Islaam such as Shaykhul Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and other than him.
And as I mentioned, this was the position of the Majority of the Sahaabah.
But sadly you messed up your only valid point by returning to this:
“Again what is your fear here? Why do you think Muslims will convert to Hinduism? Answer one question for once.”
I stated that this is not an issue. This is not a fear and we’re not talking about “fear of repercussions”. If you want to discuss “repercussions” then my point would be the rise of the Khawaarij due to this event.
And there is no denial or doubts about that, build a church in Saudi Arabia and the Khawaarij will triple their activities in the region. And this is just a pot about to boil, all they need is a more “solid” evidence against Saudi Arabia to increase in their activities. So the repercussions you will face is not Muslims converting to Hinduism, but rather more of the youth turning to the methodology of the Khawaarij and this is an undeniable result. I don’t know how familiar you are with that mentality, but it’s not something “small”, it’s a major issue with many youth.
However that’s a separate point.
My point is not conversions, it’s the utter opposite of Tawheed, and that is to not only Allow, but promote by constructing and allowing the construction of places of Kufr in the lands of Tawheed.
As for this:
“Also, think what if the Hindus took your example and started burning mosques and stopping Muslims from praying in India.”
Honestly this argument is based on a hypothetical basis. The world is not on an equal level. Some places in the world are more hostile to Islaam and some are not. We’re not discussing this from a political basis if we were then you can basically “put Islaam out of the picture”. We’re discussing this based on the Sharee’ah. Suppose Hindus did ban Masaajid (they already burn masaajid in Gujuraat), then upon the Muslims is to make Hijrah to a place where they CAN practice Islaam (such as the Muslim lands). And if they are not able, then they can practice in their homes and make a common place a Masjid. What does Allaah say about this in the Qur’aan?
Allaah says in Surah an-Nisaa:
قَالُواْ كُنَّا مُسْتَضْعَفِينَ فِي الأَرْضِ قَالْوَاْ أَلَمْ تَكُنْ أَرْضُ اللّهِ وَاسِعَةً فَتُهَاجِرُواْ فِيهَا
((They will say: We were weak in the land. Say: Is not the land of Allaah vast? Then migrate in it)) (sorry for the bad translation)
And if you say “what if they are not able?”
Then Allaah says in Surah at-Talaaq:
ومن يتق الله يجعل له مخرجا
((And whoever Fears Allaah, He will make a way out for him))
You said:
“The world is a different place where peace and coexistence requires we have to respect the believes of others”
Allaah often tells us in the Qur’aan: وجاهدوا في الله حق جهاده
((And make Jihaad in the way of Allaah with a correct Jihaad)) (Again sorry for the bad translation)
And what is Jihaad in the way of Allaah? It is: ان تجعل كلمة لا إله إلا الله هي العليا
((To make the word: “There is nothing worthy of worship except Allaah” the upper most))
And the evidence of this is vast in the Qur’aan and Sunnah.
So then is permitting and constructing Churches, and places of shirk making this Kalimah uppermost or is it weakening it?
And I’m not speaking of preventing them from practicing, I mean opening their practice and allowing it to be practiced manifest. So then in Saudi Arabia you will see the cross being worshiped, or ‘Eesaa Alaihis Salaam being worshiped openly as you walk to the Masjid to worship Allaah.
Where is the “Enjoining the Good and Forbidding the evil”
I hope you understand that my issue is not the “conversions”. In our Masjid here there are many Christians turning to Islaam. The issue is the allowance and the propagation of Shirk in the land of Tawheed.
If we permit the Christians to practice, then what about the Qubooriyyoon? Arent we ordered to level the graves? Then what if they desire to practice but the Messenger of Allaah salallaahu alaihi wa salam ordered us to prevent this!?
You said:
“By the way I am looking for what you think, not some scholar’s idea, as I hope I am talking to a person not a library!”
What you are hearing is what I think.
However as al-Khateeb al Baghdaadee reported in his Sharaf as-haabul Hadeeth from Sufyaan ath-Thawree:
إنما الدين بالآثار وليس بالرأي
((Indeed the religion is in the narrations and not in the opinions))
I do apologize to the blog owner again for such a large post.
Abu Sinan,
Your statement:
“It almost seems sometimes that they cut and paste this stuff.”
Is a very unjust statement. Aboo Daawood reported in his Sunan that the Prophet salallaahu alaihi wa salam said:
إياكم والظن، فإن الظن أكذب الحديث
((Beware of Conjecture, for verily conjecture is the most lying of speech))
You said: “Never an original thought in their mind, no critical thinking at all. ”
You should know that personal attacks severely discredit your position.
I have not spoken about your intellect or lack thereof, but you speak about “not having critical thinking” or “ignorant of history”, is this the manners of a Muslim when dealing with another Muslim?
Ibn Mas’ood radhiallaahu anhu said:
ما على وجه الأرض شئ أحوج إلي طول سجن من اللسان
“There is nothing on the face of the earth that is more in need of being imprisoned for a lengthy period of time than the tongue”
Please take this into consideration: Personal remarks about a person severely weaken your ability to credibly make a point.
You stated further:
“This is EXACTLY why the Muslim world puts out so many engineers but trails the world in innovative technology.”
Until: “This is why the Muslim world is backwards”
You stated you knew history, then you would be aware of what Ibn al-Atheer said in his Taareekh about the fall of the Muslim empire, which was about the same time as the destruction of the “Golden Era” of Islaam in technology and science which you speak of. He mentioned that the destruction of strength of the Ummah came from a detachment from the Sharee’ah of Allaah. Just as the Messenger of Allaah salallaahu alaihi wa salam said in the Hadeeth reported by Aboo Daawood in his Sunan:
إذا تبايعتم بالعينة وأخذتم أذناب البقر ورضيتم بالزرع وتركتم الجهاد سلط الله عليكم ذلا لا ينزعه حتى ترجعوا إلى دينكم
((If you follow the interest-based transactions and hold firm to the tails of the cows, and are pleased with cultivation and left the Jihaad in the path of Allaah, the Humiliation of Allaah will be put upon you, and it will not be removed until you return to your religion))
Your statement:
“Ali and “Aboo” can do their best to go back to the time of the companions, meanwhile whilst they are busy riding on their camels, living in tents, the rest of us can get on doing our best to bring something to this earth besides hate and division.”
Is a serious blow to your own position.
Statements like show a weakness in your argument, and it also shows a weakness in understanding of the opponents position.
We’re not saying to not be technologically advanced, or innovative in science and technology. The building of places of Kufr does not mean that one is technologically advanced.
Perhaps instead of having Soo’ adh-Dhann (evil conjecture) about us and claiming we’re the type of people who “want to go back in time” and flailing arguments like that, then you should probably contemplate on the follow line of poetry:
ترجو النجاة ولم تسلك مسالكها … إن السفينة لا تجري على اليبس
You want success but you do not tread its path,
Indeed the Ship does not sail through dry land.
Aboo Redundant,
I got through about half your long message. It was way too long and not worth reading. You are one confused human being. You do not get it, all the problems we have with any radical groups that you fear is a result of people with your type of thinking. Feeding generations of Muslim with such junk. You should consider another approach if you are capable of that.
You are actually promoting that we should make enemies of others even if that means 150 million people can be expelled. Your world and what you promote is something dark and goes against humanity and you have no shame in justifying it with religion. By the way if the radical Muslims continue in their aggressive hostilities to other religions you may see that in your life time. The entire world is getting fed up with your radical mentality if you have not noticed.
You know when the human brain develops, neurons make connections to form logical circuits. This is what gives us the ability to reason and that happens at an early age. Your neurons have made all the wrong connections. There is no way I can unscramble the mess you have in there. Too much circular logic in your thinking. I give up on trying to get a reasonable discussion with you. You simply have bad hardware/logical circuits.
Saudi in the US,
The fact that you had as little concern to even fully read my response show much on your behalf. And considering it “not worth reading” shows a lack of regard in discussion.
You’re speaking about “respect” and the likes of this but then you turn around with this manner of speech? Fear Allaah ya Akhee.
Then you claimed I am a confused person without even reading my reply in completion. Do not be a hasty individual ya Akhee.
And do not throw about accusations that will be upon your shoulders on Yawm al-Qiyaamah.
And if you consider what I said as Junk, then know that I have not said anything except that I have an evidence from the People of Knowledge from Ahlus Sunnah, the likes of the Major ones from amongst the Sahaabah such as Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn Mas’ood and the Mother of the believers, Aa’ishah radhiallaahu anhum ajma’een.
You’ve read a part of my reply and then turned it into an aggressive response. This is nothing less than oppression. The Messenger of Allaah said:
إياكم والظلم، فإن الظلم ظلمات يوم القيامة
((Beware of oppression, for oppression is darkness on the Day of Standing))
And to accuse my speech of Radicalism shows a strange stance towards the statements of the Companions.
Then your usage of personal attacks to degrade my character and my intellect just weaken your position and know that between us, Allaah is a witness to your speech.
Logic is a perception formulated by knowledge and experience. When you lack knowledge, especially in Sharee’ah, your logical framework become a flailing system of perceptive opinions based on a weak foundation.
You ended your discussion with a personal attack. I implore you to refrain from personal attacks.
As we find in the saying: الكيّس من دان نفسه
The clever one is he who checks himself
Aboo Redundant,
I read half of your response and the reason is you never told me anything about what you think. You reverted back to telling me what you read again. So it was not worth me reading it. If i want to read someone else’s opinion I will Google or go to the library it and read it myself.
You really need to get out of your box and experience the world for all its goodness. The idea that Muslims should disrespect other religions and constantly attack them is repulsing. And yes when you deny people the right to practice their religion freely, you are attacking their religion.
I will give you a true story that I have experienced, hopefully this will give you an understanding of how terrible your position is:
In 2001 after the 911 attack. There was a lot of fear in the United States that Americans will attack Mosques. I lived in a small town in the outer suburbs of Los Angeles. We had a small community mosque. Note the Los Angeles area had over 20 of these, compared to not 1 church in Saudi. The local Churches, did not call for burning the mosque. Which is exactly what would have happened if the situation is reversed in the Middle East (Imams would have called for that on Friday prayers, if 15 Christians killed 3000 Muslims in an attack). No they called for the opposite, they actually instructed their worshipers to help protect the Muslims in the community. So for a period of over 4 weeks, Christian elderly men and women (in groups of roughly 10), will stand in front of the Mosque during the 5 prayer times holding peace signs, so no crazies will attack the Mosque while people are praying. They were acting like human shields for Muslims for lack of better term.
They went out of their way, not only to allow us to pray after such a disaster, but also to protect us. We should learn from that. The world would be a better place if we care about each other. I will never forget that act of kindness.
From you I hear the opposite. Oppress them because they do not think like me. That thinking cannot be justified no matter how many references you bring back. It is not humane. It is a simple point, please think about it for a while before you go to your library of books. Learn to think for yourself for once.
Ali you said: “And there is no denial or doubts about that, build a church in Saudi Arabia and the Khawaarij will triple their activities in the region.”
Since I dont speak Arabic and there was a lot of Arabic in this post, I dont really feel like translating them all right now but I did decide to look up the word Khawaarij. Now from reading this it convinces me that you haven’t got a clue. I think you should think long and hard about your comments on “increasing Khawaarij” and why they are kinda ridiculous and don’t increase the strength of your argument one iota.
Let’s all give in to the terrorists shall we?
Sorry, I meant to quote Aboo Redundant there…
Ryan,
Whatever is written in Arabic script has been translated.
As for the word Khawaarij, it refers to a sect in Islaam.
And I don’t expect you to know the severity of the mentality and how it’s afflicted the youth of the Muslims.
I don’t think anyone wants Saudi Arabia to turn out like Egypt was during the reign of Sadat. This mentality is strong, and supported by many of the ignorant people and many are just waiting for such an excuse to erupt on the Saudi Government. Granted in this issue, it would be wrong of the government to build churches, but you can say it will be the “straw that broke the camels back”.
And if you think it’s “giving in” then you are mistaken. And this isn’t the crux of my argument, as I stated it’s just a repercussion.
There are hot bed’s of this mentality found in Saudi Arabia and believe me it’s more than an ideological attack.
Saudi in the US,
How can you formulate a proper response with just reading half of what is said? I made it clear that my thoughts are based on my Religion, and the religion is a transmission not an open opinionated forum for every person to put in their thoughts and turn it into religion. That’s the religion of the Mu’tazilah. This religion is based upon the Qur’aan and Sunnah, not upon the opinions of Fulaan wa ‘Alaan.
Your approach to this particular discussion is not a beneficial approach. We’re not talking merely politics, this is a matter of the religion. So you expect that the opinions builds up the religion and its rulings? This is not the methodology of a Muslim, this is the methodology of the Mu’tazilah.
And sir, I have experienced a lot of the world and I cannot understand how a person can derive a judgment as you have about me with merely a few posts. As you spoke about logic and the development of logic, then know that logic is formed by knowledge and experience, and a persons logic may differ from another based on his derivation of a particular circumstance, this is holding Knowledge equal. A practical example is in what occurred with the Sahaabah in the situation of Banee Quraydah.
And just to note, I did not go “copy/paste” statements, I quoted them from memory which is why I didnt put any of the page numbers from the books.
Your story is besides the point. I can give a counter story where a Masjid in our community area was shot at. I can give you another personal story where two of our brothers were beaten unconscious because they were Muslim, even though only one of them was Arab and the other was Russian. Or what about how the sister whose Hijaab was ripped off her head? There are many stories like this but they cannot be used as a proof for anything.
The obligation upon every Muslim in Saudi Arabia is to protect the Dhimmee and the mu’aahad. So if I saw a Muslim fighting a Christian because of his religion, I would have to defend the Christian from that oppression.
This is a separate issue from what’s being discussed.
What’s at hand is the Opening of places of SHIRK and KUFR by the government.
So basically you’re saying that Enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is Inhumane due to “religious freedom”?
Abbo Redundant,
You managed another long one that repeated the same as you did before, let’s see 5 times now. Then you wonder why we do not want to read what you write.
Your argument of defending Christian from oppression does not hold water since you advocate oppressing them yourself.
Your argument about modern day Khwarij is over stated.
Your examples of things that happened 100’s of years ago are not relevant the world is much different now. Start dealing with today. This is why you do not make sense, you are stuck in the past.
The point of my story, which you obviously did not get was: that religions when at their best can show great kindness to each other. If we as Muslims are kind to others also, we can build that to develop a world of peaceful coexistence. Building trust requires many kind gestures and rejecting aggression. We are stopping at the basics, which is accepting others’ religion. You can focus on hate or you can focus on kindness. One is better than the other. You need to decide which side you are on.
The story you listed about people being attacked. Is it individual acts or institutionalized (big difference between the 2)? Do you live in Saudi by the way or have you lived there ever? Where did this story occur?
Saudi in the US,
I’ll make this quick.
Each post made the same point from a different angle, if only you took the time to read it. You came out with the same response each time, thereby I responded to it trying to explain why your understanding was wrong, but you just decided not to read. But then how can you have not read all the posts and say they are the same? Are you just looking at the length?
Your statement on oppression: The Sharee’ah does not contradict itself. Allaah promises the Kuffaar the Hell-Fire, is that oppression from Allaah? Yet Allaah ordered us to protect Ahl adh-Dhimmah.
The issue of the Khawaarij is not 100 years ago, it’s very plausible in our time. In fact if you’ve dealt with Khawaarij for years you would see what I spoke of more clearly.
Showing kindness to other religions is one thing. I dont spit in the face of other religions, but I dont condone allowing Shirk to spread. My Allegiance to Allaah and His Messenger override that. And that’s the point i’ve been making. How can you condone the establishment of places of Shirk and continue to say you are upon Tawheed? (I’m NOT making Takfeer here)
I can give you institutionalized attacks on Muslims if you like, I have enough of both stories and experiences to tell you that. I’ve seen Muslims been slaughtered in fields and muslims being targeted.
I was born in and grew up in Saudia and I lived in the US (where the stories are from) and have been to Asia, Africa, Europe and I currently live in Saudi Arabia again.
I have been following this discussion for a while now but didn’t think it prudent to comment until now.
Regardless of what positions individuals reading this may hold, I find it disappointing that someone would make sweeping generalizations about the comments of another person while admitting they did not even finish reading them.
It is one thing to disagree, but to accuse another person of lacking intellect or knowledge just because they disagree with you is not right. We are Muslims alhamdu lillaah, we should check ourselves so our behavior reflects that at all times.
Humid Subtropical,
It is fair to read half of a 4 page message and determine the rest is not worth reading. Actually I think I was more than fair reading 2 pages and looking for something new, after 5 long previous messages of repeating the same thing over and over.
By the way you made a sweeping comment without reading what I said (i.e. I said I read half, not that I did not read the comment altogether.)
Regarding making judgments on intellect. Let’s be real here. A person that holds a core belief of not respecting the believes of 80% of the people on the planet should not get a pass from the rest of us in respecting their thinking. It is as basic as that.
Also realize, the fact the person I am talking to is a Muslim or non Muslim has nothing to do with this. I will not respect a Christian that will promote preventing Muslims from performing their religious duties in the US in the same way.
Saudi in the US,
I’ve been in many discussions before in which people were would speak an hour at a time with their arguments, and some others with 10 pages worth of argumentation which I disagreed with. Some of which required me to do extensive cross-checking research before responding. However out of respect for the persons I would give them the least to read what they have to say and answer them only after I comprehend what they are saying. You are not able to comprehend without reading in entirety, if you do then that becomes conjecture because you cognitively base your thoughts based on a perception built up from a few building blocks and not the entire foundation.
Yahyaa ibn Khaalid said:
لَا تُرَدَّ عَلَى أَحَدٍ جَوَاباً حَتَى تَفْهَمُ كَلَامَهُ
Do not respond to anyone until you have understood their words,
فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ يَصْرِ فُكَ عَنْ جَوَابِ كَلَامِهِ إِلَى غَيْرِهِ وَ يُؤَكِّدُ اَلجَهْلَ عَلَيْكَ
For that will cause you to respond to what they have not said, and thus confirm your own ignorance.
وَ لَكِنِ اَفْهَمْ عَنْهُ، فَإِذَا فَهِمْتَهُ فَأَجِبْهُ، وَ لَا تَتَعَجَّلْ بِالجَوَابِ قَبْل َالِاسْتِفْهَامِ
Rather you must understand his speech properly. So when you understand him, then respond. And do not rush to answer before asking for clarity.
وَ لَا تَسْتَحْيِ أَنْ تَسْتَفْهِمَ إِذَا لَمْ تَفْهَمْ، فَإِنَّ اَلجَوَابَ قَبْلَ اَلْفَهْمِ حُمْقٌ
And do not be shy to seek clarity when you do not understand. For verily answering before understanding is sheer idiocy!
وَ إِذَا جَهِلْتَ قَبْلَ أَنْ تَسْأَلَ، فَيَبْدُو لَكَ
So if you do not know before asking, then ask! Then it will come to you.
فَسُؤَالُكَ وَاسْتِفْهَامُكَ أَحْمَدُ بِكَ وَ خَيْرٌ لَكَ مِنَ السُّكُوتِ عَلَى الْعَيِّ.
Your questioning and seeking clarity is more praiseworthy and better for you then being silent and incapable of expressing yourself!
(Jaami’ Bayaan al ‘Ilm wa Fadhlihi of Ibn Abdil Barr)
And yes, let’s be real here… You’re basing your position towards me based on half readings and assumptions.
My Allegiance is to Allaah. I do not respect Shirk and kufr ever. I may respect the person but not his beliefs. I detest that Allaah, the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, should be degraded by someone worshiping what He Created.
Islaam has everything to do with this discussion and your mannerisms in dialogue. Observe the mannerisms of a Muslim first: المسلم أخ المسلم ((A Muslim is a Brother of a Muslim))
Aboo Redundant,
I gave you a half read because you do not know how to get to your point. I will not spend hours reading your endless quotes. I told you very early, I do not want to talk to a library I want to talk to a person.
With all due respect, you sound like an Automata that is not capable of thinking so you go to references. Look at all your messages they are full of quotes from others. I really cannot stitch those into what you think . That is your job not mine. Let loose and tell me what you think. No quotes from others, just you as a person expressing yourself. Try it, it will be a great experience and will shorten your messages
And do not start on this mannerism of a Muslim discussion, just another out of topic that we do not want to start. My manners is what they are. That was the job of my parents not yours. Learn to live with it, because you will not have a chance in changing them.
It is also good to stay away from useless discussions, which have no end.
Aboo Redundant, how did you come up with this name? Here is how this word is defined:
Redundant:
1 a: exceeding what is necessary or normal : superfluous b: characterized by or containing an excess; specifically : using more words than necessary c: characterized by similarity or repetition
So you are the father of redundancy?
No disrespect intended.
I dont’ know if I am in the minority or not but I have been enjoying reading the exchanges going on here. I would be very curious to see how participants who have been commenting here would be reacting and/or responding to queries if they had attended the World Dialogue in Madrid? For example, those who have commented and who are Saudi or let’s make it more simple…those who are Muslim, regardless of nationality, would you have liked to have been a chosen participant?
It does seem to have become pointless. Reading these kinds of conversations makes me fear the thought of people of the opinions held by Aboo Redundant being the majority on our planet… unable to think outside of that thought’s relevance to the Koran.
Carol, my issue is of redundancy. Not the the topic. I expressed my views very early on this topic. I just do not like to repeat myself.
SH,
I am aware of the meaning of the word Redundant.
The name “Aboo Redundant” is derived from a theory which me and a few others started writing about based on analysis of certain traits found in different fields and applications.
We had planned to put some of the business applications and management theory out under this account but we haven’t gotten around to it yet.
Saudi in the US,
I’m truly astonished by your response and lack of decorum in responding.
I already explained the reason for the length of the posts, my point was quite simple but you happened to complicate it with incomprehensibility based upon culpable perceptions.
When dealing with a religious issue (as my point is from a perspective of religion) then we refer to the sources of the religion and those who are qualified in it (the Scholars).
If you are not capable of carrying out a knowledge-based discussion then you simply dont have to respond. I had seen a religious perspective being brought and people using the Qur’aan and Sunnah to back up their view, therefore I entered from this aspect which you are evading that aspect in lieu with what you perceive as logic.
As for manners, then it’s not “the job of your parents” alone. Take that responsibility yourself and as we know that the Prophet salallaahu alaihi wa salam was sent to perfect the character.
Allaahul Musta’aan.
Assalaamu alaikum.
Saudi in the US,
Allah legislated two sources of guidance for us, the quraan and the sunnah of rasooullah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. If we are in doubt in regards to the understand of the sunnah, we can then look to the actions of the sahaba.
Furthermore, Allah instructed us that if we disagree in a matter, to refer it back to Allah and his messenger sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. This will settle the dispute for us.
Then why is it that you keep on repeating this
“Let loose and tell me what you think”
Ya akhi/ukhti, how many times does the brother have to post before you understand that what he is posting is what he thinks!?!? even if he is quoting some one else, it is obviously because he agrees with what they are saying?
Our religion is based on quraan and the sunnah, and Allah told us to return to the scholars if we dont know. And here you are, asking us to put aside all of that give u “what we think”??
Come one akhi/ukhti, we have disagreed, let us turn back to the quraan and the sunnah and the actions of the sahaba, and we will inshaallah find the solution there. What is the problem with that? Why are you so opposed to such an approach?
This is a religious issue, lets deal with it using religious texts.
As for the issue of not having any religion other than islaam in the arabian peninsula, the the hadeeth reported by Ahmad where the prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam promised to take out the jews and the christians from the arabian peninsula is clear.
What omar did, in regards to carrying out this order is clear also.
Our hatred of kufr, doesnt equal injustice towards the kuffaar. Since, Allah hates Kufr! dont u know that yakhi? Allah hates kufr, but He will never be unjust to the kuffar, rather they are unjust to themselves.
We have to deal with all people in a just way. Make the distinction, the prophet did it and so did the sahaba.
But then again, all you care about is the opinions of the people.
Allahul musta’aan.
Abu Redundant and Shariq,
Then why do we have non-Muslims present in KSA? So they all should be shown the exit and told to get out?
Opinions is anyone can give here. Remember folks, this is a blog and I do not believe anyone of us is a scholar here.
Both of you are being very harsh with Saudi in US. He has asked you to think, which obviously is difficult for some.
No one has said that we should not use the Quran and Sunnah as our guide, but Allah has also given us brains for a purpose. Now I know why I left KSA and made the choice to live in the West. At least, I am able to use my brain and not be subjected to narrow minded thinking.
Aboo Redundant,
Do not even think about talking about other people’s character when you cannot pass the simple Hypocrisy test. You lived in the US and were offered full religious freedoms, but do not want to extend the same to others.
You are a lost cause. I really tried at some point to give you constructive criticism about your style of over dependence on quotes that people really do not understand what you think. What you carry is not a knowledge debate, it is a Parrot show. Have a good life, one day you will figure it out I hope.
I would just like to add briefly that in regards to the issue of how muslims should deal with non-muslims, then it is a whole topic on its own. However just briefly it needs to be said that Muslims are to treat everyone with justice and fairness. Cheating and oppression have been made haraam upon us in regards to all individuals. And Allah told us in the quraan that we should act kindly against those who dont fight us. How many of the sahaba become muslims due to seeing the beautiful character of those muslims around them!
There is so much more that can be said on this topic, and the life of the messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam is ripe with examples of this kind treatment.
But please, as an appeal to the muslims, dont let your personal opinions be the basis of ur religion. Our religion is based on two revealations, if you want anything further you can look to the sahaba.
When we do look into the quraan and the sunnah, we will find that Allah hates disbelief and those that die upon it, at the same time He orders us with good character.
It is not a contradiction.
Saudi in the US,
Please dont accuse me of Nifaaq which is paramount to Takfeer. You shuold have more sense than that. I justified my position with my point of reference from the Qur’aan and Sunnah whereas you came around with rejecting evidences on the basis that you don’t like references. Allaahul Musta’aan.
When I lived in the U.S. I signed an agreement to abide by their laws, just as non-Muslims sign the agreement to abide by the laws of Saudi Arabia.
To me, my obligation to Allaah over rides all else.
Your “constructive criticism” was nothing but personal pot shots and what seemed to be an passive-aggressive attack.
Fear Allaah Akhee.
Dear SH,
There is a legitemate answer for what you have asked. It is found in the life of the sahaba.
The least you could have done is to say that yes the prophet did say that, sallallahu alaihi wa sallam, but then why do we have them there? that would have shown that you are tryiing to understand the situation. Alas, i dont know what you did with the hadeeth.
Brother/sister, you have to understand that the hadeeth of taking out the jews and the christians from the arabian peninsula has reasons behind it. It can take up another post, but whatever those reasons were, the prohibition was for them not to settle here and live in the arabian peninsula permanently.
From the understanding of the companions it is clear that they are allowed to come and work, but it should be on a temporary basis. The prohibition is that they shouldnt be able to settle here.
As for makkah, then they arent allowed to enter it at all, for whatever reason. As for madeenah, then it is reported that during the time of umar chrisitans and jews came to trade, but after they finished their trade, they had to leave.
Anyway, for further proofs you have to give me some time.
Akhi/ukhti, again i am saying that look to the quraan and the sunnah and the actions of the sahaba. You will find the correct islamic position there. Not by asking what i think, or what saudi in the us thinks, or what aboo redundant thinks. etc etc
SH,
We’re not against the Non-Muslims being in Saudi Arabia. We’re against the Saudi Government building churches and opening the manifestation of Kufr in the Land of Tawheed.
As for “what you think” and all this repetitive kalaam, if I simply removed the quotes and not referenced anything, then would you speak any different? What I Quote is what I believe it’s what I think.
But it leads me to wonder why you, Saudi in the US and Abu Sinan have take a very passive-aggressive response towards me so quickly since immediately after my first 2 posts.
Whatever the case it, if you and Saudi in the US and Abu Sinan want to seriously discuss this with me then we will make our reference point the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Otherwise I don’t think you or anyone else really should try fall back on a verse or two but when others bring the Qur’aan and Sunnah you jump on them for “referencing”
Aboo Redundant,
Let me start out to begin with that this is not an attack or a criticismin any way. I am enjoying readhing the dialogues and differing perspectives and views. If I am understanding correctly what Saudi in US has requested is for you to respond to a question without the need to quote “references” or what some reading my view as “justification” of your words. Sure; there is nothing wrong with that and all of us will do that to one degree or another…but also it is equally enjoyable to simply freely dialogue too without the need to reinforce or explain how ones words are in compliance with the Quran or a hadith or a particular scholar…because in this case, one is simply expressing themselves naturally and freely.
So as a thought…how about we suggest Saudi in US (or anyone else for that matter) ask one question rather than a paragraph of multiple questions to begin anew?
And actually in line with this post which I wrote mainly to highlight law of the Kingdom in regards to religion, I think it is also worth discussing King Abdullah’s initiative with the World Dialogue since that is also about religion and tolerance.
Do you wish you could have been chosen as an official participant of the Dialogue?
I believe this is one of the problems with Muslims, we are always led to believe as to fear Allah. Think about that statement, it is through love of Allah that all else comes. Through love of Allah, we do not do things which He dislikes.
Maybe the above concept is hard for some to understand but that in my view, is why we have so much duplicity in our behavior as Muslims.
What aboo Redundant said here is true, especially in regards to saudi in the us and Abu sinan.
American Bedu,
I understand what you are saying as I have also understood the same from Saudi in the US and others. As I stated, in a religious discussion (or from a religious perspective) one must rely on evidences. The religion is established on evidences not on opinions. If we open doors for opinions, then everyone who has a voice will speak on issues they are ignorant of.
However I digress. I would accept a discussion only if the basis of it were the Qur’aan and Sunnah, as for opinions then my opinions are built from Qur’aan and Sunnah.
I do not wish I could have been chosen for that as far better than me are available such as Shaykh Abdul-Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh.
SH,
The command to Fear Allaah is in the Qur’aan repeated in many many Ayaat
Shariq,
What a difference you make in speaking. You actually did not have 20 quotes from others.Thank you for that.
The issue in my mind is not whether Allah hates the disbelieve in the the prophets message. That is a given. Other religions also say the same thing about us. We are the kufar in the eyes of a Christian, but they get over that and respect our believes. We need to do the same to promote the cause of respect and inter religious peace.
The issue is that we live in a world that has changed significantly over the past 100 years. We can travel across the world in less than a day and we have interconnected interests in a globalized economy. It is for the benefit of our nation to look fair and welcoming to our gussets from around the world. Our reputation as a country has been taking a beating over the past few years and we keep reinforcing it through these very hardened positions.
The issue of whether the entire Arabian peninsula should be of limits to other religions is debatable. This is why you see countries like Qatar and Kuwait allow this. The Hadith in questions refers to the Prophet allowing the Jews to stay under certain conditions and it was based on a specific situation of war between Muslims and Jews.
The point is why do we have to take the most extreme position on this issue, when in our situation in the modern world it is better for all of us to find common ground. The Hadith also describes a different situation.
Sallam
Aboo Redundant, yes, i am aware of that. Neither I am negating what is stated in the Quran. My point, maybe you did not understand. Focus more on the love of Allah and through this we follow and understand the fear of Allah.
Saudi in the US,
I never made any such generalization. I pointed out that you did not finish reading the other guy’s comments. That doesn’t contradict that you read only half; they both are true, and I did read all of your comments. Please be careful when saying such things about others.
As for “being real,” I don’t think that is what you are doing. You call it not respecting the beliefs of others, he calls it not promoting kufr and shirk. You aren’t being objective in your assessment. I also still fail to understand how disagreeing with you on this issue means someone lacks intelligence.
Please try to show more respect for others even when disagreeing, your comments to both him and myself are not befitting of brothers in Islaam.
S H,
I dislike the use of the words “Fear Allah”, when you disagree with a person. They over use it for their purpose, like some how the person I am talking to is sacred and Allah will punish me for disagreeing with him. Quite an arrogant attitude to walk around the earth with. I ignored talking about that, but it is one of the reasons I do not react well to Aboo’s comments.
Tell me about fearing Allah in a different context and I will take in a very positive way.
Allah, will rewards or punish us for our deeds. There is no need to use those words against each other.
Humid Subtropical,
I gave him a fair read of 2 pages of 4 that was more than I should have to be honest. I do not have an obligation to him to read all what he writes. I am a free person that can make decisions of what I read and make any judgments I want about how to asses people. Those decisions are mine and mine only to make. You have the right to criticize that, which you did. So let’s end this line.
Saudi in US,
I do understand. I was just trying for him and others to think of better ways to communicate. Word usage is a problem for many of us, of how we communicate with others.
SH & Saudi in the US,
Concerning the phrase: “Fear Allaah” it is a translation of اتق الله however you wish to take it to mean “be more pious” or “be more mindworthy of Allaah” or whatever else you like, then this was the advice of the Prophet salallaahu alaihi wa salam in good and bad so I do not know how you guys are taking such a strange stance towards this and disliking the phrases Allaah and His messenger used very often. Why do you take it as “Be afraid of Allaah’s punishment” where as being advised with the Taqwa of Allaah means to be more weary of Allaah and mindful.
You both seem to have immediately taken to Soo’ adh-Dhann! Wallaahul Musta’aan.
As for the respect issue, let me state this clearly:
Respecting the Kuffaar is not the same as “aiding them in worship by building their places of worship”
I must say that I cannot continue in this discussion as it’s merely just argumentation without a foundation.
Thanks for the discussion and I do hope that there does not exist any “hard feelings” as a result.
Jazaakum Allaahu Khair
Aboo Redundant,
Please READ my sentences again. I actually like the phrase when used in the right context.
You too have a great day Aboo.
Although I see it different than you regarding the foundation question. As I see that you are ignoring the entire advancement in the world and civilization. A point of disagreement perhaps, but I really encourage you to look at the world with a little more positive view. I hope you will find the wisdom in that some day.
I’ve read everything, Aboo too.
I can say that from the comments I’ve learned a lot about the differing schools of thought as well as many similar trains of thought but worded in different ways.
Comments are always welcomed here to foster understanding.
It is hard to have a conversation when you cannot even agree on the meanings of the terms, and when you disagree, you are told to “fear Allah” as if some here claim to speak for Him.
The term “fear Allah” is often followed by more harsh “advice” and then that is usually followed by violence.
People who think they can speak for God, or think that they have a right to impose their views of religion on others also feel they have a right to impose their views with violence. Afterall, since they can speak for God and know what God wants, why not use violence to impose it?
I have said it before, and I’ll say it again, there will come a time when the middle of the road majority will have to strike down those who are extremists. The reason the Muslim community, worldwide, is so backwards is because for too long the moderates, those people in the middle of the road, have let the extremists dominate the agenda.
The world will be a better place when the extremists are put into their place.
Abu Sinan,
Nobody here has claimed to speak on behalf of Allaah. Please do not throw around such hefty accusations over a mere internet discussion.
The brother explained his speech, it being from the Sunnah of the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to use this phrase in both good and bad it appears. You can remark on your past experience with this phrase being negative and harsh, but this person isn’t the one whom you had these past experiences with. We should always give our brothers and sisters the benefit of the doubt.
This talk of extremism in the context of speaking about these brothers (my assumption is that you refer to Aboo Redundant, Ali, and Shariq; if that is incorrect, please say so) insinuates that you feel they are extremist, simply for following hadeeth mentioning the establishment of only one religion in the Arabian Peninsula, and of this ruling being specific to that region.
It’s one thing to disagree with that, but to call him/them extremists for that disagreement is unfair. By that reasoning, I could also call you an extremist due to the extreme hostility you displayed, and it’s personal nature, toward these brothers from the first few comments.
I wouldn’t do that, because you are my Muslim brother and I must be just. I really don’t think you should speak in such a manner during disagreements either.
@Humid,
When someone says “Fear Allah” in response to a statement, they are telling you that your words contradict the words of God. That is speaking for God. Who is anyone here to say to someone “fear God” in respect to their statements?
I wouldnt know if “Aboo” or Ali and Shariq are extremists based on one opinion.
That is your insinuation, not mine. Interesting you take issue with what you claim is my insinuation in one section, yet follow that up immidiately with your own insinuation.
So when you consider I did no such thing there is no reason to respond to the rest of your post which is based on insinuation, not something I said.
Nothing here is personal for me, it couldnt be, I dont know anyone here. My remarks are only based on the comments left here and my opinion that moderates will need to tackle extremists in the future. I didnt name anyone, didnt point to anyone.
However, it is interesting that you automatically thought of these people.
Sorry if the “Muslim brother” comments means little to me. All too often those who make such comments are on the cusp of wanting to tell you how wrong you are, or are just playing at “kalam fadi”.
Abu Sinan,
When someone tells you to “Fear Allah” they can mean a lot of things, not just what you said here. It’s two words; the intent behind them can vary.
As for insinuation, I feel that is obvious. Whether you intended to or not, the implication when speaking of moderates and extremists in this context is that those you disagreed with and were addressing in the bulk of this exchange were extremists. This is the apparent meaning, that’s not even really worth going back and forth about.
As for pointing as making things personal, you did just that. This was the point of my comments. You called the intellect and knowledge of some specific brothers into question based on a few internet comments and that was not right.
I will repeat my point again, as I feel it warrants repeating: disagreeing with one another is fine. But please remain respectful of your Muslims brothers (even if the term means little to you, that’s who they are) and don’t make personal comments on them, especially when you don’t consider things personal to begin with as you said.
there are no said-jewish or christns, please be sure before you talk
there are no saudi-jewish or christns, please be sure before you talk
there will come a time when the middle of the road majority will have to strike down those who are extremists.
According to the Koran, how can the middle-of-the-roaders justify that? If the Koran (or hadiths) can’t be used to justify such action, doesn’t that mean people would be abandoning their faith?
Solomon,
One most certainly can justify a campaign against extremism by using The Qur’an and hadith. Some examples below:
“Confound not truth with falsehood, nor knowingly conceal the truth.” Qur’an 2:42
“We made you to be a community of the middle way, so that (with the example of your lives) you might bear witness to the truth before all mankind.” (Qur’an, 2:143)
Hadith:
“Do not be people without minds of your own, saying that if others treat you well you will treat them well, and that if they do wrong you will do wrong to them. Instead, accustom yourselves to do good if people do good and not to do wrong (even) if they do evil.” (Al- Tirmidhi)
Hum, that last one can also be used not to do wrong against the extremists just because they do evil.
Of course you could claim that getting rid of extremists is actually doing good and not doing evil….
Oops, going down a slippery road here….
I didn’t know the quran actually mentions ”the middle road” going to look it up
The Chicago Sun Times also chose to pick up this post:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=B6kcqoGH9Pf8Bzn7nRZ5sNNoB8Hqa0pDlhuVB95ddW2riA9M
Just a quick question …
In India basically we have given muslims to practice their religion but we cant do the same in their country what makes muslims think their religion is any better than mine or Christans.So i guess we should do the same to muslims and break all their mosques down just like they did to a make shift Hindu Temple in KSA.Its funny for 1400 years muslim robbers came and robbed India convert Hindu into muslims by force .Broke our Temples and build mosques there .I think personally its about time we start treating muslims exactly like they treat us.Just like Vatican or ksa is the holiest place Every place in INDIA is holy for us.We gave muslims part of our country which is now pakistan and bangladest .All the Hindus in pakistan were murdered but we let muslims live in INDIA who chose to but now i am hearing their mullahs preaching that they want to convert whole India to islamic country???This is what we get by giving you guys freedom?????
Neeleshneey – I’ve actually lived in both India and Pakistan. For starters there are actually more muslims in India than in all of Pakistan. Secondly, all faiths are practiced in Pakistan. Not only Hindusim but also Christianity, the Mormon’s have a church in Pakistan, Judaism has been practiced in Pakistan, etc.
However in Saudi Arabia by comparison, Islam is the only religion which can be openly practiced.
Just highlighting the tension felt around the world between people of differing religions. I find it very interesting and seriously doubt that in this age of globalisation where we are mixing cultures and opinions more than ever before, that it will end soon, nor easily.