#Islamic Oath

[soltlane1]

Sahih Muslim Book 1 - Hadith 260-266

Sahih Muslim Book 1 – Hadith 260-266 Chapter 61: Warning of the Fire for the one who swears a false oath in order to unlawfully take the right of another Muslim. It is narrated on the authority of Abu Umama that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) observed: He who appropriated the right of a Muslim by (swearing a false) oath, Allah would make Hell-fire necessary for him and would declare Paradise…

[quranindex]

Discover Quran Verses about #Oaths @ https://quranindex.info/search/oaths [33:55] #Quran #Islam

[muslimah255]

From Sunan Ibn Majah

[arabicfornerds]

How a wrong vowel in the Quran may produce blasphemy The correct vowel endings damma, kasra, fatha in Arabic can be a headache. If you are careless, you could turn verse 9:3 of the Qur'an into blasphemy (kufr). https://arabic-for-nerds.com/grammar/analysis-sura-9-tawba/?feed_id=4748

[urdudarululoom]

Insists Oath

Rasool-Allah SallAllahu Alaihi Wasallam said if anybody insists on taking an oath in which he swears Read more

[thepagansun]

Respect Neo-Pagans and Our Gods!

Although they probably will never see it (or care), this post is meant for Hollywood, Netflix, Marvel and all other industries and streaming platforms that are hosting shows based on but twisting pagan or polytheist "mythology" or ancient religions such as Gods of Egypt, Immortals, Clash of the Titans, Thor: Love and Thunder, DT17, Supernatural, Kaos, Twilight of the Gods, Blood of Zeus, Percy Jackson, Xena: Warrior Princess, The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, Record of Ragnarok, American Gods, Lore Olympus, and God of War games, etc.

The trend of creating content that demonizes, humiliates, or insults our Gods is upsetting and unfair. Creative and artistic license is one thing, but it's a double-standard for content about the monotheistic god or religions to be treated with respect even when under academic criticism while are ours are depicted as one-dimensional, villainized and humiliated. We are asking for that same respect.

Yes, content about any kind of "mythology" is fun, but the modern world needs to please remember that these were and still are RELIGIONS to many people around the world, myself included.

People worshipped these Gods, listened to their stories around the fire, married under their vows, raised their children, went to war, and but also built magnificent structures, wrote literature, prayed in their temples, and many more!

In fact, we still have vestiges of their worship! The names of the months and days of the week in the Western world come from Roman or Norse/Germanic Gods, the Olympic Games were originally dedicated to Zeus, the Hippocratic Oath was originally a prayer offered to Apollo, people from all over the ancient world visited the shrine and oracle at Apollo's Delphi, and many more examples.

And while yes, sometimes people were sacrificed to some pagan Gods (not so much the Greeks or Romans), but are we really going to pretend that many more people haven't died in the name of Christianity or Islam??

Lord Zeus wasn't just some womanizer, he was also King of the Gods, Father of Gods and Humans, the God of Hospitality, Oaths, Lightning, Law, Order, Authority, Monarchy, etc.

This was also Lord Zeus of the ancient Greeks:

This was also Lord Odin of the ancient Norse:

This was also Lady Hera of the ancient Greeks:

This was also Lord Ra of the ancient Egyptians:

This was also Lord Huracan of the ancient Maya:

Even if you personally don't worship these Gods, at least respect the fact that your ancestors did. Imagine if 100-200 years from now your descendants start making movies and shows that demonize or humiliate Yahweh, Jesus, Allah and Mohammed, etc.!

In fact, neo-paganism is the fastest growing religion in the United States: https://commonwealthpolicycenter.org/paganism-is-americas-fastest-growing-religion/#:~:text=Paganism%20is%20one%20of%20the,a%20broader%20form%20of%20paganism.

Members of Ásatrù, heathen religion of Iceland, honoring the Norse Gods:

Members of Hellenism, honoring the ancient Greek Gods:

Members of my religion, Nova Roma, honoring the ancient Roman Gods:

Traditional African religion:

Traditional Maya religion:

Members of Wicca at Stonehenge, the biggest Neo-Pagan religion in the world with 3-5 million practioners worldwide!

Our Gods are our RELIGION, not just your "mythology!" And both They and we, their followers, deserve the same respect you expect for your religions.

And they at least would never condemn you to an eternal fiery pit simply for not believing in them, unlike some other god I could mention.

They are here. We are here. They exist. We exist. And we are not going anywhere.

[magpod-confessions]

If you ask me what my TMA confession is, I'll tell you "John and Martin were never in love, they were just bonded through mind-shattering trauma and a desperate need to be wanted/accepted. They have the chemistry of a musty laundry bag."

But if you REALLY ask me, I'd say...

It makes me uncomfortable when I see people depict Basira in hijab... it's not just some accessory, it's a symbol of a deeply held religious belief, an oath, and a physical display of faith. Just because someone has an Arab name does not mean they're of a particular faith, and that seems like the ONLY reason people have to depict her that way. None of her actions or words, directly or indirectly, are representative of Islam, and she expresses no particular faith herself. It feels like an uncomfortable mix of stereotyping and people trying to virtue signal with their headcanons. And it just makes me squirm a little when I see it, because I would never say it directly to someone.

.

[straynoahide]

i've taken the (real) oath. i know people who are better and worse with patients, people who are prejudiced... but this guy's personality is incompatible with medical praxis.

there's a difference between being a bad doctor and being mengele. people like this should have their license revoked for genocidal incitement, not much room for hesitation there.

I do suspect he's not a real doctor.

Because doctors don't take the hypocritical oath.

[elumish]

Sort of related to the post I just reblogged about the anti-abortion movement, but:

I think that some people have an impulse in recent times when writing antagonists and villains to shy away having them be acting based on truly held beliefs or even beliefs based on reality.

They have to be grifters or incorrect or misunderstand the world. If they truly believe in something right (correct and/or morally good by whatever standard), if they truly hold their beliefs, then they can be an anti-hero or a minor antagonist but eventually they are revealed to Have Been Right All Along and someone else is the Big Bad of the story.

And there's nothing wrong with doing that, with having the villain be someone who is taking advantage of average people or is lying about their beliefs or whose belief is based in something inaccurate. The villain can be mistaken or confused or just wrong.

But the thing is that, in real life, many people who we see as villains are acting under truly held beliefs that are based largely in reality. The things that make them villains in our view are what they want to do about it.

Part of what galvanized Stewart Rhodes to begin to take action against the U.S. government was his opposition to what he saw as unconstitutional overreaches of the surveillance and detention powers/efforts taken by the federal government in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. It galvanized a lot of people and faced a huge amount of opposition in the years following the attacks. In that sense, not only was this belief "real" but it also would considered "morally good" by many people, including probably most people here on this site.

The problem is that Stewart Rhodes founded the Oath Keepers and has since been convicted of seditious conspiracy, obstructing an official proceeding, and evidence tampering for his part in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The leaders of Islamic State/Daesh are acting based on truly held beliefs. Bin Laden's demands were based in reality. Many anti-abortion people operate based on an internally-consistent logic and belief system--it may just not be one that makes much sense to or fits the belief of people who disagree with them.

My point here is that you don't need to shy away from villains who have extremely strong beliefs, where "proving them wrong" isn't possible or isn't relevant because they are also acting based on facts, where the problem isn't the validity of the beliefs but the actions they are taking.

In many ways, those can be the hardest villain to stop in stories, because they can't be talked out of what they're doing any more than the protagonist can.

[wonder-worker]

"Almost every great Occitan dynasty (and many a castellan family as well) could name the matriarchs of their near or distant past, women whose lives were as charged with intrigue, ceremony, and warfare as those of their male contemporaries. [...] The Trencavels were particularly rich in such matriarchs, beginning on one side with Garsend, heiress to the viscounty of Beziers in the late tenth century, who by her marriage to Count Raymond of Carcassonne joined her coastal lands that dominated the land route between the Rhone and the Pyrenees to the interior lands of her husband, which sat athwart the roads from Narbonne and the Massif Central to Toulouse. Their son Peter Raymond married Rangard of La Marche, sister of Almodis (whose three marriages-the second to the count of Toulouse and the third to the count of Barcelona-made her into the stuff of legend in both the Christian and the Islamic world). On her husband's death, Rangard, along with her son, took over the rule of his counties. On her son's death in 1067, she allied herself with the count of Cerdagne (in the Pyrenees, to the south of Carcassonne and Toulouse) in order to stay in power. She was outwitted by her daughter Ermengard and Ermengard's husband, the viscount of Albi and Nl'mes, who allied themselves with the count and countess of Barcelona to conquer the lands of the count of Carcassonne with the help of sacks of Moslem gold. This Ermengard was the real creator of the family enterprise that modern historians know as the Trencavels. After her husband's death, she took the reins of power as her mother had done before her, going from castle to castle all the way from Albi in the west to Nl'mes in the east and the Razes in the south to collect oaths of fidelity. In the 1080s she repeated the process with her young son Bernard Ato, hoping thus to assure his quiet succession when she passed from the scene. The Trencavels also surely remembered Ermessend, sister of the count of Carcassonne and the bishop of Gerona. As wife and then widow of Count Ramon Borrell of Barcelona, she was twice regent, once for her son and once for her grandson; the latter, along with his wife Almodis of la Marche, had to wage war against her and finally buy out her dowry in order to take personal rule of Catalonia. On the Albigeois side of the family there was Diafronissa, far back in the early tenth century. Clergy bearing an ancient charter could remind them of her, for there she was, listed first in a gift to the canons of Beaumont-d'Aveyron, taking precedence in the document over a son and grandson, both of whom were already viscounts at the time the gift was made, and over another grandson who was bishop. Despite her great age, she had not retired from the concerns of this world."

— Fredric L. Cheyette, Ermengard of Narbonne and the World of the Troubadours

[soltlane1]

Sahih Muslim Book 1 - Hadith 196-205

Sahih Muslim Book 1 – Hadith 196-205 Chapter 45: Clarifying the emphatic prohibition of An-Namimah (Malicious Gossip) It is reported from Hudhaifa that news reached him (the Holy Prophet) that a certain man carried tales. Upon this Hudhaifa remarked: I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying: The tale-bearer shall not enter Paradise. (Sahih Muslim Book 1 – Hadith 196) It is reported on the…

[quranindex]

Discover Quran Verses about #Oaths @ https://quranindex.info/search/oaths [16:38] #Quran #Islam

[muslimah255]

From Sunan an-Nasa’i

[deadpresidents]

Is there any truth to the 1980 October surprise theory?

The New York Times published a story earlier this year where Ben Barnes -- a Republican supporter of Reagan's in 1980 who had once served as Lieutenant Governor of Texas, Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, and protege of former Texas Governor John Connally -- confirmed that the Reagan campaign absolutely encouraged Iran not to release the American embassy hostages before the election because Reagan would give the Iranians a better deal if he was elected President. Barnes admitted that he was present as Connally passed that message around while on a trip to the Middle East in order to get word to the Iranians. It's not exactly a smoking gun because virtually everyone seemingly involved in implementing the October Surprise is dead other than Barnes, but it's a weird thing for Barnes to lie about 45 years later, especially considering how close his relationship was with Governor Connally. Plus, we know that there were shady contacts between people in the Reagan Administration and Iran because of the Iran-Contra scandal.

I think there is definitely some truth to the theory, but I also believe that the Iranians were more than happy to spite President Carter by not releasing the hostages until literally the moment Reagan took the oath of office. The Iranians were still furious with the Carter Administration for letting the Shah come to the United States for medical treatment after he was forced to leave Iran as the Iranian Revolution exploded and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to become Supreme Leader. Carter had also helped broker the Camp David Accords between Israel and Egypt, which also infuriated Iran and much of the Islamic world. Plus, Carter had ordered Operation Eagle Claw -- the failed attempt to rescue the hostages by force -- and that was seen as an act of war. So, the Ayatollah and leaders of Revolutionary Iran had no love lost for President Carter and weren't interested in doing him any favors before he left office.

The October Surprise that many people overlook is the one which took place in 1968 shortly before the Nixon vs. Humphrey election. When it looked like there might be some progress made in peace talks to bring the Vietnam War to a close, Nixon and his advisers got word to the South Vietnamese to hold off on working toward peace until Nixon was elected and could give them better terms. It was such an egregious act that LBJ actually told people around him that he felt Nixon had committed treason and that he had the blood of American soldiers on his hands for sabotaging peace talks. We even have the tapes of LBJ's phone calls after finding out about Nixon's actions where President Johnson straight-up says, "This is Treason!"

[kahin]

hello! to all my muslim friends with contamination and/or religious OCD i want to share a few tips with you:

your ablution/wudu' does not need to be elaborate to be accepted. Intend for yourself to do your wudu' and say it out loud/whispered if you need to confirm to yourself, say bismillah al rahman al raheem, wash your face and hands and arms up to the elbow, wipe your head with water, and wipe your feet with water. if you end up needing to wash your hands or anything else in between, that is fine because you are still technically still doing your wudu so you do not need to be redoing steps.

regarding any discharge: if you bleed outside your period then that is considered istihadah and you don't need to do any full-body purificiation, but you just need to repeat your wudu' before every prayer; the normal, healthy, chronic discharge that a lot of people get does not invalidate your wudu so no need to repeat it.

yes, doing your prayer correctly can go a long way, but remember the important thing is to get it done. your prayers will inshallah be accepted as long as you haven't done anything to warrant it not being accepted (i.e. you're not facing the qiblah for example)

there is no demand for preciseness. if you're stuck in a spiral of, for example, 'i am not facing the qiblah exactly oh no', i know it's hard, but do not fret. Allah has made most things easy, and He is the most understanding out of everyone. if you are a few degrees off, you are okay. Facing the qiblah means being in at least the general vicinity of it even if you aren't 1000% precise. Diagram below should help explain what I mean.

[ID: A black arrow pointing northwest on a white canvas. Two red arrows originating from the same point as the black arrow are pointing in the same direction a little bit apart from the black arrow. end ID.]

Say the black arrow is where the Qiblah is as mathematically precisely as possible. The red arrows are the direction you may end up praying at. This is completely fine, given that you did your effort to get as close as possible to the Qiblah as you could, despite it being a few degrees off. Your prayer is fine. You don't need to repeat it or spend ages adjusting that prayer mat.

a lot of guilt can really be racked up from not praying. i get that. Allah also understands, because even if not necessarily difficult for everyone, prayer is by design inconvenient because it forces you to break from your routine. start off small, even if it isn't all your prayers. that can be sorted later. you not praying does not make you a disbeliever so you do not need to put yourself through the process of re-entering islam everytime you miss a few prayers.

unrelated to prayer but if you have thoughts of disbelief or blasphemy, remember that you are not judged for anything that's in your head. it's in your head, so you don't need to retake your oath or start repenting like crazy.

if you have any other disability in addition to OCD that you're worried about repeating prayer or wudu (e.g. you have a neurological condition that makes you lose control of your bladder or you have a colostomy bag), there is no need to. you can do wudu' before every prayer and whatever happens after that is not your issue

if you're stuck in the spiral of doubting your prayer and needing to check and remember that you did all your steps, you can try recording yourself praying and checking the footage after. also remember that if you do forget to do a whole rakah or a step, you can simply do the prostration of forgetfulness at the end of your prayer

I may have missed a few things, so just let me know. But Islam is meant to be as easy as you need it to be and Allah is the most forgiving and understanding. OCD is genuinely debilitating and is in fact a disability. You have a condition, of course God understands. I know it's not easy as just 'oh yeah I can just stop constantly repeating my wudu' but sometimes just having that knowledge can go a long way.

[julaibib]

What are your thoughts on people who are "Ahle Hadees"? I have met quite a few of them but they are so strict with following the religion (esp in India) that they cancel out scholars or islamic speakers who they narrow down to preaching "wrong aqeedah". They call themselves "Salafis" too. Are "salafis" and "ahle hadees" different from each other? There are "salafi" women who only wear black color clothes and no other color. They sometimes rebuke me for making mistakes while performing wudu and says, "Allah will never forgive such a mistake." I was seriously scared tbh.

Being a Muslim according to the way the righteous predecessors (salaf) were is the safest and best thing in this time full of wrong ideas and wrong ways of applying Islam in a way that the Prophet or his companions did not do Because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The best of people are my generation, then those who come after them, then those who come after them. Then there will come people whose testimony will come before their oath, and their oath before their testimony.”

Therefore, we are required when we find many mistakes spread in the nation to return and imitate what the sahaba were doing The problem is that some of those who claim to be from the people of hadith or the salaf way now do this in a wrong and difficult way in advice, it is possible that warning about something that you did wrong was correct and I mean the meaning of the speech

But they did it in a wrong way and not because the way is wrong does not mean that the speech is wrong, it is possible for a person to have correct speech Some people do this and give correct advice but in a wrong way, so never think that the speech is wrong because the way of the speaker is ridiculous or wrong

In fact, I do not know the circumstances there in India and what the method is like, but I think that their method of advice is bad or incorrect, but being on the path of the Salaf is the best. In general, I do not like to describe myself as anything other than a Muslim, and I do not like those other names.