#gist of Islam

[spiritsonic]

Deleted my reblog of the post about possible Palestinian donation bots and scams. While I agree with the overall gist of the post, that we should all think critically about where all these donation drives are coming from, their more hyperbolic statements didn't sit right with me. Just as I don't think trusting every ask about donations is smart, I don't think reporting every ask you get is good either, as it will inevitably lead to legitimate accounts being punished for the actions of opportunistic bots. Also, dismissing them as fronts for human traffickers is impossible to prove, and makes it WAY too easy to vilify and dismiss every message you get. I don't want to support that train of thought, even indirectly.

If you want to signal boost or donate to individual drives you do you, please just practice due diligence and take a careful look at where they're coming from before putting money down. In my personal opinion I think it's more effective to donate to established charities with proof of the work they're doing on the ground, so I'm going to repost the list of links for some of those from the original post.

Palestine Children's Relief Fund

Palestine Red Crescent Society

Islamic Relief USA

World Central Kitchen

Medecins Sans Frontiers

[txttletale]

you said that religion is actions and relations, not beliefs- would you be willing to elaborate and/or point to some reading? or like at least defining what "beliefs" means here?

sure. now i'm sure there's some much more recent scholarship on this but everything i think of this is fundamentally drawing on/extrapolating on the german ideology and gramsci's work--but the gist of it is that there is no (let us take an example) 'islam' that exists independent of its practicioners. this is a materialist (as opposed to idealist) stance on religion (& ideology more generally).

so what this means is that--sure, everything that comes under the umbrella of 'islam' does in fact share a few core concepts (the quran, the indivisbility of god, mohammad as a prophet)--but that attempts to make any sweeping generalized statement about the ideological content of islam are bound to fail because ultimately the islam of the iranian state apparatus & the islam of the taliban & the islam of muslim feminists in indonesia & the islam of the PLO & the islam of liberal arab-americans are all fundamentally different ideologically because they are shaped not by some eternal essence of islam but by the social circumstances and communities within which each of these groups is practing.

(want to be super clear that i am just using islam as an example here, the same can be applied to any religion in any place--christianity, for example, is not uniquely genocidal & colonial due to some inherent ideological content, which is why going through the bible to point out violence & slavery and being like 'see, this is what's wrong with christianity' is a futile exercise--christianity has been the religion of a genocidal & colonial ruling class across much of the globe, and so that practice of it of course takes on that character)

hence, for example, there's absolutely no contradiction between, say, the judaism of diaspora reform jews & that of the israeli state--the stark difference makes sense when you realize that they are not both informed ideologically by some inherent essence of judaism but by the historical context of centuries of persecution vs. decades of genocidal state building. no religion has an innate inextricable character--all character that a religion has is given to it when it becomes a social fact, and comes from the people who practice it and their material and power relations.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Rinat Harash

How do children react when they are caught red-handed? They blame someone else and cry.

Which is exactly what the head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) did on Thursday (May 30), in an op-ed published by The New York Times.

In the article, titled “Israel Must Stop Its Campaign Against UNRWA,” Philippe Lazzarini whines that his organization is under attack by the Jewish state, which has accused it of having links to Gaza terror groups.

The gist of his over-simplistic argument, that omits Hamas as the real target of Israel’s war effort, is as follows: UNRWA is attacked by vicious Israelis for no reason, and the world must do something about it.

In his own dramatic words, it sounds like Israel’s war aim is to target and harass innocent UNRWA employees and not Hamas terrorists:

As I write this, our agency has verified that at least 192 UNRWA employees have been killed in Gaza. More than 170 UNRWA premises have been damaged or destroyed. UNRWA-run schools have been demolished.

Israeli officials are not only threatening the work of our staff and mission, they are also delegitimizing UNRWA by effectively characterizing it as a terrorist organization.

How can this be possible? Where is the international outrage? Its absence is a license to disregard the United Nations and opens the door to impunity and chaos.

While Israel has long been hostile to UNRWA, following the abhorrent attacks of Oct. 7 it unleashed a campaign to equate UNRWA with Hamas and depict the agency as promoting extremism.

All of the above allows Lazzarini to deflect criticism and avoid holding himself and his organization accountable in the face of Israeli allegations.

While he refers to the dozen UNRWA employees who have been accused by Israel of participating in the October 7 massacre, he treads lightly: He says that UNRWA investigates Israel’s allegations but at the same time creates the impression of a false dichotomy between the organization and its employees.

In fact, he ignores evidence suggesting that UNRWA has become a Hamas front:

Israel has said that 190 UNRWA employees, including teachers, have doubled as Hamas or Islamic Jihad terrorists.

Israel uncovered a Hamas facility under UNRWA headquarters in Gaza.

The IDF regularly releases data showing that Hamas terrorists use UNRWA schools in Gaza.

UN Watch exposed that 3,000 UNRWA teachers were in a Telegram group that celebrated the October 7 attack.

Why does Lazzarini not address these allegations head-on in an apologetic op-ed?

Interestingly, in his frenzy to attack Israel, he seems to admit that Hamas uses UNRWA facilities in Gaza.

This point was ironically reinforced on the same day of Lazzarini’s article’s publication, when the IDF revealed that Hamas had fired an anti-tank missile at its troops from an UNRWA school in Gaza.

But Lazzarini seems to be unaware of his own responsibility for the utter moral bankruptcy of his organization.

He cannot even bring himself to mention Hamas’ October 7 atrocities, which he refers to only in the 9th paragraph as “an abhorrent attack.”

Like the child caught red-handed, he accuses the neighborhood “bully” and expects an adult — or in this case “the world” — to help (and perhaps renew the flow of pocket money that has been suspended.)

Perhaps he thinks he can get away with it, because UNRWA has always been seen as a favorite child, who is nothing but virtuous.

But the world needs grown-ups who clean up their own mess, instead of blaming others for exposing it.

[theladysherlock]

This was nothing like Buckingham palace, where Deryn had watched the changing of the royal lioness guard her first day in London. That was four stories tall and as square as a cake. But here the buildings were low and surrounded by colonnades, their arches decorated with checkerboards of black and white marble, as shiny as piano keys.

Hello everyone it's time for an Impromptu Architectural History Lesson from Lily, your resident Former Architectural History Student

This is NOT what the sultan's palace looked like in 1914. The Sultan (at the time) would have lived in Dolmabahçe Palace, which was built in 1843-56 and does, in fact, look relatively European.

For context, here's Buckingham Palace (built in 1703):

And here's Dolmabahçe Palace:

See? Where are the colonades? There's no reason Deryn wouldn't recognize this architecture, it's definitely pulling from more European styles. You have a similar material language, similar shapes, etc. "Square as a cake" indeed.

So this description is almost definitely of the much older Topkapı Palace in Istanbul, which was built in 1459.

(That last picture is just a model but you get the gist)

I mean. Just look at it. That's much closer to the actual description, down to the courtyard that they had to finagle the Stamboul into.

(Also the checkerboard arches are a classic Islamic Architectural feature as a reference back to the Mosque of Cordoba in Spain, which began construction in 785. That's not important to this part of the book, it's just a fun fact.)

[i-cant-sing]

Dreams! I love dreams!

I'm not Islamic but I've read about djinns before when I was around 15 and I asked a friend who was islam a lot of questions. You can imagine how terrified younger me was when I found a mark that could be interpreted as a djinn mark after waking up from a nap 😭

I have the most insane dreams and usually I can remember the entirety of it and just type everything the moment I wake up so I don't end up forgetting it (my notes app hates me for it 😭). I think the most plot filled dream was an apocalypse one, the explanation was something about it being a strand of rabies and how it evolved to make humans more rabid but filled with rage then somehow it evolved to make them more durable?!! It was accidentally leaked by some government and it spread too quickly then humanity decided to form "domes" to house the uninfected. There were around 20 domes around the world in different countries (max was 25 but 5 fell because people were being stupid, can you imagine that people were literally denying that the virus was even a thing like how they denied covid? Crazy 😂).

And the military was reconstructed to something more simple, each dome had a "commander" and there were squads with some holding a specific purpose and others just for fighting. The squads would be deployed to regain more land for humanity. They even developed a form of "beacon" that would help the agents (that's what they were referred to) identify severe levels of contamination and another invention that would help agents last longer outside for missions. That's why the domes were built, because the virus had managed to become sort of airborne?

A lot of agents used to die when sent out on missions which is why a shit ton of stuff was invented for them. Then it turns out that the most OP person was part of some dangerous experiments that the higher ups were running. The gist is that they would look for different individuals that could co-exist in a way with the virus. A lot of people died and they would use those to then develop a serum that could stall the symptoms while keeping the durability/strength. But the person would still slowly become corrupted. And then the plot plot was figuring out who was purposefully collapsing different domes, lowering the numbers from 20 down to 28. Part of the ending was exposing how even in an apocalypse, those in control would do inhumane things, and that the rich would stomp on the poor.

I just realized how long this is, I am so sorry 😭. I always ramble when it comes to dreams 😭. And I'm not that great of a writer so I don't write about them to anyone either 🤧

A++++ dream

[theculturedmarxist]

Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor and dimwit, had written a laudation of his own and his bosses foreign policy for the November print edition of Foreign Affairs. The piece was finalized before the war in Palestine had begun.

The Sources of American Power A Foreign Policy for a Changed World

Excerpts:

Indeed, although the Middle East remains beset with perennial challenges, the region is quieter than it has been for decades. The progress is fragile, to be sure. But it is also not an accident. ... [The president's] approach returns discipline to U.S. policy. It emphasizes deterring aggression, de-escalating conflicts, and integrating the region through joint infrastructure projects and new partnerships, including between Israel and its Arab neighbors. And it is bearing fruit. ... This disciplined approach frees up resources for other global priorities, reduces the risk of new Middle Eastern conflicts, and ensures that U.S. interests are protected on a far more sustainable basis. Challenges remain. The Israeli-Palestinian situation is tense, particularly in the West Bank, but in the face of serious frictions, we have de-escalated crises in Gaza and restored direct diplomacy between the parties after years of its absence.

---

Alastair Crooke, who has personally negotiated prisoner exchanges between Hamas and Israel, has published a rather bleak outlook.

Escalations Cannot Be Stopped – The White House Is Rattled; Escalations Might All Fuse Into ‘One’ The reality of the necessity of war is permeating widely the consciousness of the Arabic and Islamic world.

... It is no coincidence that Netanyahu flourished a map of Israel during his General Assembly address last month in which Israel dominated from the River to the Sea – and Palestine (indeed any Palestinian territory) was non-existent. Tom Friedman in his NYT reflections may fear that just as NATO’s impaired performance in Ukraine has ruptured ‘the NATO myth’, so too the 7 October Israeli military and intelligence collapse and what happens in its wake in Gaza ‘might explode the entire pro-American alliance structure’ in the Middle East. The confluence of two such humiliations might break the spine of western primacy. This seems to be the gist to Friedman’s analysis. (He likely is correct). Hamas has succeeded in smashing the Israel deterrence paradigm: They were not afraid, the IDF proved far from invincible, and the Arab street mobilised as never before (confounding western cynics who laugh at the very notion of there being an ‘Arab Street’). Well, that is where we are – and the White House is rattled. ... This is what worries the White House Team. They are deeply unconfident that an Israeli invasion of Gaza will put ‘Humpty’ together again. Rather, they fear that events may go badly for the IDF, and further, that the images relayed across the Middle East of Israel using overwhelming force in a civilian urban setting will revolt the Islamic sphere. In spite of western scepticism, there are signs that this insurrection in the Arab sphere is different, and resembles more the 1916 Arab Revolt that overthrew the Ottoman Empire. It is taking on a distinct ‘edge’ as both Shi’a and Sunni religious authorities state the duty of Muslims to stand with Palestinians. In other words, as the Israeli polity becomes plainly ‘Prophetical’, so the Islamic mood is turning eschatological, in its turn. That the White House should be floating kites about ‘moderate’ Arab leaders pressing ‘moderate’ Palestinians to form an Israeli-friendly government in Gaza that would displace Hamas and impose security and order shows just how severed is the West from reality. Recall that Mahmoud Abbas, General Sisi and the King of Jordan (some of the region’s most pliable leaders) pointedly refused even to meet with Biden after the latter’s Israel trip. The anger across the region is real and threatens ‘moderate’ Arab leaders, whose room for manoeuvre is now circumscribed. So hotspots are proliferating, as are attacks on U.S. deployments around the region. Some in Washington claim to perceive an Iranian hand, and are hoping to expand a window for war with Iran. ... Should Israel enter Gaza (and Israel may decide it has no choice but to launch a ground operation, given the domestic political dynamics and public sentiment), it is likely that Hizbullah will incrementally be drawn further in, leaving the U.S. with the binary option of seeing Israel defeated, or launching a major war in which all the hotspots become fused ‘as one’. In a sense, the Israeli-Islamic conflict now may only be resolved in this kinetic way. All efforts since 1947 have seen the divide only deepen. The reality of the necessity of war is permeating widely the consciousness of the Arabic and Islamic world.

[laufire]

I'm not sure of how familiar the (non-spaniard) average tumblr user is with 11M (3/11?), but even if they know what I'm referring too, they probably don't know much about the aftermath here in spain. the 20th anniversary is approaching, and they're talking about the attacks a lot on tv, so that's what prompted it.

the gist of it is that in march 11th, 2004, there was a terrorist attack on madrid, spain, pertaining coordinating bombings on four trains. at the time, a conservative party was in power, with prime minister aznar (bush's wannabe best friend, and ally in iraq), and from the very beginning, the evidence pointed very strongly to islamic terrorism. but the national elections were three days away, the conservative party pushed for a narrative of domestic terrorism being responsible, and later, when that narrative just couldn't stand on its own, for one about a conspiracy being afoot.

like, this is (obviously) after 9/11 (11S here), but bush and the conservative party here were at different times of their term so it makes sense that the strategy was different. they probably thought they couldn't pull off what bush did in such a short time (building an ideology around The Enemy like that). and in part... maybe? I was very young (7yo) and my immediate circle was left-leaning, so I probably have a skewed version of things, but society did hold aznar accountable for the attacks. the impression was that although the war in iraq had its detractors, especially from the left, maybe the average citizen didn't think much about it one way or the other, but after that it was... why are we involed there in the first place? how is that any of our business? why did aznar drag us into this, and what have been the consequences of him trying to play in bigger leagues?

but there's a lot suggesting that it was the lie that broke the camel's back. the protests for the next few days particularly demanded to know WHO was behind the attacks, hearing the contradictory versions and noticing how flimsy the one offered by the conservatives was. and besides, aznar was the leader of the party, but he wasn't the electoral candidate, mariano rajoy was (he has his issues too, that filthy thief, but we're not getting into him now lol. the current leader of the party is friendly with drug lords and the former one likely faked his masters degree so there's a lot going in there). point being, I think admitting the truth and building a strategy around it, imo, would've worked better than the lie did.

because the lie was and continues to be brazen. to this day, I haven't heard a single member of the popular party (that's what the traditional conservatives here call themselves, btw) state without caveats that it was not ETA (the domestic terrorist group, now long dismantled, but still used by the conservatives as a discoursive tool). iirc, about 10 years ago aznar published a book where he insisted of the contrary. the closest I've seen was in an interview today, when the former foreign affairs minister of the party said he "doesn't believe in the conspiracy theory, never did" and "always said so, always wrote so" well I haven't read your books sir, but I very much doubt that, because the party line WAS lying, long past when it was even remotely reasonable because the very same morning of the attacks, the investigators had ruled out your version. investigators who were later harassed for contradicting that party line, btw.

he also says claims that the party didn't lie, that there was a "miscommunication" and that there was NO attempt on their part to use this attack for political gain, either before the election or during the next term, and look. I'm willing to buy the first part. I'm skeptical, but let's go with it. let's say they first really thought it was ETA for a hot minute, and just couldn't wait to get it out no matter how counterproductive that would've been for an investigation. let's say they then received an alternate version, one backed by the evidence and then... what? insisted on their own? desperately tried to convince the citizens of it? all but accused their rivals of complicity in the attack? and maintained that version, more or less explicitly, for all these years? after the terrorist cell was apprehended the next month, even?

where are the apologies? where are the acknowledgementes of all the incredibly bold lies? (like how there was "evidence" pointed to ETA, and they were talking, among other disproven facts, about a CD from a music band of the same geographical region as the terrorist group... ok). why is aznar still declining to talk about it this year, when everyone and their mother has something to say about this anniversary. come the fuck on, sir.

moving on from that, the thing here is. I have very mixed feelings on my country, but this is a period where I look back to and can feel some pride for my compatriots, tbh. they didn't let themselves be fooled, they didn't let themselves be used like tools for the conservative party. the socialist party won the election and they retired the troops from iraq immediately, as promised, and very much followed a very different strategy from bush's (who called prime minister zapatero to tell him he was very disappointed. zapatero is a true gentleman and wouldn't have told him where he could shove his disappointment, but I sure wish he had).

and I wonder where the fuck did that go lmao. because it sure isn't like that with their current leadership, both national (mr drug lord bestie) or regional (ms trump lite, probably the next party leader... she already took down the previous one because he tried to go after her corrupt brother so. give it time). I don't think we've gotten dumber but it sure feels like that sometimes. I think the real issue is that conservatives are radicalised and they will accept anything that allows them to attack The Enemy (mostly internal, this time they succeeded in that, I guess). said enemy being leftists, queers, feminists, immigrants (I did say mostly), regionalists, and so on.

and now you have people in that party straight up saying prime minister sánchez is an ally of hamas for speaking out against israel and their followers regurgitating that shit without seemingly one thought inside their skulls, but again, stupidity is not the damn issue here.

[intrepid-fictioneer-7]

"Historical Civilization Cohabitation", for lack of a better term, has always been an obsession of mine.

I don't mean fantasies where the cultures and realms are inspired by historical ones, like in Warhammer Fantasy. I mean a story where a strange (frequently artificial or supernatural) event forces different "great"™ civilizations that rarely or never interacted, as they were separated by great distances or stretches of time, to be stuck together in a new environment where they are neighbors, and the clashes that ensue.

An example of this is For Honor. After a Cataclysm in the 10th-11th centuries that drastically altered the planet's geography and destroyed countless civilizations, three nations consisting of knights, Vikings, and samurai arrived at a new land and compete for its resources by warring against each other, up until what would be present-day for us. It explicitly takes place on our Earth after a point-of-divergence, so these are actual European knights, Norse raiders, and Japanese samurai (who came west after Japan sunk). Although For Honor, being a live-service multiplayer game, has somewhat of an inconsistent lore subject to retcons that is more beholden to what will be interesting for the game than what makes sense. For example, it went from somewhat grounded to magic being real now. Other factions from historical culture have since arrived in the setting, some of which make some sense (a group from ancient China, Scottish highlanders, Arabian warriors, Aztec jaguar warriors who sailed east, Asian pirates similar to wokou and with firearms, etc.) and others that are just straight up impossible (apparently, both the Roman Empire and Ancient Egypt were still alive before the Cataclysm hit them). Another example of Historical Civilization Cohabitation is Horizon in the Middle of Nowhere, whose map I posted months ago. The gist is that a science fantasy posthuman civilization (basically elves, dragons, magic, etc. but with added scifi nonsense) recreates world history like a giant historical reenactment experiment, hoping that by retracing their steps they rediscover space/dimensional flight and return to the heavens/space (it is deliberately unclear if actual outer space or actual heaven is meant) they fell down from. They are stuck on the Japanese islands to do it, as the Earth had become mostly uninhabitable at this point, so the archipelago is treated like the "world" in miniature. It's a gonzo series, though it has a lot of, um, sus element in both the plot and the worldbuilding.

The tabletop role-playing game Banestorm is somewhat close to what I mean, but a bit of a different example. It's a setting in which Christians and Muslims from around the First Crusade were transported to a fantasy planet by a botched spell, and now in what would be our modern-day, humans are the dominant species over native elves, dwarves, and orcs as well as fellow transposed races such as hobbits and goblins, and many of these species have converted to either Christianity and Islam. It's really peculiar, but the civilizations there are mostly the medieval Christian and Islamic worlds. There is a land of pagan tribes and a realm created by transported Asian populations, but the pagan savage land is boring and nonsensical, while the Asian realm (named "Sahud") is has aged so poorly it's embarrassing.

But my fascination with this trope started with an old book from my childhood:

For some reason, world history has actually operated in successive cycles, with the same civilizations rising and falling again, in the same process, from the dinosaurs to mankind nuking itself while fighting its robots. While this was happening, the continents continued to drift until they rejoined once again into a super-continent, the Atoll of Zoombira. And the third time history repeated, the civilization found themselves next to each other.

It was not high literature, if you couldn't tell by the title and the goofy map. And not just that, but revisiting it showed really amateurish writing, especially compared to other YA books at the time.

But the setting, of multiple civilizations on a new Pangea separated by walls to stop a literal world war, always stayed stuck in my mind like mold, because of the basic concept but also because of the numerous things it didn't do. The original series never explain why history repeated 3 times, leave much of the history of the nations of Zoombira (just the worse names) blank save for specific plot relevant thing, nevermind the state of the place before they raised their walls. You would think this cyclic history would be something important or a cycle to break or something when it always ends with human extinction. And there is also a fair number of "great"™ civilizations present, but not others for some reason: why no ancient China? Persia? Arabs? Mongols? Incas? Sub-Saharan Africa? North America? And the mechanics of "Jurassium" are outright bizarre, like who built the walls keeping the dinosaurs in and why haven't some of the species spread across the continents instead? Jurassium also has cavemen cohabiting with dinosaurs, and the idea of Paleolithic or Neolithic humans living among dinosaurs is not explored at all. There is the "modern" world in the "contrée oubliée (forgotten country)" that is basically post-apocalyptic and radioactive, which raises even further questions like why didn't they curbstomp the others, why is it still radiated if it's a new cycle (did they nuke themselves again?), and where are the robots who war start the whole end of the world.

All this wasted potential has severely rotten my brain and hasn't left me, making me desire to see more of the same or similar concepts elsewhere as seen in the examples I mention above.

And Historical Civilization Cohabitation, while a cool concept to me, is rarely executed the way I would personally want it to.

[atheistcartoons]

In verse 7 of Surah 19 (Maryam), the Koran says that no one was called John before John the Baptist. This is self-evidently not true. Islamic scholars try to get around this by claiming that John and Johanan are not the same name. 

They are. Even if they were not, this is also not true.

Even better, we can make a good guess as to how it happened. The Koran assumes that you already have the basic gist of the Christian bible. Presumably these stories were floating around the Levant and Arabia for centuries with varying degrees of accuracy. 

Luke says there was no one in John’s family called John before John the Baptist. Somehow this got garbled by the Koran into the obviously and clearly incorrect idea that there was no one in the history of the world called John before John the Baptist.

This is one mistake in the Koran. There are many. Of course if your starting assumption is “everything in the Koran is correct”, then you will find a way to justifiy all the mistakes. To anyone who is not a Muslim, those justifications sound off the wall. 

[basicsofislam]

ISLAM 101: Muslim Culture and Character: Embracing The World: Part 5

TOLERANCE AND DIALOGUE IN THE QUR’AN AND THE SUNNAH

The Qur’an always accepts forgiveness and tolerance as basic principles, so much so that “the servants of the All-Merciful” are introduced in the following manner:

And the servants of (God) the All-Merciful are those who move on the Earth in humility, and when the ignorant address them, they say: “Peace.” (Al-Furqan 25:63)

When they meet hollow words or unseemly behavior, they pass them by with dignity. (Al-Furqan 25:72)

And when they hear vain talk, they turn away therefrom and say: “To us our deeds, and to you yours.” (Al-Qasas 28:55)

The general gist of these verses is that when those who have been favored with true servanthood to God encounter meaningless and ugly words or behavior they say nothing unbecoming, but rather pass by in a dignified manner.

In short: “Everyone acts according to his own disposition,” (Al-Isra 17:84) and thus displays his or her own character. The character of heroes of tolerance is gentleness, consideration, and tolerance. When God sent Moses and Aaron to a man who claimed to possess divinity, as the Pharaoh had done, He commanded them to behave tolerantly and to speak softly (Ta Ha 20:44).

The life of the Pride of Humanity (peace and blessings be upon him) was led in an orbit of forgiveness and forbearance. He even behaved in such a manner toward Abu Sufyan, who persecuted him throughout his lifetime. During the conquest of Makka, even though Abu Sufyan said he still was not sure about Islam, the Messenger said: “Those who take refuge in Abu Sufyan's house are safe, just as those who take refuge in the Ka’ba are safe.” Thus, in respect of providing refuge and safety, Abu Sufyan’s house was mentioned alongside the Ka’ba. Tolerance was more valuable than if tons of gold had been given to Abu Sufyan, a man in his seventies, in whom egoism and chieftainship had become ingrained.

In addition to being commanded to take tolerance and to use dialogue as his basis while performing his duties, the Prophet was directed to those aspects in which he had things in common with the People of the Book (Jews and Christians):

Say: “O People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but God; that we speculate no partners with Him; that we take not some from among ourselves for Lords other than God.” (Al-Imran 3:64)

In another verse, those whose hearts are exuberant with belief and love are commanded to behave with forgiveness and tolerance, even to those who do not believe in the afterlife:

“Tell those who believe to forgive those who do not look forward to the Days of God: It is for Him to recompense each people according to what they have earned.” (Al-Jathiyah 45:14)

Those who consider themselves addressed by these verses, all devotees of love who dream of becoming true servants of God merely because they are human beings, those who have declared their faith and thereby become Muslims and performed the mandated religious duties, must behave with tolerance and forbearance and expect nothing from other people.

[jewishbarbies]

hi! no pressure to answer this - one of my Jewish friends said they don't like to group Judaism alongside religions like Christianity and Islam, as this implies that Judaism and the Jewish people were imperialistic when historically, the Jewish community has survived thousands of years of persecution. my friend said that in Judaism, there is no proselytizing, which explains why you don't see synagogues built over indigenous places of worship unlike churches and mosques and mass conversions are not done in the name of G-d. i would like to ask, if this is a general consensus of not grouping Judaism as "Abrahamic" simply due to the historical context and connotations present now?

yes and no, imo. it’s not Abrahamic because that’s just not a thing. christianity exists because of colonialism. early rome said we couldn’t practice judaism and then turned around and bastardized torah in order to make a new religion based on someone a lot of modern jews don’t believe even existed, and went on to purge the world of jews in favor of that new religion. islam is the only one relatively close to judaism. it’s a good analogy to say us not proselytizing explains no synagogues on indigenous worship places, but it’s also not, because our beliefs are wholly against that in a way that’s beyond not proselytizing. it’s definitely simpler and easier for non jews to understand what we mean if we say it that way though.

not lumping christianity and judaism goes a lot deeper than being linked to imperialism, because there’s a lot of history involved in christian colonialism and supremacy when it comes to jews. they believe that they’re the “true chosen people” and will eventually replace us when jesus wipes us out of the holy land. at the same time, they almost fetishize us because of their misunderstanding of “chosen people”. they teach that christianity evolved from judaism and that it’s a natural progression, but that’s just not true at all, because it wouldn’t exist without colonialism and mass murder. basically however you cut it, they want to replace us, which is what they’ve been trying to do for centuries. it’s very very complex so this is the gist.

I hope this at all answered your question!

[reyannn]

Are women called devils in hadīth?

Introduction

Some critics of Islam quote a hadīth from Sahīh Muslim and allege that Islam considers women as devils. This is indeed false. Let us examine their argument and respond in a befitting manner. The hadīth they use says:

Jābir reported that Allah‟s Messenger - may peace be upon him - saw a woman, then he came to his wife, Zainab, who was tanning leather, and fulfilled his desire, then he went out to his Companions and said: “A woman comes in the form of a devil and goes in the form of a devil. If one of you sees a woman, let him go to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart.

Context of the saying:

It is imperative to understand every instruction in view of the general Islamic teachings related to the subject.

Islam restricts a person to his/her spouse only. Any way of seeking pleasure otherwise is condemned; and for the same reason, Islam orders both man and woman to be modest - even in their gaze - so as to avoid any trouble.

Likewise, Islam asks both husband and wife to be faithful to each other and to be a protection and concealment for each other‟s natural weaknesses. The Qur‟ān is quite clear on this issue when it says:

“They are your garments and you are their garments.”

The Qur‟ān here uses the word لِبَاسࣱ (libās/garment) for spouses. Classical Muslim scholar al-Asbahāni (d. 502 AH) says:

“Everything that prevents a person from acting viciously is called garment. A person is called a garment for his/her spouse because each conceals the state of the others and prevents the other from acting viciously.”

Obviously, to nourish a thought about someone else's wife or any stranger is an evil act. In this regard, a wife is a garment for her husband she helps him get away with such thoughts that may creep into his heart.

The use of the word "devil":

Naturally, many people will question as to why the word "devil" is used here. While the question is natural, it does not really cause any consternation if one is aware of its usage in the Arabic language.

At-Ṭabari (d. 310 AH) writes:

“Devil (shaiṭān) in the speech of the Arabs is every rebel among the jinn, mankind, beasts and everything.”

In this hadīth, it is used for a woman who comes out of her home in an unchaste manner seeing whom can cause stir of emotions in men.

The fact that it is used only for a woman who comes out in an unchaste fashion is clear from the subsequent narration in Muslim's collection. The wording therein is:

“If one of you likes a woman and feels attracted to her…”

It refers to fascination which is possible only when a woman comes out in a manner not befitting of a chaste woman by showing complete disregard to the Islamic injunctions about dressing.

An-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) in his monumental exegesis of Sahīh Muslim, comments:

“It is a reference to the temptation and attraction towards her for the natural inclination that men have towards women or for the fascination of their sight and what relates to them. And there is a likeness of devil in it for it invites evil thoughts and adoration [of a strange woman].”

The gist is that by virtue of her coming out in an unchaste manner, a woman facilitates evil, so such a woman is metaphorically called a "devil.‟

In fact, in the same sense, the word "devil"; is used in some other hadīths as well. This will help understand the metaphorical nature of the usage. One hadīth mentions:

The Messenger of Allah - peace be upon him - said: “A single rider is a shaiṭan (devil), and a pair of riders is a pair of shaiṭans, but three riders are a company of riders.”

This hadīth provides a key in understanding the use of the word "devil.‟ One and two riders are termed as devils because they are inciting evil by travelling like that. Consider this 1,400 years ago in the wilderness of Arabia. One or two riders were certainly more exposed to any evil (i.e. loss of life and/or property). In fact, a hadīth clarifies this:

Narrated Abu Huraira, the Messenger of Allah said: “The devil harms one or two, but when they are three, they are not harmed.”

Anything can happen to any number of people, but if one or two people travel in a place similar to what Arabia was 1,400 years ago, then they are obviously inviting evil; and for this reason only, they are metaphorically called devils.

The hadīth in question calls women, who come out in a way that can fascinate men, a devil in that sense only!

The hadīth does not degrade womankind:

As explained the hadīth by no means degrades women just like riders are not condemned; it only condemns a certain kind of behavior not approved by Islam.

The solution in the hadīth is rational:

As to the solution given in hadīth about the issue of having seen a woman in way that fascinates and stirs some peculiar kind of emotions; what could have been better than the proposed remedy?

If in a situation when a man gives-in to some natural weakness, why should he not make recourse to his wife - his own garment that protects him and conceals his weaknesses?

The other „solution‟ will only be havoc, not only for the institution of family, but also for the society at large. What happens in the societies giving in to Western culture only testifies to the beauty of what is prescribed in Islam.

Islam honors women like no other religion or system does:

There are loads of references from the Qur'ān and Sunnah that can be cited to overcome the notion that Islam degrades women. In Islam, women are equal to men. The Prophet - peace be upon him - said:

“Women are indeed the twin-halves of men.”

Explaining this al-Khattābi (d. 388 AH) stated:

“Women are likes of men in natural dispositions; as though they were cloven from them.”

At another point, the Prophet - peace be upon him - said:

'Abdullah b. 'Amr reported Allah's Messenger peace be upon him - saying: “The whole world is a provision, and the best object of benefit of the world is the pious woman.”

Such references leave no doubt about the status of women in Islam.

[ejesgistnews]

A heated debate broke out in Nigeria’s House of Representatives on Thursday, with lawmakers sharply divided over a controversial bill proposing the adoption of Sharia law as a basis for governance in the country. The bill, which aims to establish aspects of Islamic governance, has ignited concerns about religious equity and national unity. Tensions soared as members exchanged words, with some legislators expressing fear that the bill could mark a step towards the "Islamisation" of Nigeria, a country constitutionally recognised as a secular state. "Section 10 of the Nigerian Constitution says: 'The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion. Representative John Olufemi, a vocal critic, condemned the proposed legislation, arguing it violates the secular framework upheld in the constitution. "You cannot Islamise Nigeria," Olufemi asserted, drawing nods of agreement from members across party lines who fear the bill could inflame religious sensitivities. Proponents of the bill, however, argued that it seeks to provide a legal framework for states in northern Nigeria that already practice aspects of Sharia law. Representative Abdullahi Shehu, supporting the bill, claimed that it respects religious diversity and that the option to adopt Sharia law would remain within state jurisdiction, not a federal mandate. " This is about respecting the religious practices of our people, not enforcing it nationwide," Shehu explained, suggesting that states with large Muslim populations would benefit from clearer legislative guidelines on Sharia. The bill has sparked widespread concern beyond the House, with various religious and civil rights groups warning that its passage could exacerbate religious divisions. Bishop Matthew Kuka, a prominent Christian leader, called the proposal "a dangerous precedent" and urged lawmakers to consider the bill's potential impact on Nigeria's fragile unity. Civil society organisations have also voiced opposition, emphasising the importance of maintaining Nigeria’s status as a secular nation where no religion holds dominance. As deliberations continue, the bill’s future remains uncertain. If passed, it would represent a significant shift in Nigeria’s approach to governance and religious tolerance. For now, the House has referred the bill to a committee for further review, though it remains a focal point of controversy. Stay informed with Ejes Gist News – Your Source for Credible News in Nigeria Now.

[quransunnahdawah]

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)

Surah Kahf Teachings

The surah summarizes for us the gist of Islam; its main theme is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect us from all trials. Told through a series of stories that illustrate specific trials, it teaches that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect the believer at times of severity.

The four stories of Surat Al-Kahf

Trial of Faith – People of the Cave/ Ashabu Al-Kahf (Verses 9 – 26) ...

Trial of Wealth – The story of the man who owns two gardens (Verses 32 – 44) ...

Trial of Knowledge – Moses and Al-Khidr (Verses 60–82) ...

Trial of Power – Dhul-Qar-nayn with Yajuj Majuj (Verses 83–98)

      Four stories & lessons in Surah Al-Kahf (Protection from Dunya & Dajjal)

Allah has sent the Quran as guidance to all mankind. Each and every verse of the Quran has blessings and lessons for us in our daily lives.

chapter Al-Kahf. The Prophet (peace be upon him) encouraged us to read the Surah every single Friday. Moreover, he encouraged us to memorize the first ten verses of the Surah because they will safeguard us from the Dajjal (the Antichrist), the worst of afflictions that will hit mankind.

So what lessons can we take from chapter Al-Kahf? There are too many to put in one article. Or dare I say, too many lessons for even one person to extract all of them. Every time we read the chapter, we will find new lessons.

In this article, we will look at the four stories, and extract three daily life lessons for us from each of the stories. There are lots more, but we will keep it to four.

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

AlKahaf (Arabic: الكهف, al-kahf; meaning: cave). Surah Al-Kahf explains fitnah in different areas of life. The stories in this surah outline how the believer should approach these trials and tribulations. Surah Al-Kahf teaches us to never rest and to do as many good deeds as possible to be victorious. Through the worship of Allah alone, the believer can attain greater blessings and prepare himself in this world to attain Paradise in the Hereafter. Allah is the only true God. We will surely return to Allah. So worship Allah alone.

Quran 18 Surah Al Kahf

Lessons From Surah Al Kahf

Four Lessons from Surah Kahf 

Lessons and secrets of Surah Al Kahf I Tafseer

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)

[tawhidrisalatakhirah]

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)

Surah Kahf Teachings

The surah summarizes for us the gist of Islam; its main theme is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect us from all trials. Told through a series of stories that illustrate specific trials, it teaches that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect the believer at times of severity.

The four stories of Surat Al-Kahf

Trial of Faith – People of the Cave/ Ashabu Al-Kahf (Verses 9 – 26) ...

Trial of Wealth – The story of the man who owns two gardens (Verses 32 – 44) ...

Trial of Knowledge – Moses and Al-Khidr (Verses 60–82) ...

Trial of Power – Dhul-Qar-nayn with Yajuj Majuj (Verses 83–98)

      Four stories & lessons in Surah Al-Kahf (Protection from Dunya & Dajjal)

Allah has sent the Quran as guidance to all mankind. Each and every verse of the Quran has blessings and lessons for us in our daily lives.

chapter Al-Kahf. The Prophet (peace be upon him) encouraged us to read the Surah every single Friday. Moreover, he encouraged us to memorize the first ten verses of the Surah because they will safeguard us from the Dajjal (the Antichrist), the worst of afflictions that will hit mankind.

So what lessons can we take from chapter Al-Kahf? There are too many to put in one article. Or dare I say, too many lessons for even one person to extract all of them. Every time we read the chapter, we will find new lessons.

In this article, we will look at the four stories, and extract three daily life lessons for us from each of the stories. There are lots more, but we will keep it to four.

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

AlKahaf (Arabic: الكهف, al-kahf; meaning: cave). Surah Al-Kahf explains fitnah in different areas of life. The stories in this surah outline how the believer should approach these trials and tribulations. Surah Al-Kahf teaches us to never rest and to do as many good deeds as possible to be victorious. Through the worship of Allah alone, the believer can attain greater blessings and prepare himself in this world to attain Paradise in the Hereafter. Allah is the only true God. We will surely return to Allah. So worship Allah alone.

Quran 18 Surah Al Kahf

Lessons From Surah Al Kahf

Four Lessons from Surah Kahf 

Lessons and secrets of Surah Al Kahf I Tafseer

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)

[ilyforallahswt]

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)

Surah Kahf Teachings

The surah summarizes for us the gist of Islam; its main theme is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect us from all trials. Told through a series of stories that illustrate specific trials, it teaches that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will protect the believer at times of severity.

The four stories of Surat Al-Kahf

Trial of Faith – People of the Cave/ Ashabu Al-Kahf (Verses 9 – 26) ...

Trial of Wealth – The story of the man who owns two gardens (Verses 32 – 44) ...

Trial of Knowledge – Moses and Al-Khidr (Verses 60–82) ...

Trial of Power – Dhul-Qar-nayn with Yajuj Majuj (Verses 83–98)

      Four stories & lessons in Surah Al-Kahf (Protection from Dunya & Dajjal)

Allah has sent the Quran as guidance to all mankind. Each and every verse of the Quran has blessings and lessons for us in our daily lives.

chapter Al-Kahf. The Prophet (peace be upon him) encouraged us to read the Surah every single Friday. Moreover, he encouraged us to memorize the first ten verses of the Surah because they will safeguard us from the Dajjal (the Antichrist), the worst of afflictions that will hit mankind.

So what lessons can we take from chapter Al-Kahf? There are too many to put in one article. Or dare I say, too many lessons for even one person to extract all of them. Every time we read the chapter, we will find new lessons.

In this article, we will look at the four stories, and extract three daily life lessons for us from each of the stories. There are lots more, but we will keep it to four.

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

AlKahaf (Arabic: الكهف, al-kahf; meaning: cave). Surah Al-Kahf explains fitnah in different areas of life. The stories in this surah outline how the believer should approach these trials and tribulations. Surah Al-Kahf teaches us to never rest and to do as many good deeds as possible to be victorious. Through the worship of Allah alone, the believer can attain greater blessings and prepare himself in this world to attain Paradise in the Hereafter. Allah is the only true God. We will surely return to Allah. So worship Allah alone.

Quran 18 Surah Al Kahf

Lessons From Surah Al Kahf

Four Lessons from Surah Kahf 

Lessons and secrets of Surah Al Kahf I Tafseer

Read Surah Al-Kahf and prepare yourself for Paradise

Read Surah Al-Kahf On Day of Jumah Prepare Yourself For Gaining Paradise (Jannah)