What's new

[VIDEOS] Muslim Convert/Revert Stories Thread - What made them make this choice?

Anyone filled with hate of my faith only makes me giggle and make me feel sorry for them. Relax ,you cant hurt a fly.

You haven't exposed anything, delusions aren't real.

This is simple even for the EDL,RSS intelligence levels.

As I wrote earlier, they are not slaves, they have same rights as a wife.


LOL. I don't have to listen to this guy who was caught with his pants down when I have clear verses available from Quran and Hadith. I even gave you 2 links from the most reputable Islamic websites but you ignored all of them.

Do you want me to give you more Hadith and tafseer references?
 
Please watch the video, its simple enough for you.

You're another one whose posts on here are mostly anti-Islam. Why do you spend so much time attacking a faith? Please explain.


Numerous Bible verses have been discussed here. Hinduism scriptures have been debated here. Nobody has gone on ad hominem attacks like you have.

Accusing someone of being an Islamophobe is an easy way to shut down the debate and is imo a disrespectful way of engaging in discussion. Thanks.
 
Yes, he is justifying sex with captured women taken as slaves. If God was moral he could have said look after them like your mothers, sisters and daughters, not use them to satisfy battle lust.

If you say the west is no better, that they also rape during war or have relations with prostitution then Islam is no better.

Mothers and sisters lol. You think women dont want a household or kids.

Muslims esp in the early days were far morally superiour than anyone in the west inc anyone you know today.

After war, many women would be raped, taken as slaves. Islam gave these women rights to be like wives, their children get inheritence. Which slave master would give a slaves child a fair share of his wealth?

Here is another video.

Note: Ive been debating all these hate points since 911 and no offence but with much smarter people.

 
Numerous Bible verses have been discussed here. Hinduism scriptures have been debated here. Nobody has gone on ad hominem attacks like you have.

Accusing someone of being an Islamophobe is an easy way to shut down the debate and is imo a disrespectful way of engaging in discussion. Thanks.

If I wanted to shut anyone down, Id report the posts. Im merely speaking the truth, we have many hate filled people who have been spewing lies/hate on this forum for years. I was mererly wondering why. Muslims in general and esp myself dont spread hate or attack other faiths, they are much easier to attack. Not that I have to justify myself to an RSS supporter.
 
Mothers and sisters lol. You think women dont want a household or kids.

Muslims esp in the early days were far morally superiour than anyone in the west inc anyone you know today.

After war, many women would be raped, taken as slaves. Islam gave these women rights to be like wives, their children get inheritence. Which slave master would give a slaves child a fair share of his wealth?

Here is another video.

Note: Ive been debating all these hate points since 911 and no offence but with much smarter people.


No offence taken. These women were already married and had households until there menfolk were killed. You think they wanted to bear the children of their rapists?
 
LOL. I don't have to listen to this guy who was caught with his pants down when I have clear verses available from Quran and Hadith. I even gave you 2 links from the most reputable Islamic websites but you ignored all of them.

Do you want me to give you more Hadith and tafseer references?

No debate the points in both videos. You are merely copying from a hate site without context and understanding.

Lets be honest, you enjoy being ignorant and hating, perhaps you get a kick out of it?

Lets do simple points. No copy paste and no videos if it helps?

Ill start.

1. If a woman has been given the same rights as a wife and her children are part of the inheritance, how is this person still a slave?

P.s you're welcome to email Tommy Robison or as an Indian some RSS pandit.
 
No offence taken. These women were already married and had households until there menfolk were killed. You think they wanted to bear the children of their rapists?

Not all were married, what idiocy. Those that were, would prefer to be part of a household rather than be left to be taken by some Non-Muslim and raped/abused with her kids killed.

Name any secular or atheist, Christian or any other society which over 1000 years didnt rape women after winning a war with enemies? Please include your ancestors too.
 
No debate the points in both videos. You are merely copying from a hate site without context and understanding.

Lets be honest, you enjoy being ignorant and hating, perhaps you get a kick out of it?

Lets do simple points. No copy paste and no videos if it helps?

Ill start.

1. If a woman has been given the same rights as a wife and her children are part of the inheritance, how is this person still a slave?

P.s you're welcome to email Tommy Robison or as an Indian some RSS pandit.

What are you taking about? Which hate site did I reference? I gave you a Hadith and 2 Islamic websites.

Do you even know that ISIS still practices sex slavery or do you think someone like Nadia Murad is also a western asset?

https://youtu.be/KQ47jxfkyJg
 
LOL. I don't have to listen to this guy who was caught with his pants down when I have clear verses available from Quran and Hadith. I even gave you 2 links from the most reputable Islamic websites but you ignored all of them.

Do you want me to give you more Hadith and tafseer references?


As I understand it, the mainstream interpretation of the Quran lies with the four prominent schools of Islamic law . You'll have to check with what they say on this topic.
 
Name any secular or atheist, Christian or any other society which over 1000 years didnt rape women after winning a war with enemies? Please include your ancestors too.

So you admit the men under the Prophet's guidance raped women. Good. And if secular, atheist, Christians also did the same then a) Islam is no better and b) they were wrong/immoral too. See it is that easy.
 
No debate the points in both videos. You are merely copying from a hate site without context and understanding.

Lets be honest, you enjoy being ignorant and hating, perhaps you get a kick out of it?

Lets do simple points. No copy paste and no videos if it helps?

Ill start.

1. If a woman has been given the same rights as a wife and her children are part of the inheritance, how is this person still a slave?

P.s you're welcome to email Tommy Robison or as an Indian some RSS pandit.

Are you supporting slavery? First of all slaves did not have the same rights. Your knowledge of Islam is so poor that now I think you have not even read Quran with translation. Quran has multiple verses on this topic explaining how slave girls do not have the same rights as wives.

Even if they had the same rights, in what universe is it OK to make anyone a slave forcefully and have sex with them?
 
As I understand it, the mainstream interpretation of the Quran lies with the four prominent schools of Islamic law . You'll have to check with what they say on this topic.

Thing is they change the meanings of the verses to suit modern tastes. They play linguistic gymnastics hence they are harder to nail than jelly to a wall.
 
As I understand it, the mainstream interpretation of the Quran lies with the four prominent schools of Islamic law . You'll have to check with what they say on this topic.

I'm yet to see a scholar who denied that having sex with slaves was allowed. However, majority of the Muslims do not know about it.
 
Not all were married, what idiocy. Those that were, would prefer to be part of a household rather than be left to be taken by some Non-Muslim and raped/abused with her kids killed.

Name any secular or atheist, Christian or any other society which over 1000 years didnt rape women after winning a war with enemies? Please include your ancestors too.

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سَلاَمٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، عَنْ حُمَيْدٍ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، قَالَ أَقَامَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بَيْنَ خَيْبَرَ وَالْمَدِينَةِ ثَلاَثًا يُبْنَى عَلَيْهِ بِصَفِيَّةَ بِنْتِ حُيَىٍّ فَدَعَوْتُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ إِلَى وَلِيمَتِهِ، فَمَا كَانَ فِيهَا مِنْ خُبْزٍ وَلاَ لَحْمٍ، أَمَرَ بِالأَنْطَاعِ فَأُلْقِيَ فِيهَا مِنَ التَّمْرِ وَالأَقِطِ وَالسَّمْنِ فَكَانَتْ وَلِيمَتَهُ، فَقَالَ الْمُسْلِمُونَ إِحْدَى أُمَّهَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَوْ مِمَّا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُهُ فَقَالُوا إِنْ حَجَبَهَا فَهْىَ مِنْ أُمَّهَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَإِنْ لَمْ يَحْجُبْهَا فَهْىَ مِمَّا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُهُ فَلَمَّا ارْتَحَلَ وَطَّى لَهَا خَلْفَهُ وَمَدَّ الْحِجَابَ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ النَّاسِ‏.‏

Narrated Anas: The Prophet (ﷺ) stayed for three days at a place between Khaibar and Medina, and there he consummated his marriage with Safiyya bint Huyay. I invited the Muslims to a banquet which included neither meat nor bread. The Prophet (ﷺ) ordered for the leather dining sheets to be spread, and then dates, dried yogurt and butter were provided over it, and that was the Walima (banquet) of the Prophet. The Muslims asked whether Safiyya would be considered as his wife or as a slave girl of what his right hands possessed. Then they said, "If the Prophet (ﷺ) screens her from the people, then she Is the Prophet's wife but if he does not screen her, then she is a slave girl." So when the Prophet (ﷺ) proceeded, he made a place for her (on the camel) behind him and screened her from people.

Sahih al-Bukhari 5159
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:5159

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْغَفَّارِ بْنُ دَاوُدَ، حَدَّثَنَا يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، ح وَحَدَّثَنِي أَحْمَدُ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي يَعْقُوبُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الزُّهْرِيُّ، عَنْ عَمْرٍو، مَوْلَى الْمُطَّلِبِ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ قَدِمْنَا خَيْبَرَ، فَلَمَّا فَتَحَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْحِصْنَ ذُكِرَ لَهُ جَمَالُ صَفِيَّةَ بِنْتِ حُيَىِّ بْنِ أَخْطَبَ، وَقَدْ قُتِلَ زَوْجُهَا وَكَانَتْ عَرُوسًا، فَاصْطَفَاهَا النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم لِنَفْسِهِ، فَخَرَجَ بِهَا، حَتَّى بَلَغْنَا سَدَّ الصَّهْبَاءِ حَلَّتْ، فَبَنَى بِهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم، ثُمَّ صَنَعَ حَيْسًا فِي نِطَعٍ صَغِيرٍ، ثُمَّ قَالَ لِي ‏ "‏ آذِنْ مَنْ حَوْلَكَ ‏"‏‏.‏ فَكَانَتْ تِلْكَ وَلِيمَتَهُ عَلَى صَفِيَّةَ، ثُمَّ خَرَجْنَا إِلَى الْمَدِينَةِ، فَرَأَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يُحَوِّي لَهَا وَرَاءَهُ بِعَبَاءَةٍ، ثُمَّ يَجْلِسُ عِنْدَ بَعِيرِهِ، فَيَضَعُ رُكْبَتَهُ، وَتَضَعُ صَفِيَّةُ رِجْلَهَا عَلَى رُكْبَتِهِ حَتَّى تَرْكَبَ‏.‏

Narrated Anas bin Malik: We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet (ﷺ) selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba,' Safiya became clean from her menses then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) married her. Hais (i.e. an 'Arabian dish) was prepared on a small leather mat. Then the Prophet (ﷺ) said to me, "I invite the people around you." So that was the marriage banquet of the Prophet (ﷺ) and Safiya. Then we proceeded towards Medina, and I saw the Prophet, making for her a kind of cushion with his cloak behind him (on his camel). He then sat beside his camel and put his knee for Safiya to put her foot on, in order to ride (on the camel).

Sahih al-Bukhari 4211
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4211
 
I'm yet to see a scholar who denied that having sex with slaves was allowed. However, majority of the Muslims do not know about it.

You're a liar.

All classical and learned scholars says they must be as wives.

Show me one of these scholars? Ive given two videos , both say the same.
 
Are you supporting slavery? First of all slaves did not have the same rights. Your knowledge of Islam is so poor that now I think you have not even read Quran with translation. Quran has multiple verses on this topic explaining how slave girls do not have the same rights as wives.

Even if they had the same rights, in what universe is it OK to make anyone a slave forcefully and have sex with them?

Its not forceful as they have the same rights as a wife. Dont be slow, its boring.

Slavery was the norm , only Islam says to end slavery. While you're secular athiest mates were showing off black children in cages to white people less than a 100 years ago.
 
You're a liar.

All classical and learned scholars says they must be as wives.

Show me one of these scholars? Ive given two videos , both say the same.

Sex is only allowed with your wife or wives unless the woman is part of war booty.

Ever heard of Mary the Copt?
 
Sex is only allowed with your wife or wives unless the woman is part of war booty.

Ever heard of Mary the Copt?

Modi doesnt even bring his wife out, he bats for the other side doesnt he?

All are treated equally as wives.


Its hilarious RSS fans , EDL types and uneducated atheists think they know better than Muslim scholars.
 
Thing is they change the meanings of the verses to suit modern tastes. They play linguistic gymnastics hence they are harder to nail than jelly to a wall.

Not really, perhaps it's you that's finding it harder than nailing jelly to a wall. If you're going to dissect passages from the Qur'an then you've also got to understand the context, background of what you're quoting.

What we've understood from the passage you've quoted is that these women are likely widows, as a result of war, hence if the prophet or his companions wanted to take advantage they'd have raped and beaten these women, and everything in-between. There's no proof that this ever happened, or that these women were sex slaves as you're alluding to. In fact there's several hadiths for example this authentic hadith (belonging to the sahih book which is a highly respected book of narrations) in which the prophet states: If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.

Pretty self explanatory and it doesn't require me to go into any further detail. You can argue until the cows come home but evidentially there's nothing to suggest that the prophet or his companions transgressed any limits. The alleged quote from the Qur'an and the idea that it's permissible to have sex with slaves is not backed up by the prophets teaching's nor by any events in time.
The prophet was monogamously married to his first wife Khadija for 25 years. He had the power and position to do as he pleased, but he never took advantage. If you look into his life you will see that his marriages were purposeful and he wasn't the predator that is being unfairly portrayed by posters like yourself.

With all due respect, I suggest that you and other posters learn more about Islam, the Qur'an, hadith, the life of the prophet and perhaps you will have more facts and information to make an informed argument. And then perhaps we can have a deeper and more reasoned discussion. All the best.
 
Its not forceful as they have the same rights as a wife. Dont be slow, its boring.

Slavery was the norm , only Islam says to end slavery. While you're secular athiest mates were showing off black children in cages to white people less than a 100 years ago.

Slavery is discouraged in Islam. Not forbidden. Muslim men can have slaves and have sex with them. In todays world nobody does but you can’t deny history. Saudi Arabia had slavery till the 20th century I believe. . Nobody is denying the slavery in the west. They are saying Islam was no better. . That’s is. And it’s true.
 
THis isnt the 60's Robert.

The Creator is simply the one who created the Universe. With the tech today, prove the universe wasn't created.

Your arguments are something out of Dads army or Faulty towers mate.

My argument is out of classical logic, which has not changed since since the 1960s or indeed in centuries before.

You cannot prove that something is false, only that something else is true. So I cannot prove that Gods aren’t there. But as there is no evidence that they are there, I dismiss the possibility until evidence is found.
 
There's empirical evidence (observable) and there is circumstantial evidence.

There is ample circumstantial evidence supporting the existence of a creator, mainly scientific, but there is no circumstantial evidence of abiogenesis. Even Darwinian Evolution is based on circumstantial evidence, there is nothing empirical.

Then there is interpretation of evidence. Athiests believe DNA mutations are all random and not purposeful or intelligent, Theists believe mutations are purposeful and intelligent. The very fact our bodies adapt and build an immune system is evidence of intelligence.

However the Athiests counter to the existence of God is not based on science but suffering, death, and pain among the human race. How could a God be so cruel is their question, not realising that humans have free will and are in control of what happens on Earth. With the exception of natural death - entropy.

Logic dictates that if you witness 5 consecutive Royal Flushes in poker, then the game is rigged, but the probability DNA appearing through nothing but chance and 4 fundamental forces of the universe, is close to improbable, but Athiests will defy logic and say - it just happened.

Until Athiests have empirical evidence of abiogenesis and DNA arising from nothing but chemical elements, undirected, then Athiests should be ignored because they require more faith in their belief than Thiest. If athiests claim there is not creator, then prove it by demonstrating abiogenesis etc. They can't.

This is precisely why Agnostics sit on the fence and do not claim there is no God and shape their belief based on evidence.
 
I don’t understand why you think this is significant. Humans instinctively look for patterns, even where no pattern exists. We have to do this in order to come up with some sort of internal working model of the world to navigate through it. I’d call it an evolutionary adaptation.



Ok, I looked it up. The basic argument appears to be:

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

Except that causality collapses (along with everything else) at a Singularity - such as that which existed at the Big Bang. Time didn’t exist, so there was no time for a cause to act during.

I like to call humans intuitive theists, because I believe that humans have this innate need to believe in a God or a higher power, but you call it evolutionary adaptation.

As for the Kalam cosmological argument, I find it to be compelling one as it shows that the begining of the Universe had a "uncaused cause" which had to by nature be timeless and changeless pointing to the existence of a immaterial God.


Here is a video which gives scientific and philosophical evidence for the Kalam Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. If you have time, then plz do watch it.
 
Then God must have a cause as well. Now if we make an assumption that God cannot have a cause then what stops us from having a simpler assumption that the universe has no cause.

God is the "uncaused cause" God can't have a cause because there can't be an infinite regress of causes.
 
Not really, perhaps it's you that's finding it harder than nailing jelly to a wall. If you're going to dissect passages from the Qur'an then you've also got to understand the context, background of what you're quoting.

What we've understood from the passage you've quoted is that these women are likely widows, as a result of war, hence if the prophet or his companions wanted to take advantage they'd have raped and beaten these women, and everything in-between. There's no proof that this ever happened, or that these women were sex slaves as you're alluding to. In fact there's several hadiths for example this authentic hadith (belonging to the sahih book which is a highly respected book of narrations) in which the prophet states: If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.

Pretty self explanatory and it doesn't require me to go into any further detail. You can argue until the cows come home but evidentially there's nothing to suggest that the prophet or his companions transgressed any limits. The alleged quote from the Qur'an and the idea that it's permissible to have sex with slaves is not backed up by the prophets teaching's nor by any events in time.
The prophet was monogamously married to his first wife Khadija for 25 years. He had the power and position to do as he pleased, but he never took advantage. If you look into his life you will see that his marriages were purposeful and he wasn't the predator that is being unfairly portrayed by posters like yourself.

With all due respect, I suggest that you and other posters learn more about Islam, the Qur'an, hadith, the life of the prophet and perhaps you will have more facts and information to make an informed argument. And then perhaps we can have a deeper and more reasoned discussion. All the best.

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him):
0 Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Mes- senger (ﷺ), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

This is Sahih Bukhari 8 3371. Similar hadith to be found at Sahih Bukhari 62 137.

Also the poster Odd One Out has posted a link to Islamqa earlier which states that sex was allowed with captive females – also known as ‘what the right hand possesses’.

Also Quran verses 33:50, 23:5-6 and 4:24 also mention sex with ‘what the right hand possesses’ which were not necessarily married to their masters. KKWC iirc mentioned that the masters were married to these women well if they were they would be wives and these verses would not mention ‘what the right hand possesses’ in the same verse as wives when alluding to what was sexually lawful to Muslims.

Of course there will be YouTube scholars who will bring forth authentic hadith or verses from Quran exhibiting contrary views to the above or spin the above hadiths/verses to a positive light, that is because they are looking at them through the prism of modern mores.

I don’t want to antagonise the average Muslim, my family are Muslims, some of the best people I know are Muslims but when someone like KKWC lays down to a challenge to prove Islam among other things to be immoral I would say in comparison to the modern world in certain aspects Islam/Allah is immoral.

Sure you can quote context and admittedly perhaps the rules on slavery and treatment of captive females was an improvement from the mores of the time but as slavery is abolished by international standards today, automatically this makes today’s world more moral than Islam, at least in theory.

Remember what Allah has allowed can never be forbidden so even tho Islam talks about setting slaves free it cannot abolish slavery as Allah allows it.

Allah also practised collective punishment, destroying whole communities for the sins of the few, collective punishment is banned under international standards, so again in this regard modern morality is more moral than Islam/Allah.

To this day there is no crime of rape against one’s wife in Islam tho there is in British Law albeit it was relatively recent.
 
Its not forceful as they have the same rights as a wife. Dont be slow, its boring.

<b>Slavery was the norm , only Islam says to end slavery. While you're secular athiest mates were showing off black children in cages to white people less than a 100 years ago.</b>

The British Empire ended slavery in 1833.

The United States ended slavery in 1862.

Saudi Arabia ended slavery in <b>1962</b>.

Slavery was officially abolished by the League of Nations and then the United Nations.

Now, tell me which Quranic verse or Hadith ended slavery?
 
You're a liar.

All classical and learned scholars says they must be as wives.

Show me one of these scholars? Ive given two videos , both say the same.

Oh I will show you plenty. Just be patient.

Quran says that sex is allowed with female slaves who are not wives. The companions practiced it. All classic scholars interpreted it this way. If you don't believe me, just read it.

<b>Ali had sex with an underage slave girl.</b>

حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا رَوْحُ بْنُ عُبَادَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ سُوَيْدِ بْنِ مَنْجُوفٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ بُرَيْدَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ بَعَثَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَلِيًّا إِلَى خَالِدٍ لِيَقْبِضَ الْخُمُسَ وَكُنْتُ أُبْغِضُ عَلِيًّا، وَقَدِ اغْتَسَلَ، فَقُلْتُ لِخَالِدٍ أَلاَ تَرَى إِلَى هَذَا فَلَمَّا قَدِمْنَا عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ذَكَرْتُ ذَلِكَ لَهُ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ يَا بُرَيْدَةُ أَتُبْغِضُ عَلِيًّا ‏"‏‏.‏ فَقُلْتُ نَعَمْ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ لاَ تُبْغِضْهُ فَإِنَّ لَهُ فِي الْخُمُسِ أَكْثَرَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ ‏"‏‏.‏

Narrated Buraida: The Prophet (ﷺ) sent `Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated `Ali, and `Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. `Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet (ﷺ) I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate `Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus."

Sahih al-Bukhari 4350
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4350


<b>Companions asked Rasul Allah if they should practice coïtus interruptus to which he replied that it was not necessaary as whoever is meant to be born will be born.</b>

حَدَّثَنَا إِسْحَاقُ، حَدَّثَنَا عَفَّانُ، حَدَّثَنَا وُهَيْبٌ، حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى ـ هُوَ ابْنُ عُقْبَةَ ـ حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى بْنِ حَبَّانَ، عَنِ ابْنِ مُحَيْرِيزٍ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، فِي غَزْوَةِ بَنِي الْمُصْطَلِقِ أَنَّهُمْ أَصَابُوا سَبَايَا فَأَرَادُوا أَنْ يَسْتَمْتِعُوا بِهِنَّ وَلاَ يَحْمِلْنَ فَسَأَلُوا النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَنِ الْعَزْلِ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ مَا عَلَيْكُمْ أَنْ لاَ تَفْعَلُوا، فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ كَتَبَ مَنْ هُوَ خَالِقٌ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ‏"‏‏.‏ وَقَالَ مُجَاهِدٌ عَنْ قَزَعَةَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا سَعِيدٍ فَقَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ لَيْسَتْ نَفْسٌ مَخْلُوقَةٌ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ خَالِقُهَا ‏"‏‏.‏

Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relation with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet (ﷺ) about coitus interrupt us. The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection." Qaza'a said, "I heard Abu Sa`id saying that the Prophet (ﷺ) said, 'No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it."

Sahih al-Bukhari 7409
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7409

<b>A companion was rewarded a slave girl by Abu Bakr</b>

Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) again met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah ! By Allah. I have not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent her to the people of Mecca, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been kept as prisoners at Mecca.

Sahih Muslim 4345
https://hadithcollection.com/sahihm...tion/sahih-muslim-book-019-hadith-number-4345

<b>Ibne Kathir has the same opinion in his tafseer</b>

those who protect their private parts from unlawful actions and do not do that which Allah has forbidden; fornication and homosexuality, and do not approach anyone except the wives whom Allah has made permissible for them or their right hand possessions from the captives.

https://www.alim.org/quran/tafsir/ibn-kathir/surah/23/1/

<b>Al Jalalayn did the same interpretation</b>

except from their spouses that is to their spouses and what slaves their right hands possess that is concubines for then they are not blameworthy in having sexual intercourse with them.

https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.as...hNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

<b>Ibne Abbass agrees</b>

Save from their wives) up to four wives (or the (slaves) that their right hands possess) without any limit in number, (for then they are not blameworthy) when they engage in that which is lawful,

https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.as...hNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2

<b>Maududi also agrees</b>

who guard their private parts scrupulously,6 except with regard to their wives and those women who are legally in their possession

http://www.englishtafsir.com/Quran/23/index.html

<b>Even modern honest scholars have the same opinion. So the so-called scholars in your video are lying.</b>

With regard to the women, they become slaves and “those whom one's right hand possesses” (described as a “right hand servant” in the question). Male children also become slaves. The ruler shares out these slaves among the mujaahideen.

A mujaahid does not have to be married in order to gain possession of a “slave whom one’s right hand possesses.” None of the scholars expressed such a view.

Rather Islam made them the property of their masters alone, and forbade anyone else to also have intercourse with them, even if that was his son.

It was narrated that Ruwayfi’ ibn Thaabit al-Ansaari said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say on the day of Hunayn: “It is not permissible for any man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to irrigate the crop of another else – meaning to have intercourse with a woman who is pregnant. And it is not permissible for a man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captured woman until he has established that she is not pregnant. And it is not permissible for a man who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to sell any booty until it has been shared out.”

Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2158; classed as hasan by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 1890.

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/125...er-of-a-right-hand-servant-have-to-be-married
 
Not really, perhaps it's you that's finding it harder than nailing jelly to a wall. If you're going to dissect passages from the Qur'an then you've also got to understand the context, background of what you're quoting.

<b>What we've understood from the passage you've quoted is that these women are likely widows, as a result of war, hence if the prophet or his companions wanted to take advantage they'd have raped and beaten these women, and everything in-between. There's no proof that this ever happened, or that these women were sex slaves as you're alluding to.</b> In fact there's several hadiths for example this authentic hadith (belonging to the sahih book which is a highly respected book of narrations) in which the prophet states: If any of you have a slave girl, whom he gives good education and excellent training, and then he emancipates her and marries her, he shall have a two-fold reward.

Pretty self explanatory and it doesn't require me to go into any further detail. You can argue until the cows come home but evidentially there's nothing to suggest that the prophet or his companions transgressed any limits. The alleged quote from the Qur'an and the idea that it's permissible to have sex with slaves is not backed up by the prophets teaching's nor by any events in time.
The prophet was monogamously married to his first wife Khadija for 25 years. He had the power and position to do as he pleased, but he never took advantage. If you look into his life you will see that his marriages were purposeful and he wasn't the predator that is being unfairly portrayed by posters like yourself.

With all due respect, I suggest that you and other posters learn more about Islam, the Qur'an, hadith, the life of the prophet and perhaps you will have more facts and information to make an informed argument. And then perhaps we can have a deeper and more reasoned discussion. All the best.

Please read about the massacre of Banu Qurayza.

All adult male captives (400 to 900 people) were beheaded. All women and children were sold into slavery.

This incident has been documented in multiple Islamic history books and endorsed by a large number of Muslim scholars.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Massacre_of_the_Banu_Qurayzah

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:

I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Sunan Abu Dawud 4390

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4390/
 
Please read about the massacre of Banu Qurayza.

All adult male captives (400 to 900 people) were beheaded. All women and children were sold into slavery.

This incident has been documented in multiple Islamic history books and endorsed by a large number of Muslim scholars.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Massacre_of_the_Banu_Qurayzah

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:

I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Sunan Abu Dawud 4390

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4390/

You could also highlight the prophet (pbuh) asking his adopted son to divorce his wife so he could marry her.
 
Sorry I forgot to add , I would like to hear comments from posters who would like to defend that. I have heard a few explanations , none that were satisfactory. If someone can shed some light on it. That would be great
 
Sorry I forgot to add , I would like to hear comments from posters who would like to defend that. I have heard a few explanations , none that were satisfactory. If someone can shed some light on it. That would be great

The issue is that a lot of Muslims don't know their history and religious text. A large number of things which they consider immoral and will never indulge in personally are part of Islam. They just do not know it because the modern scholars present a different version of the religion that they are familiar with. They disagree with ISIS and Taliban but fail to understand that these entities did not invent anything new in religion. They use references from Quran, Hadith, and Seerah to justify their acts. Their interpretation is as right as anyone else's.
 
Please read about the massacre of Banu Qurayza.

All adult male captives (400 to 900 people) were beheaded. All women and children were sold into slavery.

This incident has been documented in multiple Islamic history books and endorsed by a large number of Muslim scholars.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Massacre_of_the_Banu_Qurayzah

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:

I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Sunan Abu Dawud 4390

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4390/

You do realize that Banu Qurayza betrayed their pact and were enemies of Islam, right ?


Sheikh Yasir Qadhi narrates the story of Banu Qurayza, their treason and their punishment which was according to their own sacred text the Torah.

Its a long video but clarifies alot of misconceptions regarding this episode.
 
You could also highlight the prophet (pbuh) asking his adopted son to divorce his wife so he could marry her.

Allah has not Made for any man two hearts in his (one) body: nor has He made your wives whom ye divorce by Zihar your mothers: nor has He Made your adopted sons your sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah Tells (you) the Truth, and He Shows the (right) Way."


( 33:4-5 )

So according to Islamic jurisprudence an adopted son is not a real son , so what is wrong in marrying a divorced woman?

Secondly do you know who was wife of that person ? She was close relative of Muhammad , he saw her many times in day to day life , if he was fascinated by her , he would have married her when she was unmarried and not wait for her to get married to someone else and divorce.
 
Please read about the massacre of Banu Qurayza.

All adult male captives (400 to 900 people) were beheaded. All women and children were sold into slavery.

This incident has been documented in multiple Islamic history books and endorsed by a large number of Muslim scholars.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Massacre_of_the_Banu_Qurayzah

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:

I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Sunan Abu Dawud 4390

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4390/


Do you know the background of the incident as well ? Just picking one hadeeth and arriving at conclusion is that fair ?
 
This dude used to hate Islam. He ended up embracing Islam. He is now a Muslim. Allahu Akbar.

 
Could PPers also mention the last generation in their family that was not a muslim and belonged to another religion
 
Also i expect some posters from Bharat to expect Islam soon and their videos and posts will feature in this thread in the near future. They know who they are
 
I enjoy listening to the speeches of some revert scholars

In particular - Hamza Yusuf, Abdul Hakim Murad.

Two famous reverts related to the Indian subcontinent people may find interesting

One is Allama Asad who converted from Judaism. Here is a short biography taken from wiki. he has lived the life of 10 people!

Muhammad Asad[a] (born Leopold Weiss; 2 July 1900 – 20 February 1992) was an Austro-Hungarian Muslim polymath, born in modern day Ukraine. He worked as a journalist, traveler, writer, political theorist, and diplomat.[6]

His translation of the Quran in English, "The Message of The Qur'an" (1980) is one of the most notable of his works. In Asad's words in "The Message of the Quran": "the work which I am now placing before the public is based on a lifetime of study and of many years spent in Arabia. It is an attempt – perhaps the first attempt – at a really idiomatic, explanatory rendition of the Qur'anic message into a European language."

By age 13, Weiss had acquired a passing fluency in Hebrew and Aramaic, in addition to his native German and Polish languages.[17][18] By his mid-twenties, he could read and write in English, French, Persian and Arabic.[19][20] In Mandatory Palestine, Weiss engaged in arguments with Zionist leaders like Chaim Weizmann, voicing his reservations about some aspects of the Zionist Movement.[18] After traveling across the Arab World as a journalist, he converted to Sunni Islam in 1926 and adopted the name "Muhammad Asad"—Asad being the Arabic rendition of his root name Leo (Lion).[21]

During his stay in Saudi Arabia, he spent time with Bedouins and enjoyed the close company of the state's founder, Ibn Saud.[9][10] He also carried out a secret mission for Ibn Saud to trace the sources of funding for the Ikhwan Revolt. Due to these activities, he was dubbed in a Haaretz article as "Leopold of Arabia"—hinting similarity of his activities to those of Lawrence of Arabia.[18] On his visit to India, Asad became friends with the Muslim poet-philosopher Muhammad Iqbal, who persuaded him to abandon his eastward travels and "help elucidate the intellectual premises of the future Islamic state".[22][23] He also spent five years in internment by the British government at the outbreak of World War II.[3] On 14 August 1947, Asad received Pakistani citizenship and later served in several bureaucratic and diplomatic positions including the Director of Department of Islamic Reconstruction, Deputy Secretary (Middle East Division) in the Foreign Ministry of Pakistan, and Pakistan's envoy to the United Nations.[9][10][22]

In the West, Asad rose to prominence as a writer with his best-selling autobiography, The Road to Mecca.[23][24][25] Later, after seventeen years of scholarly research, he published his magnum opus: The Message of the Qur'an—an English translation and commentary of the Quran.[26] The book, along with the translations of Pickthall and Yusuf Ali, is regarded as one of the most influential translations of the modern era.[6][27][26] An ardent proponent of ijtihad and rationality in interpreting religious texts, he dedicated his works "to People who Think".[26][28]

In 2008, the entrance square to the UN Office in Vienna was named Muhammad Asad Platz in commemoration of his work as a "religious bridge-builder".[29] Asad has been described by his biographers as "Europe's gift to Islam" and "a Mediator between Islam and the West".[30][31]

Here is Ziaur Rahman Azmi.

Ziya-ur-Rahman Azmi was born Banke Laal into a Hindu Family[1] in 1943 in Azamgarh.[2][3] In 1959, at first he found a sanskrit translation of Quran and got attracted to Islam by reading it. A few days later, he was gifted a booklet of Abul Ala Maududi named "Satya Dharma" (true religion) by Hakeem Muhammad Ayyub Nadwi who was a member of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, and by reading the book, he became more interested to Islam and started attending Islamic seminars by Jamaat-e-Islami Hind.[4][5][6] Aged 15, he embraced Islam in 1960.[3][7] After converting to Islam, he received extreme opposition from his family and community.[4] He received his primary education in a local school and then enrolled at the Shibli National College in Azamgarh.[8] He began studying the traditional dars-e-nizami at the Jamia Darussalam in Oomerabad, and received a B.A. and an M.A. in Islamic studies from the Islamic University of Madinah and the Umm al-Qura University respectively.[2] He wrote his doctoral thesis at the Al-Azhar University.[2][6]

These men both wrote books that have helped shape the Muslim world. May Allah reward their efforts.

It is funny to see extremist chintu hindus mock converts. They still view the world through birth and caste. Whereas Islam honours the revert and convert and gives them a high station. So if you are born to a certain family you are destined to be untouchable and clean toilets.


Quran: O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.
 
I enjoy listening to the speeches of some revert scholars

In particular - Hamza Yusuf, Abdul Hakim Murad.

Two famous reverts related to the Indian subcontinent people may find interesting

One is Allama Asad who converted from Judaism. Here is a short biography taken from wiki. he has lived the life of 10 people!



Here is Ziaur Rahman Azmi.



These men both wrote books that have helped shape the Muslim world. May Allah reward their efforts.

Subhan Allah.

Thanks for sharing.


It is funny to see extremist chintu hindus mock converts. They still view the world through birth and caste. Whereas Islam honours the revert and convert and gives them a high station. So if you are born to a certain family you are destined to be untouchable and clean toilets.

Yup. They have contaminated thought processes. We should ignore their negative vibes. They are insecure and petty people.
 
I enjoy listening to the speeches of some revert scholars

In particular - Hamza Yusuf, Abdul Hakim Murad.

Two famous reverts related to the Indian subcontinent people may find interesting

One is Allama Asad who converted from Judaism. Here is a short biography taken from wiki. he has lived the life of 10 people!



Here is Ziaur Rahman Azmi.



These men both wrote books that have helped shape the Muslim world. May Allah reward their efforts.

It is funny to see extremist chintu hindus mock converts. They still view the world through birth and caste. Whereas Islam honours the revert and convert and gives them a high station. So if you are born to a certain family you are destined to be untouchable and clean toilets.


Quran: O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.
So God created people and tribes so that they can learn about one another? What kind of logic is this?

Regarding converts, there are thousands around the world converting to Hinduism. Religion is a business. More suckers that follow, more money to be made by the stakeholders. At least Hinduism does not have death penalty for leaving their cult.
How are Dalits treated in Pakistan? Care to let us know. ;)
Not to forget, how about child marriages and cousin marriages? Is that sanctioned by God too?
 
So God created people and tribes so that they can learn about one another? What kind of logic is this?

Regarding converts, there are thousands around the world converting to Hinduism. Religion is a business. More suckers that follow, more money to be made by the stakeholders. At least Hinduism does not have death penalty for leaving their cult.
How are Dalits treated in Pakistan? Care to let us know. ;)
Not to forget, how about child marriages and cousin marriages? Is that sanctioned by God too?
If they are converting to Hindusim because it brings them peace and comfort, you won't find me mocking them. I wish them well.
 
If they are converting to Hindusim because it brings them peace and comfort, you won't find me mocking them. I wish them well.
Well, read your previous post :rolleyes:

"It is funny to see extremist chintu hindus mock converts. They still view the world through birth and caste. Whereas Islam honours the revert and convert and gives them a high station. So if you are born to a certain family you are destined to be untouchable and clean toilets."
 
Well, read your previous post :rolleyes:

"It is funny to see extremist chintu hindus mock converts. They still view the world through birth and caste. Whereas Islam honours the revert and convert and gives them a high station. So if you are born to a certain family you are destined to be untouchable and clean toilets."
What do you want me to read? I am referring to the extremist Hindus who mock Muslim " converts". It is very clear.
 
What do you want me to read? I am referring to the extremist Hindus who mock Muslim " converts". It is very clear.
Mocking butthurt Hindus who cry about conversion to Islam is your right to do. No issues with that. But bringing caste system into it is pointless. Every religion has its own share of stupidity.
 
Mocking butthurt Hindus who cry about conversion to Islam is your right to do. No issues with that. But bringing caste system into it is pointless. Every religion has its own share of stupidity.
It's not pointless. For some Hindus your status is defined by birth and in this world it remains th same no matter your actions. That's why they mock converts to other religion because in their eyes the person hasn't actually changed and is still the same despite their conversion. This is an attitude shaped by caste system.

For a religious Muslim it's different.
 
This thread was made to include all the beautiful conversion stories. I think we should ignore the Islamophobes here so that they don't stink up this thread.

Here is another great conversion story (a former Islamophobic politican from Netherlands who ended up converting to Islam):



 
I would have strongly considered it, but I don't want to become a teetotaller.

Pork is fine - I don't eat it much and can live without it.
No issues brother, it takes time to change one's liking and dislikins...Abdul Raheem Green, a british revert had same issues.
 
Story of a Japanese man who converted to Islam.

Summary: The guy was introduced to Islam by his Pakistani CEO (the company he worked for). He eventually started to study different religions. He started to read Quran and from there, he decided to convert. Quran made him to convert to Islam.

His words (I am paraphrasing slightly) --> "It (Quran) felt, deep, strong, and clear. The more I read, the more I felt. I couldn't deny this book anymore. It was more like I saw it, understood it, and accepted it. So, actually, it took me a few years to convert to Islam."

 
I would have strongly considered it, but I don't want to become a teetotaller.

Pork is fine - I don't eat it much and can live without it.
There’s Muslims who drink, smoke, eat pork etc. they’re not in the right ofc, but still Muslim.

The wife of Prophet Muhammad PBUH herself said that if Islam first came down with rulings regarding alcohol etc first then no one one would’ve become Muslim.

It was important that the first decade or so was solely based around the concept of knowing God as He is and submitting to Him alone. it’s with fully accepting that reality that one naturally falls into the rulings ordained by Him. The reverse order is like swimming upstream.

So, don’t let that hold you back bro, none of the Muslims in the world including this forum are perfect. We all have our weaknesses. 😊
 
Could PPers also mention the last generation in their family that was not a muslim and belonged to another religion
Why does that matter bhai jaan.

Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself his parents were not on monotheism / Tawheed. They were both pagans. As was his grandfather and all of his known paternal ancestors up until around Prophet Ismail PBUH and iirc the generations subsequently after him. Prophet Ismail himself whose grandfather was a priest of idol worshippers in Babylon. But Prophet Ismail’s PBUH father Prophet Abraham PBUH is one of the closest servants of God.

All of this is to say religion should not be based on generations and inheritance bro. The truth is the truth. even if some one is born into Islam because their parents are Muslim, it’s their responsibility to learn about it as much as possible and accept it within their heart fully.
 
Why does that matter bhai jaan.

Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself his parents were not on monotheism / Tawheed. They were both pagans. As was his grandfather and all of his known paternal ancestors up until around Prophet Ismail PBUH and iirc the generations subsequently after him. Prophet Ismail himself whose grandfather was a priest of idol worshippers in Babylon. But Prophet Ismail’s PBUH father Prophet Abraham PBUH is one of the closest servants of God.

All of this is to say religion should not be based on generations and inheritance bro. The truth is the truth. even if some one is born into Islam because their parents are Muslim, it’s their responsibility to learn about it as much as possible and accept it within their heart fully.

Nothing wrong
Just fascinating stuff. You wouldn’t believe i only recently discovered Jinnah was a Hindu family guy a generation back in his family tree.

More people are opening about conversion stories while at the same time finally making a peaceful understanding with their old generations.

I have often seen people making it seem like their ancestors were on the wrong path and all. It doesn’t have to be this way. You can be respectful of your ancestors and that will only connect you to us better.
 
Nothing wrong
Just fascinating stuff. You wouldn’t believe i only recently discovered Jinnah was a Hindu family guy a generation back in his family tree.

More people are opening about conversion stories while at the same time finally making a peaceful understanding with their old generations.

I have often seen people making it seem like their ancestors were on the wrong path and all. It doesn’t have to be this way. You can be respectful of your ancestors and that will only connect you to us better.
I see where you’re coming from but the fundamental principle of worshipping God alone without any partners is where that divergence happens. As Muslims if any of our ancestors were on a path anything other than that, then they were wrong. We still respect them ofc, but when it comes to this subject, they were wrong.

A lot of people think Islam started with Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

However, Islam means to submit to the will of God. So throughout the history of man, Islam has always existed, whether it was during the time of Prophet Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc peace be upon them all.

So if our ancestors were on any other religion other than worshipping God alone- then yes, they were wrong. As a Muslim we have a stronger connection to somebody in Sweden or Japan or Burma who is Muslim and lineage wise distant from us than our own ancestor if said ancestor would have been associating partners to God.

That is the importance of monotheism / Tawheed in Islam.

Does that mean a revert to Islam does not respect his parents or be harsh with them if said parents are not Muslim? Absolutely not. He or she must still fulfill rights toward parents and be kind with them but decline and draw the boundary when it comes to disobedience to God.

Best example is Prophet Abraham PBUH. Whose dad was part of the group that wanted him thrown into a fire for worshipping God alone. However, despite that, Prophet Abraham was still respectful to his father. While still acknowledging he was on the wrong path.

So disagreements are fine. As long as they’re respectful.
 
I see where you’re coming from but the fundamental principle of worshipping God alone without any partners is where that divergence happens. As Muslims if any of our ancestors were on a path anything other than that, then they were wrong. We still respect them ofc, but when it comes to this subject, they were wrong.

A lot of people think Islam started with Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

However, Islam means to submit to the will of God. So throughout the history of man, Islam has always existed, whether it was during the time of Prophet Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc peace be upon them all.

So if our ancestors were on any other religion other than worshipping God alone- then yes, they were wrong. As a Muslim we have a stronger connection to somebody in Sweden or Japan or Burma who is Muslim and lineage wise distant from us than our own ancestor if said ancestor would have been associating partners to God.

That is the importance of monotheism / Tawheed in Islam.

Does that mean a revert to Islam does not respect his parents or be harsh with them if said parents are not Muslim? Absolutely not. He or she must still fulfill rights toward parents and be kind with them but decline and draw the boundary when it comes to disobedience to God.

Best example is Prophet Abraham PBUH. Whose dad was part of the group that wanted him thrown into a fire for worshipping God alone. However, despite that, Prophet Abraham was still respectful to his father. While still acknowledging he was on the wrong path.

So disagreements are fine. As long as they’re respectful.

I have seen some great Muslims with complete clarity on why they chose to be Muslims at an individual life and many of them are now opening up about ancestors.

Dr Imam Umer Ahmed Ilyasi speaking on this matter in a very sensible manner.


I agree with you that if disrespect is the intention we can never build relationships. We must honour the decisions of people.
 
Beautiful

@Suleiman @DeadlyVenom @Cpt. Rishwat

The unique identity of the sub continental Muslims must be acknowledged. In many ways they even show more devotion

Dividing Muslims into nationalities is a pass time for some people. For most of us it doesn't matter. Great religious scholars who have shaped our religion come from all walks of life.
 

@sweep_shot @Suleiman @Bhaijaan

Some racists in the UK are angry at Muslims building a masjid near the lake district and are spreading fake news.

But the beautiful thing is the men building the masjid are indigenous English white converts!

What a powerful statement. Black, white, Brown or Arab we are all brothers under this banner
 
@Suleiman @DeadlyVenom @Cpt. Rishwat

The unique identity of the sub continental Muslims must be acknowledged. In many ways they even show more devotion

as @DeadlyVenom said when you’re Muslim, you’re Muslim. If a Muslim feels inferiority or superiority over another Muslim due to race that’s due to their weakness of faith.

However yes, some of the best scholars of Islam to this day have been non Arab. From present day Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Albania, Africa, and more. My own Quran teacher growing up was from Malaysia. So if a subcontinental Muslim feels inferiority to Arabs they need to familiarize themselves with the words of Prophet Muhammad PBUH on this topic:

“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a White has no superiority over a Black nor a Black has any superiority over a White except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood.”

One of the closest companions of the prophet Muhammad PBUH whose name was Salman Al Farisi (May Allah be pleased with him). He was from Persia, which was majority Zorastrian at that time, and so was he early on in his life. Yet during war time he didn’t hesitate to fight against the Persians alongside the Muslims because our identity is by faith first above everything. And the Prophet PBUH himself said that “Salman is from my family” even though they were from 2 completely different races.

P.S He is the primary reason a lot of Muslims give their sons the name Salman. Very interesting life he led from fire worshipper, to Christianity before the Prophethood of Prophet Muhammad PBUH, and then once he saw the signs in the Bible and the priests used to talk about regarding the final messenger, then finally to Islam when prophethood was given. 😊
 

@sweep_shot @Suleiman @Bhaijaan

Some racists in the UK are angry at Muslims building a masjid near the lake district and are spreading fake news.

But the beautiful thing is the men building the masjid are indigenous English white converts!

What a powerful statement. Black, white, Brown or Arab we are all brothers under this banner
Subhan Allah. May Allah bless them. All the other ajar of any and all worshippers going to that mosque will go to them too now. Crazy to imagine.
 

@sweep_shot @Suleiman @Bhaijaan

Some racists in the UK are angry at Muslims building a masjid near the lake district and are spreading fake news.

But the beautiful thing is the men building the masjid are indigenous English white converts!

What a powerful statement. Black, white, Brown or Arab we are all brothers under this banner

Ma sha Allah.

Indeed. We are all brothers regardless of race.
 
Dividing Muslims into nationalities is a pass time for some people. For most of us it doesn't matter. Great religious scholars who have shaped our religion come from all walks of life.

Agree.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, "O people, verily your Lord is One and your father is one. Verily there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a red man over a black man, or of a black man over a red man, except in terms of taqwa (piety)." (reference: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/182686/is-the-arab-muslim-better-than-the-non-arab-muslim).
 
Back
Top