Muslims VS Muslims

[Vigno]

Asalamu Alekum

We have previously spoken much about the hatred, mistreatment and ignorance that many westerns or non muslims have towards muslims, but what about the hatred that muslims have for muslims?

Plainly speaking, Muslims these days have lost their unity, lost love for one another, lost care and feelings that were present at the time of Prophet Muhammed PBUH. How at that time Muslims were one and the bad that happened to one of them, happened to all.

Now when you look at muslims, it is really a pity and I ll give some examples although I know it is clear enough what am aiming at for am sure all do see the same.

In the mosque, you find people praying, you find them sitting in the mosque most of the time and seeking refuge in Allah swt, but they can't even afford to smile, or talk politely to their brothers in the Mosque or outside unless its their friends or so.
Really I have seen this myself, some just don't smile and when I look at their face, I feel like its the end of time.

That is not what Islam is about, real Muslims should have a smile shone on their faces when meeting their brothers and when you look at their faces, you should see the light of Iman in them.
Again, really sad...I leave the mosque and see people wearing their slippers and kicking other slippers off their way carelessly, Subhanah Allah, what would the Prophet PBUH do when he sees this from his Ummah.

Last example, a complaint from the women side of the mosque, women praying Taraweeh are fighting with each other and insulting each other for a place in the mosque since there is hardly any space.

If this is how Muslims are going to keep acting then those who insult Islam are just going to keep doing so and they ll say, "hey look how Muslims act". Lets first change ourselves, and then look forward to changing how people think about us.

 

[Salahudeen]

There is too much division in everything, Muslims' are too busy fighting and arguing with each other about fiqh/aqeedah/ who is on the right path/who is devient and misguided. We'll never accompolish anything if we're not united. We're not even a cause for worry to the non Muslims' because they're mentality is "The Muslims are too busy arguing with themselves to do anything that will harm us" When the Muslims' unite then they will be worried.

I know what you mean about the masjid, people are to shy to give salaam to strangers

 

['Abd Al-Maajid]

...
Again, really sad...I leave the mosque and see people wearing their slippers and kicking other slippers off their way carelessly...

LOL this happens a lot in my mosque also...ummm I must say in every mosque...

 

[Vigno]

LOL this happens a lot in my mosque also...ummm I must say in every mosque...

Sad enough...So brother do as I do, put the slippers together as much as you can, you will get hasanat for this inshallah.
Jazaka Allah khiir

 

[Vigno]

I know what you mean about the masjid, people are to shy to give salaam to strangers

It's not just about being shy, even am shy to do that at times or feel the person will eat me if I do, but its about carelessness, people have no feelings for one another, no smile, no salaam, nothing! Not all of of course, mashallah some people are very nice alhamdulilah, but its just sad when you see the people living in their own world.
Many have the thought that when they come to the mosque, then its time to be on your own and not talk to anyone, that's totally wrong and on no basis.
Believe or not, when I raise my hand to some people, they are so happily surprised that I am offering to shake hands with them, like its something new, subhanah Allah.
But am happy when I see them smile, that's enough for me alhamdulilah.

 

[Grace Seeker]

There is too much division in everything, Muslims' are too busy fighting and arguing with each other about fiqh/aqeedah/ who is on the right path/who is devient and misguided. We'll never accompolish anything if we're not united. We're not even a cause for worry to the non Muslims' because they're mentality is "The Muslims are too busy arguing with themselves to do anything that will harm us" When the Muslims' unite then they will be worried.

I know what you mean about the masjid, people are to shy to give salaam to strangers

Even as a non-Muslim I find it sad to see Muslims (or any other group of people) fighting with each other. But why should non-Muslims be worried about Muslims being united? You seem to imply we have something to fear from a united Ummah.

 

[aadil77]

Even as a non-Muslim I find it sad to see Muslims (or any other group of people) fighting with each other. But why should non-Muslims be worried about Muslims being united? You seem to imply we have something to fear from a united Ummah.

If you think about it in the case of muslim nations and governments, if we were all united like previously in the khilafate, then we'd not have others wagings wars in every other muslim land.

 

[Grace Seeker]

If you think about it in the case of muslim nations and governments, if we were all united like previously in the khilafate, then we'd not have others wagings wars in every other muslim land.

That's not something I would fear, but something I would welcome. In a world where the Ummah was united, I presume (I hope not falsely) that the views of Islamic Society of North America or Free Muslims Coalition and not those of al-Qaeda or the Taliban would be dominate. Surely Anwar El Sadat is a better model for an Islamic political leader than Osama bin Laden. I can see the world being a much better place for Muslims and non-Muslims alike in such circumstances.

 

[أحمد]

That's not something I would fear, but something I would welcome. In a world where the Ummah was united, I presume (I hope not falsely) that the views of Islamic Society of North America or Free Muslims Coalition and not those of al-Qaeda or the Taliban would be dominate. Surely Anwar El Sadat is a better model for an Islamic political leader than Osama bin Laden. I can see the world being a much better place for Muslims and non-Muslims alike in such circumstances.

You may welcome it, but not everyone would.

Islam forbids making, buying, selling or being part of a business associated with Khamr (Alcohol); the same applies for anything Haram. Crimes are dealt with very strictly with the judgement of each person by his own religious law.

A Jewish man and woman who had been brought to be judged for adultery at the time of Rasoolullah :saws1: were stoned to death as was written in their religious scripture.

Riba (Interest) is Haram, and would be non-existent in an Islamic State. This wouldn't demolish the banking system, but would revert it to how it was when started centuries ago by Muslims. Those who live on money made through interest, would have to find honest means of earning instead. This isn't welcome by the capitalist world we live in.

:wa:

 

[Grace Seeker]

But as there is no complusion in religion, why would even a united Ummah try to impose Islamic values and Islamic law on non-Muslims? Wouldn't that be inconsistent with Islam itself? If a united Ummah means that Muslims are going to attempt to impose their way of life on everyone else as well as themselves, then that would be something for non-Muslims to be afraid of, and understandably so.

 

[أحمد]

But as there is no complusion in religion, why would even a united Ummah try to impose Islamic values and Islamic law on non-Muslims? Wouldn't that be inconsistent with Islam itself? If a united Ummah means that Muslims are going to attempt to impose their way of life on everyone else as well as themselves, then that would be something for non-Muslims to be afraid of, and understandably so.

Nowhere did I write about imposing Islamic law or values upon non-Muslims. Islam has a system for life in any situation; for individuals and government. If someone is a Jew; he will be judged by Jewish law, not by Islamic law. If someone is a Christian; he will be judged by Christian law. This is not only justice, but it ensures one doesn't impose their law above the law of the individual being judged.

The problem is; people fail to distinguish between being given freedom, and being restricted to follow a system of law, which allows crimes and evils under the tag of "moderate practice". A poor person takes a bank loan to be put into a position of paying back the loan AND a large sum of Interest, which only keeps accumulating. Where Islam gives freedom from such evil practices; there are people who see this as "imposing Islamic values" and "restricting freedom".

You may welcome it, but not everyone would.

Islam forbids making, buying, selling or being part of a business associated with Khamr (Alcohol); the same applies for anything Haram. Crimes are dealt with very strictly with the judgement of each person by his own religious law.

A Jewish man and woman who had been brought to be judged for adultery at the time of Rasoolullah :saws1: were stoned to death as was written in their religious scripture.

Riba (Interest) is Haram, and would be non-existent in an Islamic State. This wouldn't demolish the banking system, but would revert it to how it was when started centuries ago by Muslims. Those who live on money made through interest, would have to find honest means of earning instead. This isn't welcome by the capitalist world we live in.

:wa:

:wa:

 

[Vigno]

But as there is no complusion in religion, why would even a united Ummah try to impose Islamic values and Islamic law on non-Muslims? Wouldn't that be inconsistent with Islam itself? If a united Ummah means that Muslims are going to attempt to impose their way of life on everyone else as well as themselves, then that would be something for non-Muslims to be afraid of, and understandably so.

Islam does not force anything on anyone, that's how it was and that is how it should always remain. But if one is to live amongst a muslim community then he or she should abide by the rules. At the time of the khilafah, there was peace between muslims and non muslims, fewer poor people coz everyone gave money to the poor, like Ahmed said no interest (makes the rich more rich and the poor more poor and this is forbidden by Islam coz it's not good for us).
In general, anything that is bad for us has been forbidden and so its sad and silly enough that people seek what's bad for them.

A united Ummah would make the rules that are good for mankind available and those that are bad forbidden. So what is to be feared in that? Unless people want to be bad, there is absolutely no fault in that.

 

[أحمد]

You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah . If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient. (3:110)

:wa:

 

[aadil77]

That's not something I would fear, but something I would welcome. In a world where the Ummah was united, I presume (I hope not falsely) that the views of Islamic Society of North America or Free Muslims Coalition and not those of al-Qaeda or the Taliban would be dominate. Surely Anwar El Sadat is a better model for an Islamic political leader than Osama bin Laden. I can see the world being a much better place for Muslims and non-Muslims alike in such circumstances.

what I meant is war-mongering nations such the US would think twice before dropping bombs in our lands - if we were united like in the past

 

[Soulja Girl]

people are to shy to give salaam to strangers

^It's not cuz they're shy.. It's cuz they just don't want to.. Sometimes you say salam so loudly but you still won't get a reply, maybe just a dirty/weird look.. Meh.

:wa:

 

[Vigno]

^It's not cuz they're shy.. It's cuz they just don't want to.. Sometimes you say salam so loudly but you still won't get a reply, maybe just a dirty/weird look.. Meh.

:wa:

EXACTLY!!! That's what I wanted to say.
Jazaki Allah khiir

 

[Grace Seeker]

Nowhere did I write about imposing Islamic law or values upon non-Muslims.

Pardon me, but the very next statement sounds like imposing an Islamic system of jurisprudence on non-Muslims.

Islam has a system for life in any situation; for individuals and government. If someone is a Jew; he will be judged by Jewish law, not by Islamic law. If someone is a Christian; he will be judged by Christian law. This is not only justice, but it ensures one doesn't impose their law above the law of the individual being judged.

It may be that Islam holds this to the way the world should run. It might even make a good logical argument. But why should Isalm have any say whatsoever, even if it makes perfect sense within an Islamic system of thought, with regard to laws for non-Muslims? A united Ummah does not have to automatically mean Sharia law.


I'm not arguing as to whether Islamic law is better or worse than other laws. I'm simply saying that I have no fear of a united Ummah unless it is the position of that Ummah to impose their values on people outside of it. What I saw you suggesting was that

Crimes are dealt with very strictly with the judgement of each person by his own religious law.

The way I read this statement, it seemed to me you were implying that somehow when Muslims unite that this will be the way that all crimes are dealt with. And I do call that a decision to impose someone else's religious values on me.


Just as no Muslim would accept the interpretation of the Islamic jurisprudence by a non-Muslim over that of Muslim scholars, nor should any member of the Ummah deem themselves capable of interpreting another religions text sufficiently to impose law or consequence of law derived from those text on them.


But beyond that, let us say that Muslims unite and quit fighting among themselves. And let us say that in those countries where Muslims significantly outnumber non-Muslims they decide to implement Sharia law as the law of the land. Again, why should this be something that non-Muslims (at least in other countries) are afraid of? Surely your statements above, such as,

Riba (Interest) is Haram, and would be non-existent in an Islamic State. This wouldn't demolish the banking system, but would revert it to how it was when started centuries ago by Muslims. Those who live on money made through interest, would have to find honest means of earning instead. This isn't welcome by the capitalist world we live in.

are not intended to imply that the Ummah would seek to impose those same laws in non-Islamic states.


Couldn't the Ummah be satisfied with a situation in which there existed a world in which there were different laws in different countries as determined by those who actually lived within those countries? Then if Mulsims were united and were of the character of those I cited above, in those countries in which they represented the majority they may indeed establish laws in accord with Islamic values, but their rule would still protect the minority populations who lived among them. Of that I don't have any fear. I only fear when it seems you suggest that a united Ummah would push for more than that, and try to make it the same law which they themselves practice be the law of the land everywhere. That is going beyond Muslims being united; to me that does imply complusion.

 

[Grace Seeker]

what I meant is war-mongering nations such the US would think twice before dropping bombs in our lands - if we were united like in the past

Ah, so you meant politically and militarily united, not united in the sense of being of one mind about the way to practice Islam? You're probably right. No nation goes against another (even if they think they are right to do so) without first consider the consequences and whether they have the strength to do so. A more united Islam in the sense you describe would give those who were going to act pause to consider those actions twice before proceeding, lest they incur wrath in response.

My hope would be that a united Islam would return to following the genuine teachings of Islam, of that I have no fears. I believe that a true return by all Muslims to the genuine teachings of Islam would also mean divesting itself and the repudiation of those who claim to act "in defense of Islam" but in fact seem to hold mis-shapen views and values that are not truly Islamic. I'm here specifically thinking of those groups within the Taliban who now threaten to attack aid workers helping to bring relief to those affected by the flooding in Pakistan.

 

[Rhubarb Tart]

You may welcome it, but not everyone would.

Islam forbids making, buying, selling or being part of a business associated with Khamr (Alcohol); the same applies for anything Haram. Crimes are dealt with very strictly with the judgement of each person by his own religious law.

A Jewish man and woman who had been brought to be judged for adultery at the time of Rasoolullah :saws1: were stoned to death as was written in their religious scripture.

Riba (Interest) is Haram, and would be non-existent in an Islamic State. This wouldn't demolish the banking system, but would revert it to how it was when started centuries ago by Muslims. Those who live on money made through interest, would have to find honest means of earning instead. This isn't welcome by the capitalist world we live in.

:wa:

I thought they would judge themselves and Muslims would have no involvement with non Muslims. Basically a non Muslims deals with a non Muslims. And Muslims deal with Muslims?

How would one deal with an atheist then? Or other religions that don’t have a set of their own rules?

I thought non Muslims would be given the chance to have their own little state. Otherwise it could seem complicated to deal all types of non Muslims which some do not have their own rulings (Atheism etc).

Btw Jews are different and there are different types so even they wouldn’t have one rule. So Islamic state (according to you and have little knowledge on) would put them on same category even though they are different and practice their religion differently.

Allah (swt) knows best

 

[aadil77]

Ah, so you meant politically and militarily united, not united in the sense of being of one mind about the way to practice Islam? You're probably right. No nation goes against another (even if they think they are right to do so) without first consider the consequences and whether they have the strength to do so. A more united Islam in the sense you describe would give those who were going to act pause to consider those actions twice before proceeding, lest they incur wrath in response.

My hope would be that a united Islam would return to following the genuine teachings of Islam, of that I have no fears. I believe that a true return by all Muslims to the genuine teachings of Islam would also mean divesting itself and the repudiation of those who claim to act "in defense of Islam" but in fact seem to hold mis-shapen views and values that are not truly Islamic. I'm here specifically thinking of those groups within the Taliban who now threaten to attack aid workers helping to bring relief to those affected by the flooding in Pakistan.

Yep it would become one nation, same economy, same miltary, same one ruler - but unfortunately nationalism, greed, weak faith and disobeying the Al-Mighty will never allow that to happen again

no one should be attacking foreign aid workers, but if any are caught proselytising the decision to deport or execute them lies with ruler