Actually that thought is a part and parcel of trading communities like bohras, marwaris, sindhis etc where occupations are traditionally hereditary. The idea is to get married and produce children quite early so that the son gets old enough to take over the business/shop when you are nearing your retirement but are still energetic enough to teach him the tricks of the trade. This ensures a smooth transition.Originally posted by jamanpasand:
One of the advantages of early marriage is that your Children become adult while you still are below fifty. This keeps the generation gap to a minimum and you have very open communication with them.
marriage
Re: marriage
Re: marriage
My "mature" friend, I agree with you when you pit marriage against free sex since the former is paid sex - a legalised prostitution. See what these "rational and progressive thinkers" have to say :Originally posted by mature:
reading the posts of tahir and kalim who advocate free sex and are against marriage its seems he is being proven right by the forward and rational progressive thinkers
Marriage is for women the commonest mode of livelihood, and the total amount of undesired sex endured by women is probably greater in marriage than in prostitution. --Bertrand Russell
What is marriage but prostitution to one man instead of many? -- Angela Carter
Marriage is a bribe to make a housekeeper think she's a householder. -- Thornton Wilder
It is obvious that rationality has been utterly lost in modern marriage: which is no objection to marriage, however, but rather to modernity. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
In marriage, a man becomes slack and selfish, and undergoes a fatty degeneration of his moral being. -- Robert Louis Stevenson
Love is moral even without legal marriage, but marriage is immoral without love. -- Ellen Key
Books and marriage go ill together. -- Molière [Jean Baptiste Poquelin]
God invented concubinage, Satan marriage. -- Francis Picabia
Re: marriage
Human being is referred as ashraful maqhlukat in the holy quran.
The reason is we got brains which can think and analyse.
Marriage is a sunnat from our beloved prophet(PBUH).
Also the prophet(PBUH) encouraged early marriages to discourage adultery.
To deny all these would amount to challenge our own faith towards Islaam , quran and the prophet.
Imagine if marriage wouldnt had existed...would there have been a difference between humans and dogs.
The europian countries are slowly realising the impact they are suffering from negative birth rate and so some of them like UK and Germany now encourage marriage like they never did before.
The reason is we got brains which can think and analyse.
Marriage is a sunnat from our beloved prophet(PBUH).
Also the prophet(PBUH) encouraged early marriages to discourage adultery.
To deny all these would amount to challenge our own faith towards Islaam , quran and the prophet.
Imagine if marriage wouldnt had existed...would there have been a difference between humans and dogs.
The europian countries are slowly realising the impact they are suffering from negative birth rate and so some of them like UK and Germany now encourage marriage like they never did before.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
Wow. Now we have reached to a level of Free Sex.
What would be next Same Sex?
And then a generation of Bastards and Beasts!!!!!
What would be next Same Sex?
And then a generation of Bastards and Beasts!!!!!
Re: marriage
I wished we had...we are still stuck on paid sex resultig in "legalised bastards"Originally posted by jamanpasand:
Wow. Now we have reached to a level of Free Sex.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
I thought bastards are always illegitimate.
Sorry, I didn’t know that you could make it legal by making payment.
What a great way of converting Black into White !!!!!
Sorry, I didn’t know that you could make it legal by making payment.
What a great way of converting Black into White !!!!!
Re: marriage
Janampasand,
It is not your fault that you think bastards are "always illegitimate". This is what the prevailing morality dictates. Marriage, morality, legitimate/illegitimate are all human inventions. Left to Nature, there would be none of this nonsense. It's God - another human invention - that came in spoiled things for everybody. Sex is a natural and necessary activity. Nature intended it to be free, and I might add, frequent. Technically the function of sex is procreation but humans, such as they are, discovered right off the bat that there is also pleasure in it. So they indulged in it freely for thousands of years, then men discovered that women are having too much fun, and also that they could never be sure who their children are. As a result came marriage and morality to confine the women to monogamy, while men retained the right to sow wild oats wherever their lust and libido would take them. Example: Four wives plus concubines are allowed for Muslim men, while Muslim women must cover up head-to-toe. If this sounds unfair, oppressive, patriarchal, then well it is.
One could argue that marriage and such are intended to bring order and sanity to what otherwise would be a chaotic state of affairs . Granted, but the point is, order for whose benefit? Who assumes the right and authority to legislate rule/law, invent religions. Myths and divine sanction so as there be order. Look at history and you will know that it's men - powerful and rich men. The world and values you see around you, the way things are ordered and arranged, the reason why you would call someone a bastard or not is all the result - to a great extent - of rich and powerful men's intentions. It is their handiwork. And people like you, me and the majority of us play into their hands. We all are human beings. That's what matters. Bastard is a category to which Nature is completely indifferent. And that's what that should matter.
It is not your fault that you think bastards are "always illegitimate". This is what the prevailing morality dictates. Marriage, morality, legitimate/illegitimate are all human inventions. Left to Nature, there would be none of this nonsense. It's God - another human invention - that came in spoiled things for everybody. Sex is a natural and necessary activity. Nature intended it to be free, and I might add, frequent. Technically the function of sex is procreation but humans, such as they are, discovered right off the bat that there is also pleasure in it. So they indulged in it freely for thousands of years, then men discovered that women are having too much fun, and also that they could never be sure who their children are. As a result came marriage and morality to confine the women to monogamy, while men retained the right to sow wild oats wherever their lust and libido would take them. Example: Four wives plus concubines are allowed for Muslim men, while Muslim women must cover up head-to-toe. If this sounds unfair, oppressive, patriarchal, then well it is.
One could argue that marriage and such are intended to bring order and sanity to what otherwise would be a chaotic state of affairs . Granted, but the point is, order for whose benefit? Who assumes the right and authority to legislate rule/law, invent religions. Myths and divine sanction so as there be order. Look at history and you will know that it's men - powerful and rich men. The world and values you see around you, the way things are ordered and arranged, the reason why you would call someone a bastard or not is all the result - to a great extent - of rich and powerful men's intentions. It is their handiwork. And people like you, me and the majority of us play into their hands. We all are human beings. That's what matters. Bastard is a category to which Nature is completely indifferent. And that's what that should matter.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
My Dear Friend Hamsafar
Nature without law would be a jungle – a place for animals.
Nature without law would be a jungle – a place for animals.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
Again, the world without fear of God – would be a place where human will kill human to satisfy its hunger.
Re: marriage
Wowwww.. Whats an enlightment !!!!! I am impressed you Humsafar are my man for the Syedna Post (that Engineer is dying anyway) in Asgari community....Hurray a one and only true Imam in Ashari long awaited sect is finally discovered......long live Asgari Bohras!! Asgari Bohra Zindabad....Originally posted by Humsafar:
Janampasand,
It is not your fault that you think bastards are "always illegitimate". This is what the prevailing morality dictates. Marriage, morality, legitimate/illegitimate are all human inventions. Left to Nature, there would be none of this nonsense. It's God - another human invention - that came in spoiled things for everybody. Sex is a natural and necessary activity. Nature intended it to be free, and I might add, frequent. Technically the function of sex is procreation but humans, such as they are, discovered right off the bat that there is also pleasure in it. So they indulged in it freely for thousands of years, then men discovered that women are having too much fun, and also that they could never be sure who their children are. As a result came marriage and morality to confine the women to monogamy, while men retained the right to sow wild oats wherever their lust and libido would take them. Example: Four wives plus concubines are allowed for Muslim men, while Muslim women must cover up head-to-toe. If this sounds unfair, oppressive, patriarchal, then well it is.
One could argue that marriage and such are intended to bring order and sanity to what otherwise would be a chaotic state of affairs . Granted, but the point is, order for whose benefit? Who assumes the right and authority to legislate rule/law, invent religions. Myths and divine sanction so as there be order. Look at history and you will know that it's men - powerful and rich men. The world and values you see around you, the way things are ordered and arranged, the reason why you would call someone a bastard or not is all the result - to a great extent - of rich and powerful men's intentions. It is their handiwork. And people like you, me and the majority of us play into their hands. We all are human beings. That's what matters. Bastard is a category to which Nature is completely indifferent. And that's what that should matter.
Re: marriage
Dear jamanpasand: First, Nature does not impose any laws on anyone. Left to itself, Nature is a wonderful, evolving, ever adapting landscape. Laws have been created by humans and hence they reflect a anthropomorphic bias. These laws need not fossilize, but can, and must, change according to current needs. Thus, it is most natural that human laws themselves should evolve according to changing circumstances. Tyranny and terror results when a community wants to impose outdated and fossilized laws on everyone.
Second, I want to ask you this: do you behave nicely with your friends simply because you fear God's wrath? Do you refrain form murdering your neighbor just because you fear retribution from the deity? If you do, then I must confess that I would be frightened to be anywhere near you. For then I would know that your good behavior is not because of any internal drive to be good or moral, but because you fear punishment. It would then seem that if someone were to take this fear from you, you would turn into a murderous savage. I find such "morality" rather immoral and prefer a morality in which I do good because I have an internal drive to do so.
I submit that a global, secular, humanistic ethics from which morality and law are derived using consensus can maximize human happiness and minimize suffering. Instilling the fear of God into humanity will not work. It has not worked for millennia and it not going to work now. There are numerous philosophers who have developed such ethics. Bertrand Russel, Baruch Spinoza, Socrates, Immanuel Kant, John Rawls, David Hume, the Dalai Lama are some names which come immediately to mind. You may benefit by reading some of these authors.
Second, I want to ask you this: do you behave nicely with your friends simply because you fear God's wrath? Do you refrain form murdering your neighbor just because you fear retribution from the deity? If you do, then I must confess that I would be frightened to be anywhere near you. For then I would know that your good behavior is not because of any internal drive to be good or moral, but because you fear punishment. It would then seem that if someone were to take this fear from you, you would turn into a murderous savage. I find such "morality" rather immoral and prefer a morality in which I do good because I have an internal drive to do so.
I submit that a global, secular, humanistic ethics from which morality and law are derived using consensus can maximize human happiness and minimize suffering. Instilling the fear of God into humanity will not work. It has not worked for millennia and it not going to work now. There are numerous philosophers who have developed such ethics. Bertrand Russel, Baruch Spinoza, Socrates, Immanuel Kant, John Rawls, David Hume, the Dalai Lama are some names which come immediately to mind. You may benefit by reading some of these authors.
-
Average Bohra
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:01 am
Re: marriage
I carry a torch in one hand
And a bucket of water with the other
With these things, I will set fire to Heaven
And put out the flames of Hell
So that no one worship God
Out of fear of Hell
Or greed of Heaven.
~ Rabia al-Adawiyya
And a bucket of water with the other
With these things, I will set fire to Heaven
And put out the flames of Hell
So that no one worship God
Out of fear of Hell
Or greed of Heaven.
~ Rabia al-Adawiyya
Re: marriage
if all your claims are true then even gays and lesbians should be allowed within the progressive bohras,because also that type of sex will be natural according to you guys and marriage should tottaly be banned, so what will that make you and your kids
Re: marriage
Dear Kalim,
Your quote
________________________________________________
Marriage is a human institution and there is no reason why it should not change with changing times.
The issue of sex before marriage is also blown out of proportion. Sex is a normal part of a healthy life and if young people's sexual needs are curbed by outdated and ancient taboos they may manifest themselves in a most unhealthy way.
it is better to be informed of the precautions one needs to take rather than wait till it is too late.
_______________________________________________
Marriage is a human institution - agreed but there are strong reason why it should not change even though we are in 21st century.
Bcoz
1) It is the best ever institution which has evolved in the history of mankind and most widely accepted institution by mankind .
2) It keeps man and a woman in a stable and healthy life satisfying all the natural instincts including sex(majority of marraiges in the world)
Life without marriage would amount to a lonely , depressing and meaningless life.
If you do not agree with this statement , start looking around people who did not marry, who are divorced or people who have lost their spouses.
Do not get convinced with exceptions ( they might be examples left by nature for people to get misled and then judge between right and wrong)
Next your intellectual mind is fighting with early marriages,
I agree with you that very early marriages are not justified , since it might mean a wrong, biased and immature decision no doubt today's world is a very dynamic and fast evolving space.
Today's(at the age of 16/17) intelligent decision might mean tommorow's foolishness.
Marriage at the age of 23(girls) and 27(boys) shud be justifed anywhere on the globe .
Coming to sex before marriage ,
You said that 'sex is a such a natural instinct that it shudnt be curbed by outdated taboos'.
Agreed sex is a natural instinct but imagine if entire 6 billion people(approx) in the world starts satisfying this natural instinct without any rules and limitations,this world would become a mess
This would mean humans would be like street dogs (you must have seen the dog community and the way they do sex)
People wont even care for their own blood relations, siblings etc.
Whether it be 7th century or 21st or 210st century , basic laws of nature cant be challenged.
You reminded me of Osho , he was of the same opinion (he sounded excellent theoretically but practically nothing could be followed from his teachings. He was a failure as a result eventually.
Allah has created a lot of things for us , good and bad , and we are only supposed to follow the ones Islam has ordered us to.
Do not get taken away by these 21st century modernism. Try and understand the other disastrous part of it.
Bro Tahir I strongly believe instead of paying so much heed to Bertrand Russell, Angela Carter,Thornton Wilder,Friedrich Nietzsche,Robert Louis Stevenson,Ellen Key,Molière [Jean Baptiste Poquelin],Francis Picabia you shud read quran and prophet Mohammed's(PBUH) hadith.
Just FYI - Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was ranked as the 1st in his book '100 most influential men' in the world history written by Michael H.Hart
Its important for any believer to strive in understanding the psychology of Islam before anything else.
Your quote
________________________________________________
Marriage is a human institution and there is no reason why it should not change with changing times.
The issue of sex before marriage is also blown out of proportion. Sex is a normal part of a healthy life and if young people's sexual needs are curbed by outdated and ancient taboos they may manifest themselves in a most unhealthy way.
it is better to be informed of the precautions one needs to take rather than wait till it is too late.
_______________________________________________
Marriage is a human institution - agreed but there are strong reason why it should not change even though we are in 21st century.
Bcoz
1) It is the best ever institution which has evolved in the history of mankind and most widely accepted institution by mankind .
2) It keeps man and a woman in a stable and healthy life satisfying all the natural instincts including sex(majority of marraiges in the world)
Life without marriage would amount to a lonely , depressing and meaningless life.
If you do not agree with this statement , start looking around people who did not marry, who are divorced or people who have lost their spouses.
Do not get convinced with exceptions ( they might be examples left by nature for people to get misled and then judge between right and wrong)
Next your intellectual mind is fighting with early marriages,
I agree with you that very early marriages are not justified , since it might mean a wrong, biased and immature decision no doubt today's world is a very dynamic and fast evolving space.
Today's(at the age of 16/17) intelligent decision might mean tommorow's foolishness.
Marriage at the age of 23(girls) and 27(boys) shud be justifed anywhere on the globe .
Coming to sex before marriage ,
You said that 'sex is a such a natural instinct that it shudnt be curbed by outdated taboos'.
Agreed sex is a natural instinct but imagine if entire 6 billion people(approx) in the world starts satisfying this natural instinct without any rules and limitations,this world would become a mess
This would mean humans would be like street dogs (you must have seen the dog community and the way they do sex)
People wont even care for their own blood relations, siblings etc.
Whether it be 7th century or 21st or 210st century , basic laws of nature cant be challenged.
You reminded me of Osho , he was of the same opinion (he sounded excellent theoretically but practically nothing could be followed from his teachings. He was a failure as a result eventually.
Allah has created a lot of things for us , good and bad , and we are only supposed to follow the ones Islam has ordered us to.
Do not get taken away by these 21st century modernism. Try and understand the other disastrous part of it.
Bro Tahir I strongly believe instead of paying so much heed to Bertrand Russell, Angela Carter,Thornton Wilder,Friedrich Nietzsche,Robert Louis Stevenson,Ellen Key,Molière [Jean Baptiste Poquelin],Francis Picabia you shud read quran and prophet Mohammed's(PBUH) hadith.
Just FYI - Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was ranked as the 1st in his book '100 most influential men' in the world history written by Michael H.Hart
Its important for any believer to strive in understanding the psychology of Islam before anything else.
Re: marriage
brother Kalim,
Now that I think about it, I think I am more scared of you than I am of any God fearing person.
Your morals are dictated by you and by no higher authority. Even if your morals had been dictated by your parents, it would've been ok to an extent.
We already know that you think it is ok to have sex outside marriage. You think it is ok to have children outside of marriage. You think it is ok for men to leave women to take care of their children alone (single mothers). Who knows what will come next? Wife swapping? But wait, you discarded marriage already so that is one moral we won't have to worry about.
How about killing girl infants? or raping young boys? These were norms in societies of yester years until religion banned them.
Yeah, I don't hink I am going to leave any female members of my family anywhere close to you.
Now that I think about it, I think I am more scared of you than I am of any God fearing person.
Your morals are dictated by you and by no higher authority. Even if your morals had been dictated by your parents, it would've been ok to an extent.
We already know that you think it is ok to have sex outside marriage. You think it is ok to have children outside of marriage. You think it is ok for men to leave women to take care of their children alone (single mothers). Who knows what will come next? Wife swapping? But wait, you discarded marriage already so that is one moral we won't have to worry about.
How about killing girl infants? or raping young boys? These were norms in societies of yester years until religion banned them.
Yeah, I don't hink I am going to leave any female members of my family anywhere close to you.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
Quote from Kalim
Second, I want to ask you this: do you behave nicely with your friends simply because you fear God's wrath? Do you refrain form murdering your neighbor just because you fear retribution from the deity? If you do, then I must confess that I would be frightened to be anywhere near you. For then I would know that your good behavior is not because of any internal drive to be good or moral, but because you fear punishment. It would then seem that if someone were to take this fear from you, you would turn into a murderous savage. I find such "morality" rather immoral and prefer a morality in which I do good because I have an internal drive to do so.
Unquote
I a perfect happy scenario you will be my friend and I will be yours.
But what happens when the interest clashes? Don’t your hear friend killed friend, brother killed brother and so on. Fear of unknown ( God or whatever one believes )
Keep a check on your savage.
Again, why we complain on rich and powerful making laws. Do weak and poor have the capability of making those ?
For whom protection the laws are made for ? Yes, for the weak because powerful have the capability of defending themselves.
Infact one should be grateful to rich and powerful. While discussing this topic, the reformist have only kothar’s power in perspective.
Second, I want to ask you this: do you behave nicely with your friends simply because you fear God's wrath? Do you refrain form murdering your neighbor just because you fear retribution from the deity? If you do, then I must confess that I would be frightened to be anywhere near you. For then I would know that your good behavior is not because of any internal drive to be good or moral, but because you fear punishment. It would then seem that if someone were to take this fear from you, you would turn into a murderous savage. I find such "morality" rather immoral and prefer a morality in which I do good because I have an internal drive to do so.
Unquote
I a perfect happy scenario you will be my friend and I will be yours.
But what happens when the interest clashes? Don’t your hear friend killed friend, brother killed brother and so on. Fear of unknown ( God or whatever one believes )
Keep a check on your savage.
Again, why we complain on rich and powerful making laws. Do weak and poor have the capability of making those ?
For whom protection the laws are made for ? Yes, for the weak because powerful have the capability of defending themselves.
Infact one should be grateful to rich and powerful. While discussing this topic, the reformist have only kothar’s power in perspective.
-
jamanpasand
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 4:01 am
Re: marriage
In my opinion, power is not bad but ultimate power is bad.
That is why balance of power is the best bet.
That is why balance of power is the best bet.
Re: marriage
Bro Zeal,Originally posted by Zeal:
Bro Tahir I strongly believe instead of paying so much heed to Bertrand Russell, Angela Carter,Thornton Wilder,Friedrich Nietzsche,Robert Louis Stevenson,Ellen Key,Molière [Jean Baptiste Poquelin],Francis Picabia you shud read quran and prophet Mohammed's(PBUH) hadith.
Just FYI - Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was ranked as the 1st in his book '100 most influential men' in the world history written by Michael H.Hart
It is amazing that you prefer to heed to a relatively obscure person like Michael H. Hart over the likes of Russel, Nietzche and Angela Carter together. Also, the list which you mention is about the most "influential" and not the most "intellectual" people.
Re: marriage
Scared,Originally posted by scared:
Yeah, I don't hink I am going to leave any female members of my family anywhere close to you.
Can you confidently leave the female members of your family close to any God fearing person in the world? For instance, there are many God fearing Arabs who come down to India hunting for lolitas every year. Also, most of the serial killers in the west so far have been God fearing. The last time I checked, even George Bush is a God fearing Christian.
Given a choice, I would leave my 12 year old sister close to Kalim rather than an Arab tourist.
Re: marriage
I forgot to mention an illustrious utility of marriage as demonstrated by the most God fearing people of the world. Many sex tourists from middle east marry teenage girls from poor families (usually hyderabad) in lieu of money to the girls' father. They then spent several nights with her in a hotel or a rented house and fly away to their home country giving her divorce. This way they are assured that they aren't doing anything outside the bounds of religion.
Re: marriage
Gentlepeople: First, I do not advocate abolition of marriage, but the right of a state to dictate particular concepts of marriage and its related morality on its citizens. Second, infanticide, pedophilia were very common among religious people. It was not religion which "banned" them but a better, rational understanding of the human condition. Second, I am not advocating sex outside marriage but am questioning the need for abstinence before. Please do read my posts more carefully.
Again, Br. scared seems to think that one can be genuinely good only if his morality comes from some "higher authority". Such a morality has no value for it does not stem from a genuine drive to be good but a fear of retribution if one is not. Humans have been conditioned for millennia to fear authority and to derive their morality from this fear. Hence it is not surprising that when one proposes to look for a "inner moral yardstick" one feels apprehensive. This apprehension, however, vanishes when one discovers that there are people who have developed comprehensive systems of morality and law without any basis in fear. The names I mentioned in my previous post are some of these and you may profit from reading some of their works. Further, many Sufis transformed the fear of God into an intense love for him, sometimes bordering on a erotic passion.
There is one thing I must clarify, however: I do not propose the abolition of deterrents against crime. I do, however, propose that the definition of crime must be determined from the human condition and not from what some deity supposedly wants us to do. Pedophilia is a crime so is infanticide, but sex between consenting adults is not. Neither is single mothers having a family. Expressing your self freely is not crime but repressing speech for sake of religious or social taboo is.
I agree that most people are not ready to accept a humanistic (self driven) morality, but this is simply a result of centuries of conditioning. However, if the human race is to survive the internecine religion-driven hatred of these times then humanism seems to be the only option. Humanism based on a basic respect for humans as humans and not as Muslims, Hindus, Jews or on nationalism is, I agree, a very difficult paradigm shift for most people. But such a shift must be made if we are to leave our children with a world less full of strife than we find ourselves in.
Humanism can be summarized by this line: "Not that I love God less, but that I love humans more." ("Not that I lov'd Caesar less, but that I lov'd Rome more." Brutus in Julius Caesar (III, ii, 22) on explaining why he killed Caesar)
Anyway, this is my last contribution on this subject. Most of these ideas have been worked out by many people before and I can only urge you to learn more from them.
Again, Br. scared seems to think that one can be genuinely good only if his morality comes from some "higher authority". Such a morality has no value for it does not stem from a genuine drive to be good but a fear of retribution if one is not. Humans have been conditioned for millennia to fear authority and to derive their morality from this fear. Hence it is not surprising that when one proposes to look for a "inner moral yardstick" one feels apprehensive. This apprehension, however, vanishes when one discovers that there are people who have developed comprehensive systems of morality and law without any basis in fear. The names I mentioned in my previous post are some of these and you may profit from reading some of their works. Further, many Sufis transformed the fear of God into an intense love for him, sometimes bordering on a erotic passion.
There is one thing I must clarify, however: I do not propose the abolition of deterrents against crime. I do, however, propose that the definition of crime must be determined from the human condition and not from what some deity supposedly wants us to do. Pedophilia is a crime so is infanticide, but sex between consenting adults is not. Neither is single mothers having a family. Expressing your self freely is not crime but repressing speech for sake of religious or social taboo is.
I agree that most people are not ready to accept a humanistic (self driven) morality, but this is simply a result of centuries of conditioning. However, if the human race is to survive the internecine religion-driven hatred of these times then humanism seems to be the only option. Humanism based on a basic respect for humans as humans and not as Muslims, Hindus, Jews or on nationalism is, I agree, a very difficult paradigm shift for most people. But such a shift must be made if we are to leave our children with a world less full of strife than we find ourselves in.
Humanism can be summarized by this line: "Not that I love God less, but that I love humans more." ("Not that I lov'd Caesar less, but that I lov'd Rome more." Brutus in Julius Caesar (III, ii, 22) on explaining why he killed Caesar)
Anyway, this is my last contribution on this subject. Most of these ideas have been worked out by many people before and I can only urge you to learn more from them.
Re: marriage
Dear brother tahir,
These arabs that you describe are not God fearing at all. These are the people who have decided themselves about what is moral and what is not just like brother kalim.
Islam does not allow Arabs to go lolita hunting in India. They have decided that it is morally ok for them to do so.
These arabs that you describe are not God fearing at all. These are the people who have decided themselves about what is moral and what is not just like brother kalim.
Islam does not allow Arabs to go lolita hunting in India. They have decided that it is morally ok for them to do so.
Re: marriage
brother tahir,
I am sorry for not having read your second post. Again what I said in my previous post applies there too. There is no concept of temporary marriages in Islam to satisfy your lust.
These arabs have discovered their own moralities. Just because a person is an arab, it does not mean that he is a true muslim too.
I am sure nobody has seen such an arab go into a mosque.
This sure is an example of a person who does not fear God.
I am sorry for not having read your second post. Again what I said in my previous post applies there too. There is no concept of temporary marriages in Islam to satisfy your lust.
These arabs have discovered their own moralities. Just because a person is an arab, it does not mean that he is a true muslim too.
I am sure nobody has seen such an arab go into a mosque.
This sure is an example of a person who does not fear God.
-
Average Bohra
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:01 am
Re: marriage
Scared Anajmi,
If these Arabs are not God fearing true muslims, the Bohras are not, the Aga Khanis are not, then exactly who is representing this splintered and misrepresented religion of peace ? Does one assume and accept the reality that this religion is not misrepresented and this is Islam ? Or has the Quran reduced Muslims simply to the ritualistic adherence to the Five Pillars and everyhing else goes ? Or is it that the no one understands it so there are no "true Muslims" ?
If these Arabs are not God fearing true muslims, the Bohras are not, the Aga Khanis are not, then exactly who is representing this splintered and misrepresented religion of peace ? Does one assume and accept the reality that this religion is not misrepresented and this is Islam ? Or has the Quran reduced Muslims simply to the ritualistic adherence to the Five Pillars and everyhing else goes ? Or is it that the no one understands it so there are no "true Muslims" ?
Re: marriage
dear brother Average Bohra,
True Muslims do not have to belong to any particular sect. An arab may be a true muslim, a bohra may be a true muslim, even an aga khani may be a true muslim.
I am sure you haven't seen every arab come down to india for lolita hunting or for temporary marriages. There are bad people in every sect. Unfortunately, as we see even on this board, Islam has a high percentage (mind not higher, but high) of them.
True Muslims do not have to belong to any particular sect. An arab may be a true muslim, a bohra may be a true muslim, even an aga khani may be a true muslim.
I am sure you haven't seen every arab come down to india for lolita hunting or for temporary marriages. There are bad people in every sect. Unfortunately, as we see even on this board, Islam has a high percentage (mind not higher, but high) of them.
Re: marriage
By the way, the three sects that you mentioned, constitute less than 25% of the muslim population worldwide.
-
Average Bohra
- Posts: 924
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:01 am
Re: marriage
Anajmi,
Last I checked, the Arabs weren't a "sect", just primarily Wahabis. If you add Sunnis & the rest of the Shiah sects into the mix, the logic still holds and the percentage is close to 100. Who represents true Islam ?
Every Arab is not lolita hunting, every American doesn't support the war, every Jew doesn't support the Palestinian oppression, all of us against forced and arranged marriages of children or those who accept pre-marital sex do not "have children outside of marriage", or "leave women to take care of their children alone ", condone "wife swapping", or "rape young boys".
Incidentally, pedophilia is not banned by Islam or Christianity however, it is against the law in the West, but a common practice in Muslim countries. The same can be said for leaving women alone to take care of children. There are no enforceable child support laws in Muslim countries.
Last I checked, the Arabs weren't a "sect", just primarily Wahabis. If you add Sunnis & the rest of the Shiah sects into the mix, the logic still holds and the percentage is close to 100. Who represents true Islam ?
Every Arab is not lolita hunting, every American doesn't support the war, every Jew doesn't support the Palestinian oppression, all of us against forced and arranged marriages of children or those who accept pre-marital sex do not "have children outside of marriage", or "leave women to take care of their children alone ", condone "wife swapping", or "rape young boys".
Incidentally, pedophilia is not banned by Islam or Christianity however, it is against the law in the West, but a common practice in Muslim countries. The same can be said for leaving women alone to take care of children. There are no enforceable child support laws in Muslim countries.
Re: marriage
What can I say? If you consider every muslim to be as corrupt as one or two that you may know, the percentage who are corrupt would be close to 100 now wouldn't it?If you add Sunnis & the rest of the Shiah sects into the mix, the logic still holds and the percentage is close to 100. Who represents true Islam ?
I don't think I can argue with that logic.
Re: marriage
And I am also sure that every true muslim for you is Anajmi. Anajmi must definitely be proud.
Re: marriage
Br. scared,Islam does not allow Arabs to go lolita hunting in India. They have decided that it is morally ok for them to do so
If you argue with any of those arabs, they'll convince you that they aren't doing anything unislamic. Islam doesnt prohibit marrying a 15 year old nor does it specify the minimum number of days for which you can marry her. Infact, those arabs could accuse you of insulting the prophet if you try to preach them what they are doing is wrong !
So finally it is our own conscience and inner drive to be good, as kalim puts it, which can guide us to right conduct according to the place and time.