[cheetahs56]

Originally Posted by Perseveranze
I'm sure it is, keep being in denial though.

How am I in denial. I pointed out to you, that this translation of "push" maks no sense in the context of pain that Aeysha suffered as a result of it. Simply pushing somebody doesn't cause them pain as explained. Hitting somebody does. So please don't accuse others of being in denial, when you are the one that cannot respond to rational explanations.

Originally Posted by Perseveranze

And yet another correction, the hadith transmission happened after the Prophet(pbuh) passed away.

Yes, but it was still a retrospective collection of things that he is said to have said and accounts and commentaries of his life in the form of quotations.

So if you are going to say it isn't an issue of chronology, then either Aeysha was lying or there is a contradiction in the Islamic scriptures. The chronology possibility was actually the most suitable for you (but you threw it out), since it doesn't interfere with the internal consistency of Islam, nor does is question the virtuous of the Sahabah. Sure it may seem dodgy to some people whose minds are infested with Western corruptions, but you were quite happy to accept the fact that Mohammad pushed his penis inside a 9 year old child, so it can't be that difficult to accept that he hit one of his wives.

Originally Posted by Perseveranze

Also you missed this part;

Btw this refutation wasn't for you, it was for others who have this misconception. Islamaphobes usually can't accept facts.

Sorry, didn't know that needed a response. You should remember that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones (second time I have written this for you, the earlier one was your criticism of others' spelling and grammar, when yours is not without error), since you have a terrible habit of missing other people's posts.

The hadith was AFTER the passing of Muhammed (SAW), so that TOTALLY disproves you're point you ignorant fool. It is better to not say anything and appear dumb, than to open you're mouth and remove all doubt.

Don't bother replying as well.

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC ChaCha A810e

[ads22uk]

The OP is such an idiot

[Alexok]

(Original post by Dandaman9999)
There is an error. But what does Islam have to do with it? Apart from yelling Allahu Akbar for no reason this is just some stupid person who has committed murder... Nothing to do with Islam.

Unless something in the article says something different because I'm just saying this by looking at your title.

What normal sain person would chop of the head of another human being? Religion and other mental disorders can quite easily make people believe doing these crazy things are good. It obviously does have something to do with his beliefs

[Alexok]

Any belief or superstition that takes control of whole entire life will inevitably result in a percentage of the population doing crazy things and believing its good. Its not that complicated, we can keep saying that its not the religion bla bla bla. But just cut the crap

[Alexok]

It doesn't matter what the quran or bible "actually means" ,its about what in REALITY WHAT HAPPENS

[Dandaman9999]

(Original post by Alexok)
What normal sain person would chop of the head of another human being? Religion and other mental disorders can quite easily make people believe doing these crazy things are good. It obviously does have something to do with his beliefs

I think it's more towards the insane part... That and he's completely misinterpreted what his religion is trying to teach him. That's how extremists are created. Like you said, what normal person will ever do this? I agree, his beliefs are ridiculous BUT I can guarantee you that the majority of the people of the same religion he claims he s part of do not have his beliefs. He is a ridiculously small minority.

[xXxiKillxXx]

(Original post by ExMuslim)
I wonder what their argument was about? Had the wife said she would leave him and then he killed her, that would be a crime of passion and not something motivated by Islam. But had she said she was becoming an agnostic or no longer going to wear hijab in public, then her death would probably be justifiable in the eyes of many Muslims, even laudable. Judging from the fact he decapitated her, a gruesome method of murder favored by Islamic crazies, and then proceeded to do the Allah is great chant, then I suspect the motivation to be something closer to the latter.

Well he was drunk, so he was a very good Muslim wasn't he? /Thread

[SaharaDesert]

Are we still talking about this?
The man had a mental illness.

Here's some other crazy and immoral things mentally ill people do:
Mentally ill man kills his wife and 5 children
Mentally ill man kills his dad
Btw, in this story, the man claims he was writing a book about Greek gods.
So, I guess this means, believing in greek gods = killing father?

[S-man10]

Please avoid going going off-topic here

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Simply pushing removes evil/bad thoughts, that's why the Prophet(pbuh) did it to so many people. I am guessing this part didn't quite get your comprehension.

The context of the incident is quite obviously not a spiritual push, and the fact that is caused her pain should be quite enough for anybody to realise that this was a physical strike

(Original post by Perseveranze)
So now your going to say Aisha(ra) was a liar, or that there's a contradiction in Sahih hadiths.

Well if you are going to throw out the possibility of time frame chronology being an explanation for the variable accounts (as I said, this was the best option to you), then it leads the logical conclusion that either Aeshya is lying, or there is a contradiction in the Islamic scriptures (either from Aeysha lying or from deficient collection methodology of Hadiths, or from human error). It's called logic.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
First one is desperation, typical Islamaphobe, when they can't think of an excuse, just say that the hadith narrator is a liar. I guess that means you can't accept any hadiths or make any conclusions based on them.

These were all human being, with all the faults that human beings possess. Even it is acknowledged that prophets are not free of sin, and certainly not the sahabah. So do you concede that it is possible that Aeysha could tell a lie? (irrespective of this issue we are discussing).

The hadiths are a source of information about Mohammad. As with any historical source, they are fallible from a secular perspective, which means there is variable reliability. Obviously this applies to to the Islamic understanding of reliability too, but the Islamic understanding is a rigid dogma ("science of the hadith"), whereas reliability from a secular perspective is much more nuanced. So any Hadith that is negative about Mohammad is unlikely to be suffering from narrator bias (a form of reliability) since there would be strong disincentive not to report these things. Obviously, that does not mean it is reliable, because there are many other facets to reliability, not just narrator bias. All hadiths that are positive about Mohammad have to be assessed with caution because of the obvious narrator bias of the sahabah to convey Mohammad's character positively. Hope that helps you understand.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Second one is claiming that the Sahih hadith is in contradiction (I lol'd), when you don't understand Arabic, or hadith sciences or anything regarding Islam for that matter.

Anybody can make these judgments. This smokescreen of Arabic fluency is just a deflection, often raised by Muslims when they have been backed into a corner. If Arabic is required to fully appraise Islam as you seem to say, then Islam is not a universal religion, and a religion just for Arabs. I imagine though, that is Arabic requirement is only applied selectively.

Are you fluent in Arabic?

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Let's not forget, you make statements like; "Go to Richard Dawkins for Advice on religion, but go to the Priest on advice on Biology" and always attempt to use genetic fallacies.

I would greatly value if you would actually identify this post in which you claim I wrote this, then we can put this reccurant slander to rest (because basically, I didn't say this, nor anything resembling it). I know facts and accuracy are not your thing, but when it leads to recurrent slander, it should be a wake up call to address this issue.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Nope, because it's true. You keep making desperation assumptions and further embarrassing yourself.

It's not a desperate assumption, it was a lifeline for you. You threw it out, instead preferring to believe that the Hadiths contradict eachother and that Aeysha was a liar. Nothing desperate or embarrassing on my part.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
The narrator was Urwah(ra) who collected a whole host of narrations from Aisha(ra) during the latter stages of her life.

Okay, so she was either lying, or the Hadiths contradict eachother. Simple.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Ok, you're not intellectual enough to have a convo with me. I don't mean this to sound arrogant, but you are just a waste of time. I think people can see this judging by most of your posts. With my last response, thought I'd just let you know.

It was a statement of fact pure and simple. Issues such as Aeysha's age of marriage, are very important in terms of debating with Muslims, because it is one of the issues in Islam (along with things such as the rights of a husband to beat his wife, a merciful God eternally torturing people in Hell, predestination) that are essentially faith-breakers when it comes to Muslims. Obviously some Muslims deny the facts (you're happy to accept the issue of Aeysha's age, but not the issue of Mohammad hitting her for example), and some try and realign values to make it seem okay and legitimate in a form of self-deception. For those that engage in such self deception, it is very important to reiterate in plain and graphic terms the issue at hand, so they cannot hide behind the fluffy facades that they construct for themselves in a vain attempt to preserve their faith.

You can run away from this issue by just making nonsensical statements about me, and you are free to do so, nobody can stop you. However, no matter what others may say, you are not a bad, insincere or irrational person, it is just you have, with good intention, bought into an ideology that you feel is logical (even though it is only internally logical, and based on circular arguments, and it actually easily refutable), and you are too filled with pride at this moment in time to consider it's fallacy. But you're clearly young, and have plenty of time to find your way, and I doubt in the future it will be the same as what you subscribe to now.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Your basically Indiana, except indiana makes a lot of grammatical errors and struggles to put his points across. Both are desperate though.

Indo-Chinese Food makes wild and sensational exaggerations about Islam, and so while some of the things he says are very true, things need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

I just convey cold hard facts and logical arguments. Nothing more, nothing less.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
I'm sure my grammar is perfectly fine. And, if you are referring to Xotol trying to pick me out on misspelling "Argument" wrong, then I saved him the embarrassment of showing his mistake.

Your discussion with Xotol only showed your level of pride, and how much it is blinding you. It also showed that you are willing to be dishonest. Your own pride and lack of humility are basically what defines you at this moment in time. Hopefully, things will change over time, and so too will this fortress you've built around your mind. That's when things will start getting interesting.

My own spelling is not great, so am not going to pick up on your mistakes (and they are mistakes, not typos). However, grammatically, you make a lot of mistakes, especially in the use of apostrophes, and particularly in the use of your/you're and its/it's. But who cares, what you write is understandable (as is Indo-Chinese Food), so I imagine your picking out his spelling is most likely a combination of deflection as well as belittlement (one of the curses of the proud and unhumble). It is very much a character of Salafis, who often spend so much time pointing out the faults and errors of others, when they are guilty of the same. That's when pride and lack of humility evolve into hypocrisy. Ironically, pride, lack of humility and hypocrisy are the things that Salafis rile against the most, without realising that it is these 3 things that drive their own personalities.

(Original post by Perseveranze)
Just warning you, people like you don't really last long here. I understand you like to troll, but try to make it less obvious.

Erm, have been here a while mate. Hopefully converse again after you ban expires

[Rat_Bag]

(Original post by cheetahs56)
The hadith was AFTER the passing of Muhammed (SAW), so that TOTALLY disproves you're point you ignorant fool.

Learn to read before you respond, and especially when you are going to making judgements of people.

The issue of chronology was included for the sake of completeness in listing out the logical possibilities, as well as giving desperate people like Perseverenze a lifeline (he's already backed into a corner, so it would be cruel not to give him some way of getting out without loosing face)

So if it is not an issue of chronology, then either Aeysha was lying, or the Hadiths are contradictory. That doesn't look good for your religion.

(Original post by cheetahs56)
It is better to not say anything and appear dumb, than to open you're mouth and remove all doubt.

You are the one who looks dumb here, not me.

(Original post by cheetahs56)
Don't bother replying as well.

Because you want to run away instead?

[squirrels]

I think you will find there're different types of people within every community. For an example, just because someone Caucasian is a racist, you can't argue all the Caucasians are racist.

Same with Islam. You have extremists like the person you're talking about and the innocent people who fight for justice and equality. When It comes to religion, it all depends on how you interpret the holy texts and docterines.

[dannyoh]

Your intolerance and outright xenophobia towards Muslims in this thread means that you cannot create proper debate about religious values and whether they play any part in our western society today. I agree with you in parts: many religious values in all religions are incompatible with our society today, such as the way women are treated, but your outright racist attitude is rather abhorrent.

The man was mentally ill and obviously not right in the head, so the fact that he committed one act of disgust towards a woman can't be applied generally to everybody. That's like saying one man killed another man, so the whole of manhood doesn't fit in with cultural values - it doesn't work like that.

[Carter78]

(Original post by DawnRaider)

Still, this guy required his wife to wear head scarf, even in a non islamic society - so i would deem this is as quite extreme and strict in following of islam (according to your rules of calculation) So there is nothing to suggest that this guy or his family were liberal muslims at all- quite the opposite in fact.

Yet wearing a headscarf is actually very common in Kreuzburg/Neukölln. - I should know I live there!

Are all of these Muslims in Kreuzburg extreme? If so, why aren't they all cutting their wives heads off?

(Original post by DawnRaider)
I didnt side step anything, You stated that beheads were neglibigle in islamic scoiety, without any evidcne - i simply asked you how do we know how frequent they are?

You mean apart from the evidence from Amnesty international that I provided which failed to mention beheadings even once? Did you even read the links that I gave to you?

(Original post by DawnRaider)
im talking about googling for verified news stories, not conjecture
if you gooled beheading right now, yiu will come up with this muslim guy at the top

I don't think you know how search engines work. A story will appear at the top of Google because of the popularity of that story. Thousands of internet users would have linked to this story and thus Google will match it to your search query.

Because one story is at the top of search results, this does not mean that the action of women being beheaded happens on a daily occurrence in the Middle East. If I type "Kim Kardashian sex tape" into Google, because her video would be at the top of the search results would not mean she makes a new video every day, but rather that her one video she made became an extremely popular search result.

Again, please bring the facts that show that women being beheaded is a common occurrence within the Islamic World.

[NerdyGeek]

Im Muslim and have memorised the Quran! In nowere of the holy book does it say that crap that you just wrote. I understand the Quran and it does NOT say that rubbish. I dont know were you got your facts from but they are COMPLETELY incorrect!
Yeah we do take "the quran 100% seriously but therre is soo much more proof! And if you are so anti Muslim then why the hell is Islam the fastest growing religion TODAY??!Why?

[GuitarWorm]

As stated in the article, the man was mentally ill and no matter what religion a person is they can still become mentally ill. He didn't kill because he's Muslim; he killed because he was sick in the head and wasn't think straight and rationally.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[mali167]

Why is it that every time a Muslim does something wrong, Islam is put on trial??

[sophia_]

(Original post by TheLastOfUs)
And people still think islam is compatible with civilised culture?

Uhm. That man is not compatible with civilised culture.

Religion has nothing to do with it.

[MyselfEtAl]

(Original post by Rat_Bag)
Why did God make it "THAT complex"? Why not a straight forward, unambiguous manifesto? This would save all the countless killing that goes on within the ummah, and all the time wasted by men in beards referencing and cross referencing just to try and make sense of this jumble of texts.

because of how the Quran is written, like I said, it is just MINOR fiqh issues where the "interpretation" issues arrise, the essence of Islam is still the same, ie belief in Allah (S) and Mohammed, and the "day of judgement"

If God created me just to then follow the instructions of other men, then what was the point of creating men with free-will?

God created these men as a guide for you to better yourself and to help you, it's your choice if you want to follow Islam (and consequently, them) in the end though

Of course it's Arab supremism, don't try and dress it up as practicality.

opinion stated as fact nicely there

Am sure it is not a "minor" issue to the poor Sunni wife who gets beaten by her husband, and then her face rubbed in the Qur'an when she protests.

Am sure it is not a "minor" issue to the poor Shia wife, whose husband runs off each night to get a 3 hour temporary wife with the blessing from the local mullah.

Sunnis have their own rulings regarding their wife beatings (eg with a miswak etc) which have been discussed earlier on in the thread.

The Shia example is a crap one, no mutah (temporary marriage) is valid without the permission of the first wife, and the father of the woman taking part in the temporary marriage.

Yeah, but it's so obvious that the Islamic rules suck. And moreover, it is so obvious that Islam is manmade.

opinion as fact again

That isn't strictly true to be fair, since Mohammad had ALOT more than 4 wives at once, and that lifestyle is not allowed for others.

I'm not aware of him having more than 4 wives at once?

(Original post by Rat_Bag)
And this modesty is basically an expression of patriarchy, which all of a sudden, you think is okay. Men can do this, but women can't, and this excuse of "modesty" (that all powerful trump card) is played to co-opt acceptance.

that depends on the way you look at it again, but just because some guy in the UK sees it as patriarchy, doesn't mean it's going to change how 1 billion Muslim women feel about it today. If they're wearing a hijab out of choice, I don't see a problem with it.

Erm, objectification in this sense is the process of turning a living thing into an object. You however already think women are sexual objects, so how on earth do you square this circle of Hijab stopping the objectification of women, when you freely admit that it is a reinforcement of it? You really need to sit down and think about what you believe.

No, what I meant was, a woman's beauty is what causes her to be sexually objectified, the hijab acts as a preventative

The Hijab, definitely, because of the intention of obligation of women to wear hijab, as well as the intention of the wearer. While some Muslim women feel comfortable in hijab, the underlying teaching behind it, make it objectification in every circumstance.

Bikini, well it depends on the individual . If she's wearing it because she has to as part of commercial photoshoot, or because she feels the need to to feel attractice or flaunt her body. But if she just feels comfortable in it, because it is hot, and she's in and out of the water and on the beach, it's a very practical piece of attire .

It depends on the individual and their intentions, exactly. So if a Muslim woman wearing a hijab is wearing it because she sees it as stopping herself from being objectified like the bikini woman, then so be it? Why is this so much of a concern for you? (Unless she is actively being forced to wear it).

To the last part: lol.

[FSP]

If you take anything literally from Religion to Westminster Law, your an idiot.

Men in Islam, have to pay for the running and maintenance of the home, even if the Women has her own income. The Man has no right over the womens dowry.Nor can the Man force his wife to do Housework.

But for cultural reason men cant cook, women stay home to raise children etc

But as in all relationships people give and take, doesnt mean anyone is being oppressed.