Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

How often do you view the Islamic Society? Watch

  • View Poll Results: How often do you view the Islamic Society thread?
    I am Sunni - Frequently
    19.42%
    I am Sunni - Infrequently
    16.50%
    I am Sunni - Rarely/Never
    7.77%
    I am Shia - Frequently
    0
    0%
    I am Shia - Infrequently
    1.94%
    I am Shia - Rarely/Never
    0.97%
    I am Non-Muslim - Frequently
    4.85%
    I am Non-Muslim - Infrequently
    6.80%
    I am Non-Muslim - Rarely/Never
    41.75%

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kadak)
    It is dishonest to claim they simply learned algebra from pre existing societies.They added hugely to algebra too and other branches of science.
    Even if this were the case, it's disingenuous to call them Muslim discoveries as if Islam was actually the reason they made the discovery, it wasn't. White Europeans' discoveries aren't called "Christian discoveries/inventions" and rightly so.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    ...
    I'm surprised you frequently view the ISOC and :hello:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kadak)
    It is dishonest to claim they simply learned algebra from pre existing societies.They added hugely to algebra too and other branches of science.
    No one is denying that. Yes, they may have contributed greatly but this doesn't mean they 'invented' algebra.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Even if this were the case, it's disingenuous to call them Muslim discoveries as if Islam was actually the reason they made the discovery, it wasn't. White Europeans' discoveries aren't called "Christian discoveries/inventions" and rightly so.
    I know,which is why I never called them such.Its reformed who calls them muslim discoveries.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Legendary Quest)
    No one is denying that. Yes, they may have contributed greatly but this doesn't mean they 'invented' algebra.
    If you are bothered to read the person I quoted,Reformed said that they simply got knowledge from other societies.
    When did I say they invented algebra ?Did you not even bother to read what you have underlined ?I phrased it like that for a reason.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leukocyte)
    I'm surprised you frequently view the ISOC and :hello:
    Hello, hope you're OK
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kadak)
    If you are bothered to read the person I quoted,Reformed said that they simply got knowledge from other societies.
    When did I say they invented algebra ?Did you not even bother to read what you have underlined ?I phrased it like that for a reason.
    Then precisely what are you disputing? He was arguing against the notion that Muslims invented algebra, stating that they gained knowledge from pre-Islamic societies. He's entirely correct. Muslims later on contributed, yes, but that doesn't negate Reformed's statement. Therefore, you're arguing over nothing.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Hello, hope you're OK
    I'm good thanks. Wbu?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leukocyte)
    I'm good thanks. Wbu?
    Yeah, good. Getting a bit bored of these ridiculously long holidays though!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Legendary Quest)
    Then precisely what are you disputing? He was arguing against the notion that Muslims invented algebra, stating that they gained knowledge from pre-Islamic societies. He's entirely correct. Muslims later on contributed, yes, but that doesn't negate Reform's statement. Therefore, you're arguing over nothing.
    LISTEN.He is not entirely correct.This is the statement I am disputing

    islamic golden age saw muslims invent maths, algebra and calculus, which the rest of us know they did not, the y simply learnt it form pre islamic societies.

    Ok,you claim he is entirely corrrect ,let`s check your statement.By reformed claims,if they learnt calculus from pre islamic societies,that must clearly mean calculus was around in pre islamic society .Thats obviously false,so your claim that he is "entirely correct" is false unless you have a different definition/notion
    of entire.

    Where in his statement did he say they contributed ?He didn`t,but he did mention they learnt it from pre-islamic societies.Nowhere did he claim they contributed to maths,it seems to suggest from his statement people in that time in that region made no original contributions to maths.There is a reason when scientific papers are made,you name the contributors.

    When you say later on,what time period ?16th century ?Your use of the vague word later on seems to suggest you are refusing to admit people in that region during the Islamic Golden age made contributions to maths.

    Ironically ,your the one arguing over nothing ,since in your previous quote you said I shouldn`t say they invented algebra,but i never made that claim.Making straw man arguments like you did is "argument over nothing"
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Most (if not all) of these are Muslims; how are you supposed to understand or see a representative demographic if you're unfairly notifying Muslims?

    You probs won't see any accurate stats with the non-Muslims.
    (And you probably wouldn't have anyway because I guess / reckon Muslims would have had a disposition to click on this thread anyway. Just from a semi-scientific point of view. )
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IdeasForLife)
    I am. I don't mean this a bad way but people really need to stop thinking that opposing Tawheed means you are emotional lol. This is exactly the view he propagates of his opponents and unfortunately many eat it up. He even seems to be trying to turn Al-Farhan's image into a bad guy above.

    I oppose Tawheed for several reasons e.g. he supports one of the butchers of Syria and Iraq. This does not make anyone emotional whatsoever.

    I disagree. This is simply bowing down to Tawheed and the Islam hating people's demands. Muslims should not be like this. There is no politics in the OP. What we are arguing against is falsehood being added to the OP.
    Ok I understand where you are coming from. Al-Farhan is a nice person masha'Allah and he wouldn't want bad for anyone insha'Allah. I blame politics, it invites some confusion and misunderstanding into the thread and makes Islam at fault when actually it is a separate matter. Actually, it is about affairs of the world rather than Islam. If arguments go further than that I think we should take it onto another thread. It may cause less misunderstanding with everyone associating the matters with I-SOC thread.

    Well I did highlight that Tawheed brother did not imo did not need to respond that post and say what he did. I am actually no one to stop him but I feel it would have been better off if he responded from vm or pm if he saw something he did not like about it. As I feel that the user that posted it might not have intended sectarianism etc, even if it appeared so from the original post. Same applies for all.

    Idc what sect or group a person is from if they are doing evil then it is evil and it is their action. I will stand against it if there is proof.

    I know, I did not mean to say there is. I am saying just in case lol in future someone actually demands for something like that and has nothing to do with what the hadiths, sunnah, Qur'an and the prophets (peace be upon them all). For example, if a person wants to add something to may be support a certain leader etc nowadays, but use Islam as a cover up for it. Also, I feel strongly that no one should actually start demanding things to the thread starter and putting pressure on them to accept their view. As in the future, I may want something for all to accept. But then if I am mature, I will think beforehand of its necessity. If I still think I should then I should first explain myself fully and actually ask the OP for their opinion on it as may be I am in the wrong and should not act like I want it now or never. Then also if others disagree, it will only be wise of me to step back and not mention it again as the the thread does not belong to me nor should I start attacking people for not accepting. On top, I still have the option to post so I will post away I guess. It will be still part of the thread as long as it is not worthy of being totally against the thread rules. And as you said, I can't make others bow down to me and forget the majority, it will be me forcing myself views etc upon others.

    Ya Allah what have I typed?
    May Allah forgive me for the wrong.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kadak)
    LISTEN.He is not entirely correct.This is the statement I am disputing

    islamic golden age saw muslims invent maths, algebra and calculus, which the rest of us know they did not, the y simply learnt it form pre islamic societies.

    Ok,you claim he is entirely corrrect ,let`s check your statement.By reformed claims,if they learnt calculus from pre islamic societies,that must clearly mean calculus was around in pre islamic society .Thats obviously false,so your claim that he is "entirely correct" is false unless you have a different definition/notion
    of entire.
    Ancient civilisations such as the Chinese, Greeks and Egyptians developed a number of theories, most of which contributed to the calculus we know today. That's science. People build on work conducted by those who came before them and that is precisely the point Reformed and I were making - that Arabs built on previous work but did not invent calculus.

    Where in his statement did he say they contributed ?He didn`t,but he did mention they learnt it from pre-islamic societies.
    I apologise. I thought you was capable of deducing something so simple. Again, no one is denying that Arabs did contribute.

    Nowhere did he claim they contributed to maths,it seems to suggest from his statement people in that time in that region made no original contributions to maths.There is a reason when scientific papers are made,you name the contributors.
    I'll say it again, he was arguing against the notion that Muslims invented calculus or algebra. He was not discussing the contributions the Muslims did make because that's a different topic. That was not what he was concerned about when making that post. It was about whether or not Muslims invented algebra and maths.

    When you say later on,what time period ?16th century ?Your use of the vague word later on seems to suggest you are refusing to admit people in that region during the Islamic Golden age made contributions to maths.
    But Arabs did make contributions. Again, no one is denying that. Besides, that isn't even relevant to what was being discussed. The discussion was about whether or not Muslims invented calculus and algebra... Which they didn't and you have admitted that so your original post was pointless. Stop going off on a tangent please.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leukocyte)
    I'm surprised you frequently view the ISOC and :hello:
    How do you know? How can we see what others selected?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not calling Al-Farhan bad, I'm saying Tawheed's trying to make him look bad. http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...2#post66484142 Read the latter part of Tawheed's post and now look, is Tawheed trying to make Al-Farhan look bad? (Might've misunderstood you on the Al-Farhan part so forgive me if I have )

    Sister I really disagree. This is more about religion if anything. The ISOC OP is purely a religious issue because people do not agree with certain beliefs being added (due to our great scholars having ruled against them). It would be akin to spreading falsehood if everyone agreed to it. World affairs are not being talked about with regards to the OP.

    Moving unto world affairs, the Isoc behaves very strangely around issue. Now if I post about Sisi killing Egyptian Muslims, noone complains because noone is a Sisi supporter and people make their duas and make ameens. Now I post about Iranian backed militias murdering Muslims, people make make their "may Allah grant them Jannah" duas again and add ameens but then when one person defends the killer of the muslims, the Isoc, rather than defend their dying brothers, go into a shell and say "oh not politics again". The same Muslims who say they care about Syria suddenly can't find it within themselves to say "No, that man is evil and kills Muslims, you should not be supporting him". Rather they oppose anyone who highlights the atrocities being committed in Syria and tell them to stop with the politics. This is especially where my opposition to HAnwar comes from.

    The Muslims are one ummah and they feel pain together so I will always denounce the killer of Muslims. This is not just politics, this is Islam. Do you think this is incorrect?

    Do you not think it is evil if a person supports the killer of Muslims (e.g. Khameini, Assad, Putin etc...)? If the person can be excused by ignorance because they may just be naive, do you think it's right if other people don't challenge their views?

    Noone has ever demanded such a thing and it's not correct to change ISOC rules to prepare for a scenario which does not look like occurring. In fact, it's a waste of time IMO. Yes, see that's why we would have no problem with you because you wouldn't push it. But in this case we have a user, who after being refused by majority ( and with no support shown from regular Isocers), has tried get around member's wishes and gone to the moderators. If you did this - http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...4&postcount=83 , you'd be challenged too




    (Original post by h333)
    Ok I understand where you are coming from. Al-Farhan is a nice person masha'Allah and he wouldn't want bad for anyone insha'Allah. I blame politics, it invites some confusion and misunderstanding into the thread and makes Islam at fault when actually it is a separate matter. Actually, it is about affairs of the world rather than Islam. If argument goes further I think we should take it onto another thread. It may cause less misunderstanding with everyone associating the matters with I-SOC thread.

    Well I did highlight that Tawheed brother did not imo did not need to respond that post and say what he did. I am actually no one to stop him but I feel it would have been better off if he responded from vm or pm if he saw something he did not like about it. As I feel that the user that posted it might not have intended sectarianism etc, even if it appeared so from the original post.

    Idc what sect and group a person is from if they are doing evil then it is evil and it is their action. I with stand against it if there is proof.

    I know I did not meant to say there is. I am saying just in case lol in future someone actually demands for something like that and has nothing to do with what the hadiths, sunnah, Qur'an and the prophets (peace be upon them all). For example, if a person wants to add something to may be support a certain leader etc nowadays, but use Islam as a cover up for it. Also, I feel strongly that no one shoulf actually start demanding things to the thread starter and putting pressure on them to accept their view. As in the future, I may want something for all to accept. Butt then if I am mature, I will think beforehand of its necessity. If I still think I should then I should first explain myself fully and actually ask the OP for their opinion on it as may be I am in the wrong and should not act like I want it now or never. Then also if others disagree, it will only be wise of me to step back and not mention it again as the the thread does not belong to me nor should I start attacking people for not accepting. On top, I still have the option to post so I will post away I guess. It will be still part of the thread as long as it is not worthy of being totally against the thread rules. And as you said, I can't make others bow down to me and forget the majority, it will be me forcing myself views etc upon others.

    Ya Allah have I typed.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    How do you know? How can we see what others selected?
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/poll...do=showresults
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Alisha*)
    My mums a Wahabi and my dads a Sunni. Can someone tell me the difference?
    I assume by 'wahhabi' you mean to say salafi's.

    There are fundamental Aqeedah differences between a number of groups in the ahlus-sunnah, and the salafi-subgroup. To give you a basic introduction, Salafi'ism is a brand of Islam that seeks to take a very literalistic, rigid interpretation of the Quran and sunnah. They are intolerant of any diverging views save their own, and this leads them to abusing and asking others to forsake many scholars or groups in the ahlus-sunnah, such as Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf, Yassir Qadhi, the barelavi's, ashari's, even groups among the hanafi's (salafi-islam clashes a lot with hanafi-islam). They are quick to call others deviant, and very, very secterian.

    Alhamdullilah, my salafi-cousin is rather kind to me, and not secterian, and i have had deep indepth discussions with him about his beliefs. So not all salafi's are like that. Many converts often join salafi islam out of an idea of following the pure sunnah. Many , after research, often then leave salafi islam.

    For one, Salafi's derive a lot of their teachings from Ibn Taymiyyah, and are prone to giving very literalistic interpretations about Allah azwj himself.

    IslamQa, which is a well-known salafi website, promoting bigotry against other groups who do not adhere to their specific brand of Islam, affirm that Allah azwj has 'two feet':

    "Affirmation Allah has two feet" https://islamqa.info/en/166843

    Here is a salafi-sheikh affirming that Allah azwj has 'fingers': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr5cZZ-2DAE


    A number of madhabs in the ahlus-sunnah do not believe Allah azwj has two feet, and interpret the ahadith differently. There are some significant differences therefore, in the understanding of Tawheed itself between salafi's and other groups within the ahlus-sunnah.

    Here is a wonderful article written by Yassir Qadhi, who left the salafi-sect and became a Hanafi (afaik). He has had a lot of abuse from salafi's due to this, but here is his article: http://muslimmatters.org/2014/04/22/...r-yasir-qadhi/

    Video of why Sheikh Yasir Qadhi left the salafi-sect:



    Websites, video's and articles from scholars/sheikhs/alims/adherents from the Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaah refuting the modern salafi-sect and movement:

    1. Great set of articles by the ahlus-sunnah wal jammaah website sunnah.org refuting salafi-islam: http://www.sunnah.org/articles/Wahhabiarticleedit.htm
    2. Ahlus-sunnah wal jmaah sheikh, Asrar discusses salafi islam (he calles them 'najdi's', so you don't get confused. Najd is where he believes they were founded):
    3. Sheikh Asrar Rashid (ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah sheikh) talks about salafi-ism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY88v4yZTHg
    4. Video where Sheikh Hamzah Yusuf (maliki sheikh) responds to the salafi-habit of refuting everyone and regarding anyone to does not adhere to their strict interpretation of Islam as apostates/deviants: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMkyW06vu4k



    I even have ahlus-sunnah wal jamaah family members, who respect me but have firm theological disagreements with shia Islam, tell me that they are opposed to the salafi's.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Do you think a law should be passed to imprison people for insulting the prophet Muhammad?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Al-farhan)
    Well I was waiting for you to point it, and show me.But you sorely disappoint me.
    Alright, I'll humour you, even though I'm fairly sure you know what it is that I'm referring to.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    (Original post by Al-farhan)
    Without adding anything to the op it's already a no brainer that sectarian and inflammatory comments are/will not be tolerated by the isoc and its members. And history of the isoc has proven that members do and will stand against such activities.
    Would you say the following recent post is not sectarian/anti-Ahmadi in nature? Or that it has been repudiated by other members? :holmes:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    I received no reply to that from you, though I did get a lengthy rant from Saeed (which has since unfortunately been deleted) that was mostly about my apparent shortcomings of character than anything I had actually said, for which, incidentally, you gave him a pat on the back. :lol:

    Spoiler:
    Show
    To any mods: I am not trying to restart a long off-topic conversation from another thread; simply reminding Al-farhan of something, at his request.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-farhan)
    So now all your distortions, lies, fabrications make sense.
    Since the above is your goal. And it seems by any means it seems including the deplorable acts mentioned above.
    seems like a strange society that demands all references to any current (sunni generally) islamist attack to be removed form thread, but whose members then post details of incidences where shias have killed sunnis in syrian and iraqi wars.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 21, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.