EDIT: Oh, ok. Thanks for the explanation, Brother Sidhe.
You're welcome brother, notice the description is actually surprisingly good as well, civ had some great civolopaedia entries. Concise but informative.
Ask a Muslim
- Thread starter incantrix
- Start date
- Status
You're welcome brother, notice the description is actually surprisingly good as well, civ had some great civolopaedia entries. Concise but informative.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
Actually, I noticed a lot of mistakes in the Civolapaedia, but they are never intentional or negative, in my opinion. But yes, like the picture for the Masjid Al-Haram is actually the Dome of the Rock Mosque instead. The former is located in Mecca, whereas the latter is in Jerusalem.
And there were other minor things, but overall, good job.Spiffor
Chieftain
Salah Al-Din, I asked you other questions, but you might have overlooked them (at the end of a page when things went fast). Please take a look there
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5021166&postcount=700
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5021166&postcount=700
Thanks, Salah-Al-Din for your responds. It is giving me interesting knowledge.
I have some other questions
I have question if is/was there some non-muslim political leader who is respected by you?
Other question, you are doctor student. Are there some rules which muslims have to keep in practise of treatment?
How had your family moved to US?
Were you in Europe?
Wrote some muslim some book about military tactics like is The Art of War from Sun Tzu?
sry for English.
I have some other questions
I have question if is/was there some non-muslim political leader who is respected by you?
Other question, you are doctor student. Are there some rules which muslims have to keep in practise of treatment?
How had your family moved to US?
Were you in Europe?
Wrote some muslim some book about military tactics like is The Art of War from Sun Tzu?
sry for English.
I'm disappointed in your view of democracy in the Middle East.
Since 1940 and again after the arrival of the Soviets, the Middle East has basically imported European models of rule: fascist, Nazi, and communist.
From my perspective, to speak of dictatorships as being the immemorial way of doing things in that part of the world seems simply untrue.
Is my understanding that consent of the ruled and the need for consultation wrong? I thought these two ideals are explicitly recommended in the Koran and seem to have very democratic tenets.
Since 1940 and again after the arrival of the Soviets, the Middle East has basically imported European models of rule: fascist, Nazi, and communist.
From my perspective, to speak of dictatorships as being the immemorial way of doing things in that part of the world seems simply untrue.
Is my understanding that consent of the ruled and the need for consultation wrong? I thought these two ideals are explicitly recommended in the Koran and seem to have very democratic tenets.
HannibalBarka
We are Free
It takes just pronouncing the word "talaq" for a muslim man to divorce his wife !!! How is that more stable Sir?
Family holds together as long as there is love, every blessing from Allah, Jesus or the Bourgmaster is just for the ceremony, a piece of paper, a contract.
Again that just shows that you are a heterosexual male. Ask any heterosexual girl if she finds Claudia Schiffer's body more beatifull than Brad Pitt's, and you'll see that you are wrong
HannibalBarka
We are Free
Lies. That just shows that you have never lived in a the ME. It is hard for a women to divorce because it is socially very badly seen, it will be very hard for her to find a new husband and because she very often depend financially on her husband.
First that is a rude and intolerant comment about western people, and is no better than the BS some racist scum throw here about the Islamic World. Parents in the West care about their kids no matter what age just like Eastern people do.
Second, in the West, divorce is more common among "working", thus financially independent, women. So yes divorce is something not all women can afford.
HannibalBarka
We are Free
I am not going to do it myself, hehe.
I think the first stage is spreading awareness and implanting the idea (of Caliphate) in the hearts and minds of Muslims everywhere. When enough people believe in it, I think it is only bound to happen as a result.
OK. Than it will never happen
These are actually two questions.
The first question is: how is a Caliph chosen?
The second question is: how are laws passed, based on popular demand or upon Holy Law?
As for the first question, there is no hard and fast rule for this, and the methodology for choosing the Caliphate has been left open based upon Urf (cultural norms). The Arabs of that time had a system of Shurah (mutual consultation). It was not altogether different than democracy, albeit a primitive form of it. The people would nominate someone. Nobody could become the Caliph if he did not get Bayat (oath of allegiance) from the people.
However, to answer your question, there is no Divine Law that dictates how a leader is chosen, and it is therefore permissible for us to figure out the best way to do this. Maybe some people would say that a democratic election would be a good way to do this. I myself am not qualified to give an opinion on what this procedure would be since I don't really know much about the political sciences, jurisprudence, government, etc.
Having said that, one of the major downfalls of Muslim Empires in the past was their failure in creating a working system of Caliph nomination and succession. In fact, the successor to almost every Muslim leader was civil war. This has been a major downfall of Muslims, and I think that we as a people should work out a system of succession to prevent such civil war and strife...I believe that we should draw on the example of the West in this matter, because they are very good at creating stable governments that pass down power in a fairly controlled way. No problem with learning from the West.
OK, fair enough.
If 99% of the People demand that a law be enacted, how are you going to prevent that otherwise than by installing a dictatorship !!!!!
I am a man
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
I'll answer all your posts shortly, Allah Willing. A bit busy right now...will do so in a few hours...
A bit busy right now...will do so in a few hours...Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
Some more questions, Salah Al-Din
Sure, shoot.
Edit: and thanks for your answers
Thank you.
No, this is not what I said, brother. I said slavery is Haram (forbidden) except in one situation: which is prisoners of war captured in battle, as this is their penalty for waging an unjust war. However, this would not be applicable if the Islamic nation signed a covenant such as the Geneva Convention that prohibited this, especially if it meant that Muslim prisoners of war wouldn't be taken as slaves either.
Again, for hundreds of years, there was no system for "housing" captured prisoners of war (i.e. combatants captured in battle). The norm was keeping them as slaves. This practise was carried out by almost all of the empires. And though Islam allowed for this, even still the prisoners were to be treated as brothers and to be given the same food as the captors, etc. The treatment of these POW slaves is very good, and I had an earlier post which showed this. Please see my earlier posts on this topic.
I would never say that Islam is not perfected. The allowance for POW slaves is still applicable to today. If an Islamic nation were at war with another country which violated the Geneva Convention and abused Muslim POWs, then the Muslims could put that country's POWs to work just like prisoners in the American penal system are put to work routinely. The work extracted by the POWs could be used to increase productivity in order to boost the country's defense against the attacking force.
Yes, perfectly stated.
We believe that Islam is perfected for all time; however, we believe that Prophet Jesus (as) will return and rule us. It could be then that we would be ruled by the Ijtihad of Prophet Jesus (as). And this will be near the End of Time.
I honestly don't know what you are asking. Please rephrase.
It is permissible for a man to go swimming on "men's day" so long as he covers himself from navel to knee. This is the minimum that must be covered for men in front of other men, and it is termed awrah.
It is also permissible for a woman to go swimming on "women's day" so long as she covers herself from navel to knee. This is the minimum that must be covered for women in front of other women, and it is also referred to as awrah. (The breasts are not included in the awrah of women to women due to breast-feeding. Nonetheless, it should be noted that this awrah is simply the bare minimum, and the general principle is to cover up.)
It is Haram (forbidden) for either to go to a co-ed swimming pool.
As for the Hammam (public bath): "the prohibition is when there is nakedness in such places. However, if the awrah is not exposed then it is permissible." (al-Durr al-Mukhtar ma'a Radd al-Muhtar 5:32).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (r) said: "The scholars said a concession is granted to women allowing them to go to the public baths in cases of need just as it is granted to men, so long as they lower their gaze and guard their chastity. This also applies to women who are sick or bleeding following childbirth, or who have to do ghusl and cannot do it anywhere except in the public baths." (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa 15/380)
"[They] may enter (the public baths) in cases of necessity so long as they cover their awrah." (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa 21/342)
There is a Prophetic Saying in which a man says that he won't tie his camel because he trusts in God and the camel will not run away if God doesn't want it to. To this, Prophet Muhammad (s) replied that you should pray to God but you should also tie your camel. After this incident, it has become an Islamic saying "tie your camel", which means that definitely Allah's Grace is what allows anything to happen, but we ourselves must put in the effort.
Therefore, yes it is Allah and Allah alone Who will allow for the Muslim lands to return to the Caliphate system under Shariah. However, we should not just sit back and wait for that to happen, but rather we should actively work for that and show effort to reach that, and thereby become instruments of Allah's Work.
Allah likes to see effort on our part, and the effort we show is simply a formality. We lift a rock, and it seems like it is us who did that, but in reality, our efforts to do that are just a formality and all the power was Allah's. It was not us that lifted the rock, but Allah; nonetheless Allah wants to see us use our effort to lift it and then He allows for it to be lifted. My point is that the situation of Muslims today is dire, and yes it is true that we should pray to Allah for Him to change that, but we must actively work for it too, because Allah says:
"Allah will never change the condition of a people until they (first) change their inner-selves." (Quran, 8:53)
It is not sufficient to only pray all day that Allah change the condition of the Muslims, but rather a Muslim must work to do that (and also pray on top of that work).
- I don't really understand why you turn off music in Civ. You quoted that music is Haram, but there are two different reasons why I don't see it applying to Civ:
1. Music is Haram because it creates lewdness. There's no risk of that when playing Civ
2. Music is Haram because it derives you from the worship of Allah - but couldn't the same be said of any entertainment, including those that weren't invented at the time (i.e playing a computer game)?
Alcohol is forbidden by Allah. People have given a number of reasons for this prohibition, such as that it leads to a drunken state in which a person can do harm to himself and others, committing sins since he is not in his senses. And there are many other reasons people give for the prohibition of alcohol. This is all well and good. However, *even* if you were able to remove all of these reasons, alcohol would still be forbidden. If, for instance, you were able to lock a person up in a room, chain him to the bed so that he couldn't harm anybody, etc...even still, you could not give him alcohol.
In the end of the day, alcohol and music are forbidden, regardless of the reasons. Allah says that He will never enjoin something or forbid something except that it benefits the people, but this benefit (i.e. the reason) may not be known to us and only known to Allah. We as humans can guess what these reasons are, but these guesses are simply for our ownselves that we may increase our faith and remove doubt. We believe Allah is the King of Kings, and you do not question a King's Law in His Land. The King made a command and Law, and we cannot change that Law even if with our justifications and reasoning.
Having said that, I will now provide a wiseness for this prohibition in changing Allah's Laws: it prevents the changing of the faith from its original creed. Muslims believe that the Christians "went astray" (as mentioned in the Quran) because they kept using their own reasoning and intellect instead of obeying Allah's Commands and sticking to that. For example, they invented all sorts of things because they felt that they have benefit.
I remember recieving an email forward from a Christian which told a story about how a man had a conversation with God. It was a nice story with a good moral, but it was obviously invented by someone, and even the person who invented it would not claim that it was a divinely related story part of the Christian canon. However, to a Muslim, such a story would be considered blasphemous and a lie attributed to Allah, because Allah never did say any of those things. We are not allowed to speak for Allah in Islam, nor to add to the doctrine or laws.
Why not? Because we believe that man, no matter how well-intentioned, is creation and therefore imperfect. He will always make mistakes and errors. Even if he creates ten good additions to religion, he will add one negative addition and thereby destroy the purity of the faith, mixing man-made things with God's Word so much so that we will no longer know what is God's Word and what is man-made.
Therefore, to make a very short story into a very long story, Muslims are to follow the letter of the law. Alcohol and music are forbidden, and there are many reasons for these prohibitions, some of which we know and others which we do not. One hundred years ago, a man may think that alcohol is only forbidden because of the loss of inhibitions, then he could think alcohol is perfectly OK to use if the man was chained up. However, we now know another reason, which is that alcohol causes liver cirhosis and is dangerous to the body. And maybe in another hundred years, we'll come to know another reason and maybe in the Next Life we'll know even more reasons. Therefore, we can't just cancel out a law because we feel that the reasons no longer apply.
As for music, we believe that it has psychological effects that are intoxicating in nature, even while playing Civ. We believe that music controls emotions and is actually very potent, definitely not insignificant as some people might think it is.
Furthermore, in Islam, Allah prohibits things as a benefit to society as a whole, not necessarily for every person in every situation. Therefore, even though alcohol (or music) may have benefit to one person in one situation, overall it has a bad effect on society as a whole. Hence, it is prohibited for the greater good, benefitting society as a whole. It is like a Surgeon General's warning: oftentimes the prohibitions passed by the Surgeon General do not apply to all people, but the government has found that the overall benefit to society is great and it is easier and more effective to simply tell everyone to stop eating such and such.
For example, steroids are considered harmful overall, and therefore they are prohibited, even though knowledgeable bodybuilders know how to use them with minimal side effects. Nonetheless, making exceptions for people would open a pandora's box and no doubt make it difficult to control who does and does not use steroids. It is like passing a law that only people who are qualified can use steroids. However, we know that many people who are *not* qualified would *think* they are, and therefore use them and damage their bodies.
Now extend this analogy to Islam's prohibitions: if we allowed music in certain situations, then many people would be justifying themselves as fitting into this category. You would say "oh this is not that bad of a song" or that this song is clean enough (even though it is not)...people will be sliding and entering into many grey areas. Islam does not like grey areas, and prohibits entering them. This has shown to have overall benefit to society.
Islam takes the preventive measure rather than suffer the consequences. This is also one of the principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, namely ‘blocking the means’ (sadd al-dhara'i). This is based on the idea of preventing an evil before it actually materializes, and is taken from the heart of the guidance of the Quran and Prophetic Way that, “Preventing harm is given precedence even to achieving possible benefits.”
aneeshm
Deity
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
Hi, Brother Redy.
There are many leaders I respect that were not Muslim. The list is endless and would no doubt be very similar to the list of other people on this forum.
Yes, there are specific rules that apply and sometimes it becomes a bit difficult for me. Nonetheless, I try my best to adhere to them, to the best of my abilities.
They swam here.
Just kidding.
They flew here.
My father was offered a scholarship for studies and hence moved.No. My parents lived in Pakistan and then moved to America. I, myself, have always lived in America, although I've visited parts of the world, including parts of Europe such as the UK, France, Switzerland, and Italy.
I don't know what you are asking exactly. However, you might care to know that there was a very famous Muslim general that was the leader appointed by Prophet Muhammad (s). His name was Khalid bin Waleed (r), and he was referred to as the "Sword of Allah." He was a military genius, and his tactics are still remembered by military academia and applied. His military genius is credited with allowing the small Muslim force to overcome and break two powerful empires of the time: Byzantium and Persia.
Take care, brother.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
Hey, brother Aneeshm.
What's up? Yes, it would be Haram (forbidden). Firstly, it would *definitely* be Haram (forbidden) for a Muslim to chant Hindu religious prayers.
But I don't think that's your question. Even if it were not a religious prayer of another religion, it would still be Haram (forbidden) due to the music in the background.I have not read all of his work nor have I heard all of his speeches. Nonetheless, I have seen enough to have an overall good impression of him. I agree with him on many things, but differ with him on some things as is normal. He has interesting speeches, if just because he has a cute accent, lol.
Take care, Brother.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
I think you misunderstood my earlier post.
(1) Consent of the ruled and (2) the need for consultation are both considered essential to Islam. Any ruler who does not follow these two things is sinning.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
Hi, Brother Hannibal.
First of all, I apologize for continually referring to you as a female. It's because of your icon, so my subconscious just works that way, just as I'm sure most of you imagine my icon to be what I look like.
I think that many of the things you say are always revolving around common rhetoric of Islam-haters, things which are based upon true lies and half-truths. You have, for example, stated that divorce is too easy to give and that the man just has to say "talaq (divorce)" three times.
You misunderstand Islam and Islamic culture. Yes, it takes three oaths to break a marriage. But your point is completely negated when we see that it takes three oaths to have a marriage in the first place.
The Nikah (marriage) is simply an oath that is repeated three times. In fact, the Prophet (s) discouraged fancy marriages as is the case today, and most of the Sahabah (the Prophet's Companions) would just get their wives to say the oath three times and that was it. In Islam, you ask the woman three times: "Do you agree to take me as your lawfully wedded husband?" And she responds three times with "yes" or "I do." That's it. Married.Hence, the marriage is initiated and ended in the same manner, with three oaths. To you, this seems easy and insignificant, but to a Muslim, oaths are considered a *huge* thing, especially when they are made to Allah. The fact that something requires three powerful oaths means it has importance, not that it is insignificant.
I think that you do not enjoy dealing with practicality. For example, you seem to be under the impression that men and women should cover just as much, ignoring the fact that women have breasts and curves, that they are the ones who are on all the billboards and everywhere half-naked, not men. They are the ones who come to work in such attire, not men. So instead of deciding to deal with such realities, you instead care to work in an idealistic world in which such practicalities are ignored.
Yes, the marriage contract is just a piece of paper, and idealistically speaking why can't a married and un-married couple be the same? But we *all* know, from a practical point of view, that there is a WORLD of a difference between a couple that is married and that which is not. It is MUCH harder for a couple to break up if they are married as opposed to if they are not. This is just common sense and experience. It is a fact of the real world, not some imaginary fantasy world. Marriage creates a more lasting relationship. Not only are there laws in place which facilitate that, but there is just a psychological and social push to make it so. If you took a set of people who are married and asked them how hard it is to break up with their partner, and then compare that with another set of people who are not married, you will find that the latter will generally say that it is easier for them to consider breaking up as opposed to the former, who feel duty-bound to stick out the marriage. God created the institution of marriage in order to create stable family structures.
Once again, living in an idealistic world. Obviously, I am not cogitating that women would be attracted to women or the other way around. What I am making is an obvious observation, namely that the woman has more "adornments" than a man. I am not attracted to peacocks, but I can easily make the observation that the male peacock is more beautiful than the female peacock. (It is the male peacock which is so colorful, not the female one.) Yes, a male peacock would say that a female peacock attracts him more than a male one, but this doesn't change the general observation that the male one has more adornments and is hence overall the more beautiful creature.
Scientists have said that the male peacock has developed that way in order to win over mates and attract them. They even have gone so far as to say human women developed this way (i.e. more attractive) for the same purpose, whereas men didn't since they were selected by females for other reasons such as wealth, power, and status, which attracted females more than looks.
I also find it funny that--no matter what--people will try to make it seem like we are putting down females. If we had the belief that men were more attractive than women, then you would say this is proof of the fact that we put women down. If we have the belief that women are more beautiful, than this is seen as demeaning. It is a very biased manner in which you view and judge our beliefs: you have first made up your mind that Muslims oppress women and are violent, and then you take everything and view it with that goggle vision.
-----------------------------
More to come, Allah Willing.
aneeshm
Deity
Yes, it would be Haram (forbidden). Firstly, it would *definitely* be Haram (forbidden) for a Muslim to chant Hindu religious prayers.
Not to chant, but to listen to. And if there was no music in the background, then would it be still forbidden? What if there is singing or chanting but there are no instruments, but the singer or changer has trained his voice so well that his voice is as perfectly tuned as a musical instrument?
Another question - is it forbidden for a Muslim to eat prasad offered to him by a Hindu friend - food which has been offered to Hindu deities as sacrifice, and is considered pure and holy?
I have not read all of his work nor have I heard all of his speeches. Nonetheless, I have seen enough to have an overall good impression of him. I agree with him on many things, but differ with him on some things as is normal. He has interesting speeches, if just because he has a cute accent, lol.
Take care, Brother.
What I object to about him is his complete and total lack of understanding of the Hindu scriptures.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
I have a lot of interaction with people of the Middle East, and I would even go so far as to describe myself as Middle Eastern.
Again, you have stated a half truth. Yes, once a woman divorces, unfortunately it is very difficult for her to find another spouse. (This has nothing to do with Islam, but rather custom. Prophet Muhammad
However, she has the option of going back to her parents and living with them. Muslim and Middle Eastern parents always keep their doors open to their children.
Therefore, your point that divorces are low in the East simply because women can't provide for themselves financially (and can't live independantly) is completely invalid, because I have rightfully pointed out to you that they have the option of returning to their parents' house. And this happens often.
Divorces happen less in the East than in the West due to more stable family structures. Face the facts.
I did not say that they do not care about their children. I simply said that in the West it is a common phenomenon that parents want their children out of the house by the age of eighteen, which contrasts sharply with those of the East. In the West, you hear about things like parents taking rent from their kids, and other such things which are quite frankly unheard of in the East.
Yes, because as we've just discussed, women do not have the option to go back to their parents in Western families.
OK. Than it will never happen
Just a matter of time.
A dictator is a man who can impose any law he wants. But under Islamic Law, not even the leader is allowed to enact a law that he wants to *if* it conflicts with the Divine Law. Islam and dictatorships are not compatible. In Islam, the rule is that the Caliph is a slave to the people, and he is serving them--not the other way around.
Hi, Taillesskangaru.
In regards to multi-culturalism, the Islamic faith embraces it whole-heartedly. The Quran goes so far as to say that the diversity of people (i.e. their different languages and their different skin colors) are a Sign of Allah's Greatness. The Quran says:
"And one of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colors; most surely there are signs in this for men of knowledge." (Quran, 30:22)
And Allah says that the only reason He created different peoples, ethnicities, and tribes is so that they may get to know each other (and benefit from their differences as opposed to despise each other for them). Allah says:
"O mankind! Surely, We have created you from a single pair of male and female, and made you into (various) nations and tribes that you may know each other (not that you may have pride over one another)." (Quran, 49:13)
In fact, when Islam spread to people of different ethnicities, it did not ever destroy their cultures. For example, Islam spread to India and you will find that Indian Muslims still hold on to their Indian culture. In fact, Islam demands that we respect culture in general and to uphold it, only differing with it if there is a conflict with a Divine Law. Therefore, Islam did not come to destroy cultures but to enrich them and benefit from them.
As for your second question, which is how do we treat people of other faiths? The answer to this is that the Muslim is strictly commanded to be kind and compassionate to people of *all* faiths. This is not simply a recommendation but rather it is a Divine Commandment that cannot be taken lightly.
The only non-Muslims that the Quran says that you don't have to be nice to are the tyrants who drive Muslims out of their homes and oppress in the land. Otherwise, all others are to be treated with kindness and justice. The Quran says:
"Allah does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you over religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. (Indeed) Allah loves those who are just. Allah merely forbids you from taking as friends those who have fought you over religion and who have driven you out of your homes and who supported your expulsion..." (Quran, 60:8-9)
On everyone else--everyone other than the oppressors and tyrants--Allah has enjoined kindness and compassion. Prophet Muhammad (s) said: “Allah ordained kindness in everything.”
Allah says in the Quran:
"Do good to others; surely Allah loves the doers of good." (Quran, 2:195)
"Allah enjoins justice and kindness, the doing of good to others and the giving to the kindred, and He forbids indecency and evil and wickedness; He admonishes you that you may be mindful." (Quran, 16:90)
“Worship Allah and join none with Him in worship; and do good to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, the poor, the neighbor who is near of kin, the neighbor who is a stranger, the companion by your side...Verily, Allah does not like such as are proud and boastful.” (Quran, 4:36)
Prophet Muhammad (s) also commanded us to be compassionate, saying: “The compassionate people will be shown mercy by the Merciful Lord.”
When the early Muslims were declaring the Message of Islam, many of the non-Muslims would come to insult the Muslims and say mean things to them. the Quran reminded the Muslims:
"The faithful servants of (Allah) the Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the foolish address them, they reply back with mild words of gentleness.” (Quran, 25:63)
So if Islam enjoins Muslims to be kind towards non-Muslims who insult the faith, then imagine how nice a Muslim should be towards those non-Muslims who do not insult the faith.
Prophet Muhammad (s) said: "Shall I not tell you what is the best conduct in this world and the Hereafter? It is to join the tie of kinship with one who severs it, to give to him who deprives you and to forgive him who does wrong to you."
And there are so many more verses in the Quran and Prophetic Sayings about kindness and compassion that I cannot possibly type them all out. The spirit of Islam is kindness and compassion to people of all faiths. It was embodied quite perfectly by men like Saladin (r), and you can read the quote in my signature to see what Islam enjoins.
Take care, brother.
Salah-Al-Din
Vanguard of Islam.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2007
- Messages
- 460
- Status
