Religious intolerance in Indonesia: Muslims as victims of brutal killing

That proves that they are idiots... They may be true Muslims, but they just committed a crime that Islam does not allow, so they are sinners. The fact that they think this is what Islam tells them to do proves that they have no true knowledge and are in fact idiots.

Please elaborate.

 

^^^^ Police standing around while this is going on and not really doing anything is a clear indication of something inherently wrong with that area.

I didn't read too much about it (only a couple news articles) so I may be wrong, but it appears that the President didn't straight out condemn the attacks and the perpetrators?

 

Yes, you will notice that there are huge private investments directly out of Saudi. I must be clear that I did not say Saudi Arabia, and I don't believe that the Saudi government is able to stop it. I do believe they are trying to silence the wahhabists now, which is why the wahhabists have redirected their money to other countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, etc.

I wouldn't call it the Saudi brand of Islam. The government of Saudi Arabia is attempting to remove these elements from the country, the law, society, etc. They realized IMO they made a mistake and are attempting to correct it by winning over the people. Unlike Egypt, there is actually a massive risk of Islamist take over in Saudi Arabia because the Islamists are organized, well known and wealthy + Saudi Arabia is home of the Kaaba + there is an even larger gap between low income and high income society + the regime is essentially one person so a quick replacement is possible + many more factors.

Unfortunately, this is IMO an almost impossible task. Ultimately, Saudi will be home of conservatives because that's where the Kaaba is. Following a recent discussion with an exiled Saudi, I was actually impressed with what he told me about development in Saudi Arabia and the attempt to change the culture by empowering the people rather than an all-out assault on Islamist extremists. People need to see and feel that the government considers Islamists and Muslims to be two different things.

Things like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Abdullah_University_of_Science_and_Technology

and they're building five of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Abdullah_Economic_City

Plus, unlike Dubai, they have the cash and critical mass to actually do this. I imagine that as Saudi liberalizes itself more and more, it will eat up business from Dubai, Qatar, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, etc rapidly. It's always been seen as the ideal epicenter. The only thing in their way is political risk, and they seem to be quite aware.

Unfortunately, and I really mean this, I don't hold out too much hope that the king's successor will share his vision, which is something I can tell you many many Saudis are very sad about.

 

hmm the constant suicide bombers, beatings, rapes, murders, sharia law, etc, etc all done in the name of Islam.

Islam may not allow a lot of these actions or considers them a sin but for some reason that message is not getting across to these people that consider themselves devout Muslims.

 

Just would like to point out that they are Muslims according to Shariah. Something like 99.9% of sins don't preclude you from being a Muslim. Really, the only way out is outright declaration that they are not Muslim. Ironically, doing so requires that you be killed, whereas you can rape women and children but still not be considered non-Muslim lol.

Also, at the very core of Islam, it is a grave sin to call someone a non-Muslim. Like one of the hugest sins. Because declaring someone to be a kaafir/Muslim is God's job, so you are basically engaging in shirk via taking on God's role.

This is the understanding I've come to which many scholars I've spoken to agreed with as well in the past. Would be interested to know if you know/believe otherwise.

 

interesting post.. thanks for the information

 

in Indonesia?

 

There is a hadith that says,

So yes, we are taught that it is a grave sin to call someone a kaafir, and it is not our duty to judge or to label any Muslim as such.

 

Do you say the same thing about a society whose uniformed men take part in torturing and killing prisoners? Do you label the whole society as being inherently wrong?

 

You might want to read up on that...not true at all.

 

I don't know man, that's pretty common knowledge. Essentially you are supposed to try to convince them 3 times, then it's over.

In the more extreme circles, specifically salafis, it is even possible to consider someone an apostate for not praying.

I can't see how you can argue that Sharia doesn't require you to kill an apostate. The evidence is too strong. There are tons of hadiths, not just these few that I posted.

 

Thanks for looking that up, in the Quran it says that the decision is left to God, so if any Hadith condradicts this, I would reject it. Also, if you read up about someone changing their religion/sides during war, the Quran places some condition on what you have to offer this person... they definitely don't support any of the hadiths you've shown.....sorry but I could not find it for you, I tried...... ask someone religious I'm sure they will help you out on it.

 

<br>
Posts like his are pretty shocking

 

i can spew out all the Qurainc versus of violence.... but at the end of the day all you will say is that they are "out of context".

 

contextomy

 

yup... exactly

 

I'm cool with that being your approach, and I understand it.

But that's not Sharia. Your ability to pick correct hadiths aligned with the Quran is most likely limited unless you are a scholar. You are acknowledging that there are errors in the hadith, and are aware that you don't have suffiect knowledge of all schools of thought, therefore you are exposing yourself to error intentionally. If this is the case, you do not fall under the "doing the best I can according to the best of my knowledge" freebie category.

In fact, many would say that rejecting Hadith in itself is a declaration of apostasy.

It is key for you to know about this: LINK re Nasikh wa Mansukh

If you want to take a realistic independent view, you should compile a list of people who have recited hadiths which oppose the Quran. See how many hadiths you end up with.

You should also consider that if you are rejecting specific hadiths based on Quranic evidence, there are hadiths which go beyond the Quran but don't breach it. So maybe the Quran says 1 year in prison, and hadith says 1 year and 1 day. Are you now going to determine that 1 year and 1 days is ok? Maybe there's a reason it's 1 year?

With regards to apostasy, it's fair to say you don't believe that, but it is and has always been a part of Sharia. The sheer volume of hadiths confirming that execution is the way to deal with a declaration of apostasy really makes it impossible to deny - unless Muhammad PBUH was wrong. I don't buy that so many repeated the exact same identical hadith in different years, at different times, in different places and they all collaborated to make this story up. Sure, there is context, but I have never ever heard of a hadith where someone declared apostasy and he/she WASN'T executed.

I'd say that if you conducted a survey of scholars with the following question: "What is the ruling, according to Sharia, for dealing with with a person who has declared apostasy and has rejected your appeals 3 times?"

I'd say at least 98% of Sunni scholars would need just one word to answer that question: execution.