Originally posted by Castro: Careful there Katrina , with statements like these, you will be accused of being in a celebratory mode and condoning something or the other. Members of the elite prevention-of-vice-and-promotion-of-virtue squad will then be dispatched to eliminate you. Castro, It is not an elite squad but it ought to be a whole billion plus army, a duty for every Muslim. The Believers, men and women, are protectors one of another: they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil: (Qur'an 9:71) Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. (Qur'an 2: 110)

North, This is the CL thread dude...take the L'pool vs Man U talk to another post! Ma waxa laga dhigey mod inaad meesha qastid? PS: I'm supporting L'pool on Sunday! Go Koppers!lool, does that term exist? What is up with the empty seats at Stamford Bridge in a CL night? Arsenal are reeling! They are playing without confidence at all! It took a scrappy goal (a foul, so it seemed) in injury time to beat lowly Thun! How would they do against top sides like Milan, Bayer, Barca? They'll be eaten for b/fast if they keep on like this. I like their positive, attacking football but you need to get some points (and goals) in the process. The Lyon-Real game was the best this week, the Galacticos loked like a lower division team. No dedication, no direction and no creativity! Zizou is missed big time! mojam, Ajax are exciting as always, they are playing the total football they are famolus for. It would be interesting to watch when they play Arsenal.

Originally posted by SoMa_InC: Viking sxb seriously that game was far away from lively. No skills whatsoever! The ball was never on the groud floor, always in the air, may be that is a skill. The goals were fine in an African standard football but the game was not what I expected. My expectations were high and they disappointed me. Soma Inc, A Chelsea supporter complaining about long balls? Oh dear! How did Chelsea beat Bayern Munich last year? Who are the champions of route 1 football? People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones sxb! Water under the bridge...

xiinfaniin, It is not a just a mere exercise sxb but a chapter I was reading in a book prompted me to put all these into context. Of course I accept it as it is but I might understand it as a symbolic representation for we cannot imagine things that our brains are unable to comprehend. But this doesn't mean that I will attach to it an 'illogical' interpretation (far from the truth) brought about by speculation. I would personally interpret 70 000 followers as meaning many, a huge number, and not literally seventy-thousand as we know it numerically. When it comes to interpretations, scholars have been divided depending on the time they live in. The current epoch, in terms of intepretation (from the past 100 years or so), has been dominated by literalists. This has naturally been a reaction to the era that preceeded it where the other side of the scale was generally the norm. So the dilemma remains for us commoners, does 73 sects mean, seventy-three, numerically, or is it merely allegorical? What if it comes a time in the near future when we can count 82 sects within Islam, will the Prophet's prediction in this particular tradition still stand? These are things that come to mind when confronted by such traditions, how are we to interpret it? Some are convinced it is numerical and that is why we have exclusive sects which believe to be the ONE sect that is to be saved on the Day of Reckonning. The nature of things we are yet to percieve are beyond our imagination and comprehension and naturally paradise is described in an allegorical fashion using words that we are familiar with i.e. green gardens, milk, honey, beautiful maidens etc. These description we can fathom. You imagine (as an example, a radical one as such) how you could describe the internet to a geeljire who is yet to see an automobile. Would you use words like server, hardware, software and bandwidth? Or would you try and use terminology familiar to him, even though you will know it would be very far from the Real McCoy. The geeljire will have two options, to either take your description literally or allegorically; the latter would leave it all to the imagination for it would be a massive task to try and truely comprehend (in a literal manner) something one is yet to experience.

The Prophet SAWS mentionned in a well known Hadith that the Jews would be split into 71 and the (one will be saved and 70 would go to hell), the Christians will split into 72 sects etc... and that Muslims would break up into 73 sects where all save one group/sect would go to hell. There is another well-known tradition that says that if you were to divide hellfire into 70 000 parts, all the fires in the world (combined) would only constitute one part. Such is the fury of hellfire! There is also another tradition where the Prophet SAWS says that dream-vision is the seventieth part of prophecy. ------------------------------------------------- Hadith - Sahih Bukhari 4:464, Narrated 'Imran bin Husain The Prophet SAWS said, "Verily! 70,000 or 700,000 of my followers will enter Paradise altogether; so that the first and the last amongst them will enter at the same time, and their faces will be glittering like the bright full moon." ------------------------------------------------- Volume 7, Book 71, Number 648: Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet once came out to us and said, "Some nations were displayed before me. A prophet would pass in front of me with one man, and another with two men, and another with a group of people. and another with nobody with him. Then I saw a great crowd covering the horizon and I wished that they were my followers, but it was said to me, 'This is Moses and his followers.' Then it was said to me, 'Look'' I looked and saw a big gathering with a large number of people covering the horizon. It was said, "Look this way and that way.' So I saw a big crowd covering the horizon. Then it was said to me, "These are your followers, and among them there are 70,000 who will enter Paradise without (being asked about their) accounts. " Then the people dispersed and the Prophet did not tell who those 70,000 were. So the companions of the Prophet started talking about that and some of them said, "As regards us, we were born in the era of heathenism, but then we believed in Allah and His Apostle . We think however, that these (70,000) are our offspring." That talk reached the Prophet who said, "These (70,000) are the people who do not draw an evil omen from (birds) and do not get treated by branding themselves and do not treat with Ruqya, but put their trust (only) in their Lord." then 'Ukasha bin Muhsin got up and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Am I one of those (70,000)?" The Prophet said, "Yes." Then another person got up and said, "Am I one of them?" The Prophet said, " 'Ukasha has anticipated you." ------------------------------------------------- Now, regarding i.e. the first tradition, there are many sects in Islam that claim to belong to the "saved" sect and they have their own ways of proving why they think they are the chosen ones. Arabs are well-known for using the number 70 to express the idea of a large number. So, could the Prophet SAWS be saying that (in the first tradition) a very large number of Muslims would go to hell (and not the literal meaning some have given the tradition - sect A, or sect B is the "saved" sect)? In my opinion, these traditions seem to make more sense if they are viewed as allegorical and not taken literally - the numbers that is - for we are unable to comprehend or imagine the image that the Prophet SAWS is trying to paint and therefore he uses the number 70 with varying levels. Should we take it literally? Why do some people take things like these literally? Are we compelled by the Deen to take them literally?

Originally posted by NGONGE: Viking! You really consider my words to be insulting? Well, I’m sorry you do and I’m sorry if they offended you. Let us just stay out of each other’s way, eh? I can’t stand your nonsense questions (such a word is not insulting I hope) and you can’t stand my replies. For you, and only because you’re upset, I’ll consent to ‘agreeing’ to ‘disagree’. NGONGE, Now who's acting like a (using your words) fifteen-year-old girl with a hormone imbalance ? Why are my questions getting to you? Are they too personal for a public forum? Are they explicit or repugnant? Please do tell us! Try taking your own advice and keep the eyes on the ball, afterall, it's just words on a screen!

Baashi, (I'm adressing you since NGONGE opted not to engage me) I find it quite arduous to have any form of civilised discussion with NGONGE. He (all too often) applies two tactics when having a discussion of this nature, ambiguity and mockery. If one questions/inquires further regarding his ambiguous statements, he mocks you, calls you names and questions your cognitive and comprehension abilities. Now you try having a civilised discussion with someone who applies these tactics. Despite all the hindrances, I haven't insulted him the way he has insulted me.

MashaAllah! It is tragic that death is the only thing that prompts humility among the oil oligarchs of Saudi Arabia. Why aren't they humble in their daily lives?

Well aren't you back to the same ol' NGONGE tactics! You (again) managed to call me obtuse and you still question my comprehension skills, but this time the icing was "this is the final reply..." so all the roads are closed. Hooray! That football analogy was so of the mark and I'm suprised a man of your 'callibre' would partake in such a delusion, albeit unconscious. Islam is a way of life (that you and I have accepted) and when someone who TOTALLY opposes and mocks it has something to say about it, (to your dismay) I tend not to give it too much attention. When Rushdie and his ilk call for "reform" in Islam, it is dangerous for a Muslim to heed the voices of these warped individuals, however compelling their opinions/arguments may sound. When the testimony of someone is heard in a court of law, their credibilty is one of the central issues that the court pays attention to. You should do the same to the people whose articles you use as a base for discussion for they surely have sinister intentions. PS: Don't hestitate to reply if you feel compelled for I'm still the obtuse ol' Viking with impaired comprehension; but others may benefit from your wisdom-crammed paragraphs

NGONGE, No one is trying to censor you or anything you say dude, so chill out! You try to make it look like as if you represent a force of intelligent debate in contrast to those who say "jazakallah khayr" (as if it was something bad :confused: ) when responding to a post they benefitted from. Mullahs, beard-strokers? Muslims ought to speak and think from an Islamic point of view (I know this sounds crazy to your liberated self) and it is inappropriate to call people names (and also unislamic). Irshad Manji and Salman Rushdie do make people uneasy and you knew pretty darn well when you used her (Ms Manji) opinions and claimed that "she had a point". You like controversy but lack the balls to take responsibility for what you exude. Castro, Mighty dauntless of you to take on the slippery slope.

Castro, Simple question mate, do you believe that homosexuality is wrong? Just a simple yes or no would suffice. Support your reasons with religious, scientific or whatever text you deem fit for the argument. It would be hypocritical to simply say "Islam forbids it" if you don't really believe it to be wrong. I ask this because you seem to be leaning towards the "It is genetic" argument. PS: Don't be afraid of the 'slippery slope', that's where the true colours come shining through! NGONGE, I am all too aware that you are endowed with a massive appetite for writing lengthy replies and love to have the reputation as someone who likes to stir things up, but your semantic-powered puss-yfooting doesn't do you or others any favours. Originally posted by NGONGE: Many ignore the ‘argument’ and waste their time second-guessing the ‘arguer’s’ beliefs, motives and goals. You have used the opinions of people like Irshad Manji and Salman Rushdie's to whip up a debate, you've called people who try to reason from an Islamic point of view "Pseudo-Mullahs" etc etc. If you play with words the way you do, some people will lash out at you (and some -like I do- will ask for clarification), but then again, you always reserve the right to use the "Pseudo-Mullah", "obtuse" or "you have bad comprehension skills" card. But hey, maybe I'm just one of those [with impaired comprehension] who don't understand your genius. Isn't that just lovely!

Shams-ud-Din, I agree with you bro. Are the non-believers strong or are the Muslims weak? I think it is the latter but by Muslims constantly crying foul, they appear to be attesting the former to be true. If you blessed with Haq, you need not fear anything (be it media, curriculum, gotvs agenda etc.). By emigrating to kufar lands, Muslims are actually seeking protection from an internal enemy and therefore become vulnerable to external influences. This is why you see many Muslims educated in the west subconsiously (or openly) think their Islamic heritage to be somewhat inferior to the "reason-based" western ideas. We are decaying from inside out and outside in.

NGONGE, Lo and behold! It is always your way or the hi-way! Why would it be a waste of time to break down the cud every now and then? 7, It wasn't a swipe at his thread walaal but at his efforts to break things down a tad for the comprehension impaired lad. It isn't too much to ask is it?

A blend of capitalism and racism, very dangerous!

NGONGE, C'mon sxb, if you can manage cirka 30 pages of mundane daily occurrences, you surely can feather a moment to enlighten a brother can't you?

STOIC, No6? No way! It was just a part-time thing for a friend whose family owned mathrees. I had the 'machine' or collected ganji, quite profitable.

Originally posted by Shams-ud-Din: I’m suggesting to you now; to proof that the author is wrong in his conclusion, using either religion (revelation) or science (reason) as evidence to back up and justify your opposition. It is a fact that social sciences acknowledge the influences of the socio-economic-environment as one of the most important factors which shapes and conditions every individual. It is also the case that Islam doesn’t allow muslims to live amongst disbelievers (nice people or not), and as a consequence the author has, in both cases, the support of the academic findings in the fields of social sciences, and that of the Noble Qur’aan and the Sunnah of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So, please explain to us all; what is it exactly that you are opposing here? Shams-ud-din, The problems of Muslims arise from the lamentable situation in their homelands, not abroad. Our scholars and intellectuals should be finding ways of deposing the despotic regimes we have back home instead of playing the blame game. The govts that represent the billion+ Muslims all over the world are corrupt, unIslamic and constantly dance to occidental tunes piped from Washington, London, Paris etc. What the author is stating is obvious, not negligible, but very obvious and any Muslim with basic knoweldge of the Deen ought to know. Muslims are not allowed to live among disbelievers you say, does Islam permit Muslim leaders to opress, torture, imprison and kill innocent Muslims? What is it that has compelled Somalis to migrate to kufar lands? What makes Kurds, Iraqis etc to leave their lands where the populations are predominantly Muslim? Shouldn't these issues be taken head-on instead of constantly puss-yfooting and playing victim? The author laments about how the media plays with the Muslim mind, is he unaware that even non-believers are fooled and misled by the media? The average American was made to believe that Iraq was behind 9/11, what chance do the Muslims have? Isn't it better to try and find solutions instead of whining about the apparent ailments?

xiinfaniin, Anecdot cajiib ah! Sxbkeen NGONGE waxaan kafahmey jawaabtiisu inuu sheekadan Karma ka soo horjeedo Muslinka iney isticmaalan. I might be getting old or just wrong but I really can’t see how Karma fits in into the beliefs of these Mullahs. NGONGE, I saw Kashafa's remark about Karma to be just but morbid humour, not a religious decree. I'm surprised that [you] a man of superior comprehension and wisdom failed to see this [as it was] but instead deplorably used it as an opportunity to take a predictable (see xiin's anecdot) swipe at "Mullahs". Whether it is an excess or a natural compulsion, I will not pass judgement on anyone engaging in it for that is not my place. You have passed enough judgment for the both of us. Why is my concurrence important to you? Castro, It is not about judgement but about amr bil ma'roof wa nahi anil munkar .

I was a makanga

I drink 3-4 coffee cups a day but have been to Starbuck's only once. Originally posted by NGONGE: If you stay focused and don’t get distracted by his unbelievable and genius-like logic, you will remember that his opposition to homosexuality is religiously based (as evidenced by his continued use of the phrase qoom luut). Religiously based! These Pseudo-mullahs crack me up. They’ll use anything and everything to further their own agenda. NGONGE, Remember that my comprehension skills are crap, so please bear with me Can you explain the above?

Modesty, Imagine if the last Prophet of Allah SWT viewed human beings in the manner you do! Imagine if he told his loving uncle Abu Talib (who never took the Shahada) to piss off, what would have hapenned?

Originally posted by SoMa_InC: Good to see yall back man. Viking Sxb, I watched that Cameroon vs Ivory Coast game, Damn it was the most boring, non entertaining game I watched. No wonder no African team makes it big in the World Cup. The last 5-10 minutes was better than the whole match, when Cameroon attacked and were lucky to score. Damn the only good thing about the game were the two goals that were scored by non other than Chelsea striker, Drogba. Good finish in deed. Soma Inc, We have a different understanding of football sxb. That game was quite lively...it had five great goals, a lot skill was on display (both offensively and defensively), the speed of the players was electrifying and Cameroon scored some spectaluar goals; but you must have missed all that as you were only concerned about Drogba. PS: Allez les Bleus!!!!!

7, I said many feminists support the notion of androgyny, and being a Muslim, I vehemently oppose androgyny (this has nothing to do with "loosing manliness" but is in contrast to what Islam teaches). I didn't mention the word choice at all dear (a strawman perhaps? ), I was just stating that they often reject the obvious differences that exist between sexes when adressing the opression of women in their societies.

Glad to hear mate. Seems like... - Ghana is virtually through - Tunisa vs Morocco - whoever wins that game is through. - Cameroon and Togo have destiny in their own hands while - Nigeria needs Rwanda to beat Angola in order to get through. If Angola win then they will go through. I would have preferred to have Senegal and Ivory Coast in the place of Tunisia and Angola...but Senegal are paying for their previous slip-ups while Ivory Coast were unlucky for finding themselves in the toughest group.

lol@7, I'm not upset dear, I visted the BBC site and vented my anger on the Have your say; not sure they will want to publish my rants though. Where did you get the idea that I was against choice :confused: ? Do you think androgyny is a good thing?