All religions are all the same

[selamlar]

It is what many followers of Islam take it to be, is it not.

No its not. The sayings and stories concerning the life of Muhammed are an entirely seperate body of work, namely the hadiths. These are a huge subject in and of themselves, but as a brief summary of the position that (most) interpretations of (part of the problem here is that it is not possible to accuratly summarise complex positions held by millions worldwide into a few pithy lines) Islamic theology takes is that The Qu'ran was revealed to Muhammed by Gabriel over a period of some years, and that it is the original word of God.
Muhammed himself, whilst an object of love and to a certain extent veneration, is not an object of worship per se, he did not perform miracles, claim to be anything like the son of God etc etc or (usually) claim to be anything else other than the revealer of the word of god. If you look at the call to prayer issued from mosques, it identifies Muhammed as the messenger of god, nothing more, and prayers tend to be (am not sure if they all are, but I can't think of an example where they are not) directed at god, not Muhammed. Its a complicated one, but it is fair to say that, in general, Muhammed is not worshipped, Allah is.

Oh, and صلى الله عليه وسلم

 

[selamlar]

'religions' may not be the same

but 'religion' only means one thing

re - ligio = re - connecting

No, that is one possible etymology (the augustinian one). It certainly comes from the latin root religio, but where that comes from is a matter of some debate. IIRC Cicero thought it came from the root lego (to read) as in re-lego - to re-read/reconsider/repeat

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No its not. The sayings and stories concerning the life of Muhammed are an entirely seperate body of work, namely the hadiths. These are a huge subject in and of themselves, but as a brief summary of the position that (most) interpretations of (part of the problem here is that it is not possible to accuratly summarise complex positions held by millions worldwide into a few pithy lines) Islamic theology takes is that The Qu'ran was revealed to Muhammed by Gabriel over a period of some years, and that it is the original word of God.
Muhammed himself, whilst an object of love and to a certain extent veneration, is not an object of worship per se, he did not perform miracles, claim to be anything like the son of God etc etc or (usually) claim to be anything else other than the revealer of the word of god. If you look at the call to prayer issued from mosques, it identifies Muhammed as the messenger of god, nothing more, and prayers tend to be (am not sure if they all are, but I can't think of an example where they are not) directed at god, not Muhammed. Its a complicated one, but it is fair to say that, in general, Muhammed is not worshipped, Allah is.

Oh, and صلى الله عليه وسلم

The word of god is 'revealed' through Mohammad - in other words, what Mohammad said is taken to be the word of god.

 

[selamlar]

The word of god is 'revealed' through Mohammad - in other words, what Mohammad said is taken to be the word of god.

Well that just depends on whether you believe it or not. As a kaffir, I would agree with you on that, but you would be hard pressed to find a Muslim that does. Same as asking whether Jesus was the son of god, isn't it.
For me, he would have difficultly being as there is no such thing as god and all, for a Christian, it is one of the basic articles of faith.

 

[Brainaddict]

Well then you are both wrong. Monotheism is the central dogma of Islam. There is no worship of prophets let alone "saints".

Buddhism is not a religion.

Catholicism is not polytheism.

Islam is not the same as Hinduism.

salaam.

(a) I've yet to go to a muslim country where there aren't shrines to certain venerated saints - usually where people pray to the saints for good health or whatever. I realise that muslims treat polytheism as a great evil in theory. In practice most of them practice it

(b) Buddhism: Sorry people, but if it's got shiny gold temples and a true path to follow, and priests who survive on the largesse of the people, and if it's got doctrines and mythologies and it perpetuates itself as a taught belief system down through the generations, it's a religion. Sorry.

(c) Catholicism. See (a) but Catholicism is even sillier with it's saints. It even has a Mother Goddess in the form of Mary.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

A truly monotheistic religion would see everything that happens as the expression of one god. As soon as we allow for free will to exist, we are essentially setting ourselves up as gods and meandering into polytheism.

 

[max_freakout]

No, that is one possible etymology (the augustinian one). It certainly comes from the latin root religio, but where that comes from is a matter of some debate. IIRC Cicero thought it came from the root lego (to read) as in re-lego - to re-read/reconsider/repeat

there is no debate on this, 'religion' means re-linking, or reconnecting

 

[Aldebaran]

No worship of prophets, maybe, but doesn't Islam have as a central dogma the idea that a chap called Mohammad had privileged access to the will of the one and only god? If not a deity as such, he is certainly set apart from the hoi poloi to whom the will of this god would be a mystery without him.

No. God did not speak directly to Muhammed. Revelations were sent to him through the mediation of the angel jibriel (Gabriël). Al Qur'an does not contain any new revelation, it is the original Message of God as it was given to the former Prophets. All Prophets are equal in Islam.

There is no important difference for me between 'worship of a prophet' and venerating what that prophet said as the 'will of god'.

Of course there is.
There is no worship the Prophet Muhammed or any other Prophet.
There is no worship of the Traditions (Hadith compilations) concerning the Prophet Muhammed.
There is no worship of Al Qur'an in its oral or written form.
Muslims worship God and only God.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

in general, Muhammed is not worshipped, Allah is.

Correction: Muhammed is never worshipped. Ever.

salaam.

 

[Brainaddict]

This is an interesting read on 'saints' in Islam - from a hostile source obviously, but I couldn't find anything else quickly:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol1/8c.html

But the author is trying to distinguish between 'pure' Islam and the 'sullied' version, while admitting that actually the majority of Muslims follow the sullied version. Doesn't make much sense to me. I would just say that Islam as actually practiced has polytheistic tendencies, despite the doctrines forbidding this.

 

[Aldebaran]

However, it is not true to say (as an absolute) that there are no saints in Islam. Take Hacı Bektaş Veli, for instance. Maybe not a saint by name, but the veneration/relics/festivals etc speak for themselves.

Don't know the name or what festival you talk about, but anything that aims at worship of a human is blasphemy.
Of course for non-Muslims it is difficult to make a difference between the veneration of a local person who is taken as example for Muslims and what - for example - Catholics do when it comes to their saints, who are declared saints by the Pope.

There are no declared saints in Islam. There are no intermediators between a Muslim and God.

salaam.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No. God did not speak directly to Muhammed. Revelations were sent to him through the mediation of the angel jibriel (Gabriël).

salaam.

So there is only one god, yet there are also these things called angels that act independently of that god? Are the angels not gods too? I'm confused.

Are you sure Muhammed wasn't in fact talking to himself in much the same way that certain schizophrenics do?

 

[pinkmonkey]

The problem with religion threads on Urban (as I see it) is that everyone seems to make assumptions and no one (well it seems that way) has actually done any studying or actually knows much at all about the religions they are criticising. I admit I know very little about Islam, reading the Koran is on my to-do list.

Are all religions the same? I reccommend this book http://www.amazon.com/Perennial-Philosophy-Aldous-Huxley/dp/0060901918

 

[Aldebaran]

This is an interesting read on 'saints' in Islam - from a hostile source obviously, but I couldn't find anything else quickly:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol1/8c.html

But the author is trying to distinguish between 'pure' Islam and the 'sullied' version, while admitting that actually the majority of Muslims follow the sullied version. Doesn't make much sense to me. I would just say that Islam as actually practiced has polytheistic tendencies, despite the doctrines forbidding this.

I don't need to read it to know what it is about.
Like I said, for an outsider it is difficult to distinguish between what a Muslim would call "a holy man" which mean an example to follow because of his virtuous life, and what a Christian would call a "saint".
baraka obtained by visiting the tomb of such a person is not intended nor expected to come from God through that person. It is in honouring the person's example that is sought to get good fortune or whatever people have in mind when visiting such a tomb.

Superstitions of course exists everywhere. It is in my view impossible to find a society were no superstition exists.
You can't avoid people to believe (and practice) such things.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

The problem with religion threads on Urban (as I see it) is that everyone seems to make assumptions and no one (well it seems that way) has actually done any studying or actually knows much at all about the religions they are criticising. I admit I know very little about Islam, reading the Koran is on my to-do list.

My first academic study was Islam.
If you want to read Al Qur'an, try to find a translation where some exegeses (Ar. tafsir) is included.

salaam.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There are no declared saints in Islam. There are no intermediators between a Muslim and God.

salaam.

Yet you state as a knowable fact that Muhammad received revelations from god via Jibriel (a supernatural entity of uncertain theological status known as an angel).

If there really are no intermediators between a Muslim and God, why bother with anything Muhammad had to say.

Eta: And also, why did Muhammad have Jibriel as an intermediator?

 

[Brainaddict]

I don't need to read it to know what it is about.
Like I said, for an outsider it is difficult to distinguish between what a Muslim would call "a holy man" which mean an example to follow because of his virtuous life, and what a Christian would call a "saint".
baraka obtained by visiting the tomb of such a person is not intended nor expected to come from God through that person. It is in honouring the person's example that is sought to get good fortune or whatever people have in mind when visiting such a tomb.

Superstitions of course exists everywhere. It is in my view impossible to find a society were no superstition exists.
You can't avoid people to believe (and practice) such things.

salaam.

I understand why it is important in your mind to distinguish between 'venerating' someone and 'worshipping' someone. However the distinction is completely bogus. People pray to these 'holy men' for healing and good fortune and so on. They perform exactly the same function as saints in catholicism, even if they aren't officially declared as such.

But as a religious person you are required to resolve many contradictions in your mind, are very practised at it, and can therefore resolve this too. Good on you - but don't expect us to buy it

 

[Aldebaran]

I understand why it is important in your mind to distinguish between 'venerating' someone and 'worshipping' someone. However the distinction is completely bogus. People pray to these 'holy men' for healing and good fortune and so on. They perform exactly the same function as saints in catholicism, even if they aren't officially declared as such.

No.
I know Catholicism and its practices since I opened my eyes.
I know Islam and its practices since the very same moment.
I know where the distinction is between veneration of an Islamic "holy person" and a Catholic Saint.

But as a religious person you are required to resolve many contradictions in your mind, are very practised at it, and can therefore resolve this too. Good on you - but don't expect us to buy it

I don't need to resolve any contradictions.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yet you state as a knowable fact that Muhammad received revelations from god via Jibriel (a supernatural entity of uncertain theological status known as an angel).

If there really are no intermediators between a Muslim and God, why bother with anything Muhammad had to say.

Eta: And also, why did Muhammad have Jibriel as an intermediator?

Ask God.

salaam.

 

[Brainaddict]

Course you don't have any contradictions to resolve. How could there be any contradictions in The Truth? I've just been reading about al Wahhab's view on this though:

Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab's emphasis on the oneness of God was asserted in contradistinction to shirk, or polytheism, defined as the act of associating any person or object with powers that should be attributed only to God. He condemned specific acts that he viewed as leading to shirk, such as votive offerings, praying at saints' tombs and at graves, and any prayer ritual in which the suppliant appeals to a third party for intercession with God. Particularly objectionable were certain religious festivals, including celebrations of the Prophet's birthday, Shia mourning ceremonies, and Sufi mysticism. Consequently, the Wahhabis forbid grave markers or tombs in burial sites and the building of any shrines that could become a locus of shirk.

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/islam/countries/bl_SaudiIslamWahhabi.htm

So in his view, as well as in the view of most outside observers, the majority of muslims have polytheistic tendencies.

 

[pinkmonkey]

My first academic study was Islam.
If you want to read Al Qur'an, try to find a translation where some exegeses (Ar. tafsir) is included.

salaam.

Do you have a link to where I could buy one?

 

[selamlar]

Don't know the name or what festival you talk about, but anything that aims at worship of a human is blasphemy.

Not the best link, but a way in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajji_Bektash_Wali

Idolatry, rather than blasphemy, I would have thought, although 15 million alevi's would disagree. Of course, thats if the alevis are muslims. There is quite some debate on the matter.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Ask God.

End of discussion, methinks.

 

[selamlar]

there is no debate on this, 'religion' means re-linking, or reconnecting

No, that is one possible etymology.

religion
c.1200, "state of life bound by monastic vows," also "conduct indicating a belief in a divine power," from Anglo-Fr. religiun (11c.), from O.Fr. religion "religious community," from L. religionem (nom. religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods," in L.L. "monastic life" (5c.); according to Cicero, derived from relegare "go through again, read again," from re- "again" + legere "read" (see lecture). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (and many modern writers) connects it with religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods." Another possible origin is religiens "careful," opposite of negligens. Meaning "particular system of faith" is recorded from c.1300.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=religion

Interesting, and relevent, quote, from the same source:

"To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name." [Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, 1885]

 

[selamlar]

Correction: Muhammed is never worshipped. Ever.

salaam.

<cough>

malwid
مَوْلِدُ آلنَبِيِّ‎

 

[Aldebaran]

I've just been reading about al Wahhab's view on this though:

Of course. Do you read there anything else than what I am saying?
Any such actions are condemned, through the centuries by scholars. (Besides that ibn al wahhab nor the madhab named after him and all that comes to it in past and present isn't exactly among my favourites).

Yet as I said, you cant prevent people from taking examples out of their own societies and contributing them powers they don't have. It is called superstition for a reason. If you read carefully (and understand in islamic context = forget yours) it is against such exaggerations that al wahhab warns. Nowadays people are warned exactly the same. But folklore is folklore and superstition is superstition and you name me a society where none of it exists. I'll give you the Nobel Prize of Originality.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Not the best link, but a way in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajji_Bektash_Wali

Idolatry, rather than blasphemy, I would have thought, although 15 million alevi's would disagree. Of course, thats if the alevis are muslims. There is quite some debate on the matter.

Idolatry is blasphemy.

salaam.

 

[Brainaddict]

Aldebaran, out sailing earlier today:

 

[danny la rouge]

Idolatry is blasphemy.

salaam.

Not to idols.

 

[selamlar]

Idolatry is blasphemy.

salaam.

Idolatry is against tevhid, sure, and it is probably shirk, but it ain't blasphemy. Blasphemy would be speaking to defame/harm/deny the prophets/the Qur'an etc.