Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

pikiran lo sempit. Kalo ngga tau apa-apa nga usah komentar

I know what "pikiran" means. and I know you speak english. Show some courage and actually say something relevant.

p.s. I should have added "rapist" in my initial comment.

OK. What I'm trying to say is you have a really narrow mind. Saying something based only something you read or hear something that could be unvalid.

And please, the way you're giving comment is just for making people (especially moslem) angry. Not based on ur own intellectual thoughts.

He never behead, he release slave, he doesnt do massacre, and mostly he would never rape. Huahahaha...God, thats one new I heard from you.

Please, sir (!) use this comment to comment (!) not to falsely acused.

thank you

I'm sorry if you are offended. Do you really not know these basic facts?

After the battle of the ditch, Mohammed turned on a jewish tribe called the Banu Qurazayah. They had cheered for the people of Mecca in the recent fight.
A pit was dug. The adult men were beheaded, accounts differ as to whether Mohammed himself participated. And as Allah's prophet he was entitled to a cut of the loot, a choice of the women captives, and money's from any children sold as slaves.

Bukhari
Volume 8, Book 74, Number 278:
Narrated Abu Said:

The people of (the tribe of) Quraiza agreed upon to accept the verdict of Sa'd. The Prophet sent for him (Sa'd) and he came. The Prophet said (to those people), "Get up for your chief or the best among you!" Sa'd sat beside the Prophet and the Prophet said (to him), "These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sa'd said, "So I give my judgment that their warriors should be killed and their women and children should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have judged according to the King's (Allah's) judgment." (See Hadith No. 447, Vol. 5)


This is all pretty well established. From Ibn al shaq on, all muslim historians have had to deal with this. If you want I can direct you to a dozen incidents just as gorey. I will spare you. But none are more than a google search away. Or perhaps we should discuss his marriage to a nine year old.

My problem with Armstrong comes in the way she downplays, or flat out ignores these things. Bringing them up does not really help a sense of comfort and brotherhood between the faiths. But neither can a relationship be based on lies.

Yes, I have heard of this and I have read the answers as well. I'm sorry that I can not explain it as fluent as you are.

What I can say is, it wasnt muhammad who verdict the behead. Sa'd did. If I am not wrong it's the deal or culture of the prisoner of war to have verdict from the capturer (which is sa'd). The story is quite long and I can not replay it well in my limited memory and languange ability.

The marriage too, EVERY mariage that is, based only on political objection. Except for his marriage to khadijah. I dont know where you come from but in that time, women does married in such a young age because there were no high education, carreer and such for woman to look forward too. They were only a daughter then a mother and a wife. Later on when she is 13/14 then Aisyah could live together with muhammad as a wife. Even now in Indonesia, in small village or such, women married in young age. We have to remember the time and place of the history you asked.

About the war..why is it such a big deal? Moslem at that time was tortured and killed as well. Beheaded too, massacred too, pinned by rock etc. Why is it never mentioned by non-moslem? Muhammad fought in the name of protecting the people and religion. Dont tell me you doesnt now perang salib? (forgive me I dont remember the english word). The war where christian fought in the name of their god? Why we never make it such a big deal? or accused one man as a ruthless murderer? (The king? I dont remember his name too)

Yes, history is a violent time. Dont see it from our point of view (our idealistic-modern-so called civilized point of view that is, which is bullsh*t coz there are still killing and amoral behavior everywhere in the world)

Vermint, please remember too, muhammad is a prophet. Dont speak about him like he is moslem's god. If you ever read Quran, you will see how history will be explained more detailed and how muhammad always been reminded by god if he ever done wrong as a human. He is someone we respect and there are a lot of good things and deed he done that we are supposed to follow. The teaching, islam, is not from him. It's from Allah. He is a prophet, a messanger.

Ok, the comment for Armstrong, I can accept it. This is what I'm trying to say. If you comment using ur latest comment, there would be no discussion like this. I was just trying to say that your comment was like a hatred toward muhammad rather than comment to what Armstrong wrote on her book. Or maybe its just me, being too sensitive =) Honestly, I havent read this book. I was just stumbled on your comment.

Karen might not have the more detail history of muhammad. She might actually doesnt want to mention it because there were a lot of contradiction about it. Just like we are doing now. You said that and I said this. She maybe doesnt have the balls to choose which side to believe or maybe even its a good choice not to take side. Who knows...

No hard feelings, kay

No hard feelings. It's sort of nice to be able to calmly discuss a fairly unpleasant subject.

And understand, I'm not so much fighting with you as I am the Taliban/Al Qeuda types who claim to speake for your faith. They say it justifies some pretty horribe things. I curious to know, And argument is how I learn.

Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, even atheism all have bloody pasts. But if King Olaf goes around slaughtering heathens, you can say that he is acting in an "un-christlike" manner.

You say that Mohammed did not order the massacre. This is debateble. He certainly did nothing to stop it. Condemned no one who participated. And expected his share of the spoils afterwards. He seems to have been innocently standing around alot of massacres.


..........
We went out with Allah's Messenger on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women. And we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, but at the same time we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception).
But we said: We are doing an act wheras Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.
Sahih Muslim Book 8 Number 3371
...............

From what I understand, Mohammed is considered to have lived the perfect life in accordance with God's will. Anything he forbade is forbidden. Anything he did is permitted. This leads to some problems.

Thomas Jefferson owned slaves.And probably fathered children by one of them. He seemed to recognize the coming disaster when he said...

"When I think that God is just, I fear for my country."

And we paid for that bit of hypocrisy in our founding with a civil war, and near a million dead. I consider Jefferson one of the great men of history, but have no illusion about his moral failings.

Of course, I am not a muslim, and cannot tell you how to reform your religion. But I kind of wish you would. Mohammed conducted himself as a seventh century warlord. It is now the twenty first. God had a habit of choosing imperfect men as his prophets. Time to seperate the messenger from the message.


p.s.
I've read Sale,Litton, Spencer, Ibn Warraq, etc on top of Armstrong and Esposito. If you have any reccomendations of islamic history I look them over.

=) this is where I can not speak much. The literature u showned me are from hadits. Which is not our (moslem) main source of law. Hadits are writtened by hundreds of man. And hundreds of it too have provened contradict with quran. Me, myself, never read hadits. I only hold on to Quran and sunnah.
And muhammad said that they will be not condemned by doing sexual intercourse not with their legal wife? Dear God...I'll be definitely sure the hadits is wrong. Zinah is one of the biggest sin in islam.

Of course, I can not debate about history, Especially something writtened by a man. Who knows? I didnt live at that century.

Like I said, the massacre-the war-it started when moslem were being tortured too. Muhammad was told to fight when he and the moslem people are being fought with violent. well, you cant expect powders and feathers in wars right?
I can not answer too if you ask about why he didnt condemned? well he certainly allow the war because god said it is ok if we are defending ourselves.

I never really read detailed history about my religion. Not even muhammad's. I'm just a regular liberal moslem myself. Having going to moslem school for 14 years. I only read Quran for things like this. If you ask me any recommendation? Definitely Quran. =P

Karen Armstrong book was supposed to be my first muhammad story book =)

I think it answers your question when you said "God had a habit of choosing imperfect men as his prophets". If not, the prophet itself will be considered as God. There lies the true reason why Muhammad done mistakes too. To show he is just a human. Maybe u've read book that only said incredible things about Muhammad. And aside the human parts of him. I dont know. I'm not the fanatic-worship muhammad-type..hahaha...

Well, maybe if I could give u a suggest. If you read about things that confront muhammad, have you read the answers from other source? I myself doesnt have a recommendation. Maybe while you're wondering around in the net? And keep open minded like this =) I like people who can discuss like you rather than judge.

Oh yea, I read Jeffrey Lang's book. Maybe you'd like to know a little about the questions that are regularly asked by non-moslem or even by moslem themselves. The book is quite good with simple words.

This is abut as close to agreement as we're likely to come. I think I've shown that Armstrong's book is inadequate. You've made the point that Islam isn't quite the monolith I was afraid of.

Still looking for the Jeffrey Lang book.

Agree...Yup, maybe it is. But I'll still gonna read it. You know why I choose Karen's armstrong to be my first book about Muhammad? Because she is not a moslem. Where "MAYBE" there could be bias in it. And thank you for trying to understand a little what I know about Islam.

Nice talking with you. salam =)

wow, wat an interesting disscussions here..

U know menoedh, i like the way u respond to people who have typical western prejudices about Islam and Muhammad(pbuh),people like varmint(who might spit some words dat might make u feel offended).

And i also apreciate Varmint, who has willingness to consider some ideas that contrary to his own, with open minded instead of respond it with ignorance and keep spitting mean words to offend people with different opinion, jz like other typical Islam hatred from (mostly)western society.

I think this is how every people shud do when dealing with contradiction issues or different point of views--with open minded thoughts instead of more rage and hatred, because u know, we're jz the same, we're all only seeking for the truths, and despite of every differences that we have, we're all only seeking for happiness for our own selves and people around us, and hatred wont ever make any of us closer to it,ever.

hours before i read ur discussion,i jz found some interesting quotes from goodreads

"The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference."
� Elie Wiesel

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness;
only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate;
only love can do that."
� Martin Luther King Jr.


i realy hope dat we cud always find and spread happiness in our lives.
may peace be upon you, varmint and menoedh. salam.

Nice quotes =)
I agree..I hope there would be more people that could drive out hate ergo love..hehehehe

Salam, Cory...

You certainly wasted your time. And mine.