Saddam's will to be hung without a blindfold, to die like a martyr made me wonder what exactly a martyr is today.
"In the Christian context, a martyr is an innocent person who, without seeking death (suicide being seen as sinful), is murdered or put to death for his or her religious faith or convictions. An example is the persecution of early Christians in the Roman Empire. Christian martyrs sometimes decline to defend themselves at all, in what they see as an imitation of Jesus' willing sacrifice.
Islam accepts a much broader view of what constitutes a "martyr", including anyone who dies in the struggle between the Dar al Islam and the Dar al Harb. As a result, the word is applied much more liberally, including to some who seek and cause their own deaths, without necessarily excluding those who deliberately cause the deaths of others as their final act.
In a secular context, too, the term is sometimes applied to those who use violence, such as those who die for a nation's glory during wartime (usually known under other names such as "fallen warriors"). The death of a martyr or the value attributed to it is called martyrdom.
Outside of an academic or religious context, the word "martyr" is used ironically in casual conversation to refer to someone who seeks attention or sympathy by exaggerating the impact upon themselves of some deprivation or work. " (from wikipedia)
"In Arabic, a martyr is termed "shaheed" (literally, "witness").
(...)
Muslims who die in a legitimate jihad bis saif (struggle with the sword, or Islamic holy war) are typically considered shahid. This usage became controversial in the late 20th century (due to the Islamic strictures against suicide), when it began to be applied to suicide bombers by various groups. There a huge controversy about the meaning of jihad in Islam, since the Prophet Muhammad never claimed that suicide is equal to jihad; Jihad is an act of fighting for the Dar al Islam, either to defend it against an aggressor or to bring about its expansion. Where messenger Muhammad explained, in hadith, that those who commit suicide are forbidden to even smell heaven. Some contend that these murders are contrary to the spirit of Islam, while many other Muslims argue they are fighters who "kill and are killed" in Jihad bis saif, the victims being legitimate targets. The concept of heroic martyrdom is termed "Istish-haad".
Most recently, the execution of Saddam Hussein, that took place on Dec. 30, 3006 at 6 AM Baghdad time, might make him a martyr in the eyes of his followers." (from wikipedia)
What is the point of his martyrdom? What is he trying to achieve? Is it glorious to die like a martyr or is it a way of getting people with the same belief to respond with vengeful acts, as the title of my thread suggests? Or is Saddam just seeking attention again by eggarating his importance...
And how effective is martyrdom really to the common man, the suicide bomber and the warrior that fell? Are they being commemorated in any way, being put on a list of heroes or is the martyrdom just to appease their minds and that of their family and friends, to ease the loss of their life?
I would like to hear some opinions and views on the effectiveness of martyrdom.
Perpetuating conflict: Martyrdom
Perpetuating conflict: Martyrdom
[size=-1]An optimist is a badly informed pessimist.[/size]
If that would be true, martyrdom would be a personal thing, in hope that your personal death will be avenged and your name be glorified, while you have been captured and killed by the enemy. That makes it an invention for turning defeat into glory, rather than a title with religious importance.
How credible really is such a claim then, if it is claimed for personal glory and who will respond to the call for martyrdom of Hussein? Religious fanatics or those who supported and respected the ex-dictator? Can we say anything about that?
How credible really is such a claim then, if it is claimed for personal glory and who will respond to the call for martyrdom of Hussein? Religious fanatics or those who supported and respected the ex-dictator? Can we say anything about that?
[size=-1]An optimist is a badly informed pessimist.[/size]
I'd say that those people who claim the right to martyrdom, by saying "my people will avenge my death" or similar attitude, are those who just can't accept dying... It's a way they grasp at the last tiny hope to live, not in a body, but in someone's mind, in someone's will, or words of a song... That's how I have always seen it...
Whew, I'm getting too metaphysical... Yes, I think it is a try to turn defeat into glory... As much glory you can get while defeated, which is not much. But who will answer "saddam's call"?... Probably those who had a good living alongside him - people who will always defend any system, no matter how bad. We have a lot of them in my country...
Whew, I'm getting too metaphysical... Yes, I think it is a try to turn defeat into glory... As much glory you can get while defeated, which is not much. But who will answer "saddam's call"?... Probably those who had a good living alongside him - people who will always defend any system, no matter how bad. We have a lot of them in my country...
Kitchen Witchcraft : Of Magic and Macaroni - a blog about, well, a witch in the kitchen.
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
-
Malta Soron
- Posts: 526
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:21 pm
- Location: Leiden
- Contact:
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
The Islamic Martyrdom is a direct continuation of jihad. They are twins.
A. Ezzati, Tehran University:
The concept of martyrdom (shahada) in Islam can only be understood in the light of the Islamic concept of Holy Struggle (jihad) and the concept of jihad may only be appreciated if the concept of the doctrine of enjoining right and discovering wrong (al-amr bi'l-maruf) is properly appreciated, and good and bad, right and wrong, can only be understood if the independent divine source of righteousness, truth, and goodness (tawhid), and how the Message of the divine source of righteousness and truth has been honestly and properly conveyed to humanity through prophethood, are understood. Finally the divine message may not be fully appreciated unless the embodiment of this divine message, or the Model of Guidance, and the Supreme Paradigm (imama or uswa) is properly recognized.
I don't pretend I properly recognize the Supreme Paradigm so let us read on:
A shahid is the person who sees and witnesses, and he is therefore the witness, as if the martyr witnesses and sees the truth physically and thus stands by it firmly, so much so that not only does he testify it verbally, but he is prepared to struggle and fight and give up his life for the truth, and thus to become a martyr. In this way, and by his struggle and sacrifice for the sake of the truth, he become a model, a paradigm, and an example for others, worthy of being copied, and worthy of being followed.
OK, does that mean one has to take a gun/knife/bomb, fight and be killed to become a martyr? Keep reading:
We may therefore conclude that there is neither jihad nor martyrdom outside the realm of truth, that martyrdom applies only when it is preceded by jihad, that jihad is an inclusive struggle for the cause of the truth, that a mujahid dies the death of a martyr even though he does not fall on the battlefield. He dies as a martyr even though he is not killed, on the condition that he stays loyal to the divine truth and stands ready to fight for the truth and to defend it at all costs, even at the cost of his own life. He is a mujahid while he lives, and a martyr if he dies or is killed for it.
Aha, just stay the course, be loyal to the truth and be ready to be called upon. Sort of National Guard? And who is going to call?
In Islam man needs guidance to the truth. The true guidance is from the whole truth, God, the Source of Truth and Guidance (50:6, 71, 88, 92:12). But since it is man who is to be guided, the guide should naturally be a man. Islam is the message from the source of truth, given to the Messenger as the guideline for leading mankind to the truth. Guiding humanity requires leading humanity.
And now we came to the "leading men", the ones who would call upon their loyal mujahiddin conditioned to view martyrdom as a noble goal.
Historically, the Islamic martyrdom practice started in 11th century in the Assassin cults called Nizari. They used large doses of hashish to “see the paradise” (the Arabic word Assassin means “hashish user”) which was promised them as a reward for their dubious services. Those druggies fanatically obeyed orders of their manipulative superiors who was apparently pursuing their own political goals. The lethal killers were successfully blending with any culture: they were formally excused from any requirements applied to Muslims, moral included. They could eat any food normally prohibited to Muslims. They were a perfect weapon, always 'ready to be called upon'
So, terrorism is a time-honored 'noble' tradition.
It is not a vendetta, it is not about avenging, or at least, not mainly about avenging.
A. Ezzati, Tehran University:
The concept of martyrdom (shahada) in Islam can only be understood in the light of the Islamic concept of Holy Struggle (jihad) and the concept of jihad may only be appreciated if the concept of the doctrine of enjoining right and discovering wrong (al-amr bi'l-maruf) is properly appreciated, and good and bad, right and wrong, can only be understood if the independent divine source of righteousness, truth, and goodness (tawhid), and how the Message of the divine source of righteousness and truth has been honestly and properly conveyed to humanity through prophethood, are understood. Finally the divine message may not be fully appreciated unless the embodiment of this divine message, or the Model of Guidance, and the Supreme Paradigm (imama or uswa) is properly recognized.
I don't pretend I properly recognize the Supreme Paradigm so let us read on:
A shahid is the person who sees and witnesses, and he is therefore the witness, as if the martyr witnesses and sees the truth physically and thus stands by it firmly, so much so that not only does he testify it verbally, but he is prepared to struggle and fight and give up his life for the truth, and thus to become a martyr. In this way, and by his struggle and sacrifice for the sake of the truth, he become a model, a paradigm, and an example for others, worthy of being copied, and worthy of being followed.
OK, does that mean one has to take a gun/knife/bomb, fight and be killed to become a martyr? Keep reading:
We may therefore conclude that there is neither jihad nor martyrdom outside the realm of truth, that martyrdom applies only when it is preceded by jihad, that jihad is an inclusive struggle for the cause of the truth, that a mujahid dies the death of a martyr even though he does not fall on the battlefield. He dies as a martyr even though he is not killed, on the condition that he stays loyal to the divine truth and stands ready to fight for the truth and to defend it at all costs, even at the cost of his own life. He is a mujahid while he lives, and a martyr if he dies or is killed for it.
Aha, just stay the course, be loyal to the truth and be ready to be called upon. Sort of National Guard? And who is going to call?
In Islam man needs guidance to the truth. The true guidance is from the whole truth, God, the Source of Truth and Guidance (50:6, 71, 88, 92:12). But since it is man who is to be guided, the guide should naturally be a man. Islam is the message from the source of truth, given to the Messenger as the guideline for leading mankind to the truth. Guiding humanity requires leading humanity.
And now we came to the "leading men", the ones who would call upon their loyal mujahiddin conditioned to view martyrdom as a noble goal.
Historically, the Islamic martyrdom practice started in 11th century in the Assassin cults called Nizari. They used large doses of hashish to “see the paradise” (the Arabic word Assassin means “hashish user”) which was promised them as a reward for their dubious services. Those druggies fanatically obeyed orders of their manipulative superiors who was apparently pursuing their own political goals. The lethal killers were successfully blending with any culture: they were formally excused from any requirements applied to Muslims, moral included. They could eat any food normally prohibited to Muslims. They were a perfect weapon, always 'ready to be called upon'
So, terrorism is a time-honored 'noble' tradition.
It is not a vendetta, it is not about avenging, or at least, not mainly about avenging.
Yes, Mohammed promised that a man would have 72 Houris (beautiful virgins) and 28 young boys (!) to deflower.Isn't it true that people who die in martyrdom (that is, who die while fighting in a jihad) are rewarded for it by Allah (the stuff with the 72 virgins)?
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
Is it just me, or is that the most disgusting thing you can belive in?
I mean, I got used to big religions being misogynic, I know there is nothing in any paradise in any "global" religion promised to women (I know, I made a torough study on that) but all the same... How can they be so shameless about it? How? :speech: "You'll get a glass of orange juice and a virgin to deflower"... By my mother's mother, I feel... dirty even writing that. Ugh.
I mean, I got used to big religions being misogynic, I know there is nothing in any paradise in any "global" religion promised to women (I know, I made a torough study on that) but all the same... How can they be so shameless about it? How? :speech: "You'll get a glass of orange juice and a virgin to deflower"... By my mother's mother, I feel... dirty even writing that. Ugh.
Kitchen Witchcraft : Of Magic and Macaroni - a blog about, well, a witch in the kitchen.
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
I frankly lost my entire post due to this crappy PC but here are the main points as I don’t have the time to repeat all I said. So my sarcastic remarks and jabs will remain lost to the internet for sometime.
1. Shaheed does not mean Martyr. It means witness. A shaheed is someone who bears witness to the acts which further the cause for Islam. Abdul Sattar Edhi (Google him and his Edhi foundation if you don’t know who he is) is a man who has never fought a war or a jihad as defined by the west. Yet when he dies he will be a Shaheed. Why? Because he fought against poverty and other general aliments of society, his foundation provides homes to the homeless. Free medical treatment etc etc.
2. The definition of martyr by the west is defined by violence. It is not defined as such by Islam. Just look up the definition in your dictionary. You should notice that right away.
4. Martyrdom is subjective. People have said those Dutch MPs who put up the burqa ban legislation are martyrs for the cause of a secular Europe or emancipating women. The question is how many believe that.
5. Saddam is a dead man. Who gives a damn what he called himself. It does not change the nature of his actions or the man he was.
***********************
1. Hoors. Basically what you have is a bunch of idiotic westerns who can’t speak Arabic telling the media what they think.
2. Hoors are a class of angels. In Islam angels have no gender. They are neither man or woman as defined by modern man.
3. The Arabic word for virgin is not hoor. Some dumbass in the west did that translation. There is no mention of sexual virginity in Islam when it comes to Hoors. No where. I can bet my damn life on that.
4. Shaheeds are not limited to Gender. So a woman who is shaheed also gets 72 females virgins to deflower? Hardly. They get 72 hoors. 72 Asexual angels.
5. In Islam man and angel can not copulate. They can not mix. The eroticism of the concept of shahadat and the hoors is a concept created in the West. Not in Islam. It is not our concern what you all imagine.
6. To recap. What are hoors? Asexual angels who serve a shaheed. They are not female virgins as defined by western media sources. I personally think this whole eroticism of shahdat is because western society is so hell bent on making everything sexual.
7. Shaheed is a concept created in the first war in Islam. The battle of Badr. Those are the first shaheed. Not assassins in the 11th century.
8. The shaheed do not get 28 boys to deflower. Homosexuality is punishable by death by our laws and hadis. Hell the Quran speaks of a city which Allah burned to the ground for practicing homosexuality. So how the hell is homosexuality allowed in Heaven. Atleast be logical in your propaganda.
9. Lady Dragonfly please don’t spread stupidity and ignorance and claim it to be the way my faith acts. Your obvious hatred for Islam is evident. Stop while you are ahead.
1. Shaheed does not mean Martyr. It means witness. A shaheed is someone who bears witness to the acts which further the cause for Islam. Abdul Sattar Edhi (Google him and his Edhi foundation if you don’t know who he is) is a man who has never fought a war or a jihad as defined by the west. Yet when he dies he will be a Shaheed. Why? Because he fought against poverty and other general aliments of society, his foundation provides homes to the homeless. Free medical treatment etc etc.
2. The definition of martyr by the west is defined by violence. It is not defined as such by Islam. Just look up the definition in your dictionary. You should notice that right away.
4. Martyrdom is subjective. People have said those Dutch MPs who put up the burqa ban legislation are martyrs for the cause of a secular Europe or emancipating women. The question is how many believe that.
5. Saddam is a dead man. Who gives a damn what he called himself. It does not change the nature of his actions or the man he was.
***********************
1. Hoors. Basically what you have is a bunch of idiotic westerns who can’t speak Arabic telling the media what they think.
2. Hoors are a class of angels. In Islam angels have no gender. They are neither man or woman as defined by modern man.
3. The Arabic word for virgin is not hoor. Some dumbass in the west did that translation. There is no mention of sexual virginity in Islam when it comes to Hoors. No where. I can bet my damn life on that.
4. Shaheeds are not limited to Gender. So a woman who is shaheed also gets 72 females virgins to deflower? Hardly. They get 72 hoors. 72 Asexual angels.
5. In Islam man and angel can not copulate. They can not mix. The eroticism of the concept of shahadat and the hoors is a concept created in the West. Not in Islam. It is not our concern what you all imagine.
6. To recap. What are hoors? Asexual angels who serve a shaheed. They are not female virgins as defined by western media sources. I personally think this whole eroticism of shahdat is because western society is so hell bent on making everything sexual.
7. Shaheed is a concept created in the first war in Islam. The battle of Badr. Those are the first shaheed. Not assassins in the 11th century.
8. The shaheed do not get 28 boys to deflower. Homosexuality is punishable by death by our laws and hadis. Hell the Quran speaks of a city which Allah burned to the ground for practicing homosexuality. So how the hell is homosexuality allowed in Heaven. Atleast be logical in your propaganda.
9. Lady Dragonfly please don’t spread stupidity and ignorance and claim it to be the way my faith acts. Your obvious hatred for Islam is evident. Stop while you are ahead.
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
Wow.
Thank you, CM, for enlightening things. I am sorry if what I wrote was in any way offensive to you (and I see it was). I see we have all been victims of our own ignorance, and am personally relieved to hear that. Especially since that very concept has been haunting me for a long time.
Please accept my apologies for that injust misunderstanding, and thank you for clearing my life a little bit. I shall have one thing less to worry about.
Thank you, CM.
And yes, Saddam is dead, and if anyone wants to follow him, that's their problem. I hope they won't.
Thank you, CM, for enlightening things. I am sorry if what I wrote was in any way offensive to you (and I see it was). I see we have all been victims of our own ignorance, and am personally relieved to hear that. Especially since that very concept has been haunting me for a long time.
Please accept my apologies for that injust misunderstanding, and thank you for clearing my life a little bit. I shall have one thing less to worry about.
Thank you, CM.
And yes, Saddam is dead, and if anyone wants to follow him, that's their problem. I hope they won't.
Kitchen Witchcraft : Of Magic and Macaroni - a blog about, well, a witch in the kitchen.
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
I find your evaluation to be grossly one-sided, but whether or not that is directly your fault is something to dwell on. Before going into attack mode I'd like to know what kind of intensive religious study you've done or course you have taken to understand just where you've gotten this information and what makes you inclined to believe that Muslims historically praise 'terrorism'. You have quoted a professional definition, but your evaluations of it are clearly biased and swing away from the truth.Lady Dragonfly wrote:The Islamic Martyrdom is a direct continuation of jihad. They are twins.
A. Ezzati, Tehran University:
The concept of martyrdom (shahada) in Islam can only be understood in the light of the Islamic concept of Holy Struggle (jihad) and the concept of jihad may only be appreciated if the concept of the doctrine of enjoining right and discovering wrong (al-amr bi'l-maruf) is properly appreciated, and good and bad, right and wrong, can only be understood if the independent divine source of righteousness, truth, and goodness (tawhid), and how the Message of the divine source of righteousness and truth has been honestly and properly conveyed to humanity through prophethood, are understood. Finally the divine message may not be fully appreciated unless the embodiment of this divine message, or the Model of Guidance, and the Supreme Paradigm (imama or uswa) is properly recognized.
I don't pretend I properly recognize the Supreme Paradigm so let us read on:
A shahid is the person who sees and witnesses, and he is therefore the witness, as if the martyr witnesses and sees the truth physically and thus stands by it firmly, so much so that not only does he testify it verbally, but he is prepared to struggle and fight and give up his life for the truth, and thus to become a martyr. In this way, and by his struggle and sacrifice for the sake of the truth, he become a model, a paradigm, and an example for others, worthy of being copied, and worthy of being followed.
OK, does that mean one has to take a gun/knife/bomb, fight and be killed to become a martyr? Keep reading:
We may therefore conclude that there is neither jihad nor martyrdom outside the realm of truth, that martyrdom applies only when it is preceded by jihad, that jihad is an inclusive struggle for the cause of the truth, that a mujahid dies the death of a martyr even though he does not fall on the battlefield. He dies as a martyr even though he is not killed, on the condition that he stays loyal to the divine truth and stands ready to fight for the truth and to defend it at all costs, even at the cost of his own life. He is a mujahid while he lives, and a martyr if he dies or is killed for it.
Aha, just stay the course, be loyal to the truth and be ready to be called upon. Sort of National Guard? And who is going to call?
In Islam man needs guidance to the truth. The true guidance is from the whole truth, God, the Source of Truth and Guidance (50:6, 71, 88, 92:12). But since it is man who is to be guided, the guide should naturally be a man. Islam is the message from the source of truth, given to the Messenger as the guideline for leading mankind to the truth. Guiding humanity requires leading humanity.
And now we came to the "leading men", the ones who would call upon their loyal mujahiddin conditioned to view martyrdom as a noble goal.
Historically, the Islamic martyrdom practice started in 11th century in the Assassin cults called Nizari. They used large doses of hashish to “see the paradise” (the Arabic word Assassin means “hashish user”) which was promised them as a reward for their dubious services. Those druggies fanatically obeyed orders of their manipulative superiors who was apparently pursuing their own political goals. The lethal killers were successfully blending with any culture: they were formally excused from any requirements applied to Muslims, moral included. They could eat any food normally prohibited to Muslims. They were a perfect weapon, always 'ready to be called upon'
So, terrorism is a time-honored 'noble' tradition.
It is not a vendetta, it is not about avenging, or at least, not mainly about avenging.
Yes, Mohammed promised that a man would have 72 Houris (beautiful virgins) and 28 young boys (!) to deflower.
Sure, you can cite professionals and historical/religious texts all you want. I can point to Leviticus 20:13 and talk to religious scholars who agree that homosexuality is a sin, but because I live in Western society I know that not all devout Christians are homicidal homophobes. I agree with Fas that the 'dumbed down' version of Muslim 'martyrs' originates in the transition from Middle East to the West, where values are wondrously varied. Our society(which, I believe, is far more sexually orientated that those of the Middle East) has latched on to the idea that these violent groups that wish to do the US harm are representative of a lusty culture obsessed with being granted a heavenly brothel when they die. I can't tell you how many foreign policy classes I took that define jihad as a "holy war" that poor, misguided individuals embark on with the hopes of obtaining this paradise after their violent death. It's much easier for a vengeful culture like ours to blame the actions of terrorists on the supposed immoral promises made by Islam, say your 72 virgins/28 boys, than accept that there are characters who are charismatic enough to mislead impressionable young people into believing their bending of the truth to manipulate their actions.
A few months ago I was able to attend a forum being held by an Iraqi immigrant on the misconceptions of Islam in America. One of his first questions was 'What is the definition of 'jihad'?" Well, the first person said "holy war", and sure enough our speaker turned away from him and declared that this was exact reason he held this forums. Frankly, I'm almost inclined to tell you to take this argument of yours to any devout Muslim, simply to see what happens. I'd be shocked if he or she wasn't immensely offended by your presumptuous conclusions.
And as for your definition of Nizari, well... Deuteronomy 17:12, Exodus 22:17, Leviticus 20:27, Exodus 21:15, ect... all call upon any practitioner to commit murder despite a certain commandment not to kill. So it's not a 'National Guard' as you say, but is it not an army that is exempt from the rules when it is convenient? I'm Kemet orthodox, which preaches the Netjer, our gods, practice incest, murder, and homosexuality, though we followers are hardly threats to society. Like I said, anyone could pick out things they don't like about any faith and use them to define the religion to a culture unfamiliar with it.
"There are worse things in the world than serving the whims of a deadly sex goddess." - Zevran
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
First of all, if somebody was offended, I am truly sorry because no offense was intended.
Please let me quote Qu'ran (a translation, of course) without much commentary.
Qur’an 55:46-56 :
But for those that fear the majesty of their Lord there are two gardens (which of your Lord’s blessings
would you deny?) planted with shady trees. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each is watered by a flowing spring. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each bears every kind of fruit in pairs. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
They shall recline on couches lined with thick brocade, and within reach will hang the fruits of both gardens. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Therein are bashful virgins whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Virgins as fair as corals and rubies. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Shall the reward of goodness be anything but good? Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
And beside these there shall be two other gardens (which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?) of darkest green. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
A gushing fountain shall flow in each. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each planted with fruit-trees, the palm and the pomegranate. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
In each there shall be virgins chaste and fair. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Dark-eyed virgins, sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?), whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
They shall recline on green cushions and fine carpets. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Blessed be the name of your Lord, the Lord of Majesty and glory!
Qu'ran 78:31
As for the righteous, they shall surely triumph. Theirs shall be gardens and vineyards, and high- bosomed virgins for companions: a truly overflowing cup.
Qu'ran 37:40-48
...They will sit with bashful, dark-eyed virgins, as chaste as the sheltered eggs of ostriches.
Qu'ran 44:51-55
...Yes and We shall wed them to dark-eyed houris.
Qu'ran 52:17-20
...They shall recline on couches ranged in rows. To dark-eyed houris we shall wed them...
Qu'ran 52:24
Round about them will serve, to them, boys (handsome) as pearls well-guarded.
Qu'ran 56:17
Round about them will serve boys of perpetual freshness.
Qu'ran 76:19
And round about them will serve boys of perpetual freshness: if thou seest them, thou wouldst think them scattered pearls.
I've read some different interpretations long time ago and I remember something about "deflowering virgins and boys" (of course some of those interpretations belonged to the critics equally opposed to all religions). Was I wrong in my recollection? Then I will apologize. My post is a pure opinion since I am not a religious scholar though I would have to disagree that I am completely unfamiliar with Islam.
Besides, referring to the westerners as "bunch of idiots" and "dumbasses" "telling the media..." does not score high tolerance points either.
@Aqua-chan
To add to what I have said above, there is an Islamic link I quoted on Martyrdom (which helped to draw my 'presumptuous conclusions')
THE CONCEPT OF MARTYRDOM IN ISLAM
Hashshashin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am grateful.CM wrote:I frankly lost my entire post due to this crappy PC but here are the main points as I don’t have the time to repeat all I said. So my sarcastic remarks and jabs will remain lost to the internet for sometime.
Unfortunately, all sacred texts are poor translations. That is what we get and that is what causes religious debates for centuries. Should something be understood literally or is this a metaphor? Did this saint/prophet mean this or that? Does this word translate this or that?CM wrote:
1. Hoors. Basically what you have is a bunch of idiotic westerns who can’t speak Arabic telling the media what they think.
2. Hoors are a class of angels. In Islam angels have no gender. They are neither man or woman as defined by modern man.
3. The Arabic word for virgin is not hoor. Some dumbass in the west did that translation. There is no mention of sexual virginity in Islam when it comes to Hoors. No where. I can bet my damn life on that.
Please let me quote Qu'ran (a translation, of course) without much commentary.
Qur’an 55:46-56 :
But for those that fear the majesty of their Lord there are two gardens (which of your Lord’s blessings
would you deny?) planted with shady trees. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each is watered by a flowing spring. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each bears every kind of fruit in pairs. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
They shall recline on couches lined with thick brocade, and within reach will hang the fruits of both gardens. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Therein are bashful virgins whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Virgins as fair as corals and rubies. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Shall the reward of goodness be anything but good? Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
And beside these there shall be two other gardens (which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?) of darkest green. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
A gushing fountain shall flow in each. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Each planted with fruit-trees, the palm and the pomegranate. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
In each there shall be virgins chaste and fair. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Dark-eyed virgins, sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?), whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
They shall recline on green cushions and fine carpets. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny?
Blessed be the name of your Lord, the Lord of Majesty and glory!
Qu'ran 78:31
As for the righteous, they shall surely triumph. Theirs shall be gardens and vineyards, and high- bosomed virgins for companions: a truly overflowing cup.
Qu'ran 37:40-48
...They will sit with bashful, dark-eyed virgins, as chaste as the sheltered eggs of ostriches.
Qu'ran 44:51-55
...Yes and We shall wed them to dark-eyed houris.
Qu'ran 52:17-20
...They shall recline on couches ranged in rows. To dark-eyed houris we shall wed them...
Qu'ran 52:24
Round about them will serve, to them, boys (handsome) as pearls well-guarded.
Qu'ran 56:17
Round about them will serve boys of perpetual freshness.
Qu'ran 76:19
And round about them will serve boys of perpetual freshness: if thou seest them, thou wouldst think them scattered pearls.
I've read some different interpretations long time ago and I remember something about "deflowering virgins and boys" (of course some of those interpretations belonged to the critics equally opposed to all religions). Was I wrong in my recollection? Then I will apologize. My post is a pure opinion since I am not a religious scholar though I would have to disagree that I am completely unfamiliar with Islam.
There is no propaganda. It is an opinion based on whatever information I have (granted the information may be incorrect but that can be peacefully debated). I don't hate Islam or any other religion but I am concerned with the terrorism (can you blame me for that?). In this forum people express their opinions about religion and BTW the Christianity gets the most heat (should I quote?). I don't recall you referring to that critique as "spreading stupidity and ignorance".Atleast be logical in your propaganda.
9. Lady Dragonfly please don’t spread stupidity and ignorance and claim it to be the way my faith acts. Your obvious hatred for Islam is evident. Stop while you are ahead.
Besides, referring to the westerners as "bunch of idiots" and "dumbasses" "telling the media..." does not score high tolerance points either.
@Aqua-chan
To add to what I have said above, there is an Islamic link I quoted on Martyrdom (which helped to draw my 'presumptuous conclusions')
THE CONCEPT OF MARTYRDOM IN ISLAM
Not to go far, there is a good article in Wikipedia:And as for your definition of Nizari, well... Deuteronomy 17:12, Exodus 22:17, Leviticus 20:27, Exodus 21:15, ect... all call upon any practitioner to commit murder despite a certain commandment not to kill. So it's not a 'National Guard' as you say, but is it not an army that is exempt from the rules when it is convenient? I'm Kemet orthodox, which preaches the Netjer, our gods, practice incest, murder, and homosexuality, though we followers are hardly threats to society. Like I said, anyone could pick out things they don't like about any faith and use them to define the religion to a culture unfamiliar with it.
Hashshashin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
In my next reincarnation I would like to become a COLD SHOWER for all hot-headed males of this forum passionately cutting my throat from time to time (and don't even think of turning me off!!!) :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
So, should you spot a new GB member by the name COLD SHOWER that would indicate LD is gone, long live LD!!! :laugh:
So, should you spot a new GB member by the name COLD SHOWER that would indicate LD is gone, long live LD!!! :laugh:
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
Islamic Voice
Some reading on Hoors. I apologise for not providing a link before hand and a disclaimer. I am a muslim, but my views should not be taken as a monopoly on my faith or what my faith ascribes. I do my best to provide the views that are held by the majority of muslims – views I do not agree with myself like suicide bombers and shahadat.
No one caused offense save for LD. But then again this is not the first nor will it be the last time LD has said something about Islam which defies what my religion teaches.
LD Before we go into the translation you have provided? Who are you using? Pickthal? Do you have a link? There is a nice website from I believe Cornell which has the best three translations into English. I would suggest using those as those are all proper translations. If you don’t want those three try reading up on books by Micheal Sells from Haverford college in the US. He is a protestant. Or try Espisito from Georgetown who is a devout catholic.
I would recommend both because they have been studying Islam since what the early 70s in the case of Espisito. He runs the Georgetown school on Middle East Affairs.
Btw just to point out one thing. Out of the numerous times Hoors have been translated in that English text, the translation has changed.
From reading the text you have provided Hooris have been translated as:
1. Bashful Virgins
2. Virgins
3. Dark-eyed Virgins
4. High-bosomed Virgins
5. Bashful and Dark-eyed Virgins (Wow A 2 for 1 sale this time!)
6. Dark-eyed Houris
Now Hoor or Hoori is one word. Yet in your translation it is described in 6 different ways with adjectives that constantly change? Why is that? Do you not see something illogical and incoherent with the translation you have provided?
I call it stupidity because it is such. Simply put if Hoor is not translated into virgin in Arabic (A language which has not changed since the advent of islam) how can one state factually that hoor means virgin? If that is not stupidity what is it?
Secondly on christainity, you can ask anybody here I am usually the first one to defend christainity on these forums as well. Hell I remember a debate where I ended up defending the Pope of all people after what he said about our Holy Prophet. Religion is a sacred matter and should be dealt with delicately and with respect. Regardless of the religion. There is enough misinformation out there on Islam it drives most people up the wall.
Spreading incorrect information about a religion in my opinion any religion is spreading intolerance. And lastly most people know this by now, when it comes to Islam and factually baseless information I am not tolerant at all. If someone says something factually incorrect and misrepresents my religion I will not be tolerant at all. I have a simple policy when it comes to any religion. Get your facts straight or don’t open your mouth.
Btw just a bit of friendily advice to Ik, don’t use Wikipedia when it comes to Islam. I remember 2 years ago there was an article stating that Homosexuality was allowed in Islam. People keep editing that page daily….information on Wikipedia is suspect at best.
Some reading on Hoors. I apologise for not providing a link before hand and a disclaimer. I am a muslim, but my views should not be taken as a monopoly on my faith or what my faith ascribes. I do my best to provide the views that are held by the majority of muslims – views I do not agree with myself like suicide bombers and shahadat.
No one caused offense save for LD. But then again this is not the first nor will it be the last time LD has said something about Islam which defies what my religion teaches.
LD Before we go into the translation you have provided? Who are you using? Pickthal? Do you have a link? There is a nice website from I believe Cornell which has the best three translations into English. I would suggest using those as those are all proper translations. If you don’t want those three try reading up on books by Micheal Sells from Haverford college in the US. He is a protestant. Or try Espisito from Georgetown who is a devout catholic.
I would recommend both because they have been studying Islam since what the early 70s in the case of Espisito. He runs the Georgetown school on Middle East Affairs.
Btw just to point out one thing. Out of the numerous times Hoors have been translated in that English text, the translation has changed.
From reading the text you have provided Hooris have been translated as:
1. Bashful Virgins
2. Virgins
3. Dark-eyed Virgins
4. High-bosomed Virgins
5. Bashful and Dark-eyed Virgins (Wow A 2 for 1 sale this time!)
6. Dark-eyed Houris
Now Hoor or Hoori is one word. Yet in your translation it is described in 6 different ways with adjectives that constantly change? Why is that? Do you not see something illogical and incoherent with the translation you have provided?
I call it stupidity because it is such. Simply put if Hoor is not translated into virgin in Arabic (A language which has not changed since the advent of islam) how can one state factually that hoor means virgin? If that is not stupidity what is it?
Secondly on christainity, you can ask anybody here I am usually the first one to defend christainity on these forums as well. Hell I remember a debate where I ended up defending the Pope of all people after what he said about our Holy Prophet. Religion is a sacred matter and should be dealt with delicately and with respect. Regardless of the religion. There is enough misinformation out there on Islam it drives most people up the wall.
Spreading incorrect information about a religion in my opinion any religion is spreading intolerance. And lastly most people know this by now, when it comes to Islam and factually baseless information I am not tolerant at all. If someone says something factually incorrect and misrepresents my religion I will not be tolerant at all. I have a simple policy when it comes to any religion. Get your facts straight or don’t open your mouth.
Btw just a bit of friendily advice to Ik, don’t use Wikipedia when it comes to Islam. I remember 2 years ago there was an article stating that Homosexuality was allowed in Islam. People keep editing that page daily….information on Wikipedia is suspect at best.
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
That sounds great.I am a muslim, but my views should not be taken as a monopoly on my faith or what my faith ascribes. I do my best to provide the views that are held by the majority of muslims – views I do not agree with myself like suicide bombers and shahadat.
Are you so sure?No one caused offense save for LD.
I beg to disagree.But then again this is not the first nor will it be the last time LD has said something about Islam which defies what my religion teaches.
Umm... Freedom of speech? An opinion based on available articles and Islamic websites? Expressed informally in a gaming forum, without resorting to profanity? Am I the only one who has ever said something in this forum about a religion that "defies what one's religion teaches"? (You don't have to answer to these questions...
). If you want this conversation to continue, I will be happy to participate. History and substance of Islam (along with the other religions) interests me greatly and I would like to learn more. No confrontation is necessary. If you don't want to continue, that is fine too.
Will you provide a link to Cornell?
The one you actually provided got me confused over the point you made about the translation of the word in question.
Your link:I call it stupidity because it is such. Simply put if Hoor is not translated into virgin in Arabic (A language which has not changed since the advent of islam) how can one state factually that hoor means virgin? If that is not stupidity what is it?
“But those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, We shall soon admit to Gardens, with rivers flowing beneath - their eternal home; therein shall they have companions pure and holy: we shall admit them to shades, cool and ever deepening”. [Al-Quran 4:57]
Therefore the word hoor has no specific gender. Mohammad Asad has translated the word hoor as spouse and Abdullah Yusuf Ali as companion. Therefore according to some scholars a man in paradise will have a hoor that is a beautiful maiden with beautiful big and lustrous eyes and a woman in paradise will get a man with beautiful big and lustrous eyes.
So, what is the right translation, CM? Looks like Mohammad Asad and Abdullah Yusuf Ali have different opinions and your link states, literally, that men will get maidens and women will get men. What say you?
However, the topic at hand was Islamic martyrdom if you remember; I would like you to comment on the article I quoted (I provided the link in one of the previous posts). And while you will be doing that, please share your thoughts about the following disturbing article published in Saudi Arabia, in the Saudi daily Al-Iqtisadiyya :
Special Dispatch Series - No. 1032
Thank you.
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
Now look.
I am the first to understand how difficult and "hot" can religion discussions get, especially discussions on Islam, if women are around. I am quite a militant one in both women rights and the-case-of-making-religion-a-private-affair, which I think would be best.
But,
This thread is on a matter of martyrdom, and you guys seem to have monopolized the discussion while not exactly following the subject. I'm not authorized do give you instructions, but I may advice you to move this, very important and needed, discussion elsewhere. I guarantee to become the most faithful reader.
With regards,
QuenGalad
I am the first to understand how difficult and "hot" can religion discussions get, especially discussions on Islam, if women are around. I am quite a militant one in both women rights and the-case-of-making-religion-a-private-affair, which I think would be best.
But,
This thread is on a matter of martyrdom, and you guys seem to have monopolized the discussion while not exactly following the subject. I'm not authorized do give you instructions, but I may advice you to move this, very important and needed, discussion elsewhere. I guarantee to become the most faithful reader.
With regards,
QuenGalad
Kitchen Witchcraft : Of Magic and Macaroni - a blog about, well, a witch in the kitchen.
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
The Pale Mansion : My e-published lovecraftian novella! You should totally check it out!
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
Sorry, I was away from my computer since I last posted... Was very busy...
@QuenGalad
Yes, the topic was martyrdom, I completely agree, I pointed that out too.
I asked for the opinion about the two ISLAMIC links I provided concerning the topic but since none comments are upcoming so far I assume the matter is cleared up. With all due respect to my opponents' arguments I shall maintain my original point of view supported by Islamic authors until these authors are proved wrong.
The discussion was not monopolized, I don't understand why you think it was. Anybody could jump right in at any time.
Where would you like to move a discussion like that? To PM?
@QuenGalad
Yes, the topic was martyrdom, I completely agree, I pointed that out too.
I asked for the opinion about the two ISLAMIC links I provided concerning the topic but since none comments are upcoming so far I assume the matter is cleared up. With all due respect to my opponents' arguments I shall maintain my original point of view supported by Islamic authors until these authors are proved wrong.
The discussion was not monopolized, I don't understand why you think it was. Anybody could jump right in at any time.
Where would you like to move a discussion like that? To PM?
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
[INDENT]The concept of martyrdom[/INDENT]
I understand that you cannot become a martyr by dying in certain way (for example, as Saddam, who requested to be hung without blindfold to die as a martyr), and that death is no prerequisite for becoming Shaheed.
The concept of martyrdom has obviously been grabbed and mangled by the western modern society as well as the reward given to one who dies as a witness of his/her (Islamic) faith. I can see this has to do with errors in translation and interpretation, which makes it hard to discern the original meaning of the texts. Qur'an seems to say the reward for dying as Shaheed is the service of 72 Hoors in heaven. Whatever they do up there does not have a lot to do with the situation on earth and the position and importance of Shaheed in the mortal scene down here.
--------
Semantical question: Can the western word Martyr be used for Islamic word Shaheed, or has the meaning of the former strayed too far from the latter by western influence, if they ever were the same?
--------
[INDENT]Martyrdom in modern times and war[/INDENT]
[quote="Aqua-chan]It's much easier for a vengeful culture like ours to blame the actions of terrorists on the supposed immoral promises made by Islam"]
I do not know if you can describe western culture as a more vengeful culture than islamic culture, but I do think you have a point when you say that we in the secular west can't understand the religious motivations very well and that our attempt to conceptualise in order to make sense of terroristic actions fails, under influence of wrong translations and, likely, the media and/or manipulative political forces.
I do not know if you intended to write it this way, but what you wrote can also be read as following: The actions of terrorists can be explained if we accept that young people, under the influence of charismatic characters, are manipulated into becoming terrorists.
I suppose however that you meant there are charismatic (western) characters who make us (westerners) believe that terrorists are following up immoral Islamic promises, so we can be manipulated to fight them through our fear.
I think there is truth in both (and maybe you meant that). Terrorist leaders, like Bin Laden, very likely use the same methods as western leaders, like G.W. Bush. Armed with Qur'an and anti-Qur'an sentiments respectively, they can both be accused of instilling fear in people, setting up populations against eachother for their cause, be it religion, might, economy or global security.
-------
Has martyrdom (or becoming Shaheed) become a propagandic weapon in the war against the west, making people fight against the western perversionists, either by encouraging people to fight under the promise that they will be rewarded in heaven or by inspiring people to continue their fighting to avenge the fallen brothers of faith? I ask, because I am starting to think it works like this in modern times (hence the title of the thread). To what extent do the texts in Qur'an agree with that interpretation?
[size=-1]An optimist is a badly informed pessimist.[/size]