What constitutes a Muslim?

[Dust]

Reading tons and tons of posts on this magnificent forum, I can't help but to notice one strange pattern: there are many pockets of Muslim views, but ironically, the holders of the different views are not tolerant towards each other. I have even seen people go as far as evicting others (and the favoured being returned) from the fold of Islam.

I find this strange and I get dumbfounded by it at times, because I don't know how accurate my assessment is of Muslims when there are numerous views; and, holding views different than the loudest (or the powerful) might attract hostile aggression.

Why does this happen among Muslims and what constitutes a Muslims when you all adhere to the Quran and accept the Prophet Muhammad as your prophet?

I hope this can stimulate good discussion and help outsiders to understanding the true meaning of Islam.

[Roshina]

Dust, you're asking a question that Muslim scholars have been debating since the rise of Islam! What constitutes Muslimhood? What constitutes kufar? They cannot agree -- because the answer is quite ambiguous according to the Quran and the hadiths.

We make it seem SO easy when we say, "ALL you have to do is follow Allah and the Prophet," but in actuality, it's not at all that simple. And, no, it's not that we're making it difficult for ourselves. If that's so, which group is the one making it difficult for itself and others? We don't know, and I am certain we'll never know.

If you look around, the extremist Muslims might agree on some things, but they disagree on many, many other things among themselves! And those are the ones who preach the creed of the ahl-e-sunnah. Why have such labels in the first place if we're going to follow ISLAM, BOTH the Quran and the sunnah? But what many have done is completely neglect the QURANIC teachings (why? Because the Quran is not clear on most issues at all) and turn instead to the hadiths (why? because they are specific. And the reason they're specific is that they're the interpretations of Person A of Person B's statements about what Person C said that Person D told him that the Prophet did or did not do or said. The hadiths are literally frozen in the 7th century, whereas the Quran is far more universal. But that's another debate for another time... though it's an active one currently among Muslim scholars and students of Islam.).

The extremists aren't the only ones who have so many differences of opinion, though. The non-extremists are no different. My problem is with when we enforce OUR own understanding and call it Islam while taking everyone else's and calling it non-Islam :S Or anti-Islam! Or shirk! Or something else that indicates that it's wrong or false. Dude, what makes your views better than another Muslim's?

Funniest thing is, EACH Muslim will call her/himself "moderate" Well, duh, who'd call her/himself extremist? I mean, who's gonna say, "Oh, yeah, I'm an extremist?" And WHO is gonna say, "oh, yeah, I don't do what's right and what Islam says"? All are going to say that.

Further, there's no such thing as the "true meaning of Islam." EVERY group of Muslim is going to tell you that their understanding of Islam is the correct and true one. NO Muslim will ever say that her/his meaning of Islam is a false one. The question is, whose is really closest to the "true" one, if anyone's?

P.S. Did you know that Abu Hanifa, the scholar most followed by Muslims, actually said that it's okay to offer munz/namaaz/prayer in your OWN language and that it's not mandatory to do so in Arabic? Whoa!!! How radical is that! But in his time, it was totally okay to do and say that. His disciples as well as other major scholars (Shafi', for example, and most especially Hanbal) disagreed with him so strongly that their opinion became more popular while Abu Hanifa's was buried.

That's just to say that disagreements like this have been a part of Islam. And they always will be.... and it's not just Islam: it's every religion. It seems to be an inherent part of every single creed, especially because each group of followers (even within the religion itself) claims it's the only correct one and it attempts to suppress all other possible interpretations or options.

[Maiwand]

it is actually very simple, a muslim is someone who has submitted himself totally and 100% tot the will of Allah (swt). That means he must follow the Quran and Sunnah 100% at all times. If someone doesn't do that then he will be a sinful muslim(a), but will be still muslim. But if someone deliberately and knowingly neglects the ahkaam (commandments of allah (swt) and the messenger), then doesn't accept them, then he will be a kaafir (disbeliever). This is how simple it is.

[شمله ور خراساني]

Reading tons and tons of posts on this magnificent forum, I can't help but to notice one strange pattern: there are many pockets of Muslim views, but ironically, the holders of the different views are not tolerant towards each other. I have even seen people go as far as evicting others (and the favoured being returned) from the fold of Islam.

I find this strange and I get dumbfounded by it at times, because I don't know how accurate my assessment is of Muslims when there are numerous views; and, holding views different than the loudest (or the powerful) might attract hostile aggression.

Why does this happen among Muslims and what constitutes a Muslims when you all adhere to the Quran and accept the Prophet Muhammad as your prophet?

I hope this can stimulate good discussion and help outsiders to understanding the true meaning of Islam.

Generally, there are many muslims. But because of politics and ignorance, there are many conflicts.

There is however a list of things one should not do if one likes stay a Muslim:

What Negates One's Islam
by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
http://www.uh.edu/

Shaikh-ul-Islam Muhammad bin Suleiman At-Tamimi stated, "Know that ten matters negate one's Islam. [They are:]
"First, associating partners in the worship of Allah. Allah says,
"Verily, Allah forgives not (the sin of) setting up partners in worship with Him, but He forgives whom He pleases other sins than that" (al-Nisa 116).
Allah also says,
"Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, then Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the wrongdoers, there are no helpers" (al-Maidah 72).
Included in this category of deeds is sacrificing animals for the sake of jinn or graves.
"Second, whoever sets up an intermediary between himself and Allah, whom he prays to, seeks intercession from and puts his reliance in, has blasphemed according to the consensus of the scholars.
"Third, whoever does not consider the polytheists as disbelievers or whoever has doubt concerning their disbelief or whoever considers their way as correct has committed an act of disbelief himself.
"Fourth, if a person believes that some guidance other than the guidance of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is more complete than his or that another's judgment is better than the Prophet's, [then that person has committed an act of disbelief]. This would be like the one who prefers the rule and law of false gods [be they human or otherwise] over the Prophet's rule and law. This position is one of disbelief.
"Fifth, whoever dislikes anything the Prophet (peace be upon him) brought, even if he acts by it, has committed an act of disbelief.
"Sixth, whoever ridicules or jokes about any part of the religion of the Messenger (peace be upon him) or its rewards or its punishments, has committed an act of disbelief. The evidence for this is in the Words of Allah,
"Say: Was it Allah, or His signs or His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse, you have disbelieved after you had believed." (al-Tauba 65-66).
"Seventh, the performing of magic [is an act of disbelief], this includes those magical incantations that make one love or hate another person. Whoever performs them or is pleased with them has committed an act of disbelief. Allah says in the Quran,
"But neither of these two (angels) taught anyone (such things) until they had said, 'We are only for trial, so disbelieve not [by learning such magic from us]"' (al-Baqara 102)
"Eighth, assisting and supporting the polytheists against the Muslims [is also a type of disbelief]. The proof for this is in Allah's statement,
"And if any among you takes them [the Jews and Christians] as helpers and protectors, then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are wrongdoing" (al-Maida 51).
"Ninth, if a person believes that some people are permitted to be free of the Law of Muhammad (peace be upon him), in the same way that Khidr was free of the law of Moses (peace be upon him), then that person is a disbeliever.
"Tenth, turning away from the religion of Allah, not learning it or applying it, [is also a form of disbelief]. The evidence for this is Allah's saying,
"And who does more wrong than he who is reminded of the signs of his Lord, then he turns aside therefrom? Verily, We shall exact retribution from the sinners" (al-Sajdah 22).
"There is no difference with respect to all of the above whether the act is done jokingly, seriously or out of fear. The only exception is one who is coerced. All of them are from the greater of the dangerous acts and they are also among the most common in occurrence. A Muslim must be aware of them and fear for himself concerning such actions. We seek refuge in Allah from that which brings about His anger and the painfulness of His punishment"

Hypocrisy is of Two Types: With Respect to Belief and with Respect to Actions
Hypocrisy with respect to beliefs is of six types. The one who is guilty of any of them will be in the lowest pit of the Hellfire. These are:

(1) Denying or disbelieving the Messenger (peace be upon him).
(2) Denying something that the Messenger (peace be upon him) presented or taught.
(3) Having hatred for the Messenger (peace be upon him).
(4) Having hatred for something the Messenger (peace be upon him) presented.
(5) Being pleased if the religion of the Messenger (peace be upon him) is diminished or weakened.
(6) Being displeased if the religion of the Messenger (peace be upon him) is strengthened or victorious.

[Baygham]

Reading tons and tons of posts on this magnificent forum, I can't help but to notice one strange pattern: there are many pockets of Muslim views, but ironically, the holders of the different views are not tolerant towards each other. I have even seen people go as far as evicting others (and the favoured being returned) from the fold of Islam.

I find this strange and I get dumbfounded by it at times, because I don't know how accurate my assessment is of Muslims when there are numerous views; and, holding views different than the loudest (or the powerful) might attract hostile aggression.

Why does this happen among Muslims and what constitutes a Muslims when you all adhere to the Quran and accept the Prophet Muhammad as your prophet?

I hope this can stimulate good discussion and help outsiders to understanding the true meaning of Islam.

When you have blashphemy laws that gives one a license to kill, it becomes a very potent weapon.

Islam unanimously orders the murtad to be killed. The problem is it does not define the murtad.

Thus the immense power in the hands of those that can define the murtad for you.

With such legitimacy, rulers love Islam to subdue massess that with a stroke of a pen can be deprived of all rights (more money for the few).

thus all muslim governments in history have adopted only one version / doctrine of Islam and toleration of other subsets have not been present except in areas of geographical/ ethnic or geopolitical constraints.

This still remains a popular method. you should see on this forum that the wahabis want all else to be called murtads so as to make them of Dhimmi status in the darul-aman and keep the loot to the chosen few, same true of other subsets.

On the other hand once you are labelled a murtad by the majority, what are you supposed to do. Take me for example, I happen to disagree about the form Allah takes, this in wahabi doctrine and in the other major forms makes me 'wajabul-katal' (translation-promised hoors in return for death). Now how is one to react to that without an aggresive stance.

All this talk of blasphemy and kufar-innovation(bida'h), and my version and your version as a reason for killing and torture should be banned as a mandatory part of Islamic refermation. Only then will we see the light of day.

[Abu Hurayrah]

Islam unanimously orders the murtad to be killed. The problem is it does not define the murtad.

Thus the immense power in the hands of those that can define the murtad for you.

With such legitimacy, rulers love Islam to subdue massess that with a stroke of a pen can be deprived of all rights (more money for the few).

The murtad can be defined, and it is not true that anyone who has the actions of a murtad to be killed. There is even an opinion which states that only the apostate which fights against the muslims, faces punishment. You should check your facts

[Baygham]

The murtad can be defined, and it is not true that anyone who has the actions of a murtad to be killed. There is even an opinion which states that only the apostate which fights against the muslims, faces punishment. You should check your facts

that is not a unanimous position.

for example on this forum, a member representing the taliban, has called half the pashtoons murtad worth sangsar.
Now in america we would put him in a psych unit. But in afghanistan they were in power for over 8 years. During that time many were killed. Even today under one or another pretext hundreds are dying in pashtoon land under the pretext of Kafir.

No body can define murtad. or put up a definition and a hundred others will refute it. Even the interpretation that they not be killed is not a unanimous one, its an extreme view at best.

Can a murtad vote in a muslim state, have equal citizen status, reach the highest pinnacle of society. These are all discriminations that islam imposes.

The problem is most of the scientist and all free thinkers are murtads by some definition or another. Hence the dearth of knowledge in Islamic countries.

[شمله ور خراساني]

only murtads who act against islam are punished with death sentence. many members of this forum fall under this ruling.

[Baygham]

only murtads who act against islam are punished with death sentence. many members of this forum fall under this ruling.

Got your answer Abu Hurayrah

The question is if a person is all set to kill another member of society by questioning the other persons beliefs, what should the society do about that person.

(Tinga ka sangara, gooroo chi musalmanan sa fitwa warkai.)

[Wrayun]

Reading tons and tons of posts on this magnificent forum, I can't help but to notice one strange pattern: there are many pockets of Muslim views, but ironically, the holders of the different views are not tolerant towards each other. I have even seen people go as far as evicting others (and the favoured being returned) from the fold of Islam.

I find this strange and I get dumbfounded by it at times, because I don't know how accurate my assessment is of Muslims when there are numerous views; and, holding views different than the loudest (or the powerful) might attract hostile aggression.

Why does this happen among Muslims and what constitutes a Muslims when you all adhere to the Quran and accept the Prophet Muhammad as your prophet?

I hope this can stimulate good discussion and help outsiders to understanding the true meaning of Islam.

Majority of the Muslims, regardless of what school or thought they belong to, are tolerant towards each other. The minorities in these groups, are the most outspoken, and they are the very intolerant critics of others. These minorities are then used as proxies by various political parties, governments and institutions to further their own agendas. That's the same for every religion I guess.

We live in the age of information. Today, everything that you need to know about Islam is available for you. You can make up your own mind without having someone else do the thinking for you. I'd argue that the reason why so many sects and disagreements exist is due to the fact that most Muslims in the past have relied on a single point for their Islamic knowledge. They become followers of men i.e. Hanafi, Salafi, Shafi, Malaki, Shia, Hanbali, Wahabi, Sunni, Ahmedi, Agha Khani, Babi etc. Times have changed. People can verify for themselves who is right, correct, and who has deviated, and incorrect. It doesn't matter what the proponents of these different sects and groups claim, what matters is what can be proven by research and evidence. There are going to be some difficult and strenuous subjects that might never get resolved, though most issues are easily correctable.

But again, you can have the most innocent of ideology in the world, someone will twist and pervert to fit their own personal thinking. There is no foolproof ideology. A good example is how Islamic scripture is used by both Muslims and non-Muslims to promote intolerance and bigotry. Those who want peace, spirituality, love, tolerance, will seek that in Islam and will find it. Those who want to impose, suppress, take the matter of God in their hands, will seek that in Islam and will find it. The same goes for any other 'ism or thought.

Who is right, who is on the path? I think we all know the answer to that: Only Allah (God) is to judge.

[Da_Kunar_Ghro]

adherance to the Islamic faith.

[Baygham]

Majority of the Muslims, regardless of what school or thought they belong to, are tolerant towards each other. The minorities in these groups, are the most outspoken, and they are the very intolerant critics of others. These minorities are then used as proxies by various political parties, governments and institutions to further their own agendas. That's the same for every religion I guess.

We live in the age of information. Today, everything that you need to know about Islam is available for you. You can make up your own mind without having someone else do the thinking for you. I'd argue that the reason why so many sects and disagreements exist is due to the fact that most Muslims in the past have relied on a single point for their Islamic knowledge. They become followers of men i.e. Hanafi, Salafi, Shafi, Malaki, Shia, Hanbali, Wahabi, Sunni, Ahmedi, Agha Khani, Babi etc. Times have changed. People can verify for themselves who is right, correct, and who has deviated, and incorrect. It doesn't matter what the proponents of these different sects and groups claim, what matters is what can be proven by research and evidence. There are going to be some difficult and strenuous subjects that might never get resolved, though most issues are easily correctable.

But again, you can have the most innocent of ideology in the world, someone will twist and pervert to fit their own personal thinking. There is no foolproof ideology. A good example is how Islamic scripture is used by both Muslims and non-Muslims to promote intolerance and bigotry. Those who want peace, spirituality, love, tolerance, will seek that in Islam and will find it. Those who want to impose, suppress, take the matter of God in their hands, will seek that in Islam and will find it. The same goes for any other 'ism or thought.

Who is right, who is on the path? I think we all know the answer to that: Only Allah (God) is to judge.

That was not the question, the question is that if a group say A comprising 10-20 % of the population or 1 or 2% of the population, does not matter, preaches to kill anybody and everybody that they can label as X, Y and Z. How should the society accomodate them.

A. by allowing that to happen,
B. By punishing them so that it does not happen.
C, and if they continue than to eradicate them or not.

[Dust]

Amazing how on this very thread no two Muslims have given you the same answer. As per my observations, it is not a matter of what you think about what Islam is. It is a matter of who you follow. In other words, you could say that you are following Islam as per you heart and efforts, but if someone disagrees with your form of Islam you are doomed. You are Hell bound, no ifs or buts about it.

At the end of the day it is all about which Muslim group is the strongest and the most influential, because I don't buy it that it is a matter of the heart. NO WAY, JOSE! It is a matter of the approval of people, and this thread and the members of this forum, just like everyday Muslims, have perfectly illustrated this view, without explicitly saying it.

How do I know? Most people here don't speak out when the member of another sect is being abused. People join in on the attack or they simply remain calm and don't defend the person whose beliefs are being abused.

I have to commend the effort of Qrratugai. I have learnt a lot from her. She seems to be able to hold on to her views, but also gives someone else the right to also call their faith correct. I wonder if there are more Muslims like her around?

[Dust]

Strange that you first have to find God. Then you have to find the right religion. Then you have to find the sect within that religion.

I am getting dizzy.

[Wrayun]

That was not the question, the question is that if a group say A comprising 10-20 % of the population or 1 or 2% of the population, does not matter, preaches to kill anybody and everybody that they can label as X, Y and Z. How should the society accomodate them.

A. by allowing that to happen,
B. By punishing them so that it does not happen.
C, and if they continue than to eradicate them or not.

How is that different when applied to any sort of belief, not just religion? Just because a group accuses someone of hearsay doesn't make it true. There is a process for these things. Killing and eradicating is the last resort. I think extremists naturally receive little to no support, unless the population happens to be illiterate and ignorant of their own religion. That is the only time where such extremism can nurture itself when there is nothing in place to check such ideologies.

These things occur in all groups, and beliefs. If tomorrow, a group of atheists decided that killing any life form is haram, against humanism, who is to stop them from taking matters in their own hands? You see that with save the whales, save the trees, save the animals, and other left wing groups.