firedragon
Veteran Member
Which people are favoured?
Now without linking your website to promote it, just provide direct information.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Mutah, the so called "temporary marriage". Whats the problem?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Which people are favoured?
Now without linking your website to promote it, just provide direct information.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Sounds like a lot of trouble to go through for a common-law arrangement.
Maybe its over taxes and benefits perhaps?
firedragon
Veteran Member
Maybe.
Hi, I'm back now, what did you read that gave you that impression, while the Bible did not give the impression that males are "favored"?
That I agree with. That is true. Arabs I have encountered are arrogant, Persians about Persia or Iran as well, and I am myself arrogant due to my belief in the superiority of the Qur'an and Islam and my involvement with it.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Yeah. Many people who have never read it, and like you many who have never read the Bible also make this kind of statement.
You are yet to give Quranic verses that say "Jesus is the Antichrist".
Are you sure? I don't know where you are getting your ideas, from the TV or internet or something? The Qur'an does not seem to say stuff like that, I've seen Muslims wearing jeans with their faces shaved and working at banks and technology stores, I don't know where you're getting this 7th century stuff from, probably the TV and those scary guys yelling on TV? The Qur'an doesn't say anything which made me feel like I was to go back to the 7th century or that the 7th century was really so different.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Thats wrong. Arabs maybe arrogant, but the word Arab represents a huge part of the world so you are making a hasty generalisation. Logical fallacy.
But most importantly "YOU THINK" it is because it is a misinterpretation of the Quran. What evidence do you have for that?
Dont quote the Quran on this, you have to quote research on Arab people where it proves that "they are arrogant because they misinterpret the Quran".
Go ahead please.
Christ is the AntiChrist? That blows my mind! AUmmmmm!
firedragon
Veteran Member
Yep. that's what he said. But of course, since its a lie, he won't be able to provide a single verse in the Quran.
Christ is antichrist. Oxymoron.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
@firedragon
You mean only unmaried males can do Nikāḥ al-mutʿah? I do not think it was that by what I am reading in Wikipedia.
The practice was perfectly OK in the time of Mohammad. It is only Umar who banned it, but that was his personal opinion. Even his personal opinion is not admissible. Umar was not Allah's messenger. His rule should have been for him only. Muslim scholars have stated this point very clearly.
So Nikah al-Mut'ah (pleasure marriage) is allowed for all on the authority of Surah an-Nisa, Malik ibn Anas, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
You mean only unmaried males can do Nikāḥ al-mutʿah? I do not think it was that by what I am reading in Wikipedia.
The practice was perfectly OK in the time of Mohammad. It is only Umar who banned it, but that was his personal opinion. Even his personal opinion is not admissible. Umar was not Allah's messenger. His rule should have been for him only. Muslim scholars have stated this point very clearly.
So Nikah al-Mut'ah (pleasure marriage) is allowed for all on the authority of Surah an-Nisa, Malik ibn Anas, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.
Last edited:
Yeah, definitely the Qur'an hasn't (if anyone would read it) said to the Arabs that they are automatically great just by being called Arab or born into the Arab ethnicity or whatever. It seems to imply that they were jerks back in the day, which makes the triumph of Muhammed and Islam all the more impressive overall to tame a stubborn and haughty bunch of people, who were not Muslims, and even now are a mixture, with even many of the Muslims being not so familiar with the depths of the Qur'an or Islam really or taking it too seriously.
I've noticed supremacist arrogance from all sorts of people, Chinese, Indonesians, Britishers, the works! The Qur'an and even Islamic Traditions afterwards never seemed to give any group a true and real advantage, and only praises a vague "potential" hypothetical group of people, the good people, the people who are undeniably good, so that even bad people would think "dang, those are good people, goody two shoes" and feel sort of dirty looking at them and perhaps hating them "I wish they weren't clearly better than me, they make me look worse just by being around, I want to see them polluted and their reputation sullied, so they are brought low like I am and feel".
Their efforts to do harm then may entangle them and cripple them potentially, since Allah might protect the good person against the bad person, and though the bad person might distress the good person and seek to hard the good person, it is assumed Allah is behind the whole affair and plotting a greater plot, which should, insha'Allah, utterly destroy the person with the evil intentions and unjust desires towards the good person.
One simple example of this sort of activity might be that every time Skywalker brings up something, we are given the opportunity to try to showcase if it is so or not so, and then people reading about it may be able to research the matter more (or we might be affirmed regarding certain things).
So that it could be said here, that Allah is reminding the people of a few things by the work and activity in this topic:
1. Reasons why Mutah or Temporary Relationships / Marriage might be destructive to society and future relationships.
2. That people who are good matches are prescribed, and this seems to imply that mutually chaste people should be selected ideally, and people who are "fornicators" should be matched to each other for better overall comfort and less pain to the innocent.
3. That there is no ethnic superiority in the actual contents of the Qur'an and even the Islamic Tradition (which had opportunity to promote this notion) rejected this idea of ethnic superiority, making Islam very easily adopted by numerous non-Arabs, and is currently a majority Non-Arab / Non-Semitic population practicing Islam (similar to the mostly Non-Semitic Christianity practiced all over the world by a vast variety of people, except that our God is not incarnate in a Human Jew, and Allah is not an Arab or an Arab man, but a Non-Human from before the time of Earth or Humans or any creatures).
4. The stronger notions and implications of a "superior" or "chosen" people is in the Bible and the Jewish Tradition repeatedly, if you want racism, you're already in the right place by preferring the Bible over the Qur'an.
5. The Qur'an calls Jesus the Messiah, and the translation of the word Messiah is Christ, so the Qur'an calls Jesus the Christ, and does not say that Jesus is the Anti-Christ. It could be argued though, that the Jesus in the Qur'an is different from the Jesus of the New Testament. Where the Jesus of the New Testament seems to be an arrogant jerk (because he is God), the Jesus of the Qur'an is a much more likeable character in my opinion. The term "Anti-Christ" can mean "replacement" as well, something put in place of Christ, and so it could be argued that the Qur'anic Christ, since it differs from the Mainstream Christian Christ, is a different Christ and thus "Anti-Christ" if that makes you feel good? The Islamic Christ is not God or God incarnate or the Begotten Son of God, nor can any man or God or anything else "die for the sins of others", but each person is accountable for themselves and their deeds and can directly ask God for forgiveness, eliminating any need for the human sacrifice or sacrifice of a God or whatever jibberish paganistic mythological ideas were popular in the lands of Tammuz and Baal and Osiris (and Ra and Horus), the resurrecting Gods. So the Islamic Jesus Christ is theologically a very different being than the Mainstream Doctrinal Christian Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ of Islam is also different from the Jewish ideas about Jesus Christ, since they do not consider Jesus the Christ or Messiah sent to the people, they don't consider Jesus a Prophet or authentic Messenger of God, they reject Jesus.
The Qur'an says that the Christians are thus closer to the Muslims than even the Jews, and this may be because the Christians and Muslims both acknowledge Jesus as a miraculous and special case which occurred, but the Jews do not. Placed furthest away from Muslims are the Polytheists, and the Jews are said to ally with them (just like Israeli Intelligence allying with Hindu intelligence services, even though Israeli people are barely religious Jews and I don't know about the Hindu intelligence services or what the state of religion might be in the culture of the government structures and organizations in India, if they are as atheistic and secular as some Zionists seem to be).
Yet, the Qur'an seems to imply that Trinitarian types or Tri-Theist types are transgressive disbelievers, and so are really not the sort of Christians that the Qur'an seems to be talking about lovingly and favorably. Most Mainstream Christians across the world are Trinitarian Christians who call Jesus God and the Begotten Son of God so are considered hideous in their statements and major disbelievers and evildoers by the standards of the Qur'an, probably ranked along with all the other evildoers, like the polytheists for the kind of statements that are promoted by them.
The Qur'an I think says something that the Christians are determined by Allah to have mutual animosity placed between them and their endless factions and different groups and people, so that they are arguing among themselves as well. Even at the time of the Qur'an also it seems the Christians were "hooting and clapping" or something in the Churches and Church services, so that seems to be another thing that Allah has put upon some of the Christians that they are singing and hooting and clapping, which seems to be spoken of as if that is negative or in a derogatory way it seemed to me. It could just me looking down upon such things though as obnoxious and irreligious tom-foolery.
So, what we would ideally like, even if we can't get you to read the Qur'an at www.islamawakened.com/quran or find a translation you like which we could get you a copy of to read so you can properly arm yourself against the Muslim Boogeyman, is that you at the very least take notice of how what you say seems to be more true for the contents of the Bible and Jewish and Christian traditions than it is true for the Qur'an and Islamic traditions.
The nationalistic arrogance of various people is not endorsed by the Qur'an, the Qur'an seems to put down humans or "put them in their place" with humbling words and also about the limitations set upon nations by God. The Qur'an places emphasis on individual religion and individual sincerity, You and God alone and between You and God alone, no one and nothing in between really, and very little emphasis is placed on "communal good" and "communal evil", its mainly every man and woman for himself.
Furthermore, the Qur'an takes time, at a time when it was not common, to say "Muslim Men and Muslim Women" placing them on the same standing for most things, whereas the Bible places women much more "Under Man, just as Man is Under Christ" and stuff like that, there isn't so much of that sort of thing in the Qur'an, and the religion and its practice, its full practice, participation, and reading is encouraged for women.
It seems to be the apparent fact that the Qur'an and the religion it promotes is far more sensible and decent than the religion of the Bible which it basically seems to correct and sterilize of all its disturbing elements mainly that lends itself to the Muslim arrogance and superiority complex you all may be noticing.
I won't deny, I genuinely think of myself (perhaps like Satan does in the Qur'an towards Adam), as better than you each, until you match or surpass the Islamic standards of hygiene and piety.
In order to do so, you must clean yourselves regularly, worship The One God and not any Trinity or Manifestations of God, once you are bodily clean at practically all times and worshipping The Ultimate Only without Image throughout the day, then you must do more, by being kind to your family, your spouse, your children, the animals, all creatures, you must be thoughtful, you must be considerate, you must give, you must give and do good and spread peace and happiness by helping people, reducing their anxiety, speaking the truth, doing justice, giving care, being charitable, you must do good deeds constantly throughout the day to all creatures and humans and yourself and your family as much as you can. You must be kind, and avoid hurting people and harming things or being destructive and violent, but speak out against what is wrong, but moreover do things that actually might take effect, so you must be active, and even sitting on your ever-growing bum and typing, you can still do good through it, and can start by not spreading inaccuracies and lying (even though Allah makes use of you through the bad things said too, by having them corrected and contradicted).
If a person does all these things, they might impress an arrogant Muslim like myself, because your race and ethnicity has nothing to do with anything, it gives you no advantage, I myself appear to be a white person or an "every man" sort ("every man but African, Asian, Indian" lol), and though appearing such a way has given me a lot of advantages, I do not consider it giving me any special merit with my Master. I personally believe Allah made me this way to be an agent and infiltrator and (subtle as in barely) influencer upon people.
Some people get up in the morning, maybe yawn, and stretch, and set about on a day full of lying.
Well, I don't want my women to be temporary, I want to keep using them in an ongoing fashion, so I'd go so far as to ban their ability to divorce me, or requiring their permission to marry them. I'd like to just point at a woman and make her my sex slave for all eternity, who I also have no obligation to or duty towards. Now that's a Pleasure Marriage!
Most people don't believe such a practice is really to ever be put into play, most Muslims do not believe in such a thing as legal or ethical, and so most Muslims never practice any such thing. Having sex outside of marriage is more than likely much more common among the population of self-identifying Muslims than is "Mutah" or "Temporary Marriage" or "little more than a religious cover for fornication and adultery", just like the Christians do, except probably with a lot less ease and freedom overall, especially in Muslim countries and cultures where the reactions and consequences are expected to be far harsher than in the West for example, so a lot more self-identifying Christians get intoxicated, have sex with various people before marriage, and go to Church services too. It would be far fetched to say that Islam isn't a religious "upgrade" or "downgrade" towards conservative religion compared to modern Christianity in most cases. In many ways, Christianity seems like just talk, and though Islam is headed in that direction most likely, its still got a lot more which makes it seem like a "real, actual, religion with practices".
Its the word "Begotten" and "Only Begotten" that is troublesome, besides "Father" and "Son". Also, Mormons (who are not considered proper Christians by most other Christians), believe that Jesus is literally the Son of God.
firedragon
Veteran Member
See mate, you dont seem to understand the thread. If you want to discuss the technicalities of the Mutah marriage in detail in its intricacies and text etc, you can open a new thread. No problem. You can of course bring the Wikipedia sources. Alles Gut.
I don't think my desire for a woman who has never been intimate or desirous of anyone else past, present, future, but me, is really all that uncommon, and even women might wish for their man to only ever have been involved with them and no one else. It seems disturbing and offensive to think that someone you really care about could have cared about someone else or done things with them, the same things, different things, better or worse things, whatever things, every version is highly disturbing to the sensibilities of most I've interrogated and spoken to.
I almost wish that I could be free from such feelings, so that I might not suffer constantly, but its not something that seems possible to just "flick off", you are either someone who just don't have that switch flicked or you do, just like some people are psychopaths.
I almost wish that I could be free from such feelings, so that I might not suffer constantly, but its not something that seems possible to just "flick off", you are either someone who just don't have that switch flicked or you do, just like some people are psychopaths.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You wont do that. After 20 years, you would want to divorce them. See what Jeff Bezos and Rupert Murdoch did. As for obligations, those can always be negotiated in a Nikah-al-Mut'ah, or you want the marriage totally for free? Then keep your sex-slave (will hardly merit to be called a wife) hidden in a basement.
Well, the current ruling party is thoroughly religious and secularism in India does not mean abandonment of religion. Our Constitution says "Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava" (treat all religions equally). Apart of worship of only one God and idols, Hindus are as good or even better than Muslims. Our Gods and Goddesses do not make it compulsory for any one to worship them, nor to follow what one particular person said.
Last edited:
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
I have already mentioned that I have no problem with Muslim marriage, even four or fourteen marriages, Nikah-al-Mut'ah or Nikah-Halala. Why should I have any? It i not my religion, it is not my culture. They can do whatever they want within the limitations of Indian Constitution, which was not formed without the participation of Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhist, Jains, Zoroastrians and Jews. People from all religions were members of our Constituent Assembly (Constituent Assembly of India - Wikipedia).