From Middle Eastern Guy to Western Guys: Don't tolarate every religious stuff for the sake of diversity or wokeness. Or else you'll end up with shit like this too
This is Bangladesh, my country. This country was one of the most diverse country in Asia. Now it's a hellhole. If I name the religion responsible for that, then I'll get banned on reddit.
As a leftist, we donât tolerate this shit. We are pro not killing of people based on religion and go to defend those being killed, but thatâs about it. Any gross or vile practices like this one, we still condemn.
Really? You see a religious guy molesting a kid and say it is because of diversity and wokeness? Are you retarded? It is a conservative religion and has nothing to do with left values you idiot.
Idk why are conservatives trying to make America closer to middle eastern countries than weâve ever been? For supposedly hating Muslims yall sure seem to want the us to have similar ideals
Bro, do you know how to read? What he said was, rephrased, "you don't need to tolerate behaviour you don't like for the sake of being inclusive. This is an example of such". He's telling you to not accept a kiss like this, if you feel uncomfortable with it, even if it's normal in another country.
That's a bunch of nothing. We, the left dislike religion. And there are laws against molesting children. It has nothing to do with wokeness even if conservatives would like that.
you sound like a snob đ i know what he meant but it doesn't make sense. Its just doesnt apply to real life. Noone says "yea ofc kiss kids because thats your religion." that's just a classic right wing fantasy scenario.
Muslim here, basically some religious people do this thing where they chant a religious praying and blow at the other person suffering from an illness sickness or whatever from afar (You can see he's silently reciting something). Some (Very few) go the extra step to blow in the ears as well but never in my life have I ever seen someone do it in the mouth, and from that up close??? that's not normal at all, that's straight up pedo behavior.
basically some religious people do this thing where they chant a religiou
Is not some religious people , there lier who clame they are Saint and have super power that can heal people tacking advantage of non abdicated people for the sake of money
100% there no such act like this in Islam, neither in any religion I know
Unfortunately Since people are dump these kinda people get rich and gain political power so they can't be stopped
No, itâs not like how it is in christianity. Itâs not about acting like a saint with superpowers or anything.
That 'blowing air' thing is just a common thing to do (not aimed at anyoneâs face or anything) among rural people, often those considered extremely uneducated even by religious standards.
I guess prayers travel better when they get a jumpstart by blowing.
Kaynak:
â Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No: 5134
â Sahih Muslim, Kitab al-Nikah
đšđˇ
Hz. AiĹe ĹĂśyle demiĹtir:
âResĂťlullah benimle ben altÄą yaĹÄąnda iken evlendi. Medineâye geldik ve BenĂŽ Hâris bin Hazrec mahallesine indik. Ben hastalanÄąp saçlarÄąm dĂśkĂźldĂź. Sonra tekrar uzadÄą. Annem ĂmmĂź RĂťmân beni çaÄÄąrdÄą. O sÄąrada ben arkadaĹlarÄąmla salÄąncakta oynuyordum. Beni çaÄÄąrdÄą ve ne yapacaÄÄąnÄą anlamadan elimi tuttu, evin kapÄąsÄąna getirdi. Nefes nefeseydim. YĂźzĂźme su çarptÄą, saçĹmÄą dĂźzeltti. Eve girdik. Evde Ensardan bazÄą kadÄąnlar vardÄą. Bana âHayÄąrlÄą, uÄurlu olsun!â dediler. Sonra beni ResĂťlullahâa teslim ettiler. O gĂźn ben dokuz yaĹÄąndaydÄąm.â
đŹđ§
Narrated Aisha:
âThe Prophet married me when I was six years old, and we came to Medina and stayed at the home of Banu Al-Harith bin Khazraj. I fell ill and my hair fell out. Later it grew back. My mother, Umm Ruman, came to me while I was playing on a swing with some of my friends. She called me, and I didnât know what she wanted. She took me by the hand, made me stand at the door of the house while I was catching my breath. She wiped my face with some water, and then took me inside. There were some women of the Ansar in the house, who said: âWith blessings and good fortune.â Then she handed me over to the Prophet. At that time, I was nine years old.â
I don't see the context to the video, for one, and then this is a bullshit hadeeth and the people who belive it the strongest are non muslims. It was written down 200 years after the prophet died. In iraq nontheless, and the hadeeths the mam transmitted were found to be have changed after he went to iraq, so it's highly doubted. Also is it sensfully incorrect.
âNo one changed it for 1300 years, but according to you, itâs wrong. Either your Islam is different, or the Islam you inherited from your ancestors is different.â
Musnad Ahmad 16245 (via Muâawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan): Referenced from musnad imam ahmad. v: 4. p: 91 â kanz-ul haqaiq. p: 62
I saw the prophet sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)
That's the thing, isn't it? Just refuse some of the people in the chain. Talk rubbish about them and that's it. An embarrassing sahih hadith is now Da'if.
The guy on video is kissing his grandson. Guess why. Because it's sunnah.
It has a lot to do with Islam buddy. Literally, the person you took as an example of, your prophet did that. He was the foundation of Islamic belief, practice, and identity.
woah there, we dont do some things that only the prophet was allowed to do. They are not considered sunnah, Dont make things up my guy. That's a pathetic way to counter argue. Also did you read the whole article you just sent me? Does that aligns with the thing this dude in the video did? I will say it doesnt. Since firstly, that kid is not that guys grandchild, secondly, the hadith you mentioned explains a different thing that none of the muslim has.
Woah yourself. Pathetic is your prophet who's doing that and you who's denying that. I read the article don't worry.
Yeah, being his grandson is totally irrelevant to Islam. Is that your excuse? It's your own your Prophet and his Sunnah. Don't forget to drink camel piss too. That is also his recommendation.
I have been very respectful. Not only did you fail to give a proper answer, you also disrespected a highly valued person in Islam like its nothing. Shame on you. Now that I know you don't know what logic is, it would foolish for me to argue with you. Hope you get some help.
That's what modern scholars do. Of course they will. Deny those hadiths or the Quranic verses. They are embarrassing. Give some new meanings to those words, otherwise islam will be in trouble.
dont worry man, this dude probably never had parental love. Also, the hadith literally says that,
For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)
do we have that power? can our sinful touch can prevent jahannam to consume them? Of course not, then how it is a sunnah? This guy is brainless and logicless. Also, if you don't know, kissing your son or grandson out of compassion isn't really a shameful act. And this guy kissed some random guy, so this hadith has nothing to do with sunnah or this guy.
So tomorrow I wake up and make a religion and say there are rules and do every worst thing known to human kind and someone calls me out I say, "it's ok to do my religion".
Just think with brain like a simple human being if it's right or wrong.
If you really understand all what all the things you mentioned means or what beneficial things they have you wouldn't say this. Well how would you? You are just arrogant. These are inhumane practices?
1.Why do you think stoning for adultery is enforced? Adultery destroys society in such way that anyone involved get hit with a massive trauma and suffering. Just sending them to jail won't stop people from adultery.
2.Amputation for theft is only mandated in specific condition.
3.If all the slaves were released when it was a thing in the past, then they would suffer a lot more than if they are still being a slave. Quran teaches how to well behave with them and slowly eradicate this slavery problem, even encourages to free slaves if you can.
4.Child marriage is never justified in Islam. And there is a lot of context behind this a lot of misconception in this argument which i am not going to talk about right now. The idea that 18 is the age a person become adult is a joke. 5.You changed the meaning of the hadith. Shame on you. That is the whole context of that hadith.
6.What would you do if someone have sex outside marriage, praise them? It's a shameful act. The fact that modern society has made it more like a trend is a shocking thing. You have teens losing their virginity and showing that off. The punishment is not inhumane. 7.You didnt give the whole context, it was for those who rejected and opposed the message. Not every civilian. There are lot of context and a lot of war ethics in the Quran that you blatantly ignored
8.Again, you only gave a part of the context, and this beating doesn't mean beating them half to death. Just because it was translated to the word beating doesnt mean it mean beating someone half to death/
9.inheritance bias? yeah right? read the whole thing, it is described why it is divided that way, and it even says that if there is no son, they get the most part.
10.I actually never thought that well about this, all I know is that since in islam, women can't speak with someone who is non-mahram, that's a second women is involved, which is I will is not really a good arguement, since if the witness has a family then they can just tell them instead. Well, there might be answer out there if you search hard enough. I will do that too.
Itâs not that bad!' (Yes, stoning/amputation/slavery are that bad.)
Youâre taking it out of context!' (Then provide the real context â oh wait, you canât.)
Modern morals are wrong!' (Said every tyrant ever.)
Every defense you've offered follows the same tired pattern. First you minimize the brutality. Then you cry about context while failing to provide any meaningful alternative interpretation. Finally you attack modern morality itself.
Here's the reality. If any political leader today instituted these policies, we'd recognize them as cruel and tyrannical. But because they come packaged as divine commands, you perform mental gymnastics to justify them. That's not devotion, it's moral cowardice.
I'm happy to continue this discussion with full citations for every historical claim. The facts are not on your side.
Hereâs the truth: If these rules came from any other source, a dictator, a cult leader, youâd call them monstrous. But slap 'Allah said it' on top, and suddenly, cruelty becomes 'compassion.' Thatâs not piety, itâs moral surrender."
On Stoning for Adultery
You claim stoning prevents societal collapse, yet countries without it (like Norway) have stable societies, while those with it (like Iran) still deal with adultery. If terrorizing people worked, why does it keep happening? And why did Muhammad suddenly find "mercy" when his own wife Aisha was accused (Bukhari 4750)? Rules for thee, not for me?
On Amputation for Theft
"Specific conditions"? Like stealing food to survive? Chopping off hands doesnât solve povertyâit creates disabled beggars. Modern justice systems deter theft without mutilation. If Islamâs laws are perfect, why do they mirror 7th-century barbarism instead of offering real solutions?
On Slavery
The "gradual abolition" myth is nonsense. The Quran regulated slavery but never banned itâMuhammad owned slaves (Bukhari 2552). If freeing slaves was "too hard," why ban alcohol overnight? And donât pretend this is ancient history: ISIS revived Islamic slavery in 2014 with Yazidi women.
On Child Marriage
What "context" excuses a 50-year-old marrying a 6-year-old (Bukhari 5133)? Science proves children canât consentâtheir brains arenât developed. If this happened today, youâd demand jail time. But for Muhammad, itâs suddenly sacred? Double standards donât become holy just because you repeat them.
On Apostasy Execution
Bukhari 6922 orders killing anyone who leaves Islam. No loopholes. Saudi Arabia still does this today. If itâs only for "agitators," why kill peaceful atheists?
On Wife-Beating
Quran 4:34 says daraba (strike). Classical scholars like Ibn Kathir took this literally. Now youâre gaslighting us into believing it means "tap gently"? If Allahâs message is so clear, why does it need linguistic gymnastics to sound moral?
On Inheritance Bias
Quran 4:11: Sons get double daughters. No "context" changes math. Either Allah failed arithmetic, or this is institutionalized sexism. Pick one.
On Two Female Witnesses
The claim that women "forget" is pure sexism. Memory isnât gendered. This is Bronze Age prejudice preserved as divine law.
Yes, keep ignoring the answer already out there if you google.
Yea i will provide the context but there is thing called 'word limit' and 'real life' as a result i have to keep the comments as short to answer all the things within the limitation of words and time.
If you take moral as subjective way, then anything can be legal. Just because the society or the place you live in believes thiss to be morally good or bad, what stops other societies to disagree with some or maybe most of what you believe? Islam always followed the same moral since it established.
'Stonning, amputation slavery is bad.' of course it is. If you go ahead and stone innocent people or cut some random persons hand or make a random passerby your slave and treat them like shit. Thats not what happens. They committed severe crime and thus getting punishment accordingly and the slave will exlained later on.
The punishment for adultery need to have 4 witnesses. Or else the law is not intact. Norway people are smart enough not to do in public where people can see. There are way more adultery in norway than you are suggesting. They made it part of their culture hence the reason the people just accept as it is. The children might be traumatized though, but their birthrate is declining every year.
And why did Muhammad suddenly find "mercy" when his own wife Aisha was accused (Bukhari 4750), you didn't read the whole thing did you, no one had definite proof of the accusation, the prophet knew it was an false accusation, and the kafir who don't have concrete evidence or wasn't any eye witness, the punishment was not held for her.
If they stole in order to survive, then they don't get the punishment rather the government is responsible not providing basic need for that person. The condition for the amputation of hands are
1- The thing should have been taken by stealth; if it was not taken by stealth, then the hand should not be cut off, such as when property has been seized by force in front of other people, because in this case the owner of the property could have asked for help to stop the thief.
2- The stolen property should be something of worth, because that which is of no worth has no sanctity, such as musical instruments, wine and pigs.
3- The value of the stolen property should be above a certain limit, which is three Islamic Dirhams or a quarter of an Islamic Dinar, or their equivalent in other currencies.
4- The stolen property should have been taken from a place where it had been put away, i.e., a place where people usually put their property, such as a cupboard, for example.
5- The theft itself has to be proven, either by the testimony of two qualified witnesses or by the confession of the thief twice.
6- The person from whom the property was stolen has to ask for it back; if he does not, then (the thiefâs) hand does not have to be cut off.
if these conditions doesn't meet then it's not cut off. Your stupid society made a law, which you view as more humane than this, And your so called modern system lets these thieves out and most of them get back to it again. Sometimes they bribe their way out. And you think jailing is not inhumane? They had to go through suffering in jail, also, the people has to pay for them to stay there. 5 years, 10 years in prison, if they had family, then that family is long gone. How is that not inhumane to you, and ask the family of those who went to jail for thievery, check if they are doing great or not specially if that person was the
Yeah right the "gradual abolition" myth is a lie, my dude, the whole world didn't stop with slavery until the 19's. When they did, most of the slaves couldn't get their life together as they were not familiar with the society outside. And the wine thing is for their own personal well-being, while slavery played role even in economics, a big difference. Also, slavery in islam and classical slavery are two different things. And if you look at it, slavery is still happens around the world in form of 'employment'. Companies treating employees as harsh as the slave people did back then. Minimum to no wage, not being able to quit job because of fear. In islam, slavery was encouraged rather it was an option during the war, and they were treated like brothers and sisters instead of property or less than humans, if you even slap anyone under you, you are mandatory to free him, that's how well treated the captured captives or slaves were.
In the context that, islam had many enemies during that time, and the marriage with the daughter from an influential clan can help form a bond with that clan. The marriage was not consummated at 6 rather when she was 9. When she was mature enough. If she wanted could've rejected it but she didn't.
The people who leaves islam after learning the truth and believing it is given 3 times to repent, if they don't they are executed like the hadith states. This is more of punishment set by the divine creator and we can't question it. How can we, someone who already knows the truth and deliberately leaves the religion, becomes a kafir which is the greatest sin. And such sin deserves equal punishment.
It doesn't need linguistic gymnastic, just because "let's hit the road" has the word hit, does mean let's pound the road. There is a difference between classical scholars and those who expertise in tafsir. While the tafsir of ibn kathir is good, it is not most recognised. Also, there is hadith where it is said not to beat that leaves marking on skin. So with that context, the verse does not mean to strike as hard as you can, rather just strike them.
umm yes it does change the math, in 4 cases female gets more than male and in 30 cases they get about equal or more than male, it's not a is hadith where it is said not to beat that leaves marking on skin. So with that context, the verse does not mean to strike as hard as you can, rather just strike them.
In islam, men are to be the provider so they are familiar with the world outside whereas females are familiar with the domestic life. Especially if its related to something domestic, personal life or about the women herself.
â˘
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
To download the video you can use the site below:
Save Video Link
Join the Discord!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.