Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
RavenHawk

Taqiya & Naskh

11 posts in this topic

For the cop show or the country band, see elsewhere B)

16:106 “Any one who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief,- except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in Faith - but such as open their breast to Unbelief, on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Penalty.”

I have always thought that this Ayah was the definition of Taqiya. But from time to time someone will claim that this is a Shiite term and that Sunnis do not believe in it. I will concede that my Arabic is not great. Therefore, who here knows if there is another term that describes the Sunni version and what are the differences? Shiites may use this to defend themselves from Sunnis, but the first Muslims also used the same concept to defend themselves from the Meccans. Is there a Median text that abrogates this Meccan one that Shiites follow?

I remember when the following occurred. It’s one of those things that just stick with you. This is why it was easy enough to find it. But this is a great example of Sunnis practicing Taqiya.

In 2007, Sheikh Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti of Egypt, stated In regard to a Muslim’s right to renounce Islam and to join another (apostasy), his initial rulings sounded lenient. The Washington Post-Newsweek forum in English was one of the forums that published his decisions. BTW, he is Sunni (Shafi’i).

“The essential question before us is: Can a person who is a Muslim choose a religion other than Islam? The answer is yes, they can, because the Quran says, ‘Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion,’ (Quran 109:6) and, ‘Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosever will, let him disbelieve,’ (Quran18:29) and, ‘There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is distinct from error’ (Quran 2:256).”

He added, “These verses from the Quran discuss a freedom that God affords all people. But from a religious prospective, the act of abandoning one’s religion is a sin punishable by God on the Day of Judgment. If the case in Question is one of merely rejecting faith, then there is no worldly punishment.” He went on to state, “If, however, the crime of undermining the foundations of the society is added to the sin of apostasy, then the case must be referred to a judicial system whose role is to protect the integrity of the society…..According to Islam, it is not permitted for Muslims to reject their faith, so if a Muslim were to leave Islam and adopt another religion, they would thereby be committing a sin in the eyes of Islam. Religious belief and practice is a personal matter, and society only intervenes when that personal matter becomes public and threatens the well-being of its members.”

A few days later, the Grand Mufti, issued another statement. This time he was speaking in Arabic in Cairo and what he said was completely different: “What I actually said was that Islam prohibits a Muslim from changing his religion and it’s a crime that must be punished.”

So what you come away with is that Apostasy threatens the integrity of Muslim society. Note that Ayahs 109 and 18 are Meccan texts. Ayah 2 is almost a mistake. No doubt that when Gomaa spoke in Arabic, he was inferring Median texts. This is the concept of Abrogation or Naskh which usually means that when you find two contradictory Ayahs, go with the Median texts. So, is this what is going on here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. The Quran can be divided into two parts: Meccan and Medinan. There are fundamental differences between the two. The first part was revealed when Muhammad's religion was fairly new and Muslims were weak and small in number. At this time, he sought to convert Christians and Jews while avoiding a violent backlash from Mecca's ruling pagans, who opposed Muhammad's claims of prophethood. After Muhammad fled to Medina, which he soon converted and ruled, he became powerful enough to freely call on his followers to fight and conquer non-Muslims.

As for taqiya, the reason it's associated with Shiite Muslims is because they have always been a minority, and have had to lie about their beliefs to protect themselves from the Sunnis. Taqiya is allowed, but not mandatory, for all Muslims, however. An example of Sunni practice of taqiya is how some religious figures in the West fool Christians into believing Islam teaches peace and love towards Christians and Jews (the "People of the Book") by using verses from the Meccan Quran, which are contradicted by the Medinan Quran's anti-Christian and anti-Jewish verses, which of course take precedence over the Meccan verses.

According to the Quran and Hadith, apostasy is punishable by death in Islam. For a Muslim to claim otherwise is an example of either taqiya, nifaq, or plain ignorance of the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Quran and Hadith, apostasy is punishable by death in Islam. For a Muslim to claim otherwise is an example of either taqiya, nifaq, or plain ignorance of the truth.

Thanks for paraphrasing my post.

The op was more geared to bring out those that would try to defend these actions even though the internet has revealed the truth of it to the masses. How can Islamic apologists still try to defend their position that Islam is a religion of peace in light of this evidence and this is but one example. Is this harsh or unfair? Why or why not?

Now I did a search on the subject in this forum and only one other post came up. So this is a subject that hasn’t been beaten to death, yet the replies to views are quite low. Either people are reading this and agreeing and can’t add anything of value, or this is already old news and is an example of how phony the religion is, or others don’t want to touch it because they’d get burned, or someone is building a counter reply right now and filling it with distraction and deceit and it’ll take a little bit more time to reply, or not enough people have seen it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their religion is riddled with deceit. One need look no further than the hudnah to understand this. They - both Sunni and Shia - believe the means justifies the end with regard to spreading Islam over the face of the whole earth. I personally believe nothing their leaders say. This war we are currently engaged in is the last great conflict, I believe. It will simmer until it suddenly goes critical and then a global catastrophe will occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their religion is riddled with deceit. One need look no further than the hudnah to understand this. They - both Sunni and Shia - believe the means justifies the end with regard to spreading Islam over the face of the whole earth. I personally believe nothing their leaders say. This war we are currently engaged in is the last great conflict, I believe. It will simmer until it suddenly goes critical and then a global catastrophe will occur.

I know that and you know that but I wonder if they know that? I’m sure a few do. But I don’t know about the majority of them – the silent majority. They speak out against their own radicals yet it turns out to be so much lip service. A loyal decorated major in the US army kills fellow soldiers at Ft Hood. British-born Muslims feel that they are compelled to set off bombs on London buses. And you have apologists like Lion6969 making excuses that they are the victims. Do these people not know that they stand behind a very thin veil?

My post here is not intended to be Muslim bashing so please don’t go in that direction. This is intended to be a challenge. A challenge to moderates. A challenge to reform their own religion. What do you really believe? Can your religion reform and still stay true to its peaceful and tolerant values? Or are we inescapably doomed to the inevitable? You really think you can win? Do you think this will be like the Battle of Badr? How Mohammed was out numbered by superior forces but because of poor leadership and lack of desire of the Quraysh army, Mohammed carried the day. More than likely, it will be the Battle of Tours, Battle of Vienna, and WWI. Can we avoid that? My deepest, honest feeling is not so hopeful because I don’t think your desire for peaceful coexistence is there. We are a joke to you, non believers worthy of death. And we shouldn’t believe anything you say. Am I wrong? The proof will be in the replies or the lack of replies that we see here from Muslim apologists. Do you think I am being too unfair? Do something that will make me believe otherwise.

I disagree that this is the last great conflict. This just happens to be the latest greatest conflict. Let’s not forget that we have two great conflicts confronting us today. The other one is internal, which is Socialism and all its flavors. A great nation is defined by the way it handles and overcomes each great conflict that comes its way. That is what Americans of all religions do best. It may not always be pretty but the American spirit is undefeatable. The American spirit is what I bank on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the bigots are running this ship!

Taqiya is a Shiite concept not derived from Quran or Hadith, but from their imams. It was a concept created to protect Shiite ideology in a region dominated by Sunni Muslims. It was recommended to Shiites to perform taqiya infront of Sunni Muslims to deceive them about the true heretic beliefs they held.

As for the verse quoted, although the bigots run the show and google scholars galore infiltrate UM forums. They always deny the Quran context, tradition, historical facts and Hadith!

The Quran was revealed over 23 years, verses revealed either dealt with questions or scenarios present. The ayah in question is Meccan, and when historical, oral, Hadith, documented and collected evidence is used to gain the contextual background of a verse (as all verses have them since they were revealed over a long period) you come to realise the verse was revealed when the first martyr was created for the cause of Islam, an elderly woman, who was tortured and killed by pagan meccans for simply stating her belief in one god and that muhammed was his messenger. Thus the verse was revealed to tell the early converts of Islam in Mecca that if under pressure and if ones life is threatened, they can claim disbelief publicly and still believe in Islam in their hearts, in order to preserve their lives. This is very different to Shiite taqiya which is basically not denying Islam as your belief but falsely claiming you adhere to the true tennants of Islam, while in your heart you practise shiitism. Muslims in Spain did this in order to protect their lives at the hands of the inquisition, whereby everyone was either converted to Christianity or killed! Jews Muslims and heretical (allegedly) Christians all were killed.

As for the claim of an apologist, I don't think so, you really think the bigoted, false information on such forums and the internet actually affect people's views? I don't think so, only the shallow of us swim at that end of pool, those with superior intelligence and research skills are not so easily fooled!

By the way during the revelation in Mecca, there was no established Christian community or Jewish, did that come from the encyclopaedia of self created truths for those who like to pretend!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the bigots are running this ship!

Sadly, this is the answer I expected. It’s the answer that will ultimately condemn the Islamic faith.

Taqiya is a Shiite concept not derived from Quran or Hadith, but from their imams. It was a concept created to protect Shiite ideology in a region dominated by Sunni Muslims. It was recommended to Shiites to perform taqiya infront of Sunni Muslims to deceive them about the true heretic beliefs they held.

It is a concept directly derived form the Quran. Where do you think the imams got it from? Its primary purpose was to deceive anyone of a person’s beliefs to avoid persecution.

As for the verse quoted, although the bigots run the show and google scholars galore infiltrate UM forums. They always deny the Quran context, tradition, historical facts and Hadith!

Yup, always blame others. Always misdirect. Except I’m not denying the Quran. I’m pulling directly from it and in context with tradition. So please, continue to scream “bigotry” and “google scholars”. You don’t do your position any good by doing that. People are more intelligent than you give them credit for. I have to laugh at your display. If you knew anything about me, you’d know I’m probably one of the least bigoted people here. Just because I’m critical of the deceit in Islam doesn’t make me a bigot. Just makes me a bit more intelligent than what you are comfortable with. Would a bigot try to challenge the faithful to reform their ways? I think a bigot would say something about ragheads and mention that they should eat **** and die. That doesn’t sound like the tone of my post now does it?

The Quran was revealed over 23 years,

Non sequitor.

verses revealed either dealt with questions or scenarios present.

Check. That is why it is relevant.

The ayah in question is Meccan,

I’ve already stated that.

and when historical, oral, Hadith, documented and collected evidence is used to gain the contextual background of a verse (as all verses have them since they were revealed over a long period) you come to realise the verse was revealed when the first martyr was created for the cause of Islam, an elderly woman, who was tortured and killed by pagan meccans for simply stating her belief in one god and that muhammed was his messenger. Thus the verse was revealed to tell the early converts of Islam in Mecca that if under pressure and if ones life is threatened, they can claim disbelief publicly and still believe in Islam in their hearts, in order to preserve their lives.

Firstly, make up your mind. Either it is a Shiite concept or it is something that Mohammed said it was ok to do. But then you agree, I didn’t take it out of context. It is as I’ve always understood it. As I had paraphrased it. So the early converts were not Shiite now were they?

This is very different to Shiite taqiya which is basically not denying Islam as your belief but falsely claiming you adhere to the true tennants of Islam, while in your heart you practise shiitism.

Not quite. It was still to deny one’s faith in shiitism in the face of the Sunni majority. The same thing went on between Catholic and Protestant. Either side claimed that the other was heresy. There is no difference between Islam vs Paganism and Sunni vs Shiite or the line you are selling. It is still deception. Get it? You still have nothing to say about the deceit that Gomaa stated?

Muslims in Spain did this in order to protect their lives at the hands of the inquisition, whereby everyone was either converted to Christianity or killed! Jews Muslims and heretical (allegedly) Christians all were killed.

Was every Muslim in Spain at the time Shiite? Actually, all non Catholics had three choices – leave, convert, or die. Many converted and the culture I live in benefited from that hidden secret. It has enriched our lives. While some still deny their heritage, many more willingly accept it.

As for the claim of an apologist, I don't think so,

Well, if you’re not, you sure are bending over backwards doing it.

you really think the bigoted, false information on such forums and the internet actually affect people's views? I don't think so, only the shallow of us swim at that end of pool, those with superior intelligence and research skills are not so easily fooled!

I think people are quite capable of judging for themselves the value of information on such forums and it affects them a lot more than say the MSM. People use the internet to educate themselves. And you don’t fool me. None of what I posted originated from any of your missionary sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way during the revelation in Mecca, there was no established Christian community or Jewish, did that come from the encyclopaedia of self created truths for those who like to pretend!

Not necessarily Jews, but Muhammad was a merchant and had plenty of interaction with Christians, as did Mecca. There was also a small number of Christians in Mecca, and one of the first people to accept Muhammad's revelations was a Christian scholar who was the cousin of his wife Khadija.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is basically a bump because the main question has gone unanswered. Don't want this to be accidently forgotten... Now anyone can answer it, but I am real curious as to what Lion thinks of Gomaa's statements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is Sheikh Ali Gomaa partaking in Taqiya?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is Sheikh Ali Gomaa partaking in Taqiya?

I don't see his words as a renunciation of faith but as a lie designed to further the cause of Islam. Tell the kaffirs one thing and the Muslims another. This behavior seems hard wired into the peace process and dooms it before it can find agreements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.