Golden Rule of Islam

[bararallu]

I did say we did have one and I put forth quotes to prove it and articles by other Muslims who agree with me that we do. If it politically suits you to pretend that we don't, that's your business.

This actually has little to do with Islam, per se, as I said previously. Unlike some here, I do very much believe there is a range of belief, even among the fundamentalists like your self. It is your previously mentioned position that universal/timeless ethics are meaningless which make those things you quote on the golden rule be compromised. I don't think all Muslims would treat this subject comparably to you.

Because you continue to pretend that we are unique among the world's religions in not having one even after I have shown that we do.

I really think you have me mistaken for someone else.

Muhammad inquired into the health of a man that used to throw thorns in his path on a daily basis because one day he quit. That is better than do unto others. Nobody could hope to receive such forgiveness under normal circumstance.

Again, thats perfectly fine. I can find fault in other actions of Mohamed, which we have beat many horses over here, but in this case there is no obvious issue. I trust that it can be interpreted as you say. I just don't see it as a convincing concept coming from you, when you say that there aren't and cannot be any universal ethics. You cant have your cake and eat it too. If you are going to relegate somethings to historic circumstances you have to relegate everything to it. Or you can see things more metaphorically, that is- non fundamentally, and extrapolate things into universal conventions and timeless ethics that would allow for the golden rule to be what it is in most religions: a cornerstone of the religion. As it is in Judaism, in Christianity and many other Religions. Thats your decision, not "Islam" or the "Ummah" or whatever other metaphysical anthropomorphism popularized around the Internets.

[andak01]

I probably do have you confused with someone else. Scattergood for example argues that because Muslims don't have a universal set of ethics, the presumed universal ethics of the rest of the world can't be applied to us. Steven doesn't even bother to think it through that far, instead relying on the same tired mantras. You, though we rarely agree confine yourself to thoughtful discourse.

I will take it up with you that the Golden Rule is the cornerstone of religions. It may have seemed so to Hillel, but the first commandment concerns treatment and understanding of G_d, i.e. monotheism. You don't even need religion at all to follow the Golden Rule.

[Mediocrates]

I'm not sure Buddhism has anything really to say about 'do unto others' etc. I think Boddhishavta is more about the denial of your just desserts as it were in order to teach the dharma even to those who don't warrant it. And clearly Buddhism like most other world religions makes a meaningful distinction between good and bad even if they have no concept of sin. In fact I'd go as far to say that Judaism doesn't have a clear notion of 'sin' per se at least in the way they mean it in Christianity. There's obligation and there is failure in the execution of that obligation.

[Mediocrates]

In other words you don't treat others as you would be treated. You treat others because it's the right, just, ethical, moral, humane thing to do.

The rest, as they say, is commentary.

[Steven]

In other words you don't treat others as you would be treated. You treat others because it's the right, just, ethical, moral, humane thing to do.

The rest, as they say, is commentary.

Gee Med, maybe one day God will strike you with a bit of common sense and you will actually figure out what andak's goal is here.

[Steven]

[QUOTE=bararallu;278957]This actually has little to do with Islam, per se, as I said previously. Unlike some here, I do very much believe there is a range of belief, even among the fundamentalists like your self. QUOTE]

Yes there is a range of beliefs, let me know when moderate Islam actually matters.

[Mediocrates]

Let me know when moderate anything actually matters. History isn't made by moderates. They just follow behind cleaning up the mess.

[Steven]

Let me know when moderate anything actually matters. History isn't made by moderates. They just follow behind cleaning up the mess.

Then how come moderate Judaism and Christianity are in control but "moderate" Islam is not?
1 billion of them, but where are the mass rallies against sharia and Islamic takeover?

[Parsi]

Then how come moderate Judaism and Christianity are in control but "moderate" Islam is not?
1 billion of them, but where are the mass rallies against sharia and Islamic takeover?

Because the so-called "moderate Islam" is not "Islam". Jihadists follow Islam in its original and fullest form and they are not ashamed of their religion. Moderate Muslims on the other hand are usually those who either don't know much about Islam (they're often shocked when they find about it) or the ones who try to bring civilised values into Islam.

[Mediocrates]

Why? In control of what? The 'faithful'?

[andak01]

Because the so-called "moderate Islam" is not "Islam". Jihadists follow Islam in its original and fullest form and they are not ashamed of their religion. Moderate Muslims on the other hand are usually those who either don't know much about Islam (they're often shocked when they find about it) or the ones who try to bring civilised values into Islam.

That's so much baloney. I know plenty about Islam and I'm not shocked by what I find out precisely because I came from a Christian background. If Christianity was practised "in full" according to centuries of church dictates, we'd all be answering to the Pope. It took centuries to defang that papacy and almost every Protestant group that came along made attempts to establish a theocracy as well. Even today, if you'd give an inch to some folks, they'd have the ten commandments and statues of Jesus in front of every public building.

Today, if any capital crime is committed in the Vatican, they defer to Italian law. So even in the last of the Christian theocracies, the rule of law is not theocratic.

[Agnosthiest]

How does YOUR Golden Rule propose to treat Muslims?

The fact still remains that muslims are treated much better in the land of the infidels, than how infidels are treated in the land of the moslems. Right? Thats the golden rule making a significant difference.

I will take it up with you that the Golden Rule is the cornerstone of religions.

so why is it not in the koran?

[andak01]

so why is it not in the koran?

I'm interested in how you explain that a religion with no regard for others comes up with Charity as one of its pillars. How does a religion that doesn't treat others well end up with an entire book of sayings regarding buying freedom for slaves (manumission)? How does a religion that doesn't treat others well tell us to respect the elderly and treat children with kindness?

Secondly, I'm interested in how the Golden Rule applied to Christian rule of the Jews, not in secular times, but during the time that Christian law was in force? How was the Golden Rule applied to witches in Salem, Mass.? How was the Golden Rule invoked during the time of the Spanish conquests in America and back in Spain by a government consumed by religion? How was the Golden Rule applied to Native Americans? How was the Golden Rule applied during "Manifest Destiny"? How was the Golden Rule applied to the Midianites? How was the Golden Rule applied to the Tribe of Ai? The Amalek? Etc.

There has never been and will never be a theocracy that treats other religions equally just as there will never be a secular system that treats all economic models equally. In secular capitalist society, it's easy to do unto others if they aren't Commies.

[Rob]

I'm interested in how you explain that a religion with no regard for others comes up with Charity as one of its pillars.

And how much zakaat is payed to non-muslims?

How does a religion that doesn't treat others well end up with an entire book of sayings regarding buying freedom for slaves (manumission)?

Oh, please don´t tell me you consider what Muhammed did with Safiyah is an act of compassion. Please don´t

Islam teaches you to do good to other Muslims and if possible respect others. But Muslims always come first. It even teaches you not to take friends from Jews and Christians. Muslims first...that´s seems to be the credo.

[andak01]

And how much zakaat is payed to non-muslims?

Generally Muslims are the beneficiary, however there is no prohibition on giving to any needy person so long as they aren't actively struggling against Islam. An interesting note: zakaat can be used to free a slave. I presume in your worldview, a slave could only be a non-Muslim. It can also be used to pay for education.

5. To free slaves (Riqab)
Zakah can also be used to free slaves or captives.

http://www.tamilislam.com/english/basic/zakah_sadaqah.htm

Oh, please don´t tell me you consider what Muhammed did with Safiyah is an act of compassion. Please don´t

I'm sure we wouldn't agree on the circumstances of any of his wives, nor about whether the sky is blue.

Islam teaches you to do good to other Muslims and if possible respect others. But Muslims always come first. It even teaches you not to take friends from Jews and Christians. Muslims first...that´s seems to be the credo.

Not taking friends isn't at all the same as making enemies of them all. I have plenty of pleasant times with my non-Muslim work companions and perform many constructive tasks, but I wouldn't say they are the same as my friends.