One thing I hate worse than ANYTHING is when people try to regulate my religion. MY religion. When an non-Muslim says "Aren't you supposed to _______?" or an atheist says "Oh, you're doing ________ wrong." Let me deal with my beliefs, the requirement of my religion, and how I deal with my day to day life with Allah. Not you.
You do not need to deal with how I live my life in relation to religion. I did not hire you in any way to show me what you think I am doing wrong, or what you think I should be doing according to your view of my religion. It must be a terrible burden on you to try to keep me in line with what you believe is what I'm supposed to be doing according to my own beliefs. As Fiona Apple says, "curious, you looking down your nose at me, while you appease - Courteous to try and help - but let me set your mind at ease."
Even other Muslims attempt to lead me in my belief, without an invitation to do so. Why is this, I wonder? As the Qur'an states, religion is explain to you only through Allah. 75:19 "And that behold, it will be for Us to explain it." Notice, also, how it does not say, "And that behold, it will be for your aunts, your cousins, your father, your brother, your friend's friend, and a complete stranger to explain it."
I will try to be more at ease when people try to barge into my set of beliefs because Allah warns of these people, and tells us to let them be, because they are doing what they are supposed to be doing.
This is more of a plea to those who are currently doing this to me, personally, or anyone else around them. To the intelligent people who know when to stay out of someone's business when it is uninvited. I invite you to stop regulating my beliefs. I would greatly appreciate it, if you can. Thank you! Salaamu leikum.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Thursday, September 1, 2011
My Choice
I was sitting here thinking (yes, I do often sit and ponder things because I'm a genius!), "Why don't people let others believe as they want if it makes them happy?" Let me explain. . .
I was having a conversation with my friend and the Qur'an came up. He said some funny, slightly-disrespectful things (he wasn't intentionally trying to offend me). He was questioning certain things that I believed that didn't make sense to him. I asked him if his mother was religious, and he answered that she wasn't, and that's where he gets his viewpoints on religion. Most things he heard (he wasn't taught, because his parents weren't religiously affiliated) did not make sense to him and he could not relate to, therefore he had a negative viewpoint on these matters. When he was saying things and asking hypothetical questions, I told him, "If it makes me happy, if my religion makes me happy, what should it matter to anyone else?"
I could understand how, if I was miserable about what I believe and fearful all the time, someone would want to convince me that I don't have to believe such things and could be more peaceful without them. I can understand if that were the case. But for most people, religion is something wonderful to their lives. It's funny, because it's usually Atheists who are trying to convince others against their religions. I wonder why. . . I wonder why an Atheist would tell me how stupid he thinks what I believe spiritually is. Is it to simply express his point of view? Or is it to convince me of his way of thinking? If I am peaceful, happy, and content with what I believe, why should it bother him in the least, if it doesn't affect him in any way?
Usually, the people I've met who are like this, are like this in any aspect. . . For example, if I am listening to music, and they hate it, they will tell me how horrible it is and continue on. If I love a movie, and they do not, they will continue on with why it is bad and why no one should like it. Maybe, this is satisfying to them? I really don't know. Any thoughts? I would like to understand why certain people act this way. The more we understand one another, the better we can react to one another.
I was having a conversation with my friend and the Qur'an came up. He said some funny, slightly-disrespectful things (he wasn't intentionally trying to offend me). He was questioning certain things that I believed that didn't make sense to him. I asked him if his mother was religious, and he answered that she wasn't, and that's where he gets his viewpoints on religion. Most things he heard (he wasn't taught, because his parents weren't religiously affiliated) did not make sense to him and he could not relate to, therefore he had a negative viewpoint on these matters. When he was saying things and asking hypothetical questions, I told him, "If it makes me happy, if my religion makes me happy, what should it matter to anyone else?"
I could understand how, if I was miserable about what I believe and fearful all the time, someone would want to convince me that I don't have to believe such things and could be more peaceful without them. I can understand if that were the case. But for most people, religion is something wonderful to their lives. It's funny, because it's usually Atheists who are trying to convince others against their religions. I wonder why. . . I wonder why an Atheist would tell me how stupid he thinks what I believe spiritually is. Is it to simply express his point of view? Or is it to convince me of his way of thinking? If I am peaceful, happy, and content with what I believe, why should it bother him in the least, if it doesn't affect him in any way?
Usually, the people I've met who are like this, are like this in any aspect. . . For example, if I am listening to music, and they hate it, they will tell me how horrible it is and continue on. If I love a movie, and they do not, they will continue on with why it is bad and why no one should like it. Maybe, this is satisfying to them? I really don't know. Any thoughts? I would like to understand why certain people act this way. The more we understand one another, the better we can react to one another.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Another Hadith Rant
Sooo. . . Apparently, hadiths were not allowed to be recorded (written) in the beginning, so they would NOT BE CONFUSED with the Qur'an.
Explain this to me (this is actually from a hadith):
"Abu Sa'id Khudri reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that and narrate from me. . ." (Book 042, Number 7147 - Sahih Muslim)
How absolutely curious! Does this not explicitly say "do not take down anything from me. . . except the Qur'an?" Now, why would it be prohibited to write anything, lest it not be confused with the Qur'an, if, as most Muslims agree, they are to be regarded equally as important and to be followed with the same vigor?
"Muslim historians say that it was the caliph Uthman (the third caliph, or successor of Muhammad, who had formerly been Muhammad's secretary), who first urged Muslims both to write down the Qur'an in a fixed form, and to write down the hadith." (History of hadith)
So 3 successors later, these were recorded via written word? Again, hmm.
"Say: 'Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who has sent to you the Book, explained in detail.'" (Qur'an, 6:114)
As you can see, it's doesn't say, "explained in part (see hadiths for more info)." Probably the most convincing of evidence is that the Qur'an actually states that nothing has been left out of the Qur'an (6:38)! Does one need more than that?
"The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the hearer, the knower". Sura 6:114
Good site to visit for further info. . .
http://www.quran.org/
Explain this to me (this is actually from a hadith):
"Abu Sa'id Khudri reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that and narrate from me. . ." (Book 042, Number 7147 - Sahih Muslim)
How absolutely curious! Does this not explicitly say "do not take down anything from me. . . except the Qur'an?" Now, why would it be prohibited to write anything, lest it not be confused with the Qur'an, if, as most Muslims agree, they are to be regarded equally as important and to be followed with the same vigor?
"Muslim historians say that it was the caliph Uthman (the third caliph, or successor of Muhammad, who had formerly been Muhammad's secretary), who first urged Muslims both to write down the Qur'an in a fixed form, and to write down the hadith." (History of hadith)
So 3 successors later, these were recorded via written word? Again, hmm.
"Say: 'Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who has sent to you the Book, explained in detail.'" (Qur'an, 6:114)
As you can see, it's doesn't say, "explained in part (see hadiths for more info)." Probably the most convincing of evidence is that the Qur'an actually states that nothing has been left out of the Qur'an (6:38)! Does one need more than that?
"The word of your Lord is complete, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the hearer, the knower". Sura 6:114
Good site to visit for further info. . .
http://www.quran.org/
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Quranism: The Metaphor of the House
March 17, 2011 by Farouk A. Peru (from http://quranistislam.wordpress.com/)
Once upon a time, the Prophet built a house. Because all the people who lived in it had the attitude of ‘islam’, the house was always at peace and encouraged wholeness. It was appropriately called the house of islam as a description. The people who lived there were called ‘muslims’ because they were agents of wholeness and soundness.
With time, all the original occupants died and their descendants and the newcomers did not necessarily have the same attitude. However, as a matter of course, the house continued to be called the House of Islam and the people still were called Muslims. These words Islam and Muslim were reduced to names by this point and the House itself was expanded to include a few floors.
One such floor was the Sunni floor. The Sunni floor had a number of rooms. At first there were many rooms (some say 500!) which eventually got combined into a total of four rooms, the Shafiee, Hanafi, Maliki and Hambal rooms. The Sunnis were very great in number so they actually spent most of the time in the living room. There were so many of them that when people visited the House of Islam, they saw only the Sunnis. This made most people think Muslims were only the Sunnis and that the Sunni version of how the House of Islam was built was the true version.
Another floor was the Shiite floor. The Sunnis and Shiites decided they couldn’t live on a single floor. However, they lived mostly in peace with each other even though when you asked them, they would each produce arguments against each other. The Shiites also had several rooms but in the Shiites case, each of the rooms claimed to be the true inheritors of the Prophets legacy whereas in the Sunnis case, they mutually recognised each other’s rights to the Prophets legacy although they recognised only each other and no one outside Sunnism. Even then the new Sunni room called ‘Wahabi’ rejected the Shiites altogether saying they have no right to live in the House of Islam or be called Muslims.
Whenever there were visitors to the House of Islam, they mostly met the Sunnis and this led the visitors to think that the Sunnis are the House of Islam itself and the only Muslims. Some visitors found Shiites or Sufis (who were mystics and mostly accepted by both Sunnis and Shiites) and came to think that the House of Islam were truly represented by Shiites and Sufis though the Sunnis were also Muslims.
If the Prophet were to come back, he would be surprised to see Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis and Wahabis were so different from what he preached to be islam. However, he would not have denied that they were muslim (descriptively which is what Allah judges by).
There were actually people who thought all of these above floors and rooms were wrong. These people were critical of hadith and sunnah and stuck exclusively to the Quran. However, they refused a floor of their own when they were asked to build one. They said, we are solely from the House of Islam and creating floor is against what the Quran is about so we shall remain in the living room.
Whenever visitors visited the House of Islam and looked for Muslims, these people said ‘That is US! We ARE Muslims’. However, those visitors felt cheated if not terribly betrayed when they found that these people were not like other Muslims much, if at all. No matter how strongly these people felt they were the exclusive claimants of the title Muslims, the sheer numbers of the Sunnis and Shiites had already coloured the perception of those visitors or seekers after Islam. Furthermore, the Quran did not say that people like the Sunnis, Shiites and others weren’t muslims (with a small ‘m’ because the Quran cares for our behaviour, not names), the only thing is they have taken sources which detracts from the Quranic ideal.
So what is the solution for these people? Perhaps they should understand that building a floor for themselves isn’t wrong. The Quran itself acknowledges a multiplicity of paths and techniques to serve Allah and that is what floors and rooms represent. Perhaps if they built a floor called Quranism and called themselves Quranists, they would be far more recognisable and people would appreciate their honesty. These people after all did not amount to even 1 percent of the House of Islam so a name, a floor and a room gives them recognisability. Does having this room mean that these people hated the others? Not at all. A floor is simply a space where people do what they do. People who visit that space automatically know that they shouldn’t expect people to adhere to hadith and sunnah there. When they communicated about such people, they called them ‘Quranists’ and do so with respect because these people acknowledge this term. The Quranist floor also has several rooms and they knowledge each of these rooms to be legitimate quests in seeking for the truth. Not only that, they are friendly to all other floors and rooms but they do gently tell the others that they are not following the true teachings of the Prophet.
Building floors and rooms gives space. Space exists on pages, in minds and in the world. Spaces help people find us and ensure that people aren’t cheated when they simply look for Islam and Muslims (which is much more often than not, Sunnism and Sunnis). Having a space doesn’t mean one is no longer muslim (agents of wholeness and soundness) but merely tells people HOW one is muslim. Lets not confuse this with sectarianism.
With time, all the original occupants died and their descendants and the newcomers did not necessarily have the same attitude. However, as a matter of course, the house continued to be called the House of Islam and the people still were called Muslims. These words Islam and Muslim were reduced to names by this point and the House itself was expanded to include a few floors.
One such floor was the Sunni floor. The Sunni floor had a number of rooms. At first there were many rooms (some say 500!) which eventually got combined into a total of four rooms, the Shafiee, Hanafi, Maliki and Hambal rooms. The Sunnis were very great in number so they actually spent most of the time in the living room. There were so many of them that when people visited the House of Islam, they saw only the Sunnis. This made most people think Muslims were only the Sunnis and that the Sunni version of how the House of Islam was built was the true version.
Another floor was the Shiite floor. The Sunnis and Shiites decided they couldn’t live on a single floor. However, they lived mostly in peace with each other even though when you asked them, they would each produce arguments against each other. The Shiites also had several rooms but in the Shiites case, each of the rooms claimed to be the true inheritors of the Prophets legacy whereas in the Sunnis case, they mutually recognised each other’s rights to the Prophets legacy although they recognised only each other and no one outside Sunnism. Even then the new Sunni room called ‘Wahabi’ rejected the Shiites altogether saying they have no right to live in the House of Islam or be called Muslims.
Whenever there were visitors to the House of Islam, they mostly met the Sunnis and this led the visitors to think that the Sunnis are the House of Islam itself and the only Muslims. Some visitors found Shiites or Sufis (who were mystics and mostly accepted by both Sunnis and Shiites) and came to think that the House of Islam were truly represented by Shiites and Sufis though the Sunnis were also Muslims.
If the Prophet were to come back, he would be surprised to see Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis and Wahabis were so different from what he preached to be islam. However, he would not have denied that they were muslim (descriptively which is what Allah judges by).
There were actually people who thought all of these above floors and rooms were wrong. These people were critical of hadith and sunnah and stuck exclusively to the Quran. However, they refused a floor of their own when they were asked to build one. They said, we are solely from the House of Islam and creating floor is against what the Quran is about so we shall remain in the living room.
Whenever visitors visited the House of Islam and looked for Muslims, these people said ‘That is US! We ARE Muslims’. However, those visitors felt cheated if not terribly betrayed when they found that these people were not like other Muslims much, if at all. No matter how strongly these people felt they were the exclusive claimants of the title Muslims, the sheer numbers of the Sunnis and Shiites had already coloured the perception of those visitors or seekers after Islam. Furthermore, the Quran did not say that people like the Sunnis, Shiites and others weren’t muslims (with a small ‘m’ because the Quran cares for our behaviour, not names), the only thing is they have taken sources which detracts from the Quranic ideal.
So what is the solution for these people? Perhaps they should understand that building a floor for themselves isn’t wrong. The Quran itself acknowledges a multiplicity of paths and techniques to serve Allah and that is what floors and rooms represent. Perhaps if they built a floor called Quranism and called themselves Quranists, they would be far more recognisable and people would appreciate their honesty. These people after all did not amount to even 1 percent of the House of Islam so a name, a floor and a room gives them recognisability. Does having this room mean that these people hated the others? Not at all. A floor is simply a space where people do what they do. People who visit that space automatically know that they shouldn’t expect people to adhere to hadith and sunnah there. When they communicated about such people, they called them ‘Quranists’ and do so with respect because these people acknowledge this term. The Quranist floor also has several rooms and they knowledge each of these rooms to be legitimate quests in seeking for the truth. Not only that, they are friendly to all other floors and rooms but they do gently tell the others that they are not following the true teachings of the Prophet.
Building floors and rooms gives space. Space exists on pages, in minds and in the world. Spaces help people find us and ensure that people aren’t cheated when they simply look for Islam and Muslims (which is much more often than not, Sunnism and Sunnis). Having a space doesn’t mean one is no longer muslim (agents of wholeness and soundness) but merely tells people HOW one is muslim. Lets not confuse this with sectarianism.
No Label
I underestimated how complicated religion can be. . . I should rephrase that: Not how complicated religion can be, but how complicated people can make religion. It seems the more you develop into a religion, the more the people around you want you to embrace their interpretations/ways of following. I am ALMOST afraid to tell others of what I have learned! I should explain myself. . .
There are different denominations of Muslims. Everyone knows of the Sunnis & Shias, as well as the Sufis. Those really are the "main," recognizable names for most people. I have heard plenty from Sunni Muslims, some from Sufi Muslims, and none from Shia Muslims. Obviously, as what is natural, every individual thinks their path is correct, and the other paths are incorrect. This bothers me, personally.
A very good family friend told me a beautiful way to look at it. Let's say Allah is electricity. All these different homes have electric sockets to plug into and provides electricity into their devices. All these homes have access to this electricity, just in a different place. There are different paths to Allah. Who are you, as a person, to say what way is correct or incorrect for another, if you are all following a path of Allah. If one believes in the Qur'an & loves Allah, is that not enough? When one takes Shahadah, is it not a testimony that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed (pbuh) is His messenger (and nothing further)?
It's funny, because some Muslims are quick to say, "No, that is not enough," and follow it by telling you that you are not Muslim unless you follow X, Y, & Z. Has Allah given humans the power to condemn another to Hell or allow into Paradise? Has Allah given humans the ability to see inside others' souls & recognize the connection (or lack thereof) to Allah? Who is to say if someone can legitimately be called "Muslim," other than God Almighty?
If I were to walk into my Qur'an study & say, "I only believe & follow the Qur'an itself, the direct word of Allah," I wonder what my friends there would say to me? Would it be:
There are different denominations of Muslims. Everyone knows of the Sunnis & Shias, as well as the Sufis. Those really are the "main," recognizable names for most people. I have heard plenty from Sunni Muslims, some from Sufi Muslims, and none from Shia Muslims. Obviously, as what is natural, every individual thinks their path is correct, and the other paths are incorrect. This bothers me, personally.
A very good family friend told me a beautiful way to look at it. Let's say Allah is electricity. All these different homes have electric sockets to plug into and provides electricity into their devices. All these homes have access to this electricity, just in a different place. There are different paths to Allah. Who are you, as a person, to say what way is correct or incorrect for another, if you are all following a path of Allah. If one believes in the Qur'an & loves Allah, is that not enough? When one takes Shahadah, is it not a testimony that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed (pbuh) is His messenger (and nothing further)?
It's funny, because some Muslims are quick to say, "No, that is not enough," and follow it by telling you that you are not Muslim unless you follow X, Y, & Z. Has Allah given humans the power to condemn another to Hell or allow into Paradise? Has Allah given humans the ability to see inside others' souls & recognize the connection (or lack thereof) to Allah? Who is to say if someone can legitimately be called "Muslim," other than God Almighty?
If I were to walk into my Qur'an study & say, "I only believe & follow the Qur'an itself, the direct word of Allah," I wonder what my friends there would say to me? Would it be:
- "This is wonderful news! Alhumdilallah! Believe as you feel is right, and always trust & remember Allah!"
- "I cannot say that I agree, but I know that Allah is All-Knowing & will lead a believer in the correct path."
- "Oh, no, you cannot be Muslim then. It is not correct. You must follow hadith, and if you do not, you cannot call yourself Muslim!"
I'm afraid that the first option would not happen at all. I would hope to at least get the second option! I am saddened by this judgement.
Apparently, I am not alone in what I feel. There are certain Muslims that are labeled Qur'anists. These Muslims believe in the Qur'an & follow the holy text alone. Each individual varies on their stance of hadith, but they all basically reject that hadiths have authority and are requirements to Muslims. If/When you have time, please click the link I provided for a quick overview of Qur'anists from Wikipedia.
I hope against hope that my fellow Muslims are at peace with any decision I make concerning how I personally follow Islam & how my relationship is with Allah.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Sufi School
So today, I'll be going to MTO Shahmaghsoudi School of Islamic Sufism, Inshallah. I am so freshly a Muslim that I still have yet to learn of the differences between denominations of Muslims. From what I've learned so far from others, Sufi is the "spiritual" aspect of Islam (using their words). I am intrigued by this idea & love the spiritual side of things. But. . . Isn't Islam itself "spiritual?" Isn't the very nature of religion about spirituality? Maybe I just don't understand what others mean when they use that term to describe Sufism.
I am quite excited to attend the school today, actually. I have no idea what to expect from the lecture we will hear. I do know, however, we will be chanting & praying. Also, everyone is encouraged to wear white. I have a white top, but I'm probably going to wear some black slacks or light color jeans.
I read something that threw up a flag in my mind in the Qur'an the other day. I read that if you kill (purposely) a fellow believer (Muslim), your punishment is Hell. It makes me think of the extremists we see on the news constantly, who are guilty of killing Muslims. . . If they claim to believe in the Qur'an, did they just kind of. . . SKIP that surah or what? This is very clearly stated. How does one misinterpret that?
I am quite excited to attend the school today, actually. I have no idea what to expect from the lecture we will hear. I do know, however, we will be chanting & praying. Also, everyone is encouraged to wear white. I have a white top, but I'm probably going to wear some black slacks or light color jeans.
I read something that threw up a flag in my mind in the Qur'an the other day. I read that if you kill (purposely) a fellow believer (Muslim), your punishment is Hell. It makes me think of the extremists we see on the news constantly, who are guilty of killing Muslims. . . If they claim to believe in the Qur'an, did they just kind of. . . SKIP that surah or what? This is very clearly stated. How does one misinterpret that?
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Parental Guidance
I was talking with my dad this morning, one subject being, of course, religion, among other things. Apparently, everyone is going to my parents, asking them their thoughts on me "studying Islam." A good point my dad brought up was that I need to see both sides: the religious and the anti-religious. He's right.
My dad was raised Muslim (from what I'm told), and he is now atheist. Whenever religion is brought up between him & I in any way, he is always saying something negative about it overall or its followers. He's always saying that religion causes all of these wars, conflicts, etc. The thing is. . . without religion, there would not be LESS killing/wars/conflicts, not at all. Humans create in- and out-groups to separate themselves from others, whether it be with race, language, ethnicity, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, region, STATE, CITY, affiliation of any kind (religious, political, gang, etc).
Personally, I think that religion does more good than bad. Religion can inspires you to live a wholesome, disciplined, GOOD life. In a religion like Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, or Islam, does it every say in the scriptures to do something horrible to others or influence followers to live lives that are corrupt? No, never! It does not! Does it outline how to live a happy, peaceful life? The Qur'an gives guidance like, "Be good to parents, relatives, orphans, and the needy. Speak kindly and pay the poor-due," (2:83), "Kill not one another," (4:29), "Whoever participates in a good cause, will be rewarded. Whoever participates in an evil cause, will bear the consequences thereof," (4:85), "O people of the Book, do not be fanatical in your faith," (4:171) "Be kind and forgiving toward others," (7:199).
Confused or ignorant people tend to blame religion for all these atrocities, but it's not religion: it's people. Those SAME people who kill in the name of God would STILL BE KILLING PEOPLE without religion. What, do people think that those same killers would be peaceful, frolicking people without religion? If so, that is so sad. In the Qur'an, Allah says "Whoever kills a human being, it is as if he had killed all mankind. Whoever saves the life of one, it is as if he had saved the life of all" (5:32).
Also, why are others so concerned about the beliefs of others if the belief does not interfere in any negative way? My father's non-belief does not affect me in ANY way. My beliefs should not upset ANYONE else either. I do not try to convert people and I don't judge others. Allah is the only judge, so why should anyone feel the need to take on that heavy responsibility?
My dad was raised Muslim (from what I'm told), and he is now atheist. Whenever religion is brought up between him & I in any way, he is always saying something negative about it overall or its followers. He's always saying that religion causes all of these wars, conflicts, etc. The thing is. . . without religion, there would not be LESS killing/wars/conflicts, not at all. Humans create in- and out-groups to separate themselves from others, whether it be with race, language, ethnicity, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, region, STATE, CITY, affiliation of any kind (religious, political, gang, etc).
Personally, I think that religion does more good than bad. Religion can inspires you to live a wholesome, disciplined, GOOD life. In a religion like Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, or Islam, does it every say in the scriptures to do something horrible to others or influence followers to live lives that are corrupt? No, never! It does not! Does it outline how to live a happy, peaceful life? The Qur'an gives guidance like, "Be good to parents, relatives, orphans, and the needy. Speak kindly and pay the poor-due," (2:83), "Kill not one another," (4:29), "Whoever participates in a good cause, will be rewarded. Whoever participates in an evil cause, will bear the consequences thereof," (4:85), "O people of the Book, do not be fanatical in your faith," (4:171) "Be kind and forgiving toward others," (7:199).
Confused or ignorant people tend to blame religion for all these atrocities, but it's not religion: it's people. Those SAME people who kill in the name of God would STILL BE KILLING PEOPLE without religion. What, do people think that those same killers would be peaceful, frolicking people without religion? If so, that is so sad. In the Qur'an, Allah says "Whoever kills a human being, it is as if he had killed all mankind. Whoever saves the life of one, it is as if he had saved the life of all" (5:32).
Also, why are others so concerned about the beliefs of others if the belief does not interfere in any negative way? My father's non-belief does not affect me in ANY way. My beliefs should not upset ANYONE else either. I do not try to convert people and I don't judge others. Allah is the only judge, so why should anyone feel the need to take on that heavy responsibility?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
