(Part 2) Best products from r/exmuslim

> Ok, but seriously. What language did Dilmun speak ? Something unknown ? Also, is there any truth to Bahrain being the original home of the Tyrians or is this just a foundation myth that the population believed in? Like, let's say, Rome being built by Romulus and Remus..

This is a tough one and I can't really give a definitive answer, I know that the Sumerians sent messages to Dilmun written in their language so I would assume they could understand it - there's also a small link between Dilmun and Indus Valley civilizations in the way they roll their seals.

Bahrain Through the Ages shows some of the messages. If you want I have a large collection of doccuments on archaeological findings in Eastern Arabia.

Of Phoenicia's origins Herodotus says this in 440 BC:

>According to the Persians best informed in history, the Phoenicians began the quarrel. These people, who had formerly dwelt on the shores of the Erythraean Sea (Red Sea), having migrated to the Mediterranean and settled in the parts which they now inhabit, began at once, they say, to adventure on long voyages, freighting their vessels with the wares of Egypt and Assyria ...

Strabo seems to agree with this though I don't think there is any physical or genetic evidence. Lebanese people today share a link between other Mediterranean people who were once colonized or influenced by the Phoenicians.


>what I did hear is that the Arabs really referred to one specific cultural group in Arabia among other Semitic populations and that over time they "absorbed" the other populations ? Again, why wouldn't central Arabians identify as Arabs ? I thought that the culture of central Arabia was mostly Bedouin, right ?

This would be true in the Iron Age and Hellenistic period, Arabs were quite a distinct people in that they were very culturally and linguistically conservative, even today Arabic still has ties to Ugaritic. From what I gather from Greco-Roman Historians the Arabs took religion and tradition very seriously and this distinguished them from the other semitic groups like the Jews and Aramaens who adopted more Hellenistic ideas.

Diodorus Siculus says this of the Arab people:

>They have a law neither to sow corn nor to plant any fruit-bearing plant, nor to use wine, nor to build a house. This law they hold because they judge that those who possess these things will be easily compelled by powerful men to do what is ordered them because of their enjoyment of these things. Some of them keep camels, others sheep, pasturing them over the desert. Of the Arabian tribes there are not a few who graze the desert and these are much superior to the others in the amenities of life, being in number not much more than 10,000. For not a few of them are wont to bring down to the sea frankincense and myrrh and the most costly of spices, receiving them from those who convey them from what is called Arabia Felix. They are conspicuously lovers of freedom, and flee into the desert, using this as a stronghold.

We see Arabs in reliefs from the Neo-Assyrian period to the Nabataens themselves depicted in izar and even the kings and chiefs apparently dressed modestly in purple cloths.

Ammanius says this of the Arabs in 380 CE:

>Among these tribes, whose primary origin is derived from the cataracts of the Nile and the borders of the Blemmyae, all the men are warriors of equal rank; half naked, clad in colored cloaks down to the waist, overrunning different countries, with the aid of swift and active horses and speedy camels, alike in times of peace and war. Nor does any member of their tribe ever take plow in hand or cultivate a tree, or seek food by the tillage of the land; but they are perpetually wandering over various and extensive districts, having no home, no fixed abode or laws; nor can they endure to remain long in the same climate, no one district or country pleasing them for a continuance.

>Their life is one continued wandering; their wives are hired, on special covenant, for a fixed time; and that there may be some appearance of marriage in the business, the intended wife, under the name of a dowry, offers a spear and a tent to her husband, with a right to quit him after a fixed day, if she should choose to do so. And it is inconceivable with what eagerness the individuals of both sexes give themselves up to matrimonial pleasures.


Later on as you'll see in Irfan Shahid's books the Arabs would adopt influences from the Greeks and the Persians but still retained a lot of their ancient culture and morality.

To answer the second part of your question, Arabia's borders were fluid with the Arab population and their migrations and settlements. A distinction later came about between sedentary Arabs and the nomadic people. Greco-Romans seem happy to apply the term Saracen to all Arabs but the Arabians themselves made distinctions between themselves - namely between settled and nomadic people. Most Arabians would have been Arabized by a series of back and forth migrations from North and South Arabia.

>And btw, I'm in the process of reading Rome and the Arabs. Great book. (I'm only at page 75 though) The only part which I'm not sure of understanding is the Idumeans. I assume that Idumeans and Edomites are different populations from different time, right?

The Idumaean people came from Edom but moved north into the Levant, they were probably an Arabo-Aramaic mix. Herod the Great interestingly enough was an Idumaean from his Father's side. They remained relevant in history for a little while, serving in the Caeser's army as Auxiliaries but their ancient land was taken over by the Nabataeans.

>I personally feel there is a direct connection between the great ancient civilizations of the fertile crescent and the ancient Arabs.
>>What do you mean?

There's a narrative that Arab culture replaced the local Syro-Mesopotamian cultures of the fertile crescent how ever I see it as more of a natural continuation or even a revival, the Aramaens, Amorites etc were all originally nomadic peoples who settled down and founded great civilizations. When the Arabs began moving back into the Fertile Crescent we see not just a revival of the ancient Semitic culture they preserved but also a continuation of the pre-existing local one. Even today the Iraqi and Bahraini dialects still preserve words from Akkadian.

EDIT:

>Do we have any ideas of how Yemenis ended up in the South ? What are their relation to other Semitic groups ?

South Arabia has been populated by sedentary kingdoms for a very long time, these kingdoms traded copper north to Mesopotamia so they probably understood Sumerian and later Akkadian. Old Sabaean begins to appear as a language from the 8th century BCE. As these kingdoms remained sedentary and centered on trade for centuries (Saba came about during the 2nd millennium BCE and lasted until the 3rd century which is pretty amazing.)

The Old South Arabian alphabets don't have a link to Arabic which came from cursive Nabataen Aramaic, they are closely related to Ge'ez though and if you look at the old North Arabian alphabets there is an obvious similarity. The actual languages spoken in Southern Arabia such as Himyaritic were similar to Arabic in many ways.

If you're interested in the connection between the sedentary kingdoms of Yemen and the nomadic people who lived around them I'd say "Pre-Islamic Yemen: Socio-political organization of the Sabaean cultural area in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD" is an absolute must read. I've only read a little of it but it's extremely detailed and very informative.

There's some readings in Sabaic here ^1 and North Arabian here.

This guy's channel is great, though he does have a strong German accent.

>I don't know if you noticed this but the Semitic group is truly great. Every Semitic group, whether existent or not today, has left huge marks on humanity.

Definitely agree, Semitic studies is extremely interesting as is the overall history of the pre-Islamic and Early Islamic Near East.

A lot of the things we don't even think about today but couldn't live without came from ancient Syro-Mesopotamia, I honestly think the Semitic speakers are some of the most important people in the grand scale of human history.

Yeah me too I got this message

This is in regards to your post/comment on /r/Islam.

I would post on your thread but since I belong a peaceful sect of Islam which lives by the motto "love for all, hatred for none", my posts are automatically down voted by the couch potato scholars in that subreddit. So I send a pm to anyone who inquires about Islam.

There are 73 sects (http://www.real-islam.org/73_8.htm) within Islam and I belong to the /r/Ahmadiyya Muslim sect of Islam. We are persecuted by the main stream Muslims, yet despite their efforts, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is the fastest growing sect of Islam (Independent research conducted by Oxford University confirms Ahmadiyyat as the fastest growing sect of Islam). Ahmadiyyat is the only Muslim sect to be unanimously banned by all 72 sects of Islam. This does not come as a surprise to Ahmadi Muslims as this fulfills a 1400 year old prophecy (hadith) concerning the division of Islam into 73 sects. The prophecy states that:

> Abdullah bin Amar (RA) relates that the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) said "Surely things will happen to my people as happened earlier to Israelites, they will resemble each other like one shoe in a pair resembles the other to the extent that if anyone among the Israelites has openly committed adultery to his mother there will be some who will do this in my Ummah as well, verily the Israelites were divided into 72 sections but my people will be divided into 73 sections, all of them will be in the fire except one." The companions asked, 'Who are they O Messenger of Allah,' Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "They are those who will be like me and my companions."

(Hadith book Tirmdhi Hadith no 171)

> “Abu Hurayrah (RadiyAllahu Anhu) relates that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: ‘The Jews were divided into 71 or 72 sects as were the Christians. My Ummah will be divided into 73 sects.”

(Al-Mustadrak)

The ruling to ban Islam Ahmadiyya was made by the representatives of the 72 sects within Islam, effectively making it 72 sects’ vs Ahmadiyyat, the 73rd sect of Islam. The prophecy is even more stunning when one considers the fact that this is the only ruling all 72 sects have ever unanimously agreed upon, never before or after have the 72 sects agreed collectively on any such rulings.

Persecution faced by Islam Ahmadiyya Muslims:

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECdBnE-Kj7k
   
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLcNTI8u3Pw
   
   Our communities main website which contains everything you need to know about us is, www.alislam.org, however, I will do my best to present a small introduction to Ahmadiyyat for you in this message.
   
   The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community was founded in 1889 and it spans over 195 countries with membership exceeding tens of millions. Islam Ahmadiyya is the only Islamic organization to believe that the long-awaited Messiah has come in the person of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as) (1835-1908) of Qadian. Ahmad (as) claimed to be the metaphorical second coming of Jesus (as) of Nazareth and the divine guide, whose advent was foretold by the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (sa). What differentiates Islam Ahmadiyya from the mainstream sects is our interpretation of Islam and the application of Islamic teachings.
   
   Natural death of Jesus (as) BBC Report which supports the Ahmadiyya view:
   
   
3. Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfgtHnK9dw8
   
4. Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bz0caFz7es
   
5. Book http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/index.html
   
   Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is the leading Islamic organization to categorically reject terrorism in any form. Over a century ago, Ahmad (as) emphatically declared that an aggressive “jihad by the sword” has no place in Islam. In its place, he taught his followers to wage a bloodless, intellectual “jihad of the pen” to defend Islam.
   
   Jihad in Islam according to Islam Ahmadiyya:
   
   
6. https://www.alislam.org/jihad/
   
7. (1 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ3KgvcwoCA
   
8. (2 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pl9_z4FCKA
   
   Another thing I would like to mention is that despite there being 73 sects of Islam, the Quran and the Hadiths remain constant throughout all the sects, you will find they all have the same copy of the Arabic Quran and Hadiths. Their differences stem from their interpretation of those texts and on how they practice Islam. This being said, I would like to offer you a copy of the Quran with a commentary which can open up the hidden layers of the Quran for you.
   
   http://www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/guide.htm?region=E1
   
   There is also a shorter translation which offers a brief commentary on each verse of the Holy Quran. This version is available free of charge from Amazon and can be easily read on any tablet or phone though the kindle app.
   
   http://www.amazon.ca/Holy-Quran-Maulana-Muhammad-Ali-ebook/dp/B0050CPG66/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406097300&sr=8-1&keywords=ahmadiyya+quran
   
   Just a side note, the commentary is necessary as Islam has two texts of great importance, first and foremost is the Quran and second to that are the Hadiths (sayings of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) recorded by his disciples after his death). Consider the Quran as the Law and hadith a guide on how to apply said law. The commentary which I provided above does an excellent job of using both sources to relay the hidden meanings of verses for the reader, which only open up after a careful study of both the Quran and Hadith.
   
   Also, I would like to recommend a book for your reading pleasure; it talks of the origins of almost all major religions of the world and also takes on contemporary philosophies and compares them to Islam. It also does an excellent job of covering topics such as evolution and other major scientific theories and shows how not one contradicts Islam. Also, everything is backed up by references, so nothing is taken out of thin air.
   
   http://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/index.html
   
   The following are links to videos and articles which you might find helpful:
   
   

• Islam Ahmadiyya view on evolution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr2jR-MZxFY
  
  
• Islam Ahmadiyya on Sharia Law (debate): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTYrjFE6Rcg
  
  
• Islam Ahmadiyya view on Apostasy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD8HdSPTJjY
  
  
• Will non-Muslims go to hell?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTF0Eu-2iIA
  
  
• Islam Ahmadiyya concept of Heaven: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB37arZ2aFA
  
  
• Islam Ahmadiyya concept of Hell: https://www.alislam.org/library/links/00000017.html
  
  
• Islam Ahmadiyya understanding of Dajjal (Antichrist):
  
  

1. https://alislam.org/library/browse/book/The_Essence_of_Islam/?l=English&p=3#page/279/mode/1up
   
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZqqm-M7HBA
   
   

• Islam Ahmadiyya on Jinn:
  
  

1. (1 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfsU8840Ik4
   
2. (2 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-57b4v5t48
   
3. https://www.alislam.org/library/books/revelation/part_5_section_3.html
   
   

• Islam Ahmadiyya on finality of Prophet-hood:
  
  

1. (1 of 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr3af4zi9XY
   
2. (2 of 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T57UpjhQfYk
   
3. (3 of 3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptZuCJDJ0qY
   
   

• Short documentary on Prophet Muhammad (PBUH):
  
  

1. (1 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf4QKSicCu8
   
2. (2 of 2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZS_jOPY5Q8A
   
   

• Collection of debates held at various Universities and Colleges by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Student Association: http://www.reddit.com/r/ahmadiyya/comments/1co8q2/the_amsa_ahmadiyya_muslim_students_association/
  
  
• Short documentary on Drugs and Alcohol: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYW2qemfcGI
  
  If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to ask in /r/Ahmadiyya or www.alislam.org. Have a wonderful day :)
  
  This message is not sponsored by /r/Ahmadiyya or www.alislam.org. This message is being sent by an Ahmadiyya member who is enthusiastic about sharing his beliefs with the world. Please do not reply to this account as there will be no reply; for answers to your queries, please refer to the sources listed above. Thank you.

[continued]

• The intervening Deity Zao Jun (also known as Zao Shen), a Chinese domestic god known as the Kitchen God, a protector of the hearth and family
  
  > I mean, it's a big claim you're talking about [no Gods], being 100% certain that the deity millions worship daily, complete with the most famous man ever to walk the earth (Jesus, just in case you were wondering) that spurned other religions based on his 33 years here never existed, was completely made up, and will not come again.
  
  So much in one sentence :D
  
  big claim [no Gods]... I do not claim that there are no Gods. I am an agnostic atheist towards all supernatural deities, and I fall within the agnostic-gnostic atheist spectrum for all intervening deities (there are 6000+ intervening deity constructs, I do not have a full knowledge based position to refute them to a full gnostic level of reliability or certainty). If you present credible proof or evidence of any God, I will examine the evidence and adject my worldview based upon the reliability and confidence level I find within the evidence presented.
  
  Millions/billions worship... Fallacy argument from popularity.
  
  Jesus existed.... I do not make the claim that "Jesus" did not exist. I accept that a historical Jesus existed, where Jesus is the name given to the archetype of the person upon which the Jesus narrative in the New Testament is based. Yĕhōšuă‘, Joshua, Jesus, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, was not an uncommon name within the Hebrew community and may represent the actual name of this archetypal person. This Jesus character is also attributed with what can arguably be described as a lite version of the morality of Buddhism, and this Jesus was a decent, though with a rather shallow philosophy, fellow. The Divine narrative attributed to the Jesus character, however, is a different issue.
  
  Jesus will come again (second coming/end of times).... If the events of the foretold second coming take place, I will accept this as credible evidence of the Divine Jesus.
  
  > But here's the question-- with the multitude of proof you can bring, lectures to read, archaelogical evidence and the like, will people believe you?
  
  If this is asking towards the strawman you presented that I claim that there are no Gods - I present no evidence that Gods do not exist; instead I will let the overwhelming lack of credible evidence to support the existence of any supernatural deity argue for me. However religious propaganda, the wish/hope for something better/more, and/or religious childhood indoctrination makes religious Faith difficult to counter.
  
  If you are referring to the Abrahamic position of monotheistic Yahwehism, I do not expect that the argument I presented to gain wide or rapid acceptance, cognitive dissonance, culture and social pressures, can be difficult to overcome.
  
  However, if any argument I make results in that person critically evaluating their religious based worldview, to evaluate any "blind" Faith, regardless of the outcome, I would call that a good outcome. Please feel free to revisit the breakout of religious/atheist belief as the years pass and see if there is a change in ratios between the different theisms, and the theism/atheism ratio, and determine for yourself if arguments of the kind I presented (e.g., lack of credible evidence to support theism, specific arguments against theism) are having an effect.
  
  > My guess is probably not, because there's an equal amount of evidence saying the opposite.
  
  I would welcome the presentation of the evidence/argument you can provide to (1) support belief in a supernatural deity/God and/or (2) that monotheistic Yahwehism is not a corruption of it's foundational polytheistic origin. Please feel free to post your evidence/argument in /r/DebateReligion or /r/DebateAnAtheist.
  
  > You know a lot about the subject, and useful sources too. For those, thanks, but I wish you had quoted from them, as the Amazon links don't do me too much good without significant access to the text.
  
  I concur that I need citations/quoted text/pics/etc to better support the position/argument I presented against monotheistic Yahwehism. It is on my to-do list (but I am a lazy ass :D). If you search the internet, you should be able to find copies of the copyrighted references I posted to download.
  
  If you are interested, the following links to some/related information:
  
  Some of the on-line summaries/arguments are:
  
  
• Are Yahweh and El the same god OR different gods?
  
• Ugarit and the Bible
  
• Israelite Religion to Judaism: the Evolution of the Religion of Israel By David Steinberg
  
• The evolution of God
  
  While a College Senior Thesis (and the perception therefore of a less credible scholarly/appeal to authority level), the following is a good source of other reference material:
  
  
• The Ascension of Yahweh: The Origins and Development of Israelite Monotheism from the Afrasan to Josiah by Andrew Halladay
  
  While limited to starting with the Hebrew Bible as a basis, and not addressing much pre-Torah scripture related to Yahweh, the following takes a look at:
  
  
• Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism? Toward an Assessment of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible, by Michael S. Heiser, PhD
  
  A couple other references that I am looking to acquire are:
  
  
• Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (Library Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies) by John Day
  
• God in Translation: Deities in Cross-Cultural Discourse in the Biblical World by Mark S. Smith
  
  > One thing I almost never see are folks who have truly believed in religion (in my case, Christianity, as that's the faith to which I have the most exposure) and found them wanting. I've tried atheism and I know it not to be true. Can you say the same? I'm interested to know what your journey was like.
  
  I was born an implicit atheist, but raised into the Chriatian Catholic Faith with lessons (which I now call indoctrination) on the Catholic Faith presented starting at the age when I was learning to control my boweles, talk, develop initial social skills. I was a good Catholic, making the sacraments, attending Catholic schools, mass 2-4 times per week, Alterboy, youth leader, etc., reading the Bible and Catholic Catechism, and having Faith in God, in Jesus, and in the mother Church. I truly believed and oft stated my Faith. The first, let's call them cracks, started when I examined the position of the Church against that presented in Bible, especially the NT. There were ... inconsistencies. As I studied the Church, and the parts of the NT more (Gospels vs. Pauline narratives), the inconsistencies became more pronounced - and lead to more doubt. And this was just from examination and study of the Church and the Bible, it's "consistency" was found lacking. So I became more of a general Christian and examined other sects for coherence; Lutheran beliefs worked for a while, but the inconsistencies internal to the Bible, and within the various sects, continued to grow. Eventually I investigated other primary religious groupings, Judaism, islam, Buddhism, etc., each time finding less and less support for theistic belief. But I still had Faith in an intervening God, I believed that humans just got the details wrong. Finally, I was able to see that there was no credible evidence to support an intervening God and I investigated pantheism, deism, and called myself an Agnostic (and would not take a position the existence of God). Deism seemed to fit best with my worldview for a number of years, but as I matured and gained knowledge, I found even the deistic position (essentially a God of Gaps position) unsupportable. However, as an agnostic atheist I continued to study religion as (1) I may be wrong, and (2) religion, and more importantly what actions adherents to religions take relative to their Faith, directly impacts me via society. My gnostic atheist position against different constructs/concepts within theism has grown out of additional study and knowledge. Along this journey I realized that much of my desire to have Faith was based upon my fear. My fear of failure. My fear of death (which I finally realized was my fear of dieing). I came to the conclusion that the concept of an afterlife (and by extension - of mind-body dualism [aka, a soul]) was just the result of a combination of fear and human conceit. I am now an explicit atheist.
  
  > I've tried atheism and I know it not to be true.
  
  The baseline atheism position (agnostic atheism) is non-belief or lack of belief in supernatural deities. For this position to not be accepted as true requires (1) that you know (have knowledge) that Gods do not exist or (2) you believe or know that God(s) do exist. From your comments it appears that you accept the Christian position as true as a knowledge position. As suggested above, please feel free to present how you know atheism to not be true (or positively stated, your knowledge position on how the Christian God/religion is true) in one of the religious debate subreddits.
  
  Hopefully the above wall of rant text better explains my position. If you got this far, I salute you :D

So everyone I know [who is not a lying Muslim apologist] that reads Arabic says that it means hit.

All the classical mufassirun say that it means hit.

The translators say it means hit

The ahadith support that it means hit.

The plain meaning of the text is hit.

Some asshole comes along in 2011 and writes a book that says the Quran doesn't really say that, and we are supposed to believe him.

Here are three Ahadith from Al-Wahidi's Asbāb al-Nuzūl. They tell the same story. A woman went to the Prophet to complain that his daughter's husband had hit her. The Prophet said to take retaliation against the husband, but then as they were leaving, Gabriel gave him the revelation [Q4:34] that they should not retaliate against the husband.

>Men are in charge of women...) [4:34]. Said Muqat

il: “This verse (Men are in charge of women...) was

revealed about Sa‘d ibn al-Rabi‘, who was one of the le

aders of the Helpers (nuqaba’), and his wife Habibah

bint Zayd ibn Abi Zuhayr, both of whom from the Helper

s. It happened Sa‘d hit his

wife on the face because

she rebelled against him. Then her father went with her to see the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him

peace. He said to him: ‘I gave him my daughter in

marriage and he slapped her’. The Prophet, Allah bless

him and give him peace, said: ‘Let

her have retaliation against her husba

nd’. As she was leaving with her

father to execute retaliation, the Prophet, Allah bless

him and give him peace, called them and said: ‘Come

back; Gabriel has come to me’, and A

llah, exalted is He, revealed this ve

rse. The Messenger of Allah, Allah

bless him and give him peace, said: ‘We wanted some

thing while Allah wanted something else, and that

which Allah wants is good’. Retaliation was then

suspended”.

>Sa‘id ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Zahid

informed us> Zahir ibn Ahmad> Ahmad ibn al-Husayn

ibn Junayd> Ziyad ibn Ayyub> Hushaym> Yunus ibn

al-Hasan who reported that a man slapped his wife and she complained about him to the Prophet, Allah

bless him and give him peace. Her family who went wi

th her said: “O Messenger

of Allah! So-and-so has

slapped our girl”. The Prophet, Allah bless him and g

ive him peace, kept saying:

“Retaliation! Retaliation!

And there is no other judgement to be held”. But th

en this verse (Men are in charge of women...) was

revealed and the Prophet, Allah bless him and give

him peace, said: “We wanted something and Allah

wanted something else”.

>Abu Bakr al-Harithi informed

us> Abu’l-Shaykh al-Hafiz> Abu Yahya al-Razi> Sahl

al-‘Askari> ‘Ali ibn Hashim> Isma‘il> al-Hasan who said

“Around the time when the verse on retaliation was
revealed amongst the Muslims, a man had slapped his
wife. She went to the Prophet, Allah bless him and
give him peace and said: ‘My husband has slapped me an
d I want retaliation’. So he said: ‘Let there be
retaliation’. As he was still dealing with her, Allah, ex
alted is He, revealed (Men are in charge of women,
because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other...). Upon which the Prophet, Allah bless him
and give him peace, said: ‘We want
ed something and my Lord wanted
something different. O man, take
your wife by the hand’ ”

Extract. TL;DR: Qur'an tells women to cover their titties as to not be mistaken for easily accessible kuufar women. Now the hijab is a Muslim Brotherhood uniform, whether hijabis are aware of it or not, and used in the West to gain political influence to eventually influence the societies.

Note: The Muslim Brotherhood leadership does not imagine an Islamic takeover of Europe and the US, but they want to establish a strong political presence there to cave the way for their caliphate in the Middle East with support from Europe and the US. (Source. Alison Pargeter, The Muslim Brother - From Opposition to Power. Heavy reading but an absolute must if one wants to understand the history and modern pragmatism of the Muslim Brotherhood)


> 'Dr. Elham Manea is of dual nationalities, Yemeni and Swiss. She is a political scientist specialized on the Arab Middle East, a writer, and a human rights advocate. She works at Zurich University'

>"The Quran never mentioned a headscarf. In fact, the Quran never introduced a dress code.

>The way women were dressing in the 7th century, at the time of Mohammad, the Prophet of Islam, reflected the traditions during that historical period. The verses used to justify covering women were in fact an injunction that asked free Muslim women to cover their breasts, so they could be distinguished from slave Muslim women. At that time Muslim women, both slave and free, walked in public with their breasts uncovered. During a time when Mohammad had not yet become very powerful, his so-called enemies started to harass his female followers. When he complained, they would reply, “We thought they were slave women”. So the Prophet found a solution: ask free Muslim women to cover their breasts. Hence those verses in the Quran.

>What people seem to forget today is that for centuries, Muslim women who were slaves would be sold in the market with their breasts bare, and would walk in the streets that way. They would pray with their breasts bare. You can find video clips on YouTube showing Saudi slave markets from the 1960s with slave women standing bare-breasted. You can see it in photos and paintings taken in the early 20th century in Turkey, Egypt and elsewhere: slave women with their masters. If Mohammad issued an injunction from this custom for all women who are Muslims, why make an exception for slave women?

> Why would the second caliph, Omar ibn Al Khatab (579-644), the one best known for his rigorous enforcement of religious rules, punish any slave Muslim woman who tried to cover her breasts like a free woman (Moaouth 2009)?

> I am not inventing this history. It is recorded history in the Islamic tradition and religious books.

> The fact that in the 1970s you could hardly find a woman wearing the headscarf anywhere in Egypt, except in rural areas, tells you something about the social change that took place in many Muslim-majority countries—a change mainstreamed by the Islamist ideology of Hasan al Banna.

> Al Banna first articulated his position on the veil in a tract called The Muslim Woman. The original date of that tract is not known but two points are certain: it was written in the early decades of the 20th century, and he was in fact reacting to the encroachment of modernity, as more women started to take off the traditional veil. It was also a reaction to Ataturk’s vision of a national and secular state. Kamal Ataturk was a young military leader, the first president of modern-day Turkey, and he abolished the Ottoman Caliphate in 1924. To him the answer to the problems of his nation was clear: build a nation-state, modernize it through a comprehensive program of reforms, and adopt secularism as the cornerstone of that state. Central to his vision was the role of the women, who were encouraged to take off the veil and participate actively in society. They were assisted by a new family law imported from Switzerland; conservative as it may have been, it was nonetheless a welcome departure from the Islamic provisions of the Ottoman family law (Manea 2009).

> Al Banna answered with his own vision of an Islamist state, one that would ultimately lead to the creation of the Caliphate. To match that ideology he needed a dress code: the veil that covers the woman and leaves her hands and face visible. It was the symbol for a political project, one that sought to create a puritanical society based on a fundamentalist view of gender roles (Manea 2009).

> Three principles stand at the core of al Banna’s view on women:

> Men and women have different rights because of their biological differences. It is determined by their biological nature. Accordingly, women should only be taught what suits a woman’s natural function and duty. She should be taught “what suits her task and function which God has created her for: to take care of her house and raise children” (al-Banna 1988)

> Segregation between the sexes is a must because men and women cannot be trusted to be alone. They cannot control their sexual desires and will always be tempted sexually. Hence al Banna sees “a true risk” in any “mixing between sexes” and insists on separation “between the two of them unless they marry” (al-Banna 1988)

> Wearing the veil is a duty and mandatory. In fact, al Banna insists that “Islam forbids a woman to reveal her body; be alone with someone; to imitate a man”; it encourages her to “pray at her home”, and orders her to “wear the veil” (al-Banna 1988)

> Of course, it is al Banna who insists on according different rights to women because of their biological differences, and on segregation between the sexes and veiling for women. God has nothing to do with any of that.

> Do you see why, wherever this ideology starts to spread, the veil appears in tandem? The veil is core to its teaching, just as segregation between the sexes is central to its vision of a fundamentalist society. This explains why segregation between the sexes and avoidance of contact between males and females in schools and workplaces starts to become an integral demand of the Islamists, as they claim to speak for all Muslims in western democracies.

> The veil is a symbol. It is the symbol of political Islam. But some of the women who are wearing it today truly believe they are following God’s orders. They think that when they wear it they become ‘good Muslims’. Some of my female relatives in Egypt wore mini-skirts in the 1970s, but turned to the veil in the 1990s—and think they did so of their own free will. Today a reverse wave is taking place in Egypt as young women are rebelling and taking off their veils. But, for doing so, many of them endure psychological and physical punishments, defamation and threats.

> In Western democracies the picture is also complicated. In Europe, some young immigrants from Muslim-majority countries turn to it as a means of asserting their identity—but it becomes an identity of seclusion. In fact, I know of young women who were so enraged by the Danish caricatures of Mohammad that they began to wear the headscarf. Their decision was not a matter of religion. It was a way of expressing their anger and defiance.

> But many others are forced to wear it. Those who insist on not wearing it face both physical and physiological sanctions from their family and community. This pressure and punishment stems from several sources: patriarchal structures, religion, and efforts to control woman’s sexuality. I deal with many such cases in here in Switzerland but also with those connecting with me from closed communities in Europe and in Arab majority states. In certain parts of the UK, some women’s rights activists have to wear the headscarf in order to get access to the women trapped in their closed communities (Manea 2016). That tells you something about the suffocating social control in place there.

> Most importantly, wherever the numbers of Muslim students reach a critical mass in either a school or a neighbourhood, peer pressure and group dynamics gain a certain level of clout and force girls and young teenagers to wear the veil. I documented these cases in my forthcoming book on non-violent Islamism. Some will tell you it was their free choice. But when they try to take it off, they learn that free choice only applies to choosing to wear the headscarf. No free choice is the other way around."

Actually, the same reasons that are given for male genital mutilation, are also given for female genital mutilation:

FGM gives a 60% reduction in HIV infection, and many women report no ill-effects from having their genitals mutilated:

Note: I am against ALL genital mutilation of females, males and intersex. Please don't interpret this post as supporting any of these activities.

Everything I have posted below is factual; but it's supposed to be educational - to help folks clear up their confused thinking around this issue. Thanks

Genital Autonomy for all - Intersex, Male & Female

If the amputation of the mucus membranes of the male genitals results in a lowering of HIV infection; then it would not be unreasonable to assume that the amputation of the mucus membranes of the female genitals would produce the same effect. Indeed, as the total surface area of mucus membranes in females is so much greater than that of males, the effect may be even greater.

However, most western peoples will be repulsed by the idea of amputating parts of an infant female's genitals to obtain some future protection from a disease. All the more so, when nearly 100% protection can be obtain from HIV infection by use of condoms.

But this repulsion does not arise when the prospect of amputating parts of infant male genitals. This is clearly because such activity has become "normalised" in the west. This is the issue.

Like male circumcision, there are plenty of peer reviewed studies that show female circumcision is not a barrier to sexual orgasm and enjoyment. Some studies show that orgasm and enjoyment are reduced; and some show no effect.

You'll often come across members of the medical community saying that FGM has no "health" benefits, and if women have their clitoris amputated, then their sex life comes to an end. Then they say that MGM has lots of "health" benefits and that men's sex life is not affected.

But it's a myth that many women who have suffered FGM are unhappy and cannot have great sex lives. That's why they queue up to have their daughters' circumcised. Plus there are many so-called potential "health benefits" - such as a 50% reduction in HIV/AIDS.

The visible part - the glans clitoris - is only a small part of the whole clitoris. So when a woman suffers partial or total amputation of the external clitoris when undergoing FGM, only a small part of her clitoris is removed. Thus she often can enjoy a full and satisfying sex life.

The truth about the female clitoris

Learn how large the female clitoris is; and how the external glans clitoris is just a small part of it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/cliteracy_n_3823983.html
http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/sexuality/a/clitoraltruthin.htm

http://www.amazon.com/The-Clitoral-Truth-Secret-Fingertips/dp/1583224734

Female Circumcision & Health Benefits

"Stallings et al. (2005) reported that, in Tanzanian women,
the risk of HIV among women who had undergone FGC
was roughly half that of women who had not; the association
remained significant after adjusting for region, household
wealth, age, lifetime partners, union status, and recent ulcer."

Note: when it's found that circumcising female genitals reduces HIV/AIDS it's called a "conundrum" rather that a wonderfully exciting "medical" opportunity to reduces HIV/AIDS.

http://www.iasociety.org/Default.aspx?pageId=11&abstractId=2177677

"Georgia State University, Public Health Theses" — a USA University of international renown:

The Association between Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and the Risk of HIV/AIDS in Kenyan Girls and Women (15-49 Years):

"RESULTS: This study shows an inverse association (OR=0.508; 95% CI: 0.376-0.687) between FGM and HIV/AIDS, after adjusting for confounding variables."

"DISCUSSION: The inverse association between FGM and HIV/AIDS established in this study suggests a possible protective effect of female circumcision against HIV/AIDS. This finding suggests therefore the need to authenticate this inverse association in different populations and also to determine the mechanisms for the observed association."

"This study investigated whether there is a direct association between FGM and HIV/AIDS. Surprisingly, the results indicated that the practice of FGM turned out to reduce the risk of HIV. While a positive association was hypothesized, a surprising inverse association between cases of female circumcision and positive HIV serostatus was obtained, hence indicating that FGM may have protective properties against the transmission of HIV."

http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=iph_theses

"National Bureau of Statistics, Tanzania - 50% reduction in HIV/AIDS in women who have have parts of the genitals amputated:"

http://www.tzonline.org/pdf/femalecircumcisionandhivinfectionintanzania.pdf


"International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Female genital cutting in this group of women did not attenuate sexual feelings:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01550.x/abstract

"The Journal of Sexual Medicine" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17970975

"The New Scientist" (references a medical journal)

Female Circumcision Does Not Reduce Sexual Activity:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2837-female-circumcision-does-not-reduce-sexual-activity.html#.Uml2H2RDtOQ

"Journal of General Internal Medicine" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Female "Circumcision" - African Women Confront American Medicine

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497147/

Medical benefits of female circumcision: Dr. Haamid al-Ghawaabi

http://islamqa.info/en/ref/45528

"Pediatrics (AAP)" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Genital Cutting Advocated By American Academy Of Pediatrics

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/102/1/153.short

Genital Autonomy for all - Intersex, Male & Female

I understand your points, I'm not sure why you're getting such a hard time about it.

And yes, I too believe morals are relative, those claiming absolute morality nearly always do so because they believe that God has declared something. I believe different human cultures create different moralities, this is influenced by religious beliefs, traditions, etc.

The reason I like Western culture is because the morality it accepts is often agreed by a democratic process while retaining basic and fundamental rights for all it's citizens. It has certainly been influenced in the past by common religious beliefs but having a separation of church and state makes a great positive difference, in allowing the community to work out what morality is acceptable.

This kid's book Maybe Right, Maybe Wrong really opened my eyes about understanding morality.

It talks about how we can have certain principles that can help guide us to make good/ethical/moral decisions, rather than simply following rules as dictated by religion (commandments) or governments (laws).

Some of the key points:

• A principle is an idea, not a command.
  
• A principle does not tell you what to do, but how to think about what to do.
  
• Principles, unlike rules, can be broken (for example, by a more important principle, and so sometimes you have a dilemma and a good decision can be difficult).
  
• Principles, unlike rules, require careful thought.
  
• Morality is how you decide what actions are right or wrong, good or bad, better or worse (and is the same as having good principles.)
  
  The book outlines what it deems basic good principles:
  
  
• Life is valuable
  
• Respect the rights of others
  
• Try to always be fair
  
• Always be honest
  
• Try to be responsible
  
• Try to be kind to others
  
• Always try to learn
  
• Enjoy your life

heres for your 4:34 here you go, these are passages from the study quran book that i have. i'm sure youll find your answers here

Heres a video from nouman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1azySjz4edk

Al-Tirmidhi Hadith 628 Narrated by Abu Hurayrah The Prophet (saws) said: Among the Muslims the most perfect, as regards his faith, is the one whose character is excellent, and the best among you are those who treat their wives well


idk the answer to your first question allah knows best.

You asked for everything really, but here is a selection I personally like that is more focused on the biography of Muhammad.

For Muslim books on the biography of the Prophet, I highly recommend:

A Biography of the Prophet of Islam: In the Light of the Original Sources, an Analytical Study

In the Footsteps of the Prophet: Lessons from the Life of Muhammad

Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources

On the more academic side of his life and following centuries, I recommend:

Muhammad: A Very Short Introduction

Hadith: Muhammad's Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World

In God's Path: The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire

The Death of a Prophet: The End of Muhammad's Life and the Beginnings of Islam

For the four best primary sources of his biography translated into English:

The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi's Kitab al-Maghazi

The Life of the Prophet Muhammad: Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya

The Life of Muhammad

The Expeditions: An Early Biography of Muhammad

General principle and approach to understanding existence:

Anekantavada

Historical Materialism
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Books I'd recommend to every former believer:

The Birth and Death of Meaning

To Have or To Be

Language in Thought and Action

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also Ayn Rand and Sam Harris have been good examples that show to me that losing religious belief doesn't necessitate that someone becomes "good". This has driven me to relentlessly continue to search for, and facilitate the experience of Truth, Justice, Beauty, Love. In that sense I've retained the concept in Islam of jihad (to relentlessly strive and struggle for Truth Justice Beauty Love).

In this stage of our material history, I believe this can only be accomplished through abolishing private property.

3 minute intro to Marxism

10 minute intro to Karl Marx --- (Reminder for newcomers that private property refers exclusively to the means of production, not your home and other possessions which are considered personal property)

Introduction to Marxism by Professor Richard D. Wolff

Against Capitalism by Jerry Cohen

Introduction to Anarchism by Noam Chomsky

Chomsky on capitalism #1

Chomsky on capitalism #2

Here is a list of some more Chomsky videos

'Anarchy Works' - A simple Q&A style book

Albert Einstein - Why Socialism?

The Conquest of Bread by Kroptokin - Anarcho-Communism, audiobook

Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels

What is Property? by Proudhon

Reform or Revolution by Rosa Luxemborg

Anarchism and Other Essays by Emma Goldman

A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn ...Universally acclaimed by those on the left, and a definite classic/must-read ... can also be found in audiobook form on kickass torrents or the pirate bay

Capital Volume 1 by Karl Marx - Explained by David Harvey

The Principles of Communism

Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution

The Zapatista movement: A modern day libertarian socialist society

Rojava: Another modern day socialist society

Marx's concept of false consciousness; similar to what we call 'the matrix' in the 21st century

Marx on 'alienation' of workers

Liberationschool.org

http://ouleft.org/


/r/Socialism

/r/Socialism101

/r/Anarchy101 <--- the best of all the '101' subreddits IMO as it has the most content (use the search bar as well)

/r/Communism101

/r/DebateACommunist

/r/DebateAnarchism

https://youtu.be/-w12bkm9g8o?t=3m18s <--- Capitalist exploitation explained


Leftist movies and documentaries:

'Americas Unofficial Religion - The War on an Idea' - Short documentary about the history of socialism and the left in America ... This one is absolutely essential


'Matewan' - A labor union organizer comes to an embattled mining community brutally and violently dominated and harassed by the mining company - 7.9/10 on IMDB

['Land and Freedom' - an unemployed communist that comes to Spain in 1937 during the civil war to enroll the republicans and defend the democracy against the fascists. 7.6/10 on IMDB](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114671/?ref=fn_al_tt_1)


'The Take' - tells the story of workers in Buenos Aires, Argentina who reclaim control of a closed Forja auto plant where they once worked and turn it into a worker cooperative.

'Inside Job' - documentary featuring Matt Damon about the 2008 financial crisis

'Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media' - documentary about the noted American linguist/political dissident and his warning about corporate media's role in modern propaganda.


'Che: Part One' - In 1956, Ernesto 'Che' Guevara and a band of Castro-led Cuban exiles mobilize an army to topple the regime of dictator Fulgencio Batista.

'The Black Power Mixtape 1967-1975' - about the Black Panther movement, featuring Angela Davis, MLK jr, Malcom X

'The Perverts Guide to Ideology' - In this clip from the film, Slavoj Zizek explains ideology

Socialism is an economic and social system defined by social ownership of the means of production. (Workers democratically own and operate the places in which they work, as opposed to private power aka capitalism)

The means of production are non-human inputs the create economic value, such as factories, workplaces, industrial machinery, etc. Socialists refer to the means of production as capital, or private property. Private property in the socialist context shouldn't be confused with personal property, such as your home, car, computer, and other possessions.

In a capitalist society the means of production are owned and controlled privately, by those that can afford them (the capitalist aka those with capital). Production is carried out to benefit the capitalist (production for profit). Workers are paid a wage, and receive that amount regardless of how much value they produce.

Communism is the highest developed stage of socialism wherein there is no state, no money, no class system. The means of production are owned by all and provide for everyone's needs.


Past and present socialist/anarchist societies include - Revolutionary Catalonia, Anarchist Aragon, Shinmin Province in Korea/Manchuria, Free Territory of Ukraine, The Bavarian Soviet Republic, The Paris Commune, The Zapatista controlled areas of Chiapas (current day), Magonista Baja California, Shanghai People's Commune, Rojava (current day), etc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only other drive available to me is to be a careerist, which I am not interested in. I just need the money to make a living but I don't plan on going above and beyond even though the opportunities do present themselves to me.

There is great new book out called "Did Muhammad Exist" by Robert Price which brings the existence of a historical Muhammad into serious doubt. I highly recommend it.

http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/161017061X

The Author D M Murdock (pen name: Acharya S) has specialised much of her life in research and writings on the mythical and astrological origins of religions and religious figures such as Jesus and Abraham. Her books are excellent and provide a substantial mountain of evidence that Jesus was indeed not a historical figure. A second revised edition of her first book "The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold" is due out sometime this year.

Reading her work is what led me to my Agnosticism.

This is her website which includes many discussions on similar topics - http://freethoughtnation.com/

I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say "emotionally not critically".

I did some digging, which I should have spent more time doing before I asked for help, and found some things that I think look interesting (here they are in case you are curious):

http://www.amazon.com/Questioning-Islam-Questions-Answers-Religion/dp/1500336203/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416328416&sr=8-1&keywords=questioning+islam

http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/1591020115/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416328436&sr=8-1&keywords=why+I+am+not+a+muslim

http://www.amazon.com/Leaving-Islam-Apostates-Speak-Out/dp/1591020689/ref=pd_sim_b_16?ie=UTF8&refRID=18AP881NZ4JVSDVSR2V5

http://www.amazon.com/Leaving-Islam-Apostates-Speak-Out/dp/1591020689/ref=pd_sim_b_16?ie=UTF8&refRID=18AP881NZ4JVSDVSR2V5

The last one might be especially relevant to this sub (self explanatory).

Thanks for the response either way

To add to Imtiaz's post, if you're interested in learning about this phenomenon at length I strongly encourage you to read this book (which I can lend you if you have an Amazon account)

This mic is pretty much the standard for youtubers. Excellent quality and not as expensive as the full on pro mics.

http://www.bluemic.com/yeti/

http://www.amazon.com/Blue-Microphones-Yeti-USB-Microphone/dp/B002VA464S/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1419608748&sr=1-1&keywords=blue+yeti

edit: added Amazon link

Most youtubers use these mics

http://www.amazon.com/Blue-Microphones-Yeti-USB-Microphone/dp/B002VA464S

They work with pretty much anything with a USB, they would work fine on your laptop.

A Simple Koran

It is rearranged so that the sura are in chronological order for reading straight through and has inserted narrative information to give context.

An Abriged Koran is another version which has less repetition, so it's even easier to read.

Questioning Islam by Richard Townsend is the closest to a critical account that does a fair job of staying impartial (that I've found anyway). The premise is not the history of Islam, but almost every observation is supported by references from the Quran and Hadith. It's not perfect, and I don't agree with everything he says, but it is a good read nonetheless.

Hahaha https://www.amazon.com/Infertility-Caused-Decreased-Oxygen-Utilization/dp/1543749062

The 'Simple Quran' is a book which has ordered the Quran chronologically. I highly recommend it.

Although I am not a huge supporter of all of his views, Robert Spencer's book
'Did Muhammad Exist'
http://www.amazon.com/Did-Muhammad-Exist-Inquiry-Obscure/dp/161017061X
gives a detailed and well researched analysis of the circumstances surrounding the origin of Islam, comparing and citing both Islamic and non-islamic sources. It is a top read.

Here is the mobile version of your link

Islam is such a controversial topic that, when people make a presentation on it, I think it would do them well to outline their methodological approach before they start talking. They should also try and gauge, minimally, if the audience agrees with the methodology.

For instance, they could start the presentation by saying that they'll do a doctrinal, inter-textual analysis of the Koran as it relates to women, focusing on those statements in which a reference to femininity is made, and will then try and map those statements to instantiated laws in some countries in order to ascertain whether or not laws and doctrine fit with one another.

And then you start to systematically build your case with an avalanche of quotes.

My point is, you really need to make these methodological statements before hand and get the people you're talking to to commit to their validity. If they start to object to the conclusions you reach, you're then in a position to remind them that you're just applying the methodology everybody agreed with at the beginning.

It used to be you didn't need to do this because every body understood that we used reason, evidence, logic, etc, and that the defense of a conclusion at all cost was to be avoided, since we recognized the fact that we might be wrong in principle, since the method had to drive the conclusions and not the other way around. But a lot of people who believe in Islam don't subscribe to those views, so you have to backtrack a bit and tell them "Here is what I'm doing. Here is how I will proceed. Here is why I proceed this way. Here is why truth is important."

People in the west have fuzzily internalized those concepts so much they don't even realize they're achievements in the first place and thus fail to see that they have to explain anything of the sort before starting. And yet, Islam is all about :

• Revealed truth
  
  
• Doubt as weakness of faith
  
  
• Defense of Islam as duty
  
  
• Weakness of faith as evil
  
  I mean, concerning doubt, here is what a very recent commentary on the Koran has to say about it, relating to 2:10,
  
  > In their heart is a disease, and God has increased them in disease. Their is a painful punishment for having lied. (2:10)
  
  > The disease is usually understood to refer to doubt, hence a spiritual sickness. (see 2:7, 24:50)
  
  Welp. It doesn't help that what, in the west, is arguably considered to be the father of modern philosophy, had as its prime method of thinking something which we came to call "Cartesian Doubt".
  
  > Several years have now elapsed since I first became aware that I had accepted, even from my youth, many false opinions for true, and that consequently what I afterward based on such principles was highly doubtful; and from that time I was convinced of the necessity of undertaking once in my life to rid myself of all the opinions I had adopted, and of commencing anew the work of building from the foundation...
  
  Descartes