I did not cause anything. I just jotted down my observation. Whether it's right or wrong depends on where one stands.

Shelly you is a low breed snake and yes you are at the center of yet another mess.

How's the job search going? Don't worry about me. Spend the time looking for a job.

If a Muslim exonerates a fellow Muslim from blame then Allah will excuse him of his sins on the Day of Resurrection.

 

http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/re.../bukhari/043-sbt.php

 

Volume 3, Book 43, Number 622:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Umar:

Allah's Apostle said, "A Muslim is a brother of another Muslim, so he should not oppress him, nor should he hand him over to an oppressor. Whoever fulfilled the needs of his brother, Allah will fulfill his needs; whoever brought his (Muslim) brother out of a discomfort, Allah will bring him out of the discomforts of the Day of Resurrection, and whoever screened a Muslim, Allah will screen him on the Day of Resurrection . "

Bai wah ah gon tell yuh mi cyan find no wuk anywhere. Tings bad bad bad out here. If I was only like you a coulda get into de back rubbin business but as you know dat is not my ting.

The above quotations are  correct so what is the problem?

 

I never said there's a problem.

 

It probably explains why you never blame a Muslim for any evil deed.

What about the Muslim sisters?

That passage will also apply to the ones doing the killings in the ME and Pakistan...they are not doing what Muslims should do

 

Try explaining that to these knuckleheads who support their terrorist brothers.

Mars and Riff Raff,

I invite you both  to please read the entire Holy Quran and not just selected verses. By doing so it will enable you to better understand that there are verses that speak about severe punishment for wrong doing by believers. 

Give it a shot and then we can have a better discussion.

Post your record of the Meccans imposing Islam on the conquered.

There is context to this. Screening does not mean excusing a wrong. It means using a certain protocol in dealing with that issue. For instance, a Muslim is supposed to speak to that Muslim privately about remedying that situation. However, if the Muslim doesn't remedy that situation and the public is at risk, the Muslim will have an obligation to not continue to screen that Muslim but rather to expose them.

That is your interpretation or you may have been taught that by someone else. The fact is that this Islamic teaching is often interpreted to mean that a Muslim should excuse the faults of another Muslim.

 

Muslim's hadith basically says the same thing and supports the notion that covering up the faults of a fellow Muslim is rewarded by Allah.

 

It was related on the authority of Abu Hurairah, radiyallahu ‘anhu, that the Prophet,sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said:

“Whosoever relieves from a believer some grief pertaining to this world, Allah will relieve from him some grief pertaining to the Hereafter. Whosoever alleviates the difficulties of a needy person who cannot pay his debt, Allah will alleviate his difficulties in both this world and the Hereafter. Whosoever conceals the faults of a Muslim, Allah will conceal his faults in this world and the Hereafter. Allah will aid a servant (of His) so long as the servant aids his brother. Whosoever follows a path to seek knowledge therein, Allah will make easy for him a path to Paradise. No people gather together in one of the houses of Allah, reciting the Book of Allah and studying it among themselves, except that tranquility descends upon them, mercy covers them, the angels surround them, and Allah makes mention of them amongst those who are in His presence. Whosoever is slowed down by his deeds will not be hastened forward by his lineage.”

 

 

 

http://muslimjapan.com/343.html

 

 

Now that is a reasonable argument Mars. However, as you read that entire passage, you get the impression that it is eliciting good actions and deeds. To make an exception to allow for bad actions would be uncharacteristic to the passage. Like the Qur'anic passage that says "Let there arise from among you a group who enjoins what is right and forbids what is wrong" of the other one that says "The best of you in the sight of Allah is the one who is best in character". Or even the ahadith that says that "a Muslim is he in whom his neighbors are safe" The pattern you see from these invocations is to promote good actions, not necessarily religious actions. A Muslim hiding his brother's fault has a vey short life unless his brother conduct the proper remedies. Islam, like other religions teaches their followers to be good people. No doubt some betray these objectives.

Ksazma, all religions basically preach the virtue of good over evil. It is usually a recurring theme as you have pointed out. Unfortunately, sometimes we come across teachings such as the one which explicitly states that a Muslim will be rewarded by Allah if he covers up the faults of another Muslim. I say unfortunately because some knuckleheads take this literally and feel that they must follow it to be a good Muslim. They totally disregard the general religious theme of doing good being rewarded with a trip to Paradise.

Actually, you don't even need religious teachings to differentiate between right and wrong. Our natural upbringing and morals instilled by our parents along with a smithereen of common sense should be enough to guide us in the right direction but I guess that some people just can't see it that way.

Nothing objectionable with what you noted here. Actually, I am not an ardent fan of the ahadiths because I think that many of them were made up perhaps to support someone's aims. I take them with a grain of salt. Secondly, I agree that we all have a natural instinct to do good. What organized religion does is provide a platform for promoting it. This does not mean that people who don't profess a religious identity are devoid of good qualities nor does it mean that those who profess it are devoid of evils.

Attacker’s demonic tattoo draws fresh TTP conclusions

Security officials said at least five of the 10 attackers involved appeared to be Uzbek nationals. But counter-terrorism officials are perplexed by the discovery of a demonic “tattoo” on the back of one of the terrorists.

“It’s the first time I have seen tattoos on the bodies of terrorists,” added the official, who has been part of several counter-terrorism operations in the tribal regions.

What does the tattoo show?

The image, though incomplete, appears to be a rendition  of a Boris Vallejo sorcery-fantasy character.

In the militant’s case, the tattoo on his back is unfinished. One entire limb, strands of flowing hair and a smaller-headed sorcery-monster appear to be missing.

Vallejo, a Peruvian-born American painter, works almost exclusively in the fantasy and erotica genres. Swords and sorcery gods and monsters are some of his recurrent themes.

Tattoo experts say the image on the militant’s body symbolises evil. “Skulls, in my opinion, are demonic representations, but only in visualisation. They represent strength, rebelliousness and serious drawbacks,” said a Lahore-based tattoo artist.

“Mostly people who get such tattoos want to give out a message that they defy death, those who have seen death very closely, including criminals, gangsters and even rock stars,” he said on condition of anonymity.

About the tattoo on the militant’s body, he said, “It looks 10 to 12 years old. The outlines, curves and shading clearly tell that it has not been made by an expert.”

A Karachi-based tattoo artist concurred. “Mostly, criminals and gangsters get such tattoos made on their bodies,” said the artist who works at a tattoo parlour. He also spoke on condition of anonymity.

He pointed out that he had not seen a single religious person in his 10-year career with tattoos on his body. “It’s unlikely for a religious person to get such tattoos made on his body,” he said.

Religious scholars reaction

The outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which claims that it is fighting for the enforcement of Islamic shariah, has already claimed responsibility for the attack.

That is why this aspect has now added significance because according to religious scholars having tattoos on the human body is against the spirit and teachings of Islam.

“You cannot perform religious duties if you have tattoos on your body,” said Prof Khursheed Ahmed, who has written several books on Islam.

Associated with Jamaat-e-Islami, Khursheed maintained that the Peshawar airport attack confirmed “our fears that some foreign hands are carrying out these terrorist attacks in the name of Islam.”

“A practicing Muslim cannot have such images on his body,” he argued.

Mufti Naeem of Karachi’s Jamia Binoria seminary told The Express Tribune that there was no exception to drawing tattoos in Islam as shariah has clearly imposed restrictions on it.

“Yes, you can offer prayers but Islam does not permit drawing tattoos on bodies and has banned it,” he said.

The head of Pakistan Ulema Council Allama Tahir Ashrafi also endorsed the view. “It was astonishing to see the body with a horrible face tattooed on his body. Islam does not allow drawing tattoos,” he added. “This cannot be the body of a Muslim.”

‘True face of TTP’

But a security official pointed out that tattoos on the bodies of terrorists exposed the TTP claims that they were fighting for Islam.

“We know their (TTP) true face. We have raided their dens and even found pornographic films and male potency drugs from there,” he said.

When approached, the director general of the Inter-Services Public Relations, Maj-Gen Asim Saleem Bajwa, said the authorities investigating the airport attack would certainly look into all possibilities.

“But it is premature to draw any conclusion at this point,” Maj- Gen Bajwa told The Express Tribune. (With additional reporting by Umer Farooq in Peshawar, Ayesha Hasan in Lahore and Farhan Sharif in Karachi)

Published in The Express Tribune, December 17^th, 2012.