Best books about islam according to redditors

We found 1,566 Reddit comments discussing the best books about islam. We ranked the 408 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Subcategories:

Quran books
Islamic law books
Muhammed in Islam books
Shi'ism Islam books
Books about Sufism
Mecca in Islam books
Books about Hadith
History of Islam books
Books about Sunnism Islam
Women in Islam books
Islamic rituals & practice books

Top Reddit comments about Islam:

u/marnas86 · 40 pointsr/CanadaPolitics

Concurred.




Even though the entirety of my extended family doesn't fully acknowledge it as valid, I am glad that the law, my mosque and my husband's church DO acknowledge our inter-faith, inter-racial same-sex marriage as valid and I would love if the law keeps acknowledging it as valid forever and centres my family values and that of the church he goes to and the mosque I go to over that of Conservatives' or right-wing Christians.



Not all Christians are homophobes. In fact I've found more support in my husband's church than anywhere else IMHO.




But religion should not govern the validity of marriage IMHO especially bad misrepresentations of the Bible text that are based off of inaccurate translations of malakoi and arsenkoitai (for further information read: “The Bible does not condemn ‘homosexuality.’ Seriously, it doesn’t.” by adam nicholas phillips https://link.medium.com/pu6zfl8LhZ ) or manipulation of the Quran to condemn homosexuality when it's actually condemning the practice of having a beard-wife (this is from Siraj Al-Haqq Kugle's seminal work available on Amazon here: "Homosexuality in Islam: Critical Reflection on Gay, Lesbian, and Transgender Muslims" https://www.amazon.ca/dp/1851687017/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_YbUwDbGMTXC73 ).





Regardless I believe that my family values that "Love is love and it should not matter who someone loves as love is a God-given gift and not controllable by humans and that every consenting adult should be allowed to marry any other consenting adult, regardless of gender (or lack thereof), sexuality (or lack thereof), ability to procreate (or lack thereof), race/ethnicity/culture/nationality" should trump those of social conservatives that couch and hide their desire to manipulate other people's lives in nefarious and sadistic ways in the terms "family values/pro-life/religious basis for country" etc.

u/_OldBay · 36 pointsr/worldnews

May I also add the book, Refuting ISIS?


Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal Of Its Religious And Ideological Foundations https://www.amazon.com/dp/1908224126/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_NarywbCVEYD8B

u/ohamid345 · 26 pointsr/islam

Consider reading:

The Divine Reality

Islam and the Destiny of Man

Being Muslim: A Practical Guide is useful for being a practicing Muslim.

Here is a website to check out, Yaqeen Institute which is useful regarding doubts.

As it pertains to the existence of God, the Divine Reality devotes many pages to it and the following might also be of use:

Arguing God from Being (Video)

How to Rationally Find God? (Video)

The Rationality of Believing in God Part 1

The Rationality of Believing in God Part 2

The Case for Allah’s Existence in the Quran and Sunnah

u/dassitt · 23 pointsr/islam

The Qur'an can be a confusing text for beginners, especially its English translation. It isn't a "book" in the traditional sense. It's meant to be lived, interacted with, and recited out loud often. Hence, you'll find a lot of repetition, as repetition is one of the hallmarks of oral recitation; the best way to emphasize a point orally is to repeat it again and again. The Qur'an isn't a book that one is meant to simply read, and no translation can match up the majesty, eloquence, and utter elegance of its original Arabic.

I'd recommend keeping that in mind when approaching the Qur'an! It might seem daunting and inaccessible at first, and you might think, "OK, I get it," when you read the repetitive descriptions of warnings of hellfire, pleasures of paradise, mercy of Allah, etc again and again and again. Just remember: this isn't a traditional book, it's a lived, interactive text :)

Also, I'd highly recommend The Study Qur'an. It not only provides commentary and historical context to every single verse, but includes maps and many other useful tools. One of my favorite features of The Study Qur'an is its extensive collection of essays in the back of the book, ranging from topics such as Islamic art and architecture and medieval Islamic philosophy to women in Islam and Islamic eschatology. If you're in the US, it's available at most Barnes & Noble stores as well!

Most importantly, if you have any questions, come seek us! I am by no means an expert of the Qur'an, but a lot of things can be taken out of context and Islamophobes love to cherry pick certain verses that appear outwardly violent. This is a super handy infographic to explain some of them, and most English Qur'ans with commentary (including The Study Qur'an) will provide explanations and context as well!

Best of luck! Let us know if you need anything at all and what your honest thoughts are!

u/saturatedanalog · 22 pointsr/gaybros

Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle is the most prominent. There have been a couple of other academic works along similar lines. Influence is relative, of course, as these don't hold much credibility in orthodox/conservative circles.

u/auwsmit · 21 pointsr/badscience

> If you can accept that Muslims are inherently violent, uncivilized, brain deficient, unintelligent, etc then

This is an extreme misrepresentation. His position is that many of the ideas of Islam (as well as those of most mainstream religions) are potentially or likely dangerous, such that they can lead good people to do bad things. What else explains the majority of suicide bombings (within the last few decades) being committed by jihadi groups?

edit:

>... Harris' inherent anti-theism.

Also, fun fact, did you know despite being an "anti-theist" (a label he would likely disagree with), he has spent much of his life studying Eastern religions directly? He's a proponent of many Eastern meditative practices, as well as a borderline Buddhist. He's also co-authored a book with a Muslim.

u/megadongs · 21 pointsr/worldnews

Dude you always say that yet I've never seen you once offer a criticism or refutation that you always talk about. Meanwhile people like Sh. Al-Yaqubi are risking their lives by publishing long refutations of extremist ideology, and you're doing a massive disrespect to him, who has been placed on ISIS hit list, by completely ignoring it.

u/WastedP0tential · 20 pointsr/DebateAnAtheist

You wanted to be part of the intelligentsia, but throughout your philosophical journey, you always based your convictions only on authority and tradition instead of on evidence and arguments. Don't you realize that this is the epitome of anti – intellectualism?

It is correct that the New Atheists aren't the pinnacle of atheistic thought and didn't contribute many new ideas to the academic debate of atheism vs. theism or religion. But this was never their goal, and it is also unnecessary, since the academic debate is already over for many decades. If you want to know why the arguments for theism are all complete nonsense and not taken seriously anymore, why Christianity is wrong just about everything and why apologists like Craig are dishonest charlatans who make a living out of fooling people, your reading list shouldn't be New Atheists, but rather something like this:

Colin Howson – Objecting to God

George H. Smith – Atheism: The Case Against God

Graham Oppy – Arguing about Gods

Graham Oppy – The Best Argument Against God

Herman Philipse – God in the Age of Science

J. L. Mackie – The Miracle of Theism

J. L. Schellenberg – The Wisdom to Doubt

Jordan Sobel – Logic and Theism

Nicholas Everitt – The Non-Existence of God

Richard Gale – On the Nature and Existence of God

Robin Le Poidevin – Arguing for Atheism

Stewart Elliott Guthrie – Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion

Theodore Drange – Nonbelief & Evil



[Avigor Shinan – From Gods to God: How the Bible Debunked, Suppressed, or Changed Ancient Myths and Legends] (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0827609086)

Bart Ehrman – The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings

Bart Ehrman – Jesus, Interrupted

Bart Ehrman – Misquoting Jesus

Burton L. Mack – Who Wrote the New Testament?

Helmut Koester – Ancient Christian Gospels

John Barton, John Muddiman – The Oxford Bible Commentary

John Dominic Crossan – Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography

Karen Armstrong – A History of God

Mark Smith – The Early History of God

Randel McCraw Helms – Who Wrote the Gospels?

Richard Elliott Friedman – Who Wrote the Bible?

Robert Bellah – Religion in Human Evolution: From the Paleolithic to the Axial Age

Robert Walter Funk – The Gospel of Jesus

u/SaintJoanOfArc · 19 pointsr/badphilosophy

Around 1:48:12 "I will pay you $1,000 for every nonsensical statement you can find of mine in the book. Go ahead, bankrupt me."

The book: http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-A-Dialogue/dp/0674088700

Omer Aziz Contact Information: http://www.omeraziz.com/contact.html


Edit: "I'll give you a year to do this."

u/oreith · 18 pointsr/islam

My struggles with the image of Jesus as God also drew me away from christianity and as I started to learn more about Islam I came to realise that my view of Jesus as a prophet rather than God was exactly what Islam teaches us. My advice to you is to read a lot, there is so much information out there, I struggled a lot with the language used in many translations of the Quran, the one that I found the easiest to read is this one.

There are other books that really helped me, one that I really enjoyed reading is "Stories of the Prophets" by Ibn Kathir, especially coming from a Christian background. Somebody else mention videos by Nouman Ali Khan, he's very engaging so you could look up some of his stuff too. If you have any further questions don't hesitate to contact me =)

u/autumnflower · 16 pointsr/islam

>How can I, somebody who doesn't see it as authoritative, realize that it is actually true?

By reading it? I'm serious. I assume being Jewish you've read the Talmud/Torah or at least part of it? Read the Qur'an along with an accompanying tafseer/explanation and make up your mind.

People here can post long explanations and reasons, but you'll have take our word for it, that what we are saying about the Qur'an is true. By reading it yourself, you can see and know for yourself.

It's not too long, about the length of a fantasy novel these days. The Qur'an is best able to speak for itself and the religion I feel. I've heard very good things about this translation and commentary and coincidentally, I believe the translator was Jewish before converting to Islam.

u/Martin81 · 16 pointsr/svenskpolitik

Det finns över en miljard muslimer och många, många miljoner av dem är progressiva. Jag skulle definiera det som att de vill att Islam ska utvecklas så att den fungerar bra ihop med ett modernt, demokratiskt samhälle. [Maajid Nawaz](
https://sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maajid_Nawaz) tror jag är ett bra exempel på en sådan muslim.

Lyssna gärna på denna diskussion mellan honom och islamkritikern Sam Harris;

Islam & the Future of Tolerance - Maajid Nawaz & Sam Harris


De har även skrivit en bok om detta:
Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue

u/jewiscool · 14 pointsr/islam

I recommend the Jeffery Lang books: Struggling to Surrender, Even Angels Ask and Losing My Religion.

Jefferty Lang goes over all your questions and more. The books are easy read and you'll enjoy his writing style.

u/equalpartsgoodand · 13 pointsr/EnoughTrumpSpam

New Atheists like Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and Sam Harris are constantly getting accused of Islamophobia, even though they do things like co-write books with practicing Muslims. The core problem is that a lot of people have difficulty separating out criticism of Islamic doctrine with racism against Muslims, and on the other side you have people like Trump who really are just racist.

But at the end of the day, Maher was a Bernie supporter who switched to Clinton when the time came, Harris supported Clinton from the start, and even Dawkins even got in a few kicks.

u/HenkPoley · 13 pointsr/TrueReddit

Also wrote a book when discussing that topic further: http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700/

u/warnakey · 13 pointsr/AskThe_Donald

Here is why your question is stupid:

African Americans were not hated between the 1850's and 1960's because they were trying to conquer the world and force everyone to worship their God. They were hated because of the color of their skin.

I want you to buy a copy of the Quran and the Hadith and read them, like I have.

https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957/ref=zg_bs_12527_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=NVMX7ENNV3H9ZTH3NFHF

https://www.amazon.com/Hadith-1-Muhammad-al-Bukhari/dp/1523336080/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1484000656&sr=1-2&keywords=hadith

https://www.amazon.com/Hadith-2-Muhammad-al-Bukhari/dp/1523336315/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1523336315&pd_rd_r=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E&pd_rd_w=30s2i&pd_rd_wg=ZL8ne&psc=1&refRID=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E

https://www.amazon.com/Hadith-3-Sahih-al-Bukhari/dp/153025597X/ref=pd_sim_14_2?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=153025597X&pd_rd_r=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E&pd_rd_w=30s2i&pd_rd_wg=ZL8ne&psc=1&refRID=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E

https://www.amazon.com/Hadith-4-Sahih-al-Bukhari/dp/1530256526/ref=pd_sim_14_5?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1530256526&pd_rd_r=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E&pd_rd_w=30s2i&pd_rd_wg=ZL8ne&psc=1&refRID=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E

https://www.amazon.com/Hadith-5-Sahih-al-Bukhari/dp/1530256852/ref=pd_sim_14_4?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1530256852&pd_rd_r=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E&pd_rd_w=30s2i&pd_rd_wg=ZL8ne&psc=1&refRID=13EV7ASAXC5X7V5XV87E

As you read the Quran and the Hadith (the writings that are considered written directly by Allah himself) you will come to learn the true feelings and motivations of both radical and moderate Muslims. You will then understand what is actually happening.

If you would like me to save you some time, Muslims are commanded by Muhammad to conquer the world and make every human on Earth a faithful Muslim by either forcing non-believers to convert, forcing non-believers to pay taxes to Muslims, or by killing non-believers.

Every Muslim on Earth actually believes that 100% of the Earth will be Muslim eventually, and some of them actually follow the commandment of Muhammad to kill non-believers and wage war with them. It's right there in the Quran for all to see.

u/baronfebdasch · 13 pointsr/islam

As people have mentioned here, Sufism is incredibly misunderstood on multiple level by various types of people. It would be good to discuss some terms first:

  1. Tasawwuf and Tazkiyah - these are common terms that are associated with Sufism. They both share similar meanings, I won't go into the details but basically both mean achieving spiritual purification. In essence, practicing tasawwuf is what Sufism is supposed to be about. To people who misunderstand these terms, or who look historically improper connotations associated with it, hearing the term "Tasawwuf" can mean running for the hills in fear of bidah (improper innovation in Islamic practices/worship/etc.). Unfortunately, tasawwuf as a term has the same problem that the terms "Islamic fundamentalism" have (Note that there is nothing wrong with wanting to follow the fundamentals of Islam, but clever wordplay by folks in the media have redefined this to mean "supports terrorism" in the same way that tasawwuf is associated with "practicing bidah"

  2. Tariqah - This is the following of a sheikh or equivalent spiritual master to help achieve tasawwuf and the like. Consider this the same way that one might go to the same psychiatrist for therapy. The psychiatrist grows to understand your condition, and suggests exercises and approaches to help you deal with the problems. In the same way, following a tariqah allows one to use a path (like how 12 step programs work) in order to achieve spirituality. Tariqah is not necessary for tasawwuf. And not all tariqahs are equal, there are many that follow deviant ideologies and practices.

  3. Ihsan - Here's a term that people are more likely to agree with. Ihsan is a difficult word to deal with, but everyone knows there are three dimensions to a Muslim - Iman, Islam, and Ihsan. Iman is faith itself (although that is such a limiting definition), Islam is the "what" (think the other 4 pillars) and Ihsan is the "how." It isn't "how" in terms of the action, but rather the state of your heart and intention. It's about purity in action. Tasawwuf is ultimately about attaining a high state of Ihsan.

  4. Zuhd - This is another important term. Also difficult to explain, but in essence it is about avoiding attachments to this life. Zuhd is not about monasticism, and it's not about just refusing everything in this life. It's about understanding the big picture. The afterlife is the true life, this is just fleeting. If Allah gives you rizq and you earned it through halal means, enjoy it, provided you fulfill your obligations first. But if your happiness is focused on the accumulation of wealth, like our consumer society is, there is a problem. Zuhd is in many ways the opposite of riya, which is arrogance or showing off.

  5. Shariah - Now here is a term that one accustomed to the popular (in the Western sense) impressions of Sufism. Shariah is the limits. Islam is not a religion where the ends justify the means. It sets the limits according to what Allah ordains is permissible and not. Feeding one's family is a requirement and an act of worship. Feeding one's family by stealing from your employer is not. Making dawah is incumbent on every believer. Forcing conversion is not. In the same manner, achieving a higher state of spirituality is of course something expected of the believer. Performing this outside the boundaries of the Shariah is not. Thus some practices that can be associated with Sufism (whirling dervishes, the use of narcotics, abandoning prayer on the pretense that you have achieved a higher level of spirituality, etc.) are impermissible.

    So what is Sufism really? In its true form, it is attaining spirituality within the bounds of the Shariah. There cannot be Sufism without Fiqh. Anything other than that is neither Sufism nor is it Islam. It becomes a sin. Sufism is not about monastic isolation, it is not about changing Islamic law, and it is not about having hallucinations of seeing Allah.

    What are good bases for achieving spirituality and tasawwuf? It all starts with purifying one's character. There are many great books on this topic. A lot of them are written by several scholars from the subcontinent, such as students of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi. They had collections of ahadith and primers on tasawwuf to counteract the growing movement that was attacking Sufism from two sides: First, those who were so apprehensive about bidah that they rejected any notion of tasawwuf in Islam, and secondly, those who were so into spirituality that they abandoned the core responsibilities ordained to them by their maker.

    I've got titled in Urdu, but some good books in English are Purification of the Heart and Prohibitions of the Tongue (this might be out of print, I'll look for a PDF. It's translated from Mawlana Mawlud from Hamza Yusuf). In both books, the core is to first and foremost improve our character. If our character is poor, we cannot possibly achieve any spirituality. Oftentimes when people go abroad to study under scholars, they will find themselves forced to observe their teachers, and clean up the masjid, etc. The intent is to have the students first and foremost learn proper character before even opening a single text. That is what inculcates spirituality and tasawwuf.

    One thing to clarify when it comes to Sufis and Sufism. By following the Shariah, we all are trying to achieve the same destination, which is Jannah. Spirituality comes naturally to some, and is more difficult for others. The goal is not the trance. The goal is not to have visions and dreams of pious predecessors. The goal is Jannah.

    A great analogy that Sheikh Rami Nsour gave me was to look at life like a plane trip. The Shariah is our ticket, and it lets us board the plane. Some people have window seats, where along the way they might have a nice view of all kinds of amazing things along the way. Some have middle seats, where their view isn't as great. Others have aisle seats, who don't have any good view of things along the flight. However, what the passenger sees along the way does not change the destination. All the passengers, Insha Allah, are on the flight to the same destination, Jannah.

    I have some more that I could add to, but I'll leave it here. Anything that is good and true comes from Allah, and anything that is incorrect is a fault from my own self and I ask for forgiveness from you all and from Allah.

    Edit: added definition for zuhd
u/LIGHTNlNG · 13 pointsr/islam

Some Muslims make this mistake, assuming that they are guaranteed paradise so they don't make an effort to do good deeds, and some other Muslims make the mistake of having too much fear, which is also discussed in the book.

u/Rakajj · 12 pointsr/hillaryclinton

Salon remains full of absolute trash opining articles that do fuckall to actually inform on the issue and simply are poorly written, selectively cited hitjobs.

I'd highly recommend Islam and the Future of Tolerance which is effectively a transcript of a conversation between Sam Harris, a liberal atheist, and Maajid Nawaz a former recruiter for a radical islamist organization, discussing the make up of the Islamic world and the problems that need to be addressed by moderates and rational thinkers.

While Maher is running a comedy show and often doesn't devote the time or detail necessary to make the required political arguments / points on a litany of subjects, his fundamental perspective on Islam is not accurately described as 'Islamophobia' any more than his views on Christianity make him Christphobic. It's a lazy way to sidestep having an actual conversation about the subject and the Left really has dropped the ball as we have a responsibility to denounce radicalism while still protecting normal / moderate believers.

The entire conversation is very dependent on nuance; Muslims generally are different from Islamists, Islamists are different from Jihadists. Muslims are simply believers in Islam, Islamists are Muslims that want to create political laws and governments based on their Islamic theology. Jihadists take it one step farther and want to spread that Islamic theology via aggression.

There are then ways to break down these categories even further, but Islamists and Jihadists are both very real, political organizations that have agendas that run counter to Western Democratic ideals. Islamist countries are by definition theocracies, the concepts of pluralism and separation of church and state are fundamentally in conflict with Islamist ideology.

Legitimate studies have shown that Islamists and Jihadists only make up 15-20% of Muslims worldwide, but that minority still need to be seriously considered and addressed. Religious extremism of any sort, whether it's from Christians attacking Planned Parenthood or Jihadists attacking clubs and concerts - the religious motivations and implications cannot be ignored and the Left has done itself a great disservice by refusing to make a nuanced argument for rational thought in defense of Muslims generally while still decrying radicalism.

u/supes23 · 12 pointsr/islam

:)

Thoroughly recommend Professor Abdel Haleem's translation of the Quran:

The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0199535957/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_DL6QwbQXJ0J9V

My recommendations mostly more recent stuff, I think written well for a western audience

Understanding Islam and the Muslims: The Muslim Family, Islam and World Peace https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1887752471/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_QM6QwbPQHCTB9

The Messenger: The Meanings of the Life of Muhammad https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0141028556/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_1O6Qwb8M0D5KQ

Understanding the Qur'an: Themes and Style https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1845117891/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_QK6QwbGS8EN0D

Being Muslim: A Practical Guide by Asad Tarsin et al. http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01833W1KM/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_udp_awd_1L6QwbC9BNTXA

The Messenger: The Meanings of the Life of Muhammad https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0141028556/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_1O6Qwb8M0D5KQ

Worth YouTubing:

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf
Professor Tariq Ramadan
Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad

u/Rabie-A · 11 pointsr/islam

Thanks everyone for commenting,

I'm going for the translation of Abdul-Haleem since 6 out of the 7 people recommend him.

His translation on amazon and as a pdf.

u/mudgod2 · 11 pointsr/atheism

Ibn Warraq has written multiple books - Why I am not a Muslim

​

Also online check out r/https://wikiislam.net

u/n3wu53r · 11 pointsr/islam

sunnah.com has hadiths from Sunni books

But watch out, you can't just read hadith as a laymen and think you can correctly derive rulings and interpret them like a scholar.

Also check out his other book: http://www.amazon.com/Hadith-Muhammads-Legacy-Medieval-Foundations/dp/1851686630

It has a section about Shia hadith.




>From what I understand, hadiths in Shi'a Islam also deal with the Imams in some way.

In Shiism, the Imams are divinely appointed. If I have an Isnad going to the 10th Shia Imam, were that Imam says "The Prophet ﷺ said ...", according to Sunnis this only proves that the 10th Imam ages later is attributing something to Muhammad ﷺ. The isnad does not go to the Prophet ﷺ or even the tabi'un/companions. However since the 10th Imam is infallible in Shiism, this enough proof. If it is confirmed the 10th Imam said this, he can't be wrong so it's true. If I am wrong, a Shia here should correct me; don't wanna misrepresent.

Also, go out to /r/shia.

u/AndTheEgyptianSmiled · 10 pointsr/islam

He completed a book tour for this highly reviewed book he authored: https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387/

You can find more here: https://www.facebook.com/HamzaAndreasTzortzis/

u/AmarnathA · 10 pointsr/syriancivilwar

This has already been happening, and has been going on for some time. I don't think it has had much effect on individuals who are already radicalized/ing. They simply dismiss these leaders as munafiqeen (hypocrites) and sellouts.

See:
http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/
http://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Religious-Ideological-Foundations/dp/1908224126

u/ExpensiveCancel · 9 pointsr/progressive_islam

>For more references, read a whole chapter about it in Jonathan Brown’s book Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy (specifically pp. 189-199). Even he, who otherwise holds rather patriarchal ideas about women, agrees that there’s no prohibition on mixed-gender female-led prayers and that the scholars had nothing to stand on for prohibiting it.

i loved the entire response, but this part was news to me! I've never cared for Johnathan Brown but i recognize his scholarship and think it's really cool that there really is no prohibition against women leading prayer.

So who are we to make something that isn't known to be haram into a sin?

Yasmin and anyone else who think it's haram for a woman to lead are essentially just speaking for Allah when they have zero authority to be doing that. In fact, their rhetoric is what drives people further from Islam and they'll probably have to answer to Allah for that.

u/costofanarchy · 9 pointsr/islam

This is correct in terms of both contemporary Sunni and Shi'i Islam. Scholars are generally recognized by their erudition and contributions to the theory and/or application of Islamic (as well as other areas such as theology, Qur'anic exegesis, spiritual practice, etc.).

I can comment more on the situation in Twelver Shi'ism, as I am a Twelver Shi'i Muslim myself. Twelver Shi'ism will appear to have more of a hierarchical structure or at least exhibit more centrality than what is seen in the Sunni world, but it's still very far form the central hierachy of the Catholic clergly. While often finds comparisons between the Shi'i scholars and the catholic clergy in the media and even in the academic literature, these comparisons are often misguided, and at the very least reductive. Basically, within Twelver Shi'ism since the late eighteenth (or perhaps more accurately/practically, the mid-nineteenth century), the common practice has been for the laity to follow the rulings of the most learned scholar that has the authority to exercise independent legal judgements (although these are still, at least nominally, only derivations made from the source material, the Qur'an and ahadith, rather than original legislation); they would also pay the khums tax to this scholar if applicable, which among other things, funds the seminaries. At various points in time one figure would be seen by the vast majority as the most learned, but at other points in time (such as the current era), there would be multiple figures with large followings. Virtually anyone could announce themselves as a learned scholar, but to be taken seriously by much of the population, and indeed by ones peers, one would typically need to study in one of several seminaries (which today would primarily be those in Qum, Iran and to a lesser extent in Najafi, Iraq) under well-known teachers (generally, the most recognized scholars of the previous generation). Things have become more complicated since the Islamic Revolution in Iran, where the lines between scholarship and public service (i.e., holding positions of political power) are becoming blurred.

The situation within contemporary Sunni Islam is even more decentralized. For one things, there are four major legal schools within Sunni Islam, and then there's also the Salafi movement that exists outside of those legal schools. Moreover, scholarship even within the same legal school can be quite different based on geography. For example, the Hanafi school is the primary school followed in both Asia Minor (e.g., Turkey) and Central/South Asia, but as I've heard there's quite a difference between the practice of the religion, even in its more legal dimensions, between say Turkey and Pakistan; in fact even within South Asia, there are multiple approaches taken by Hanafi Sunni Musilms that lead to quite different expressions of religion, and each will have their own scholars.

Moreover, the prestige of centers of learning within Sunni Islam have also been in flux lately. One of the issues in Sunni scholarship today is that whereas in Shi'i Islam centers of learning are primarily funded through khums, in Sunni Islam they've historically relied mainly on awqaf (charitable endowments, the singular form is waqf), and these were regulated if not outright taken by modern nation states in the contemporary era. In fact, modern (often secular) nation states in the Islamic world began to increasingly oversee and regulate the formal practice of religion and its scholarship within their borders. Therefore, scholars became increasingly dependent on the state for support, so you have something like national hierarchies forming, with say, a grand mufti at the head. This in term led to the prestige of centers of learning such as Al-Azhar university in Cairo, Egypt to fall in the eyes of many, as they were seen as being co-opted by the state (although the relationship between scholars and temporal power has always been tenuous and tricky in both the Sunni and Shi'i traditions). Simultaneously, we've seen increasing prestige associated with the Salafi expression of Islam (with centers of learning in Saudi Arabia), which ostensibly eschews all hierarchy even more rigorously than what's seen in other expressions of Islam, by rejecting the legal schools. However, some would contend that effectively, much of Salafi practice comes from treating a small number of contemporary scholars as authorities.

Of course there are other Muslim groups, so we can briefly cover them. Zaydi Shi'ism also has a rich history of scholarship, based primarily in Yemen, but I'm less familiar with that to comment (and at various times throughout history the lines between Zaydi scholarship and Sunni scholarship have become blended), and I know virtually nothing about Ibadi scholarship (which is a school of thought that is neither Shi'i nor Sunni, largely based in Oman), and ditto for Zahiri scholarship (sometimes considered a fifth school in Sunni Islam). I should add that the Nizari Ismaili Shi'i community does feature a type of hierarchy, in that they have a present living Imam who carries the charismatic authority of the Prophet (saws), as opposed to the hidden Imam of the Twelver Shi'is; this Imam can act as an infallible. But really this is one charismatic figure, who essentially acts like a head of state without a territory in the modern world, surrounded by a bureaucracy. For more information, you can look up the Agha Khan Development Network (AKDN). I should add though that Nizari Isma'ilis today resemble something that is basically unrecognizable when compared to normative Sunni, Twelver/Zaidi/Shi'i, and Ibadi Islam.

There are also Sufi groups, most of which fall within Sunni Islam legally speaking, but some of which are not strictly speaking Sunni (and might actually be affiliated with Twelver Shi'ism, even though Sufism is generally viewed upon negatively in that tradition). Here you might have some hierarchy within a tariqa but that's different. There are also antinomian Sufi groups, which do their own thing and don't really follow Islamic law. These may exhibit some cult-like tendencies, where you have a charismatic community built around one or a small group of leaders, but here I'm just speculating as this is pretty far from the areas I'm knowledgeable about.

In short, aside from these mystical/antinomian persuasions, in theory, a scholar in Islam is really no different than a member of the laity in religious/theological terms, except for their ability to issue rulings on religious law. Although I don't know much about Catholicism (so take this with a grain or few of salt), I guess you can think of Muslim scholars as something in between a lay theologian and a canon lawyer I guess. In practice, of course, they serve in a distinct social/cultural role, and do things like leading prayers, officiating marriages, handling burial rites, counseling people and giving them advice, etc., although a qualified lay individual can fulfill all these functions too.

For further reading on Sunni scholarship, see Jonathan A.C. Brown's Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy, and for further reading on Shi'i scholarship, see Roy Mottahedeh's The Mantle of the Prophet.

u/segovius · 9 pointsr/Sufism

No, that's what it's called. It's by Seyyed Hossein Nasr.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Study-Quran-New-Translation-Commentary/dp/0061125865

u/Elliot_Loudermilk · 9 pointsr/islam

> Hamza starts from the personal story of his own journey to Islam. He delves the history of atheism and new atheism at first and discusses the incompleteness and irrationality of atheistic worldview. The most fascinating is that the book deals with a lot of argument for the existence of God and irrationality of atheism from natural theology but maintains an Islamic flavor from authentic sources and highlights the notable works of classical Islamic scholars and theologians related to these arguments . The book reflects not only an intellectual defence but a spiritual one. Hamza develops a structured case for the reliability of Quran as a Divine book based on epistemic testimony and inference to the best explanation of linguistic inimitability of Quran. He presents a cumulative and persuasive case for Islam in both intellectual and spiritual perspective.
> I think the effort will be a millstone in contemporary Islamic philosophy and apologetics.
>


The Divine Reality: God, Islam & The Mirage Of Atheism | Hamza Tzortzis | Amazon.com

u/ClaudiaGamon · 8 pointsr/Austria

> Brexit (aus Sicht der Engländer) gute oder schlechte Entscheidung?

Schlechte Entscheidung.

> Österreichisches Politikergehalt zu niedrig/gerecht/zu hoch

Kommt auf die politische Entscheidungsebene an. zB Bürgermeister zu niedrig, der Job wird immer unattraktiver.

> Homo-Ehe Ja/Nein

Jaaaaaa

> Haben Sie schon einmal gekifft. Wie stehen Sie zur Legalisierung von Cannabis?

Nope aber bin trotzdem dafür das jeder gerne soll wenn er will. Den Beschluss der NEOS-Mitgliederversammlung dazu gibt's hier: https://partei.neos.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/neos-positionspapier-rechtlicher_umgang_mit_cannabis1.pdf

> Sollen Kassen die vollen Therapiekosten für psychische Krankheiten wie Depression, etc zahlen? (Derzeit nur Teilerstattung, bzw begrenzte Vollerstatung)

Grundsätzlich wird hier vom den Kassen verknappt. Mit Sparmassnahmen im System wäre das finanzierbar.

> Welche Partei würden Sie diese Wahl wählen, wenn es die Neos nicht gibt und warum?

Schwierige Frage, bin froh dass ich sie mir nicht stellen muss.

> G!lt reine Politiksatire oder ein Zeichen, dass unser demokratisches System Fehler hat?

Oida, really?

> Religionsunterricht veraltet oder noch Zeit gerecht?

Ethikunterricht statt Religionsunterricht: DRINGEND notwendig.

> Verbot von Vollverschleierung sexistisch oder notwendig/wichtig

Es ist nicht sexistisch sondern eine Einschränkung der persönlichen Freiheit. Ich find die Burka ehrlich gesagt auch scheiße aber durch dieses Verbot können Frauen die Burka tragen de facto das Haus nimmer verlassen. Ganz abgesehen davon, dass es kaum welche betrifft in Österreich (und ich wohn im 20. bezirk, man würde meinen ich hätte schon ein paar Burkas gesehen aber max. 15 in 10 Jahren)
Wir brauchen einen säkularen Staat der solche Themen ehrlich angehen kann und auch die Freiheit hat, Religionskritik zu üben.
Kann zu dem Thema folgende Lektüre empfehlen: https://www.amazon.de/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700

> Ist das derzeitige Tierschutzgesetz ausreichend?

Da gibt es noch Luft nach oben. Bei der letzten Änderung haben wir mitgestimmt da es einige Verbesserung enthalten hat.

u/munshiqq · 8 pointsr/islam

Quran is a weird "book". I know when I started reading it, I expected it to read like the Bible, which seemed like a reasonable expectation. If you have time for it, there are two short books about some contexts to the Quran that don't go into too much historical detail:

How to Read the Quran by Prof Carl Ernst, which talks about the Quran as a literary genre that Arabians could be familiar with, including their legends, stories, and the order and structure of the text.

and

Approaching the Quran by Prof Michael Sells, which deals more with the auditory experience of the Quran as a ritual performance. Comes with a selection of recited verses.


CS Monitor had a brief article on Ernst's book.

u/SYEDSAYS · 8 pointsr/islam

Read Road to Makkah. Simply because

  1. It's a very well written book

  2. It's the story about how a white male, with light brown hair and blue eyes who was not interested in converting, converted.
u/chillinLikeThis · 8 pointsr/islam

There's a book by Sheikh Muhammad Al Yaqoubi which tackles this very question from the theological view!
Refuting ISIS by Sheikh Al Yaqoubi

u/monk123 · 8 pointsr/islam

>Is there any difference between a Jew converting, and a follower of another religion converting?

A Jew is a "person of the book." As such, if you convert to Islam, you will get a double reward.

>Third, I have read about people choosing a new Muslim name when they convert. How does one go about this?

It is not obligatory, but you can choose any name you want if you choose to take an Arabic name, as long as it has a good meaning. Names of prophets and "servants of" a particular attribute of Allah are common.

>Also, in your opinion, what is the best and closest English translation of the Qur'an for me to read? Maybe someday I will finally be able to master Arabic... :)

This one.

u/[deleted] · 8 pointsr/islam

Wa `alaykum,

I'll let others recommend websites. In terms of books, there's a lot of material in English available, but it can be tough to find stuff that's well-written. I've found many books to unfortunately be written in very dry and unengaging language due to the challenges of translations.

That being said, here are a few gems that I've come across:

  • Suzanne Haneef's book What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims serves as an excellent primer on Islam. The author is a female convert, and I think she offers a unique perspective female readers will appreciate.
  • Martin Ling's Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources is an excellent English biography of the Prophet (s.). The book reads like a story as opposed to a dull recitation of dates and incidents. You'll encounter many names as the book progresses, but don't get overwhelmed. Lastly, the author made some mistakes that have been corrected by respected Islamic scholars (feel free to ask or PM if interested and I'll post/forward a link for more info) but for the most part I think it represents an excellent resource for the English reader.
  • I have not read the translation in full myself, but I have heard a lot of praise for M.A.S. Abdel Haleem's translation of the Qur'an from Muslims involved in introducing non-Muslims to Islam.

    Hope this helps!
u/romandhj · 8 pointsr/JoeRogan

you mean like this?

https://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700

"Islam and the Future of Tolerance has been published with the explicit goal of inspiring a wider public discussion by way of example. In a world riven by misunderstanding and violence, Harris and Nawaz demonstrate how two people with very different views can find common ground."



so how does hunter's point work now?

u/Brodano12 · 7 pointsr/canada

No God but God by Reza Aslan is a great scholarly view on the history of Islam.

The Study Quran is a great Quran and Quranic analysis/annotation.

However, with religion, it is important you are critical of everything you read, and you try to check sources on everything, because there is a lot of misinformation out there due to 1400 years of translation and interpretation errors. Even my own interpretation could be wrong, although I've tried to make it as accurate as possible.

Also, be open to having your own interpretation of the Quran instead of looking for others'. The whole point of Islam is that it's a personal spiritual journey, so the interpretation has to be your own. That doesn't mean you can choose to misinterpret clear directions (like don't kill people), but it does allow for some flexibility in the belief system. In the end, a holy text is only what you want it to be - it's a reflection of your own state of mind. Misguided people will have a misguided interpretation, while good people will have a good interpretation.

u/gambit87 · 7 pointsr/islam

Amazon has them for $7.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0199535957/ref=tmm_pap_used_olp_sr?ie=UTF8&condition=used&qid=&sr=

Otherwise I can mail you one as I have an extra. PM me your address if you want.

u/rodmclaughlin · 7 pointsr/ukpolitics

It's odd when people claim that racial prejudice in the UK drove them toward violent Islamic fundamentalism. One can understand how Bloody Sunday might have inspired an Irishman to join the IRA, while still saying he made a mistake. But how could white intolerance of South Asians (Tania is Bangladeshi) lead one of them to want to murder Shiites and enslave Yazidis?

Maajid Nawaz says something similar in his
Islam and the future of tolerance with Sam Harris. He claims there was a lot of “racism” against people like him when he was young. This caused an “identity crisis”, which led Nawaz to join a group which tried to persuade army officers in Muslim countries to stage coups. What?!?

In short, these Sunnis are talking shite.

u/zbhoy · 7 pointsr/islam

I recommend you read Misquoting Muhammad by Jonathan Brown. It's not perfect but very good and definitely great for intro reading.

Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy https://www.amazon.com/dp/1780747829/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_SNk7AbN3K3351

u/ViciousNakedMoleRat · 7 pointsr/atheism

Yeah, I've first read about it in Nawaz's last book about two years ago. But it has experienced a great boom and has been refined in the past 3 months after Sam started using it. Their book is already finished by the way. Islam and the future of tolerance

u/waste2muchtime · 7 pointsr/islam

You may not like my answer, but in the end it's up to you how you feel about this issue. First let me say that wikiislam is a propaganda islamophobic website. If I were to want information on Christianity, I would ask a Priest or a scholar of Christianity. So please don't read what you find on propaganda websites, some things are outright fabrications, others are taken out of context, others are misattributed etc. etc. So please don't read from those websites, but read from Muslim sources. If you are really sincere in what you say, you can do various things.

Read ''In the Footsteps of the Prophet'' by Dr. Tariq Ramadan, Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University. He's a Muslim. He's well versed. He writes amazingly.

Read ''Muhammad: Man and Prophet'' by Adil Salahi. Book is somewhat expensive, but just read the top review by 'Mary' and I think that will tell you everything you need to know, haha. A biography on the life of the Prophet SAW! What more would you want!

You can always read the Qur'an - but that can be taken out of context. Muhammad Asad has a great translation of the Qur'an containing many footnotes describing the context of many verses. After all, in a book that was revealed over 23 years every verse has a context of its own.

The issue with all the above is that they cost money.

So in that case here is Dr. Yasir Qadhi's ongoing series about the life of the Prophet Muhammad SAW discussing many many things going on around his life from beginning to end. There are 98 videos and each has 1 hour.. And it's still going, so this can be really time consuming.

In the end I want to say: If you don't have the time to watch the series, or the money to buy and read the books (which are all sourced from Muslim scholars and even then the muslim scholars cite muslim scholars, the companions of the Prophet, and even the Prophet SAW himself) - then please hold your judgement on Muslims and do not let yourself be distracted by anti Islamic sources. To learn about vaccines, we learn from Doctors, not from anti-Vaccination supporters!

u/affablelurker · 7 pointsr/worldnews

There is so much for you to learn about the modern 'social geography' of Islam. Maybe, if you have the time, the following video can help to alleviate your fear that Muslims are inherently led to violence or terrorism by the Qur'an.

u/g3t_re4l · 6 pointsr/islam

I would start with understanding spiritual diseases and then understand how the Sunnah helps with dealing with those diseases. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf has a good book on understanding the different types of Spiritual Diseases of the heart and it's purification.

u/bokertovelijah · 6 pointsr/islam

> He says the Bible is the true word of God because every book in the Bible has the same topic

That's not a good litmus test. Having the same topic or message is not a miracle. You would have to include books like Frankenstein into the canon since it was also a continuation of the story of Adam and his fall.

>He also says that everything prophesised by the Bible eventually came true, like the destruction of Babylon

Every empire crumbles. This is not hard to predict.

> I still consider myself an atheist but I want to know God.

Ask God to guide you. If He guides you to the Quran (and it sounds like He has) then pour over it like any researcher looking for answers. When you feel you've exhausted it, move on. You don't need to learn Arabic, but you should know how to read the genre of literature that is the Quran. I highly recommend to everyone Carl Ernst's How to Read the Quran. I assigned this to my university students along with Michael Sells Approaching the Quran.

But to answer you question in brief, the first revelation of the Quran begins "Read! In the Name of your Lord who creates, He creates humanity as an embryo"

You are still an embryo in the womb of the Quran where all your human faculties are being nurtured. If you become aware of your fleeting and transitory existence, then God's message to you has succeeded in transforming you.

u/RadioFreeCascadia · 6 pointsr/MapPorn

Diversity of ideas, not skin color. I find that people who live in different states tend to have different views and ideas, while a visually diverse city or urban area can become quite orthodox and rigid in terms of ideas

Or, to pouch a quote I love: "Cosmopolitanism does not mean people of different skin colors all sitting around a bistro table complaining about organized religion. It means people who hold profoundly different, even mutually exclusive beliefs and cultural norms "
(Jonathan Brown, Foreword to Misquoting Mohammed: The Challenges and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy)

u/Fuzzy_Thoughts · 6 pointsr/mormon

> I would like to see an atheist debate someone like Plantingna

It's not a debate, but if you're interested in a more philosophically-focused response to Plantinga's reformed epistemology, I'd recommend checking out Prof. Tyler Wunder's content. If you just want a brief overview, here's an interview with him covering the content of his dissertation critiquing Plantinga. The link on that site to his dissertation is dead, but I reached out to him via e-mail a while back and he sent it to me. I can forward you a download link if you find yourself interested.

Also, Michael Martin treats much of Plantinga's ideas in some depth in his book Atheism: A Philosophical Justification. There are plenty of atheist philosophers that are much more careful than Hitchens and co. if you look for them. I'm not interested in an extended dialogue on their arguments, but since you seemed intrigued by Rowe, I thought I'd point out some similar resources. Graham Oppy's Arguing About Gods was recommended to me along with the Michael Martin book, but I haven't checked it out yet. I've only read certain parts of Martin's book too (it's a long read if you were to go straight through).

u/Cool_Bastard · 6 pointsr/samharris

This is precisely what Sam and Maajid Nawaz talk about in their most recent book Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue; the regressive left. I stumbled upon the regressive left several years ago (was verbally attacked) when I was in a liberal secular (atheist) group talking about religion. Islam came up and I happened to mention that 9/11 was religiously motivated. It was then that everyone jumped me, saying it was politically motivated.

I was totally confused at the time since after all, it was an atheist group and they unabashed bash the hell out of Christianity all times. I chose to read up on it and picked up a couple Ayan Hirsi Ali books. She explained this phenomenon as well; resulting in her working at a conservative think tank on how to handle Islam.

The YT video Islamophobia does an excellent job in explaining this. Well worth watching, twice. Sam chastises both Hillary and Obama for not saying the words "radical Islam" in one of his recent podcasts; there are so many I've listened to recently I'm not sure which one it was.

> Where does one even go with that?

...I don't know. This singular topic is what forced me to stop labelling myself as a liberal. Just like when dealing with super Christians or 2nd Amendmenters or hard line right wingers, there's no reasoning with the regressive left. None. They are entrenched, they will not budge. You can't engage with them, you can't reason with them because your very existence is anathema to that which they believe to be just and true. How DARE you say anything about those poor brown people suffering under the Western imperialist boot.

Where to go? I'd suggest just getting educated on the subject as much as possible. listen to every single podcast of Sam's of this year. Read Hirsi Ali's books (Infidel and Heretic, you can skip Nomad). And read Sam & Maajid's book on Islam, it's real small.

And after reading, listen to Sam's 3.5 hour mind numbing interview of Omer Aziz who is the worst kind of Islamic apologist; an educated, regressive, liberal, secular, Muslim apologist.

u/arconreef · 6 pointsr/dontyouknowwhoiam

I recommend this book as a starting point if you genuinely want to learn more.

u/UnreasonablyHostile · 6 pointsr/politics

No, they were celebrated by Fox News as being celebrated "by many around the world." More Americans feel that terrorist attacks on civilians can be justified than ANY MAJOR MUSLIM COUNTY. Not even HALF of all Americans say terrorism is never justified, versus over 80% in Muslim countries.

Congratulations, you're a worthless bigoted cunt. Have a nice day.

u/Byzantium · 5 pointsr/exmuslim

>Muslims have been debunking atheist arguments for over a millennium. I would recommend reading Hamza Tzortzis's "The Divine Reality: God, Islam & The Mirage Of Atheism". The first chapter is available for free on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1491918002&sr=8-1&keywords=hamza+tzortzis

>There is also plenty of material that is available online for free as well by Muslim authors, they use the standard arguments (i.e. Teleological, Kalam, Contingency). https://asadullahali.com/2015/08/16/the-rationality-of-believing-in-god-without-evidence-part-1/

>Tzortzis's book takes you from atheism to Islam, succinctly.

u/Comrox · 5 pointsr/islam

> What I'm asking is more for people who have genuine philosophical doubts about the very roots of Islam and religion in general.

Get your friend or have them get God, Islam & the Skeptic Mind: A Study on Faith, Science, Religious Diversity, Ethics and Evil. It's available on Amazon.

I also came across The Divine Reality: God, Islam & The Mirage Of Atheism on Amazon but haven't read it myself (just saw it pop up on recommended).

u/self · 5 pointsr/islam

> 1) No citations

Read the book for citations.

> 2) Obvious bias

Yours is, yes.

u/MubarakAlMutairi · 5 pointsr/arabs

Here.
Are.
Some.
Books.

Some.
More.
Books.

Would you like a link to my amazon wishlist to see all the books? There are a lot of non-Islamic stuff there to that you might like.

u/FourGates · 5 pointsr/progressive_islam
u/crockrox · 5 pointsr/islam

The Road to Mecca seems to be an excellent book for people contemplating joining Islam.

u/NomadicVagabond · 5 pointsr/religion

First of all, can I just say how much I love giving and receiving book recommendations? I was a religious studies major in college (and was even a T.A. in the World Religions class) so, this is right up my alley. So, I'm just going to take a seat in front of my book cases...

General:

  1. A History of God by Karen Armstrong

  2. The Great Transformation by Karen Armstrong

  3. Myths: gods, heroes, and saviors by Leonard Biallas (highly recommended)

  4. Natural History of Religion by David Hume

  5. Beyond Tolerance by Gustav Niebuhr

  6. Acts of Faith by Eboo Patel (very highly recommended, completely shaped my view on pluralism and interfaith dialogue)

  7. The Evolution of God by Robert Wright

    Christianity:

  8. Tales of the End by David L. Barr

  9. The Historical Jesus by John Dominic Crossan

  10. Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography by John Dominic Crossan

  11. The Birth of Christianity by John Dominic Crossan

  12. Who Wrote the New Testament? by Burton Mack

  13. Jesus in America by Richard Wightman Fox

  14. The Five Gospels by Robert Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar (highly recommended)

  15. Remedial Christianity by Paul Alan Laughlin

    Judaism:

  16. The Jewish Mystical Tradition by Ben Zion Bokser

  17. Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard Elliot Friedman

    Islam:

  18. Muhammad by Karen Armstrong

  19. No God but God by Reza Aslan

  20. Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations by Michael Sells

    Buddhism:

  21. Buddha by Karen Armstrong

  22. Entering the Stream ed. Samuel Bercholz & Sherab Chodzin Kohn

  23. The Life of Milarepa translated by Lobsang P. Lhalungpa

  24. Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism by John Powers

  25. Zen Flesh, Zen Bones compiled by Paul Reps (a classic in Western approached to Buddhism)

  26. Buddhist Thought by Paul Williams (if you're at all interested in Buddhist doctrine and philosophy, you would be doing yourself a disservice by not reading this book)

    Taoism:

  27. The Essential Chuang Tzu trans. by Sam Hamill & J.P. Seaton

    Atheism:

  28. Atheism by Julian Baggini

  29. The Future of an Illusion by Sigmund Freud

  30. Doubt: A History by Jennifer Michael Hecht

  31. When Atheism Becomes Religion by Chris Hedges

  32. Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith
u/Axiom292 · 5 pointsr/islam

>is Sahih Al Bukhari considered totally checked and true by all Muslims? What about specifically Sunni?

Sahih al-Bukhari is one of many compilations of hadith. All the ahadith within are sahih (authentic) according to the conditions of Imam al-Bukhari. Every hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari is accepted as authentic by all Sunni Islamic scholars, not Shias.

>if you disagree with something that is supposed to be a totally sahih hadith -- is that "haram"?

Yes, to deny a sahih hadith is fisq (transgession). To deny a hadith that is mutawatir (sahih through multiple chains) is kufr (disbelief).

>Is Sahih al Bukhari considered THE definition of the Prophet?

No. Firstly, Sahih al-Bukhari does not contain every sahih hadith - there are hundreds that are not found in Sahih al-Bukhari or even Sahih Muslim (which are together known as the Sahihayn - the two Sahihs). Secondly, we do not reject all other ahadith just because they are not at the level of sahih.

FYI most hadith compilations are not intended for use by layman. There are volumes of books devoted to the interpretation of hadith - Ibn Hajar's Fath al-Bari, for example, is a sharh (commentary) on Sahih al-Bukhari.

Edit:

(Your comments aren't showing up since you're using a new account)

>Do different schools of Islamic thought differ on the answer to these questions? For example Hanafi vs Maliki?

No. Scholars of all four madhhabs accept the ahadith in Sahih al-Bukhari as sahih. However the different madhhabs differ on the interpretation and applicability of individual ahadith.

>I understand compilations like Bukhari were made 100-200 years after the Prophet.

Clarification: Bukhari was not the first compiler of hadith.

>What is the common answer to the question of - how do we know that these actually were his sayings? I know there is the "chain" of relayers, but what is it beyond that?

A hadith has two parts - the sanad/isnad (chain of narrators) and the matn (the text). Scholars of the past memorized thousands of hadiths word for word along with their isnads. The authenticity of a hadith is judged primarily on evaluation of its isnad. It needs to be possible for each narrator to have met each successive narrator. There are volumes of books devoted to ilm ar-rijal - biographical evaluation - which include details of each narrators memory, trustworthiness, piety, knowledge, students, teachers, date of birth and death, etc. Narrators are judged as strong, rejected, unknown, trustworthy, etc. The strength of a hadith is judged by its weakest link. Multiple isnads strengthen a hadith, as do supporting narrations. There is much more to it, please take a look at this book:

Studies in Hadith Methodology and Literature by Mustafa Azami

>I understand Kufr to be when one denies the oneness of God or his prophet. Anything else, isn't Kufr -- correct?

Kufr is disbelief. Each verse of the Qur'an is mutawatir (mass-transmitted at every level of transmission). Similarly if a hadith reached the level of mutawatir there is no possibility for error. So just as denying a single verse of the Qur'an is kufr, so too is rejection of a mutawatir statement of the Prophet SAW.

Edit 2:

>thanks very much for the updated reply -- very thorough and i plan to check out the book. Did you ever read this book? If so, thoughts? I read it, but it was my first book on the topic.
http://www.amazon.com/Hadith-Muhammads-Legacy-Medieval-Foundations/dp/1851686630

Glad to be of help. No, sorry, I haven't read Brown's book, but I've seen others recommending it and I've heard only good stuff about his work.

u/kerat · 5 pointsr/islam

Easily the most outstanding translation of them all is the Muhammad Asad (Leopold Weiss) translation of the Quran. It can be found here

After that I'd have to say Allamah Noorruddin's translation here. Excellent translation. And as a book itself, probably the best. Leather bound. It's something to pass on to children and read many times.

After that I prefer Arberry's translation. He was a Cambridge linguist. He was non-muslim, but he had excellent command of the language.

Following that I prefer Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall's translation. He was one of the first English muslims. Converted, learnt the language, translated it.

After that I'd go with Yusuf Ali, an Indian-born muslim with a western education. For some odd reason, his translation and Shakir's translation are the 2 most common ones, although easily out done by Muhammad Asad's. Asad was born Leopold Weiss, a Polish Jew. He moved to the middle east, spent time with the bedouin, learnt the language, and created an utterly brilliant translation that I've linked to.


EDIT: Just a note on myself. I've read about 5 english translations. I would avoid the Sahih International, as well as the Shakir one. They are influenced too much by the Saudi authorities. I've skimmed through Haleem's version, which others have mentioned here. It seemed really good. But go with Asad, you won't regret it.

u/hdah24 · 5 pointsr/islam

The problem with any argument based on the life and actions of Muhammad is that such actions are hotly contested. Historically speaking, there is little trustworthy evidence covering his life - and western historiography has struggled to make anything of what is left (scholars such as P. Crone, M. Cook and more recently Tom Holland have done a lot of work on this).

If you're interested in this topic, I suggest you get your hands on J. A. C. Brown's book 'Misquoting Muhammad'. At a fundamental level it will demonstrate how elements of the prophet's life were reinterpreted (read: rewritten) by later scholars to justify certain acts, but it also (and Patricia Crone, Michael Cook and Tom Holland concentrate on this) covers the very serious problems faced in looking at Muhammad's life historically.

It goes like this:

In Islam, one aims to be like Muhammad. He is the role model and his actions determine how one should act. Thus you have hadith telling you whether he urinated standing up or sitting down, just as a silly example. Extremist groups like IS take this to the extreme (hence they are 'extremists'). Most Muslims are willing to accept, just as Christians are in reference to the Bible, that their prophet lived within a historical context and that God's revelation was relevant to that context. For many Muslims, it is compatible that they deviate from Muhammad's example in some ways, for he lived in a different time. They focus on the positive aspects of his character, of which there truly is many - he is by all accounts a great man, kind and generous, diplomatic and peace-loving. The negative aspects of his character are ignored, for to acknowledge them would be to undermine his importance and sanctity as a messenger of God. It's around here that I personally unsubscribe from religion - I find this idea incompatible. But to many, many people, this is okay, and they remain believers. I, and all, should respect that choice.

Anyway, herein lies a very strange historical phenomenon. Usually, the further we get from a historical event, the less is known. For the life of Muhammad, however, it seems the opposite is true: the further we get from his life the more and more detail there is about him. This can be explained, but the explanation is uncomfortable for a lot of Muslims. His life was not recorded at the time. It was remembered orally - thus you have the isnad chains of the hadith - as was the qur'an which was not codified until Caliph 'Umar at the earliest. Oral transmission is not a reliable way to preserve historical truth, especially when we're talking about centuries of oral transmission. Muslim scholars of the 10th and 11th centuries, when the life of Muhammad was codified, tried their utmost to determine what was legitimately true and what was not. But a significant amount of these 'true' hadiths have been found to be problematic (see Ignaz Goldziher, for one).

I could go on, but the general moral of the story here is that the life of Muhammad is a fascinating historiographical phenomenon. Here we have possibly the most detailed account of the life of any historical individual: few humans in history have had so much written about them. Yet all of that knowledge is on incredibly shaky ground, and in reality we are left with very little, if anything, about his life.

In relation to your questions, this is just a background understanding which I think it is important. I wish to respond to them, though, on an understanding (for sake of argument) that the early Islamic historical tradition is reliable (which it is not). For the record, I'm a Western Historian with no religious biases either way, interested only in historical fact and the implications of that fact.

> Didn't Muhammad collect sex slaves

He certainly had at least one: Maria al-Qibtiyya, who was a Coptic slave (Christian from Egypt) and bearer of his only son, Ibrahim, who died as a child. The two were not married, and she was in servitude to him, having been a gift from al-Muqawqis, the Christian ruler/governor of Egypt.

Now we return to historical context, which I'm sure you would agree is hugely important. Groups like IS, being 'extreme' (as I discuss earlier), ignore historical context. But the majority of Muslims worldwide are happy to accept that this was appropriate at the time, but no longer is. For in 7th century Arabia - and indeed across the world from China to Constantinople, from Balkh to Rome - sex slaves were an accepted part of society. The Christian monarchs of medieval Europe had sex slaves. By modern standards even, almost all of those monarchs were sexual abusers - their wives were usually younger than 18, often younger than 16.

My point here, as in the next couple of points, is that context is everything. What Muslims do celebrate though is that Muhammad's treatment of women was actually far, far better than that of the cultures which preceded him. Islam gave women property rights, for example. Women in China, Iran and Europe did not have property rights. Many contemporary observers in Europe from the 7th century onwards actually express surprise at the high status given to women in Islamic society - it is unusual to them.

>"Strike at the neck" to his enemies

This is from Qur'an 47:4, and is one of many massively misunderstood passages explained by this helpful infographic. Ironically, you'll find this if you browse the top of all time on this very subreddit.

> A religious tax

This is a seriously long and complicated subject and i've already babbled on enough, but I will make one important point here: the level of tax imposed by the Arabs on the empire established under the Rashidun was significantly better than the level of tax imposed prior. Those who lived in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt etc. actually found that under Islamic government they had a far better deal than under Byzantine or Sasanian rule.

Furthermore, there was no concerted effort of conversion. The idea that Islam was spread by the sword is historically false. In Western historiography we call the conquests 'Arab', not 'Islamic', in order to make this clear. In fact, we find the opposite is true: the Arabs were very reluctant to let non-Arabs convert to Islam. The Abbasid revolution in 750, one of the great historical junctures in the political history of Islam, was a direct result of non-Arab converts (mawali) being angry that Arab Muslims were not treating them like Muslims. The conquests, and the rule of the 'Islamic' world from the 7th century until about the 10th, was 'Arab', not 'Muslim'. After ~10th century, with the Shu'ubiyya and rise of Persian dynasties, it became 'Persian', rather than Arab - but still not 'Muslim'. This idea of 'Islamic conquests' and 'Islamic rule' is historically unfounded.

I could go on, but Islam has an incredible political, cultural and religious history which I highly recommend you read about. I'm not a Muslim and not a die-hard defender of religion, nor am I anti-religious or anti-Islam. The more I learn about it, the more I find ignorance and misunderstanding on both sides. The more I realise that, as with all history and cultural development, the truth is murky and somewhere in the middle.

TL;DR: From a historical perspective, we have to be careful when talking about the life of Muhammad. Some of what you claim is true, but must be contextualised. Some is not, and represent major misunderstandings of Islam found in the west. Overall, we should all be a bit more critical of what we think we know and understand. That goes for anti-Islamic people and Muslims alike. Perhaps the world would be a better place if everyone just accepted that we all have different worldviews, and none of them are perfect.

u/HakimPhilo · 5 pointsr/islam

> Overall rating
>
The presence of 'heavenly beauties' in Paradise is established by the Qur'an, as are the accolades and place in Heaven awarded to martyrs. Moreover, the collection of all the above transmissions, whether or not they can be accurately traced back to the Prophet or just to a Companion or other members of the early Muslim community, strongly indicate that reports were circulating among the first Muslim generations enumerating several heavenly compensations given to martyrs and including the companionship of huris. This lies behind al-Albani's decision to rate these narrations collectively as sahih (al-Albani, Silsilat al-ahadith al-sahiha, 7, part 1:647-50, no. 3213).
>
As for the specific number of seventy or seventy-two huris for each martyr, however, this hinges on the reliability of 1) the narrations via Bahir, and 2) the solitary narration from Abu Hurayra in al-Tabarani's works. Bahir's narrations fell victim to Ismail bin Ayyash's confusion and are only otherwise known by the unreliable and inaccurate Baqiyya, who was known to take liberties with precisely such extravagant contents. The narration from Abu Hurayra collected by al-Tabarani is unreliable due to the questions surrounding Bakr bin Sahl, its solitary narrator. This collection of evidence does not seem to merit any rating higher than 'weak' (**daif) for both of the Hadith clusters above.
>
[**Jonathan A.C. Brown
, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy](http://www.amazon.com/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/178074420X) -- Appendix IV

By the way that book is really excellent, Jonathan does a great job at illustrating and tracing how and why such controversies developed through Islamic civilization.

u/Bathera · 5 pointsr/islam

Read this as well OP. It was posted by /u/n3wu53r a while back. I will paste the text below:

---

Excerpt taken from "Legal Rulings Regarding Non-Muslims in Muslim Countries", Chapter XI of Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal Of Its Religious And Ideological Foundations by Shaykh Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi.

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

Amongst the rulings of non-Muslim citizens and those under contractual protection are that they are not to be exposed to any harm and it is impermissible to destroy any wine or swine a non-Muslim owns. Imam Kamal al-Din Ibn al-Humam went further and said, "Backbiting him is unlawful just as backbiting a Muslim is unlawful."^97 Ibn 'Abidin adopted this opinion in his sub-commentary known as Radd al-Muhtar, explaining that oppression against a non-Muslim citizen is worse, saying that it is "because with the contractual dhimma (pact) everything obligatory towards [one of] us is obligatory towards him, so if backbiting a Muslim is impermissible then backbiting him is [also] impermissible. In fact, they [scholars] said that oppression against a non-Muslim citizen is worse."^98 Ibn Hajar al-Haytami mentioned the same in his book entitled Deterrents from Committing Enormities.^99 The Prophetic statements prohibiting oppression against non-Muslim citizens are mass-transmitted and beyond doubt (mutawatir).^100


Insulting a non-Muslim citizen is a sin requiring punishment less than the prescribed penalties. it is related in the original text of Ibn 'Abidin's sub-commentary that 'Alā' al-Din al-Haskafi said, "If a Muslim swears at a non-Muslim citizen, he should be punished since he has committed a sin". By non-Muslim citizen (dhimmi), every non-Muslim is included whether in our lands or theirs.

The jurists went a step further by deeming it impermissible to even say to a Jew, Christian, or Zoroastrian, "O infidel (kafir)!" or "you are an infidel" if it hurts them. A Muslim should be punished for this as he has committed a sin.^101 This is only due to the fact that Islam aspires to a life of co-existence based upon respecting others in their faith, feelings, and rights. Islam was a pioneer in this before there were calls for dialogue between faiths to diffuse tension, or before the call to give religious minorities their rights.

In the book al-Iqna', which is a reliable book for fatwa in the Hanbali legal school, it states, "Whoever curses a non-Muslim citizen should receive a light punishment." The commentator Imam Mansur al-Bahuti explains this, "It is because a non-Muslim citizen is under protection and [tainting] his honor is impermissible." He goes further to say that cursing a specific individual is impermissible even if he is a non-Muslim citizen (dhimmi), stating that, "As for specifically cursing a person, its impermissibility is apparent even if he is a non-Muslim citizen who has committed a crime."^102

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

97 Kamal al-Din Ibn al-Humam, Fath al-Qadir Sharh al-Hidaya (vol. 6 p.24)

98 Ibn 'Abidin, Radd Al-Muhtar 'ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar (vol. 4 p.171).

99 Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Zawajir 'an Iqtiraf al-Kaba'ir (vol. 2 p.27)

100 Sayyid Muhammad b. Ja'far al-Kittani, Nazm al-Mutanathir min al-Hadith al-Mutawatir (Fez: al-Matba'a al-Mawlawiyya, 1328 AH) (p.107), in which he said regarding the narrations prohibiting the oppression of non-Muslim citizens, that "Al-Mawwaq mentioned them of being of an unquestionable veracity (tawatur) in the commentary of Mukhtasar Khalil... relating from Sahnun."

101 Ibn 'Abidin, al-Durr al-Mukhtar Ma'a Aslihi Tanwir al-Absar (vol. 3 p.188). See these words, as well as the words of al-Haskafi which precede it, and Ibn 'Abidin's agreement to it.

102 Shaykh Mansur b. Yunus al-Bahuti al-Hanbali, Kashshaf al-Qana' 'an Matn al-Iqna' (vol.6 pp. 125-126), in the chapter of "Honoring".

u/februarytea · 5 pointsr/keto

Its not offensive at all. I do recommend if you want to fast and learn/read Quran that you find someone from a mosque or Muslim Student Association in your area willing to guide you through those processes. I am Muslim and I no longer read Quran WITHOUT a secondary reading guide known as "Tafseer," which is basically interpretation support. Some Quran's come semi equipped with this. There is nothing worse than reading out of context and since the Quran doesn't read like a novel or in sequence it can become confusing. This is great for fear mongers who cherry pick words or lines from religious text to castigate Muslims for their faith, but really can be done with every religious text. I have this version which is easier to digest than some of the older translations. I don't like reading Shakesperian style literature. Finally, as an online resource, www.quran.com is great for 1) selecting multiple translations to compare words for more nuance, 2) listening to quran recitation if youre curious 3) viewing the Arabic text. Finally, fasting is not incumbent upon the young, sick or the infirm as well as nursing or menstruating mothers and its certainly not incumbent upon a non-Muslim so if abstaining from water is too difficult for you then drink water. If you're committed to having the full experience, even just for a day, see if you can do it. Whatever you want really. My husband is also Muslim, we don't discuss our religious "shortcomings" because its neither of our business but I'm fairly certain when he works 15 hour days in the sun, he will drink water if he feels ill. Fasting isn't meant to harm you. Some Muslims would NEVER and all the power to them, again, its considered "between you and God."

u/grumpy-oaf · 5 pointsr/Christianity

>The LBC caller said Christians “did not know their bible” and would “interpret things how ever they wanted to” - something she claims is not possible with Islam.

Umm. Yes, excessively creative exegesis is possible and widespread in Islam. See how An-Nisa 34 is read for an example. Or if one wants to put in some more effort, get a copy of HarperCollins' Study Quran, which contains an enormous amount of commentary, not infrequently including exegetes disagreeing with one another. So this sounds like a case of convert zeal causing someone to fudge the facts and ignore nuance.

She also mentions the memorization and recitation of the Quran. If my Muslim buddies in college are any indication—and I figure that they are, since they were at one of the best universities in America—then many devoted Muslims don't actually understand Quranic Arabic. How is it a virtue to recite syllables that are nonsense to the speaker?

u/jwiegley · 4 pointsr/bahai

I would love a resource like you've described, but haven't found it yet. Currently my favorite book for such study is The Study Qur'án, because it draws from historical sources and multiple interpretations, rather than emphasizing one particular way to read the Qur'án.

u/HisEminenceTamerlane · 4 pointsr/islam

I like that you called yourself a non-believer (as opposed to infidel). I highly recommend this book, compiled by 3 sunni scholars and 1 Shia:

"The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary"

http://www.amazon.com/Study-Quran-New-Translation-Commentary/dp/0061125865/ref=sr_1_fkmr2_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1465136390&sr=8-1-fkmr2&keywords=seyed+hossein+nasr

You have a translation and a very good analysis with both Shia and Sunni viewpoints.

u/YourAverageNobody · 4 pointsr/theology

I used this Study Quran for one of my comparative religion classes and found it helpful. Every page of Quranic text has roughly 1/4 page of verses and 3/4 page of commentary. There are also several essays in the back that are interesting as well!

u/SabaziosZagreus · 4 pointsr/Jewish

What you currently have is an NIV Study Bible. I have one as well. The NIV translation is a popular, Protestant translation. It has some biases and inaccuracies, so it isn’t a translation used in scholarly circles. The NIV translation of the Old Testament is a translation of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, but it at times instead translates according to the Greek Septuagint, according to the Christian New Testament, or according to Protestant theology.

The central text in Judaism is the Tanakh. Tanakh is an acronym, it stands for Torah (Law), Neviim (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings); these are the three divisions of texts contained in the Tanakh. The Torah is the first five books of the Tanakh; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Our source for our Tanakh is the Hebrew Masoretic Text. As such, the NIV Old Testament translation and a Jewish Tanakh translation are both translations of the same book: the Masoretic Text. The differences being that a Jewish Tanakh translation will be organized a little differently, some verse numbering will be different, and the translation will not be affected by Christian biases.

The most widely used Tanakh translation is the New JPS Tanakh (NJPS or 1985 JPS). You can read the NJPS Tanakh here. If you want a study bible version, I’d recommend Oxford University Press’ Jewish Study Bible which uses the NJPS translation.

My primary Qur’an is MAS Abdel Haleem’s translation.

u/bundleogrundle · 4 pointsr/islam
u/Mentos265 · 4 pointsr/islam

https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

This translation has paragraphs based on the rhyme schemes in the arabic Quran.

Free: https://archive.org/details/TheQuranKoranenglishEbook-AbdelHaleem-BestTranslationInThe

Its a old version of the book. I recommend buying it.

u/Keyan2 · 4 pointsr/islam

This book would be a great place to start. It is called Even Angels Ask, and it is a must-read for any converts or potential converts in my opinion. It's just really well-written. You can check out the reviews for yourself.

u/Vixon0 · 3 pointsr/Conservative

Although Muhammed was a blood thirsty war monger, he did unify dozens of tribes for several centuries, allowing some for some premier Arab scientists to flourish (Al-Khwarizmi, Al-Biruni, Al-Razi, etc.).

But that's where the use of the religion should end, to unify those barbaric tribes, it has no place under modern standards of human rights and living conditions.

I, of course, have no idea how to de-radicalize the religion completely, although I'd recommend looking at Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue by Sam Harris & Maajid Nawaz

Personally, I'd start by allowing in only refugees who are willing to integrate into Western life, those who are willing to not necessarily leave all their traditions, but be able to co-exist into the West without issue, it might be the best way to start.

u/ohamid234 · 3 pointsr/exmuslim

You sound like a Deist, know that from Deism to Islam is not that far off. I would recommend reading Hamza Tzortzis's book: The Divine Reality: God, Islam & The Mirage Of Atheism. It takes you from atheism to Islam, succintly.

u/JoeBradford · 3 pointsr/islam

I don't have one off the top of my head, but this issue is mentioned in several classic books of fiqh under evidence. Easiest is to refer you to my friend Jack Brown's new book Misquoting Muhammad wherein he has a lengthy discussion about verse 4:34 and the way that Sharia courts handled this issue from medieval times until today.

u/gamegyro56 · 3 pointsr/islamicleft

As far as Islam goes I'd recommend Karen Armstrong's Islam or Muhammad, or Reza Aslan's No God but God. Slightly more academic is Carl Ernst's How to Read the Qur'an, Michael Sells' Approaching the Qur'an, and Fazlur Rahman's Major Themes of the Qur'an.

u/onepath · 3 pointsr/islam

Although there are a lot of people recommending Ibn Kathir, the best translation with a complete set of footnotes that works for myself and a lot of non-Muslims are by Muhammad Asad. Here's are some very helpful reviews on the book: link

Here's a link to the copy at Amazon: link

That's just my opinion if you want as much historical information and context of revelation and related footnotes as possible, this book does an amazing job. Also, as a graphic designer I have to commend the publisher on their artwork and organization as well :)

u/Corporeal_Music · 3 pointsr/Sufism

This is the best Quran for an english speaker, as far as I’m concerned.
It has everything you need and more.

https://www.amazon.com/Message-Quran-revealed-accompanied-transliteration/dp/1904510353

u/uwootm8 · 3 pointsr/islam

>Very grateful for your reply, uwootm8. I googled "criterion of multiple attestation" in an attempt to learn more about this method. "Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim" will definitely take a look at those too. You mentioned "Ibn Ishaaq", are there other ((early)) Muslim historians who were more scrutinizing to Seerah than him? historians who made sure their stories are (as correct as it can get given the available resources of that time)? Thanks again.

Just FYI the subreddit filters out all submissions from new account, nobody can see them except if they click your username.

I am not certain of how much scrutiny was put in. Given the massive size of ibn ishaaq's collection, I tend to think he wrote everything he heard. There is another early historian named Tabari. He flat out just says that he is not judging anything he hears, he's just writing it down. Perhaps that could indicate how the early historians approached seerah. But, ibn ishaaq is pretty much the primary source nowadays. If you are critical of the work I think you can puzzle out the general life of the Prophet. The Qur'an helps in this regard, as do the hadith.

If you're interested in learning more about hadith, I would recommend this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Hadith-Muhammads-Legacy-Medieval-Foundations/dp/1851686630/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411856221&sr=8-1&keywords=jonathan+brown+hadith

It's one of the best intro's I've read.

u/Aiman_D · 3 pointsr/islam

Hadith book collections such as Al-Buhkari are basically a collection of hadiths organized topically. It doesn't provide much in the department of context and what rulings can be derived from each hadith. some hadiths were valid for a set period of time for specific circumstances and then the rule changed later. Scholars call this "Al-Nasikh wa al-Mansukh" and it is found in the hadith as well as the Quran.

My point is that books like Al-Buhkari are meant as raw data for scholars who study the context and the reasons and the conclusions of rulings in the hadith. Not for the layman to causally read through.

If you want to read hadiths that are organized for the layman here are a few suggestions from the sidebar:


---
____LIFE OF PROPHET MUHAMMAD____

u/Didyekenit · 3 pointsr/islam

"The Study Qur'an" cites multiple tafsir, which I quite like.



The problem is that many of the more readily available tafsir are more conservative, or have a wahabi bend to them, which can give you a false impression that all Muslims agree with certain statements. The Hilali-Khan translation/tafsir is just a summarized version of Ibn Kathir, which is a Salafist interpretation. (Again, I urge that anyone study tafsir from multiple schools of thought, and I am not bashing any one sect, it's just that there are many, many, many interpretations of the text and a knowledge of more than one is beneficial.)



Yusuf Ali's commentary is good, and in fact his Qur'an was the gold standard for the last 100 years in English. It's probably a bit old fashioned for most, though.



Muhammad Assad's is very good. Extremely good, and the one 90% of people would reccomend, and one you should just get anyway. Though some of his commentary is not inline with Islamic thought (his views on Jesus, for example, are controversial in general), but you should read any tafsir with a grain of salt.


Ma'ariful Qur'an is an excellent modern tafsir. Usmani was a Hanbali or Hanafi, I believe, but manages to be neutral and quite moderate in his commentary. The cost of the full 8 volume set is a bit much, but you can get a cheap version from India for a low price if you don't mind imperfect binding (I found all 8 volumes in a local shop for around 60$ CAD, which is awesome.).



If you want to read an AMAZING Shi'a commentary (you likely are not Shi'a, but still.....people should understand multiple views on any topic whether or not you agree), then Tafsir al-Mizan is incredible. It's not 100% translated into English yet, but it is available for free online. Whether Shi'a or Sunni, I think it can be agreed that Muhammad Husayn at-Tabataba'i was a great scholar.


The only work in English which includes multiple tafsir from multiple schools and multiple writers is the Study Qur'an, and it is insanely exhaustive, listing all of the sources and even telling the reader where to go and read most of the tafsir cited on the internet. It's amazing. Spend the money and also buy some "Bible highlighters" (the kind that work on thin pages). (I have been using a regular Staples brand "Hype!" highlighter and it doesn't bleed through, though, so the pages are quite tough despite being thin. Pen doesn't go through either, as I have been underlining quite a lot and have had no problems, but I would still recommend a .005 fine line marker just in case.]


If you are a cheapskate, go to altafsir.org, which is what "The Study Qur'an" advises also. You can either search for individual verses and pull up different classical tafsir for that verse, or just download/read a PDF of an entire tafsir if you prefer. Tafsir al-Jalalayn is, as I understand, the most universally used in teaching Qur'an because it is short, and only provides the context of revelation for verses. You may want more in-depth tafsir, but al-Jalalayn has been the jumping off point for Muslims for 500 years. And is available on altafsir.


tl;dr - "The Study Qur'an"

u/ahwal · 3 pointsr/islam

The Message of the Qur'an by Muhammad Asad is a great place to start. http://muhammad-asad.com/Message-of-Quran.pdf

Asad is a bit of a modernist, and proposes some ideas that are different from what classical scholars said about the text (but in line with how many Muslims understand it today). But in terms of pleasurable reading for a general introduction, you can't beat his work. If you want to study a verse or passage in more detail, The Study Qur'an will be the most complete and well-researched work in English: http://www.amazon.com/The-Study-Quran-Translation-Commentary/dp/0061125865

u/scmucc · 3 pointsr/AcademicBiblical

The new study Quran is supposedly great: Here's the amazon link.

u/Lizardman_Gr · 3 pointsr/findapath

Or try motivational or inspirational reading. If you don't need it, don't use it. While there is no shame in anti depressants, I think you should solve the problem if there is one. Anti depressants are for a chemical inbalance.

It sounds like you need love. I was where you are almost a year ago. I find myself slipping back in. I alienated myself from my friends. I felt as if no one truly cared about me, because I was not happy with myself. I was not living up to my own expectations. I was not meeting the goals I wanted to achieve, and that is devastating. I found someone who cares about me, and for that I am thankful and humbled. It's a Blessing to have someone that loves you, and I pray that you find someone who fulfills that for you, and anyone reading.

It's tough in this day and age. We have weak communities We have weak families. We don't teach values. I pray almost everyday. I spend time with God, because there I can always find love.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957
This is the translation I use. Hopefully you can find one in Flemish. By the way, I was thinking about moving to Belgium for my Masters.

u/austex_mike · 3 pointsr/islam

OK, in the interest of full disclosure I am not Muslim. However I have a degree in Islamic studies, studied Arabic in the Middle East, and have weekly Quran studies in my home.

So, first of all it is important to know that the original Qur'an is in Arabic, and many Muslims believe that in order to truly be able to understand the message of the Qur'an, you must read it in Arabic. That said, there are countless translations (some refer to them as "interpretations") of the Qur'an.

Two things to know about the Qur'an before you start. 1) As far as we know, the text of the Qur'an we have today is believed to be the same as the one recited during the life of the Prophet Muhammed. (PBUH). Unlike the Bible, the Qur'an is not a collection of stories from various sources of hundreds of years. The Qur'an as it is today is as far as we know exactly the same now as it was during the life of Muhammad. 2) The Qur'an itself is organized more or less in order from the longest chapter to the shortest. So for someone unfamiliar with the Qur'an it can be a little intimidating to start reading from beginning to end.

So, since I have lots of experience with the Qur'an, both in Arabic and English, and I have lots of experience with teaching others about it, I have learned a couple things to make it easier for people who are reading it for the first time that you might find helpful.

First, rather than read the Qur'an in the order it is traditionally arranged in, I find that it is better to read it in chronological order that the chapters were revealed in, meaning you will read it in the order that the Prophet Muhammad received the chapters from Allah. Just imagine yourself as a Arab in the 7th century who was used to hearing about pagan religion, so this on God concept is new to you. So if you look at this list you will see in the column on the far right the number of the chapters, 96 being the first one, 68 being the second one, etc.. So you will pick up your Qur'an and turn to chapter 96, then go to chapter 68 and so forth.

Second, you need to decide on a translation. Everyone has an opinion in this matter as to which translation is the best. Honestly no translation is perfect, and if you want to really understand the Qur'an you will need to read it several times. But based on my experience I have found Western English speakers do best with is the Haleem translation. The Haleem English is easy to understand, and the notes are just enough to give you some context for each chapter. So my advice is to pick up that translation and begin reading it in chronological order. I literally own dozens of translations, and have tested them all with English speakers and people new to the Qur'an, Haleem's really stands out as the easiest to understand for people new to the Qur'an.

For an idea of what your journey will be like reading the Qur'an, check out this video from Lesley Hazelton.

Did you find a place to ask a similar question about the Bible? I would be interested to know what people tell you.

u/Lawama · 3 pointsr/islam

>I want to go with a physical copy, so if I can find that particular one in a hardcover i'll go for it.

Read a chapter off the link and see if you like the translation style, if you do, buy it. It's pretty cheap, here's a link to buy it:

>http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

.

>Do you think a commentary is neccesary? Ive noticed most versions have a commentary as well, what do they provide that the text itself can not?

Kinda. I mean it will help if you're confused in certain parts. For example, in Chapter Mary (19th Chapter), after Mary gives birth to Jesus she returns to her family:

>Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, "O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste."

Christian apologists would say Muhammad got Mary the mother of Jesus, confused with Miriam the Sister of Aaron and Moses. A commentary would help clear these silly misconceptions up.

u/haqr · 3 pointsr/islam

I would suggest this translation: http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957


It is organized with paragraphs making it easier to follow, and is one the best translations

u/longresponse · 3 pointsr/islam

Try MAS Abdel Haleem's translation of The Quran. It's very smooth to read:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

If you have any questions, try your local mosque or feel free to ask your questions here.

u/imafighter · 3 pointsr/MuslimNoFap

Salam, peace be upon you,

I've been in your situation before. Questioning the existence of God, Islam, and so on.... My suggestion is to go to a sheikh that you trust and talk openly about your questions and concerns. They are very valid and normal to experience such questions. After all, Islam is built on questioning and inquiring which strengthens our faith.

Second, read the first opening chapters of this Quran interpretation from Oxford University. It covers a lot of the arguments you are hearing with their corresponding Quranic evidence.
https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

Third, check out the various talks on YouTube:

https://youtu.be/_Tauw02xyE8
https://youtu.be/EvM6i1aJz0s
https://youtu.be/JfzTlK074eg
https://youtu.be/RuZh8Tt8v-A

Hope this helps you brother

u/WarOfIdeas · 3 pointsr/TrueAtheism

For my class in Intro to Islamic Scriptures they had us purchase The Qur'an A new translation by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem.

u/shadowrh1 · 3 pointsr/islam
u/Mac8v2 · 3 pointsr/unexpectedjihad

I am Catholic and learned most of what I know about Islam though university classes and independent research. I can give you a list of books I have read about Islam that will get you started.

Oxford English Koran
Obviously the primary text is important to have and the book is pretty small. Much smaller compared to the bible.



Hadith of Bukhari: Volumes I, II, III & IV


Half of Islamic law is derived from the Koran and the other half from the Hadith. The Hadith is the collection of events, and quotes by Mohammad and his followers. This book is huge and you shouldn't try to read the whole since it is just list quotes and who they are by. But it is a good reference source and something to page through.

Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources
Biography of Mohammad using historical sources. Good reference.



Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes



Brief 350 page run of Islamic history until now as told by a Muslim. I felt the book was a bit preachy and accusatory towards the end but I read it 6 years ago so my memory might be hazy. Still a good read if you want to try to understand how mainstream moderate Muslim scholars see things. It has a good bibliography too.




There are probably a bunch of other ones I am forgetting. Take a look through Amazon and see what else they have. I would only buy books from university presses or published by academics though. They can be dense and difficult but they are peer reviewed which is important since there is so much anti-Islam, pro-Islam publishing out there.








u/Exxec71 · 3 pointsr/islam

You'll have to forgive me I'm neither the most knowledgeable, intelligent or even the best choice as a role model. I am only someone who wants to help even if its weighted in terms of an atom.

In the name of the most gracious, the most merciful.

You won't turn into an imam overnight unfortunately however we are humans and intended to err. It is by design we commit sin, the only difference is those that ask for forgiveness afterwards. You seem to intend well and fortunately you have a goal which is miles ahead of some of your peers. In my experience (yes I have highs and lows) starting with the simplest thing than work your way up. First and foremost should be porn. That's a abyss without end so be extra careful. Try to quit slowly and inshallah days turn to weeks and on. As in try to maintain yourself for a bit then if you err your err but double your efforts next time. Fast if you have to until you succeed one day so on and so on. Second Start praying just the morning prayer than work your way gradually up but don't drag your feet and don't push too hard. Allah may give you a hard time now but thats only to lesson any punishment and possibly reward you. Your young and inshallah have a long and prosperous life ahead of you. Your fear of Allah probably stems from a lack of knowledge however you wanting him to be happy is something to think about. I say spend some time reading the Quran. A easy translation like oxfords MAS abdel haleem. If its okay with you I'll buy you a kindle copy. Educate yourself by reading some of the background info on chapters in the Quran then work your way up. There are free online courses or you can consider applying to the Zaytuna institue. Only You can hold yourself back. May Allah forgive us both and grant us patience, knowledge and save us from even the mere warmth of hellfire.

Edit: Typos and some wording.

u/WheezingIntrovert · 3 pointsr/islam

I was thinking of this one any good?

u/joyfulunion · 3 pointsr/islam

We make the distinction that the Quran is only in Arabic. But the best, easiest (because it uses simple, current, non classical English) Quran Translation for me is by this one by M A S Abdel Haleem. I think there's a pdf if you google it.

u/PotentialRevert1 · 3 pointsr/islam

Well, I can't speak a lot of Arabic (I can say a handful of phrases and that's only because of what I remember from a trip to Egypt and Qur'an recitation), my translation of the Qur'an is this one by MAS Abdel Haleem: http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

It's in modern English, quite easy to read (and incidentally is the one recommended in the sidebar). But there aren't much in the way of footnotes, I believe for footnotes you'd be well off to have this translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/8171512186/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_3?pf_rd_p=569136327&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0199535957&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=0M6PYCF68XAQ7SF01N3S

It's in a more archaic form of English, but has extensive footnotes and also has the Arabic alongside the English.

I hope this is of help to you In'Sha'Allah.

u/ruinmaker · 3 pointsr/bestof

While I won't dispute the veracity of the post, calling someone on BS when they say they've read the Quran seems strange. What am I missing here:

Quran: 502 pages

Bible: 1002 pages

Of course, different versions will have different size fonts, page counts, etc. Heck, the Quran you're thinking of may have included the Torah, Zabur, Injil and other holy texts but the Quran could just mean the Quran. If so, reading both that and the Bible at an early age is hardly exceptional.

u/bornagaindeathstar · 3 pointsr/islam

I recommend the Abdel Haleem's translation for beginners. It is pretty easy to read.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0199535957/

u/mybahaiusername · 3 pointsr/religion

Your request is an interesting one. You want to know Islam, but in context I am gathering this is all completely new to you. I am not Muslim, but majored in Islamic studies and studied Arabic in the Middle East, so I have a more thorough academic background in Islam than most, and I, like you, started out knowing little to nothing.

Although others might suggest reading the Qur'an or some academic books, I think for someone like you it might be more helpful to start someplace else. There is an agnostic Jewish woman who writes about Islam named Lesley Hazelton. I would start with her book The First Muslim: the Story of Muhammad. She writes in a novel-like tone that really helps introduce people to the history of Islam.

Then, if you want to read the Qur'an, I would say you need to start with two things.

  1. You need to get a list of the Surahs (aka chapters) in chronological order. This is important because if you read the Qur'an as it is traditionally arranged you go from the really short first surah, to a really long one with lots of laws and zero context. It is more helpful to someone new to Islam to picture themselves as a 7th century Arab, and receiving the Qur'an for the first time. So read the Surahs in chronological order instead.

  2. Get a translation of the Qur'an that is easy to read. I have lots of experience with reading the Qur'an with people like yourself who have no prior experience and background. In my last Qur'anic study group we started out reading each Surah from about 8 different translations, just to hear the different interpretations of the original Arabic. Over time however, one stood out as being the easiest for new people to read and understand. It is the Haleem translation, it is a fairly recent translation so it is not on the radar of very many people, but in my experience it offers a good amount of notes and introductions, without being overwhelming for first time Islam students. Of course some people will insist that in order to really understand the Qur'an you have to read it in Arabic, and yes that is true, but reading this translation is a good place to start.
u/s-ro_mojosa · 3 pointsr/religion

Other posters are correct, feel free to read the book front to back. A Muslim friend of mine recommended to me The Message of the Qur'an it's a very good modern translation into English and has an extensive scholarly apparatus and footnotes. It is not a "readers" copy, it's intended for serious academic study. I also bought The Book of Hadith at the same time.

A few points worth keeping in mind:

  1. From the point of view of Islam, "translation" of the Quran is not technically possible. All translations are, functionally considered something akin to paraphrases or commentaries on the original classical Arabic.
  2. Although the Quran is perfectly approachable read front to back, your suspicions are correct, the text is not chronological. This is important because some passages have the function of abrogating other passages in chronological manner.
  3. There text, in a way, assumes knowledge on the part of the reader that you won't have. All religious texts and many historical texts do this too. So, I suggest getting used to reading haditha and various events in the Quran. These are legends surrounding Muhammad. Be advised there is a "sorting system" that hadith have that rank their credibility. Roughly, someone who claims to be an eye witness to an event is given more weight than an individual asserting a fact writing 200 years after said event, and so-forth.
  4. I may be getting confused here, but if memory serves, there is a sacred (or quasi-sacred) biography of Muhammad that might help you wrap your mind around the historical goings on in the text of the Quran as well. I can't recall the Arabic name of this commentary off the top of my head. Perhaps /u/Comrox or /u/TheOneFreeEngineer would do me the kindness of supplying the name of that text or clearing up my confusion. This text is distinct from a source critical biography in the modern scholarly sense, which surely would also help you, but bear in mind it is a religious document and contains its own religious bias.

    I hope this helps. Good luck wrapping your mind around the texts.
u/dingobaby28 · 2 pointsr/ramadan

Can you expand on what you said "because I don't get it?" I fasted all my life, and then after leaving home I questioned what I was fasting for. Subsequently there were 2 ramadan's that I didn't fast, but I found my way back through reading a good english translation of the quran (e.g. this one). The truth you tell yourself sets you free to figure out what to do.

u/tReP2pHu · 2 pointsr/islam

Abdul-Haleem's translation of the Quran is very good. He also wrote a good companion book "Understanding the Quran: Themes and styles" which I also recommend. If you prefer something a bit more archaic and poetic, I really like the Arberry "Koran Interpreted". You can get Arberry's (and many other translations) here: http://arthursbookshelf.com/koran/koran.html

As for Sufism, some of the best books, in my opinion, are:

Lings, Martin. What is Sufism?
http://www.amazon.com/What-Sufism-Islamic-Texts-Society/dp/0946621411/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335349461&sr=1-1

Helminski, Camille Adams. Women of Sufism: a Hidden Treasure
http://www.amazon.com/Women-Sufism-A-Hidden-Treasure/dp/1570629676/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335349480&sr=1-1


A practical guide for diseases of the heart:

Yusuf, Hamza (tr). Purification of the Heart
http://www.amazon.com/Purification-Heart-Symptoms-Spiritual-Diseases/dp/1929694156/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335349415&sr=1-1

Something more academic but fascinating. You might consider this if you want to really get into the guts of things:

http://www.amazon.com/Sufism-Theology-Ayman-Shihadeh/dp/0748626050



u/mnsh777 · 2 pointsr/religion

(courtesy of /u/lightnlng):


Check what you like from this list of Resources. I recommend starting with the Quran and a biography of prophet Muhammad (pbuh). If you want books, these ones are popular:




u/recipriversexcluson · 2 pointsr/islam

Today's Ayat for Monday, 2017-01-16 / 18 Rabi` al-thani 1438

And God's is the east and the west: and wherever you turn, there is God's countenance. Behold, God is infinite, all-knowing.

-- al-Baqarah 2:115 as rendered by Muhammad Asad


وَلِلَّهِ الْمَشْرِقُ وَالْمَغْرِبُ فَأَيْنَمَا تُوَلُّوا فَثَمَّ وَجْهُ اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/115/

Or go deeper: http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/115/w4wcv.html


(please share)


Today's Ayat is also on Facebook

u/sp0rkah0lic · 2 pointsr/worldnews

I learned about this connection and history after reading this awesome book, and I highly reccomend it to anyone who is interested in learning how Islam, and the Middle East, got to where it is today. It's about an Austrian Jew who goes backpacking around in mostly Arabic countries in the 1920's and has such a wonderful experience that he converts to Islam. Yes, you read that right. Very interesting read, and gives more insight into the unfortunate history of Wahhabism.

u/cldhrdfacts · 2 pointsr/islam

Hey I strongly recommend you read this book called the "Road to Mecca". This is really the perfect book for you, and it's one of my favorites.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Road-Mecca-Muhammad-Asad/dp/1887752374/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345438530&sr=8-1&keywords=road+to+mecca

u/EmperorOmnesDux · 2 pointsr/islam

After reading all that was recommended you should read into Misquoting Muhammad by Dr. Jonathan Brown.

u/emp_omelettedufromag · 2 pointsr/worldnews

> A problem only gets bigger if we don't talk about said problem.

100% agreed. And as an example, to come back to the very initial point of the thread, the main issue with most Muslim countries is that they are not within a government allowing freedom of speech, effectively hindering that immensely important action that is talking about the issues and solving them

> Genuine question, you see religion as something more good then bad but at what point would you consider that religion is doing more bad then good?

Genuine answer, religion to me is immensely more good than bad. The bad coming from religion is the bad that stems from people creating justifications to do bad powered by religion - not from "the religion". My general view on it is: if there was no such thing as religion, the very same people will find other ways to hurt others, it just so happens that religion is a great propaganda tool towards the uneducated> A good, harmless example would be to go to South Africa where poor villages are Christian and following "self-declared prophets" who basically preach random stuff and get all the money they can from them. Will you blame religion, or the self-declared prophet for such an evil deed? I blame the latter. Oh by the way if you're interested in the Muslim side of the things I'd recommend you read Misquoting Muhammad by Jonathan AC Brown. It's a great book recollecting the history of governments openly using different interpretations of Islamic texts to drive their country towards the direction they wanted (both good and bad examples are listed, I found it to be a pretty amazing historic book tbh!)

As someone who lived in a religious society and visited several countries, you can very easily see the good that comes immediately from religion. The feeling of brotherhood, the tendency from people to naturally help each other. Random football comparison there but I guess you heard how Dortmund fans housed Monaco fans last week? That's something you'd naturally see in every place where people follow a religion: their religion taught them to look out for others. I've been housed by complete strangers in Peru (amazing Christian family), Morocco and Mauritania (Muslim families), South Africa (Christian family) and others. They were just genuinely looking out for me, it was their natural trait, and all of them insisted that it was part of their religion. I didn't even ask for anything, they insisted they wanted to take care of me! Now to draw a parallel, I have never seen someone genuinely caring that much in countries like France, Norway etc - and it's generally much more rare to see it happening in Western countries. Could this be a good argument towards what religion does good? I think so. And that's just an example. But overall you'll find that religious societies are super welcoming, caring etc - a VERY common trait in religious societies. In less educated places, religion is the best cohesive factor: it gives everyone something to strive for, and a feeling of brotherhood. Aside from all that, the impact religion has on me and my surroundings has been immensely positive.

> My best guess is is because I have lived my entire life without it and you with it and we are both having a great time.

Definitely. All in all the real focus is: if both of us are having a great time, why would any of us be wrong in the way we are having a great time? We should all aim at living together rather than ostracizing ourselves more due to separations we deem are big enough to rule people out of our life!

u/horillagormone · 2 pointsr/islam

It was written by a revert. This is the book I was referring to.

u/tenspeedscarab · 2 pointsr/islam

This is the quran that convinced me to convert. I believe he wrote it as part of zakat.

u/heisgone · 2 pointsr/PoliticalDiscussion

Of course, saying "Islam hates us" is a bizarre statement as "Islam" isn't a person. That being said, I recommend the excellent discussion between Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz, Islam And The Future Of Tolerance. It's a short read that cover various root cause of radicalization. It's better to be familiar with the work of Sam and Maajid before reading the book.

This debate between Maajid and Ayan Hirsi Ali is a pretty good watch. It covers the question of whether Islam is a religion of peace or violence from different points of views.

Finally, the Quran is a pretty short book and someone really interested in the subject should read it, or at least take a long look at it. Taking a look at the Hadith is also interesting.

u/Sabre-Sabrey · 2 pointsr/AskALiberal

He may not lean left, but if Sam Harris is an Islamophobe, why would he be friends with Maajid Nawaz, who is a devout muslim as well as co-wrote a book discussing Islam as a religion?

u/spoiledfatty- · 2 pointsr/Muslim

I respect what you’re doing despite being an atheist. There’s a saying of the Prophet Muhammad peace be him which says

“None of you will believe until you love for your brother what you love for yourself." So honestly the greatest thing we possess as Muslims is this religion of ours. Therefore we want to invite others to it. There’s a lot of great contemporary speakers out there who focus on atheism like :

Mohammed Hijab - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHDFNoOk8WOXtHo8DIc8efQ

Abdullah Andalusi

Hamza Tzortzis

Hamza in particular has a book called “ Divine Reality” I would really recommend you give it a read .

The Divine Reality: God, Islam and the Mirage of Atheism https://www.amazon.com/dp/0996545387/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_gU5sDb0ZR486R

If you want, you can dm me and I’ll buy the book for you.

u/Yosaerys · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

>Of course. I try to keep an open mind and I appreciate all recommendations.

I can't stress this enough, read this book if you're able to and I hope it will benefit you the same way it did for me [The Divine Reality] (https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387)

>The descriptions of Heaven and Hell

What's weird about this? Lots of religions have this concept?

>the special privilages of Muhammad

This special privileges are not as big a reward as you think, he also suffered far more than any Muslim. When the Prophet first began preaching the Meccan chiefs promised him gold, rule, women and whatsoever he so desires in return for him dropping Islam, he rejected their proposal.

The Prophet was soo poor that often times there was no food to eat in his house even though he was the leader of the Islamic community and could've made himself very rich had he willed. They aren't that much of a privilege really.

>the focus on how the disbelievers are dumb

You should try to understand the context, God is saying if one sees signs all around him and is blessed with mental faculties of reasoning yet still rejects the truth then such a person is spiritually dumb and blind.

>Abrogation also doesn't make much sense when you consider an omniscient deity - especially when the recitiation is abrogated, but the law is not.

I'm not sure you understand how abrogation works. The reports of abrogation via hadiths from companions of the Prophet and not the Prophet himself are not a good evidence, if you want to be taken seriously then focus on the Quran not the hadith, God promised to protect the Quran not the Hadith. I think you were referencing the hadith about ayat rajm by Umar (r.a)

>I also find it hard to believe that an all-powerful God would give the generally stronger gender the right to physically retailate against the generally weaker gender for "fearing disobedience".

It's not a physical retaliation, just discipline and its very unlikely to happen, if you read the verse you will see that God says to try doing 2 or 3 things before resorting to beating, and any harmful beating is forbidden in Islam.

I think this entire debate is nullified by the fact that the Prophet never beat any of his wives, Muslims are required to follow his example in everything so if any Muslims wants to be like the Prophet they will never beat their wives.

>But, I must also admit I find the ahadith the worse of the two

Don't even begin with the ahadith, they're not transmitted by God and I can't defend them all, they were reported by humans who can and do make mistakes, I can only defend the Quran which I belive to be the entirely preserved word of God with zero alteration or human input.

u/humzak03 · 2 pointsr/exmuslim

For your case I recommend a great book. It’s called “the divine reality” by Hamza Tzortis. It selves into the philosophy of existence, purpose, and god, not only from an Islamic POV but from an atheist POV as well. It’s a very good read as well. Highly recommend reading it.
https://www.amazon.com/Divine-Reality-Islam-Mirage-Atheism/dp/0996545387

u/thefukizamatterwithu · 2 pointsr/exmuslim
u/petemck · 2 pointsr/atheism

I think this will answer all of your questions.

Short Answer: Yes, a majority reject such mistreatment of women. A VAST majority.

u/Logical1ty · 2 pointsr/worldnews

Also recommend this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/178074420X

Excerpt:

> Until the collision with the modern West, no Muslim scholar of any consequence ever advocated that the Qur’an be read alone. They might dispute on all else, but the varied sects of Islam all agreed that Muslims should under no circumstances read the Qur’an in a vacuum. Islam’s sects shared two foundational principles: that the Sunna of the Prophet rules over and interprets the Qur’an, and that the Prophet’s interpretive authority had been passed on to those authorities who were to lead the community after his death. Where sects diverged was over how and by whom this Sunna was known and who had the authority to speak in the Prophet’s name. For Sunnis it was transmitted and known by the Muslim community as a whole, borne via the twin routes of the Hadiths, which recorded the Prophet’s words, and the inherited teachings of the early Muslim generations, spoken for by the community’s often cacophonous body of ulama. Taken together, this was the Sunni tradition, in which the authority of God and His Prophet could coalesce from the riot of stentorian voices and express itself fully in instances of consensus (ijma‘). Shiites believed that the Prophet’s teachings were inherited by particular lines of his descendants. The esoteric knowledge of the religion and the ability to interpret infallibly the Qur’an’s layers of hidden meaning passed from father to designated son like bloodlines. Those descendants designated in succession as Imams spoke with the authority of the Prophet. Further sectarian splintering into Imami (Twelver) and Ismaili (Sevener) schools followed disagreements over which line transmitted this hidden ‘ilm.
>
> [...]
>
> Although he had once relished the Ottoman scourge that God sent against the Antichrist Papacy, Luther despised Islam as much as any bishop he condemned. If the Saxon monk had ever managed a visit to Istanbul or Damascus he would have met with a mixed reaction among his Muslim counterparts. His rejection of highly derivative papal canon law, the scholastic theology of Aquinas (with its adoption of pagan Greek logic) and his conviction that Church tradition had departed from the original scripture of the Bible would have endeared him to proto-Salafi contemporaries like the Ottoman iconoclast Shaykh Mehmet Birgili or the followers of Ibn Taymiyya. But the corollary that tradition should be jettisoned and that each believer should return to the original scriptures of the Old and New Testaments would have provoked roars of laughter.

u/komorikomori · 2 pointsr/religion

I would highly recommend The Study Quran. It is probably the most academic translation out there, at least in my opinion.

This site has basically every major English translation of the Qur'an (including The Study Quran) for comparison, more than any other site I've found.

u/diablos777 · 2 pointsr/islam

The Study Quran is the latest translation with multi sect views. Highly recommended by a lot of scholars Sunni and Shia.

The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary https://www.amazon.com/dp/0061125865/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_Ut-nxb5DHJC0N


Here's a loOoOong interview with one of the co-authors:

https://youtu.be/aKdvKECfvPI

u/funkypalestinian · 2 pointsr/progressive_islam

Hands down the best Quran in English to learn is the Study Quran,

The Study Quran: A New... https://www.amazon.com/dp/0061125865?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share

The information it has is truly great and we'll researched. It also has several essays on the back.

I can not recommend it enough

u/TheCoconutChef · 2 pointsr/exmuslim

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
u/dingobaby27 · 2 pointsr/islam

Read the quran in a language you understand, and don't worry about the arabic. Guarantee this will make a difference. If English is your first language, then I recommend this translationThe oxford translation

u/Windows101010 · 2 pointsr/islam
u/throwaway1219021 · 2 pointsr/shia

https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=56Q46TDRFH3P9756CZEH


This is the one I use... I have tried the classical poetry english ones, and I found them difficult to comprehend. But I'm glad you enjoy that version! (:

u/AnotherAlire · 2 pointsr/islam

To keep it simple, I always recommend this (Oxford) translation of the Qur'an. It's a very simple and easy to read translation that has gotten a lot of praise from many people from different backgrounds for having decent enough translations and contexts, where appropriate.

You can't go wrong with reading a translation of the Qur'an. It's where everyone should start.

---

Many people also converted to Islam after studying Malcolm X, whose journey I think embodies the perfect result of someone who fought against the racism of society out of sincerity and not out of a desire to conform (to pretend one opposes racism because it's taboo now). This sincerity led him from being a staunch advocate of Elijah Muhammad (an extreme position in the Muslim world, such that to be Elijah's follower is to make you a non-Muslim) to eventually realising the falsehood of the "Nation of Islam" and accepting the true religion of Islam, whilst continuing to fight for his cause in 'his' "country".

His letter from Mecca is also worth listening to/reading.

His last speech was also quite poetic and eye opening.

The main reason I have gone to the example of Malcolm and not linking books explaining the theology like many do is due to the example of salaf (first generations of Muslims) in how they approached dawah (teaching others the religion of Islam). They didn't let themselves get bogged down in preaching the religion to others (most time gets wasted in arguments with people who have no interest in listening, only defending their position and in repeating the same arguments like a parrot); they let their actions speak for themselves. And from their actions, the pagans reverted to Islam. It was from seeing the justice of the political system of Islam and how the leaders conducted themselves that non-Muslims reverted. Malcolm was quite similar to this in that his objective was not to become a preacher but a fighter against racism. And through understanding his fight and his reason for fighting (believing in the oneness of mankind), people revert to Islam.

To be clear, I do also have criticisms of some of Malcolm's positions, specifically his advocacy of black nationalism as a solution to racism. Though, in his defence, he believed this to only be a temporary solution. Once black people were on the same economic and political level as whites (black nationalism), the problem would be solved and hence it would no longer be black nationalism. Compared to '60s USA, oppression was worse 1400 years ago in Arabia and the solution was Islam, not black nationalism (Malcolm didn't understand that Islam had political elements to it). Had he lived longer, I believe he would have corrected his position. He also spoke of Arabia as if racism was solved there, which it isn't. Racism from all ethnic groups in the Muslim world still exists; that was a result of nationalism. Malcolm spoke about nationalism in the Muslim world freeing them from European domination; rather nationalism ensured European domination by dividing the Muslims who are instructed by Allah to remain united. But Malcolm didn't have enough time to observe everything about the Muslim world and its modern politics and history. Again, he was a proper Muslim for a very short time. Though I applaud him and pray for his forgiveness. He was sincere through and through and fought vehemently for what he thought was right. May Allah SWT have mercy upon him and reward him with Jannah. Ameen.

u/archossifrage · 2 pointsr/converts

My favorite translation of the meaning to share is the one by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem. It's easy to read and written in paragraph form. Great for Da'wah.

English only version:
The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0199535957/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_0qk7BbTH2BWR8

Arabic/English Version
The Qur'an: English translation and Parallel Arabic text https://www.amazon.com/dp/019957071X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_hsk7Bb21HDDFP

u/sneakpeekbot · 2 pointsr/ParentsAreFuckingDumb

Here's a sneak peek of /r/WhiteChristianMorals using the top posts of all time!

#1: Just moral christian things. | 0 comments
#2: Some light reading for the daily commute. | 0 comments
#3: My Favorite Praise Album! | 1 comment

----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^Contact ^^me ^^| ^^Info ^^| ^^Opt-out

u/pilotinspector85 · 2 pointsr/islam

[(Oxford World’s Classics)](The Qur’an (Oxford World’s Classics) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0199535957/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_QxwzCb5XWKMJH)

(The Clear Quran - English Only Translation: A Thematic English Translation of the Message of the final revelation https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0747XY67R/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_wywzCbFRN3C98)

u/NaveenMohamed · 2 pointsr/conspiracy

The Qu'ran says:

> "They are not [all] the same; among the People of the Scripture [Jews and Christians] is a community standing [in obedience], reciting the verses of Allah during periods of the night and prostrating [in prayer].

> "They believe in Allah and the Last Day, and they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and hasten to good deeds. And those are among the righteous.

> "And whatever good they do - never will it be removed from them. And Allah is Knowing of the righteous."

—Al-Qur'an Al-Kareem (The Noble Recitation), Surah (Chapter) 3, Ali 'Imran (The Family of 'Imran): ayat (verses) 113-115:
https://quran.com/3/113-115

> "And there are, certainly, among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), those who believe in Allah and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before Allah. They do not sell the Verses of Allah for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, Allah is Swift in account."

—Al-Qur'an Al-Kareem (The Noble Recitation), Surah (Chapter) 3, Ali 'Imran (The Family of 'Imran): ayah (verse) 199:
https://quran.com/3/199?translations=18

However, Allah ("the God [of the Prophet Abraham]") also warns in the Qur'an those who believe in a trinity, or who say that Jesus, upon whom there is peace, is the son of God, or who offer prayers to the Virgin Mary, may Allah be pleased with her, or who take saints as people to be worshipped:

> "O People of the Book! Do not go to extremes regarding your faith; say nothing about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger of Allah and the fulfilment of His Word through Mary and a spirit created by a command from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers and do not say, 'Trinity.' Stop!—for your own good. Allah is only One God. Glory be to Him! He is far above having a son! To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And Allah is sufficient as a Trustee of Affairs."

—Surah (Chapter) 4 of al-Quran al-Kareem (the Noble Recitation) - An-Nisa (The Women), ayah (verse) 171
https://quran.com/4/171?translations=101

> "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary' while the Messiah has said, 'O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

> "They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the third of three.' And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.

> "So will they not repent to Allah and seek His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

> "The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded.

> "Say, 'Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no [power of] harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?'

> "Say, 'O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and have strayed from the soundness of the way.'

> "Cursed were those who disbelieved among the Children of Israel by the tongue of David and of Jesus, the son of Mary. That was because they disobeyed and [habitually] transgressed.

> "They used not to prevent one another from wrongdoing that they did. How wretched was that which they were doing.

> "You see many of them becoming allies of those who disbelieved. How wretched is that which they have put forth for themselves in that Allah has become angry with them, and in the punishment they will abide eternally.

> And if they had believed in Allah and the Prophet and in what was revealed to him, they would not have taken them as allies; but many of them are defiantly disobedient.

> You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews and those who associate others with Allah ; and you will find the nearest of them in affection to the believers those who say, 'We are Christians.' That is because among them are priests and monks and because they are not arrogant.

> "And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, 'Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.

> "'And why should we not believe in Allah and what has come to us of the truth? And we aspire that our Lord will admit us [to Paradise] with the righteous people.'

> "So Allah rewarded them for what they said with gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide eternally. And that is the reward of doers of good.

> "But those who disbelieved and denied Our signs - they are the companions of Hellfire."

—Surah (Chapter) 5 of the Noble Quran (Recitation) - Al-Ma'idah (The Table Spread), ayat (verses) 72-86
https://quran.com/5/72-86

> "And they say, 'The Most Merciful has taken [for Himself] a son.'

> "You have done an atrocious thing.

> "The heavens almost rupture therefrom and the earth splits open and the mountains collapse in devastation

> "That they attribute to the Most Merciful a son.

> "And it is not appropriate for the Most Merciful that He should take a son.

> "There is no one in the heavens and earth but that he comes to the Most Merciful as a servant."

—Surah (Chapter) 19 of al-Quran al-Kareem (the Noble Recitation) - Maryam (The Virgin Mary), ayat (verses) 88-93
https://quran.com/19/88-93

> "Indeed, the example of Jesus in the sight of Allah is like that of Adam. He created him from dust, then said to him, 'Be!' And he was!"

—Surah (Chapter) 3 of the Noble Quran (Recitation) - Ali 'Imran (The Family of 'Imran), ayah (verse) 59
https://quran.com/3/59?translations=101

> "[All] praise is [due] to Allah, who has sent down upon His Servant the Book and has not made therein any deviance.

> "[He has made it] straight, to warn of severe punishment from Him and to give good tidings to the believers who do righteous deeds that they will have a good reward

> "In which they will remain forever

> "And to warn those who say, 'Allah has taken a son.'

> "They have no knowledge of it, nor had their fathers. Grave is the word that comes out of their mouths; they speak not except a lie."

—Surah (Chapter) 18 of the Noble Quran (Recitation) - Al-Kahf (The Cave), ayat (verses) 1-5
https://quran.com/18/1-5?translations=20

There are so many more instances of this topic being explained in the Qur'an. I suggest reading it for oneself and then deciding whether or not one believes it to truly be the word of God. This is the first one I ever purchased, and I found the footnotes it has that explain the historical context of some verses very beneficial: https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957/

u/thethinkingmuslim · 2 pointsr/islam

I personally prefer:

Translation: http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

Book on Prophet (pbuh) life: http://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Man-Prophet-Adil-Salahi/dp/0860373223/

Insha'Allah, the above two should suffice.

u/ThinkerSociety · 2 pointsr/AskNYC

Dar-Us-Salam located at 486 Atlantic Ave in Brooklyn.

They have a wide collection. If you are looking for easy-to-read Arabic, I would say it is best to read an English translation separately along with a Qur'an with large Arabic font, since the translations are usually by each line. One good translation is the Oxford World Classics edition of the Qur'an, by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem. It's highly recommended.

If you want both English and Arabic, the most comprehensive exposure I've personally had is with the following two:

  1. Holy Qur'an by Abdullah Yusuf Ali - It has a great commentary of historical narratives in addition to the translation.

  2. The Noble Qur'an by Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali and Muhammad Muhsin Khan - It's pretty comprehensive in explaining the translation.

    All 3 books can be found at that book store. You may call them to confirm, just in case.

u/plizir · 2 pointsr/islam

Salam Brother, I recommand Abdel Haleem translation of the Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics). I believe it's the best translation. The footnotes gives you the context and additional info about the verses.

I also recommand reading the autobiography of the Prophet, the best one I read so far is Tariq Ramadan's : In the Footsteps of the Prophet

​

May God make things easy for you

u/BugsByte · 2 pointsr/islam

I would recommend you the translation of the Quran prepared by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem from Oxford World's Classics, you can get it from here, it's pretty cheap too.

u/Kryptomeister · 2 pointsr/progressive_islam
u/jez2718 · 2 pointsr/DebateReligion

First and foremost, I strongly recommend you cross-post this to /r/askphilosophy (and probably also /r/philosophyofreligion) since they'll be much more qualified than here to suggest topics and lesson-plans.

Second, you should probably include the Leibnizian cosmological argument alongside the Kalam, since they are sufficiently different. There's plenty of good material out there on this: Pruss' article for the Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology (this book is a very good resource, see here for more chapters) is pretty definitive, but both he and Richard Gale have written stuff on this.

Third, I think you should use different atheistic arguments. Drop Russell's teapot: especially given your expected audience you should stick to positive arguments against the existence of God. Russell's teapot you can work in as a side comment that argues that if the negative case (i.e. refuting theistic arguments) succeeds then we should be atheists, but other wise leave it be. Better topics I think would be the Argument from Non-Belief (see also here) and Hume's argument against belief in miracles (I have a bunch of resources on this I can send you, but the original argument in Of Miracles is pretty short and is free online). You might want to read one of Mackie's The Miracle of Theism, Martin's Atheism: A Philosophical Justification or Oppy's Arguing About Gods for a good source of atheistic critiques and arguments.

u/Ibrey · 2 pointsr/Christianity

I agree 100% about seeking out the best of each side. Too many people think philosophy of religion is some kind of tug of war, with any acknowledgement of an opponent's strength being too big a concession.

I'm with /u/ludi_literarum in that I think that this question is better dealt with in writing, so I'll start with some book recommendations; I think some of the best, most substantial arguments for theism can be found in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology and Aquinas. For the best atheist arguments, I always recommend The Miracle of Theism, Arguing About Gods, and Logic and Theism.

Of those on your list I have some experience of, the good:

1. William Lane Craig. The debate king, whether or not you think his arguments are sound. Always smart, organised, and prepared.

2. Matt Dilahunty. I don't believe I've ever seen Dilahunty in a debate context, trying to make a positive case for atheism to an audience, but I've seen quite a bit of The Atheist Experience. He listens patiently to anything that anybody has to say in support of anything supernatural, even when the caller is rude or their argument idiotic, then politely explains why he finds the argument wanting. You have to respect him.

3. Christopher Hitchens. Only ranks up here because of his wit and eloquence, not because I think highly of his arguments.

The bad:

4. Lawrence Krauss. He earns his spot down here for his main contribution to the theism debate, A Universe from Nothing. We all constantly see it appealed to as a solution to the problems of the cosmological argument, which it simply is not—for those who want details of this, see David Albert's review of the book in The New York Times. What does Krauss have to say about this review? Dr Albert "was a philosopher, not a physicist, so I discounted him." (16:20–16:35)

5. Sam Harris. I watched him debate William Lane Craig on whether there can be objective moral values apart from God. Craig tore him apart, largely because Harris chose to merely assert that Craig's interpretation of his book was wrong without explaining how and then waste all his time giving obviously canned speeches about how stupid it is to believe in God.

6. Richard Dawkins. His replies to famous theistic arguments in The God Delusion can be most charitably described as very inferior to what can be found in academic literature, and I think his "who designed the designer" argument shows a lack of appreciation of certain traditional attributes of God (as Dr Gary Gutting wrote about at length here).

u/hammiesink · 2 pointsr/DebateAChristian

Uhhhhhh....

Graham Oppy wrote one of the most brilliant books on atheism ever.

J.L. Mackie, probably one of the top atheist philosophers of the 20th Century, also wrote what's often considered to be the best book on atheism ever written.

The expertise is in refuting the arguments for God's existence, and then putting forth arguments that God cannot or is unlikely to exist.

u/islamchump · 1 pointr/exmuslim

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.

u/GetAtMeKid · 1 pointr/islam

this is a good translation. Main editor is Shia, 4 co-editors are Sunni. It has all 4 sunni madhab interpretations and Shia ones as well in the commentary. Very good for people who are learning.

u/35chaton · 1 pointr/shia

That's a good one too, I have it as well. It's the one I was reading with last year actually. This one is the one I use now, primarily.

No, the Arberry version can be a bit lacking in the comprehension area, I agree. It's nice to use once in a while, but I'm not sure about for deep study.

u/Pogi_2 · 1 pointr/theology

Hey, you should pick up this book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Study-Quran-Translation-Commentary/dp/0061125865
Unless you are looking to side specifically with Salafi groups, this book provides a analysis of the verse given by traditional Muslim Scholars from different schools of theological thought. I know your whole point is to give your rendering, but perhaps understanding how Muslims have interpreted the verses could provide you more insight.

u/save_the_last_dance · 1 pointr/islam

https://www.amazon.com/Study-Quran-New-Translation-Commentary/dp/0061125865

The Study Quaran is an excellent one that comes with commentary and study notes and context. If you like NAK, you're going to love Seyyed Houssein Nasr, they're birds of a feather imo.

u/aboughdee · 1 pointr/atheism

Not every Verse in the Qur'an will have a Hadith assigned to it. However, the Study Qur'an was just released, and it will provide you 'tafsir' on every single verse. I have yet to purchase it, otherwise I would have shared with you here the exact explanation specified in that book.

> I don't know how to respond when what it is clearly stating in English is that slaves are exempt from 4:24

My friend, Verse 4:24 clearly states in English "those your right hands possess". In Verse 4:25, it clearly states in English "And whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls.".

Let's review this one more time, for my English speaking friend.

The second verse tells you, if you do not have the means to marry the women specified in the earlier verses (including "those your right hands possess" as specified in Verse 4:24), then you may marry from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls. Gasp! A distinction was made! Didn't you present me with a distinction in the other post? Surely you understand this concept.

> Do you not accept that slavery exists in the Koran?

The Qur'an accepts that slavery was an institution and fabric of society. The Qur'an was revealed during a time when slavery existed. Yet, not once in the Qur'an is the believer commanded to beat the slave, or to force conversion on the slave.

And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of worldly life. (24:33)

Instead the Qur'an consistently reminds you that God is watching, and promises a heavenly reward for the freeing of slaves.

C'mon, it's so obvious man! I'm trying to help you out here. I want you to understand the truth! I know you don't think you need what I have to offer, but I am sharing this all with you for the sake of my Lord, and for your sake, out of the love I have for you—even if you perceive it to be a fruitless effort. The Prophet Muhammad used to cry for those who would declare themselves as his enemies, and he prayed that they would be guided. One of the Prophet's first companions was a HUGE dude, who initially wanted to kill the Prophet when he discovered that Muhammad was preaching of God different from what the Meccans worshiped (until he heard the Qur'an for the first time and began to weep, then instantly submitted to Allah).

> In any case, I'm glad that you don't support slavery. Alas, I wish all Muslims of humanity shared your sentiment.

Most Muslims around the world already do share my sentiment, my friend. Muslims believe all humans will be judged for every single little thing, and can be punished for every little thing, if we are not forgiven through God's mercy. Many Muslims are hesitant to even kill a fly in their home.

Nonetheless, we will agree to disagree. You are reluctant to share my understanding of Islam, as your mind has already generated a negative perception of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. I would not follow a religion which I knew was inherently evil. I am confident that your interpretations of the Qur'an false, but if you are sincere with your understanding of Islam, and if you are sincere to know the truth, then there is no judgement upon you.


Lastly, if you are sincere about wanting to learn the truth, it couldn't hurt to listen for five minutes or so. You should at least be presented with what we believe is divine language. Just 5 minutes :D

u/svxr · 1 pointr/soccer

This translation by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem is excellent https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957/. There's a good introduction and each surah (chapter) of the Quran has it's own brief notes to help explain everything.

u/umarnasir · 1 pointr/islam
u/-420SmokeWeed- · 1 pointr/DebateReligion

>With that in mind, can someone direct me to an english translation that would make it's miraculous nature most evident?

No

But here is a translation that is recommended by many:

The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) - M.A.S. Abdel Haleem

Free PDF:

https://yassarnalquran.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/the_quran-abdel-haleem.pdf

~$7 Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

Edit: Actually Nouman Ali Khan attempts to convey the linguistic miracle to a non-Arabic audience its not perfect but without learning a new language this is pretty good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-ULa2JzPG0

u/oroboros74 · 1 pointr/AskLiteraryStudies

I highly suggest M. A. S. Abdel Haleem's The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics .

u/swjd · 1 pointr/islam

Additions:

Lives of other Prophets Series

  • [Video] Lives of the Prophets - Series of 31 lectures by Sheikh Shady on the lives of the Prophets from Adam (AS) to Isa (AS).

  • [Video] Stories Of The Prophets - Series of 30 lectures by Mufti Menk on the lives and stories of the Prophets from Adam (AS) to Isa (AS).

    End times, Death, Hereafter

  • [Video] Death and the Hereafter - Series of 10 or so lectures by Sheikh Shady on what happens during and after death. Also, the minor and major signs that would occur until the end of times.

  • [Video] Signs of Day of Judgement - Series of multiple lectures on the signs of the day of judgement by Sh. Yaser Birjas.

    Seerah (Life of Prophet Muhammad (SAW)

  • [Video] Seerah - Series of 47 lectures on the signs of the life of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by Sheikh Shady.

    Understand the Quran

  • [Video] Story Night - How Allah(swt) wrote/directed the Quran with analogies to popular works of flim and stories. Another way of looking at it is that why does it seem the Quran is out of order sometimes? Noman Ali Kahn mainly talks about the story of Musa (AS) and how ayats pertaining to his story are written.

  • [Book] The Qur'an by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem - Translation of the Quran with modern English vernacular.

  • [Book] Approaching the Qur'an: The Early Revelations by Michael Sells - There's a chapter that goes in depth about how the pre-Islamic Arabs previved the concept of love and the female beloved character layla and what Islam changed about this concept.

  • [Book] No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam by Reza Aslan -- Covers lots of topics, excellent writing overall.

  • [Audio] Fahm al-Qur'an - Tafseer of the entire Quran in very simple English. The commentary is by a female scholar, Amina Elahi so it's a good tafseer for gatherings with a lot sisters but obviously anyone can listen. Best way to make the most of this tafseer and others like it is to have a translated copy of the Quran in front of you and some highlighters, sticky notes and a dedicated notebook and just scribble away as you listen. BTW, if you have a Muslim friend(s) who is/are interested in Islam and you don't have access to a teacher or w/e, have a listening party/gathering with these lectures once a week. Since each lecture is 2 hrs long, in 30 weeks, you will have finished the tafseer of the entire Quran and you have a notebook filled with notes and a translated Quran that is now colorful and filled with notes.
u/jeffanie96 · 1 pointr/islam

Context specific to each verse. It'll say "fight the disbelievers" but the context is "fight only those who fought you first, and stop when they stop", or "kill them where ever you find them" but the context is those specific pagans in Mecca at that time who broke a treaty.

I would find another translation to read, one with a commentary from someone who has studied it and can provide the context. M.S. Haleem's is really good for this. It's only $8 on Amazon.

u/FooFighterJL · 1 pointr/Showerthoughts

First things first, choose the right version of the Koran. Most Islamic scholars think you cannot have read the Koran unless you have read it in Arabic. Since that takes too long to learn, the best version I can recommend is this.

You can get it on Kindle too if you want to save some money. It has notes too.

u/Tariq_7 · 1 pointr/converts

Yes, by all means, read more than one translation

Another excellent translation is that of Professor Abdel Haleem, Oxford, UK

http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/Public/book_tq.html

http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

u/rafiki4 · 1 pointr/islam
u/iredditgoodbadass · 1 pointr/Petioles

Totally feel you on the mistrust of religion, I'm not spiritual tho ive jumped on the mindfulness bandwagon.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

I'm reading this right now, the introduction is super interesting, you should totally get this. The Quran is all about reaffirming what happened before with all the prophets n shizz. Jews and Christians are called 'people of the book' as they came before and the quaran is all about them.

Edit: I should note I'm only 7 pages in

u/anothermuslim · 1 pointr/explainlikeimfive

Quran 60:8, 9 - Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

Quran 16:2,82: He sends down the angels, with the inspiration of His command, upon whom He wills of His servants, [telling them], "Warn that there is no deity except Me; so fear Me {Allah, that is}." ... But if they turn away, [O Muhammad] - then only upon you is [responsibility for] clear notification.

Quran 21/107-109 - And We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds. Say, "It is only revealed to me that your god is but one God; so will you be Muslims [in submission to Him]?" But if they turn away, then say, "I have announced to [all of] you equally. And I know not whether near or far is that which you are promised.

Quran 88:21-22 - So remind, [O Muhammad]; you are only a reminder.
You are not over them a controller.

Quran 22/40 - [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah ." And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned. And Allah will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might.

And you would find more if you chose to read. Unlike some translations, you would find this one to be an easy and fairly accurate read

From the hadeeths.
“Whoever kills a person who has a truce with the Muslims will never smell the fragrance of Paradise.” (Saheeh Muslim)

“Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against the person on the Day of Judgment.” (Abu Dawud)

"Whoever hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state hurts me, and he who hurts me annoys God." (Bukhari)

"He who hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state, I am his adversary, and I shall be his adversary on the Day of a Judgement." (Bukhari)

u/MrXxxKillsHimself · 1 pointr/islam
u/kingpomba · 1 pointr/DebateReligion

>On the emotional side of things, the Qur'an is the only holy book to have moved me.

That's a very personal thing though. I know plenty of (pseudo)Christians and former believers (including myself) who are just unmoved with Christianity and the bible. The reasons are numerous but a lot of the time its seeking out novelty, something new. I think a lot of people are moved by buddhist, daoist or hindu scriptures as well.

>The first time I picked a translation, and started reading, it struck at the heart of me.

It had the opposite affect on me. It really felt like a struggle. I couldn't make it through the first chapter (though its probably rare for someone to read scripture cover to cover). Which translation did you use? I have digital access to this one and i'll probably end up buying the hardback, what do you think?

> The Qur'an consistently denounces blind observance, stating not to just follow the religion of your fathers.

Thats good in theory but the vast, vast majority of muslims around today, especially in less developed countries, believe precisely for this reason.

The historical records of Muhammad are a lot more solid than Jesus though, i'll give you that. We even have letters sent by him.

u/goldflakes · 1 pointr/Libertarian

They didn't "come to America," but yes of course the conflict between the United States and the Islamic world started before the events you outlined. I'll outline the relevant points as summarily as I can. For brevity, I will include history only related to the United States and not broader Western civilization. The case of the United States is salient and representative.

History of Islam: Muhammad to 1776

Muhammad first began teaching among Pagan Arabs who were more or less friendly until he began to teach that there is only one God and all other religions' followers shall burn in hell. When they began to threaten him and his people, he fled to Mecca and Medina, subsequently taking over the western half of Saudi Arabia along with the eastern tip (Oman). Almost all secular scholars of the Qur'an agree that it is as much a political guidebook (how to run a society) as a religious text (how to be a good person). Upon his death in 632, his followers interpreted the book as they did, and a system of Caliphates began to rule the Islamic world. By 661, all of what we call the Middle East and northeastern Africa was under the Caliphate. By the 8th century, the Caliphate had extended to include land from Spain to Pakistan. This was unsustainable militarily (given few people liked being ruled under Islamic law), so it was pulled back. The Turkish peoples were to become the new military force of the Caliphate, and took Constantinople just before Columbus "found" the "New World." When the United States declared independence, Abdul Hamid I was sultan, with even Baghdad under his rule (that article makes him sound friendlier than he actually was -- he was compelled to sign treaties after military defeats).

Barbary Slaves and Pirating

Before the United States had first elected Washington as President, the Congress found itself at odds with the Caliphate controlled lands. At this time, the Muslim world was taking Europeans and Americans as slaves, estimates are that as many as 1.25 million slaves were taken from the Western world (source: Robert Davis). John Adams, America's London ambassador, was sent to the Tripoli ambassador to discuss the matter, and was met with a demand of money for various levels of peace. Terms were set for the release of slaves, short term peace, and even a price for long term peace. The United States argued that it was a new nation. If their military had previously quarreled with Europe, that was of no concern to the United States. Could not peace with a new nation be had?

When Jefferson took the Presidency in 1801, he was immediately met with a demand of $4,000,000 (adjusted for inflation but not %GDP or federal budget) to be paid to the Muslim lands. Jefferson demanded repeatedly to know by what right these demands were made. By what right did they capture Americans as slaves, seize her ships, take her property, and demand payment in exchange?

> The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners.

Thomas Jefferson to Congress and the State Department

Barbary Wars to Usama bin Laden

President Jefferson found himself in the fortunate position of having a capable Navy that he, ironically enough, had fought against funding before being elected. With it, he began the first conflict between the United States and the Caliphate. The second line of the Marine Anthem (To the shores of Tripoli) celebrates the result even today. Congress authorized Jefferson to use the full might of the United States Navy to suppress the military aggression, with permission to seize and destroy property as the Navy was able. The language was quite strong and general.

The modern Islamic revival that began in the 1970s has seen a large surge in the total Muslim population, which we must admit is in some sense responsible for the recent surge of the lower jihad as well (this being the military jihad as opposed to the higher jihad meaning an inner struggle). Al Qaeda's number one demand was restoration of the Caliphate. The crime for which America has been subject to the violence from the radical Islamists was committed after approval by the Saudi royal family to use American troops to free Kuwait from Iraq rather than using their own, limited resources and relying heavily on the local mujahidin. In other words, Usama bin Laden was angry with America because he thought that local insurgents could fight Saddam the same way they had in Afghanistan against the Soviets rather than relying on smart bombs to do the same. (He forgot, or perhaps never knew, that Afghanistan was liberated only through American assistance. People who assert the unsophisticated non-distinction between Al Qaeda and the Taliban forget this. America gave aid to the Taliban, not The Base.)

Also central to crimes committed by the United States in Bin Laden's mind was our admission that we had begun to support the right of East Timor to self determination of government. Here is one of his first speeches after the 2001 attacks.. Ctrl+f "east timor" to see that his complaint is that the Caliphate's maximum extent is no longer in effect, with the world recognizing that the military devastation committed by Indonesia was invalid.

Specific Points: Iran in WWII, The Taliban, Gulf War vs. bin Laden, and Diplomacy

So, yes, the Barbary wars happened before the Iranian coup. Keep in mind also that 1953 is also after 1945 when Nazi Germany surrendered. At that time, Iran was already under the full control of Britain and Russia (mostly the British), essentially a colony like India was. This invasion was necessary because Reza Shah was attempting to play neutral while supplying the Nazi war machine with crude oil necessary for its logistical world domination. "Iran" in Persian means "The Land of the Aryans," which Persia abruptly changed its name to in 1935, just as it was becoming friendly toward the Germans. After the war was over, Britain had a number of privately owned fields, purchased legally from the owners of the land. When Iran elected Mosaddegh to nationalize the oilfields, they did so illegally. Their country or not, the heart of libertarianism is the right to free exchange and free markets. Unless you agree that the United States can simply seize the property of any foreign corporation who operates in any way through the United States, you cannot support the right of anyone, anywhere to loot by law. The course of action taken by the West was perhaps morally wrong. But it was in response to a moral wrong, not the initiation of one. I find that very few internet historians know the history of Iran before 1953. This has always seemed odd to me -- where are you all getting your similarly edited information?

The military bases in Islamic lands were widely supported at the time by both governments and peoples. They still celebrate it as a national day of pride. Again, bin Laden considers this the great evil of America because he wanted the local mujahidin to fight Saddam rather than bringing in any Western aid. You may freely be against the Gulf War, but you cannot rationalize that the intervention was innately immoral since the United States determined that losing control of the Kuwait and Saudi oilfields would have been damaging to her interests. In other words, the United States did not initiate force but responded to the initiation of force upon a friend.

The United States used the Taliban to fight the Soviet Empire. I fail to see this as a moral evil.

The United States necessarily has diplomatic relations with all countries who are willing, including bad guys. Egyptians and Tunisians far and away have more warm feelings for the United States than ill-feelings. Only with sources such as Russia Today can you attempt to support the notion that we stood between these leaders and their people. The West was crucial to their overthrow, including freezing of their foreign assets.

Recommended Reading

Islamic Radicalism and Global Jihad History of radical Islam and current resurgence. Takes a look at the old scholars and new.

The Looming Tower Everything leading up to 9/11

Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters Details the Barbary coast slave trade

The Trial of Henry Kissinger Outlines US war crimes

Qur'an My English translation.

Instructions for American Servicemen in Iran During World War II Self explanatory.

The Forever War Solidly good book.

The Rape of Kuwait Iraq war crimes in Kuwait


Edits

  • Corrected a couple subject-verb agreements.

  • Added section headers.

  • Added recommended reading list.

  • Reworked a paragraph in the last section.
u/TheKingOfTheGame · 1 pointr/islam

Welcome to /r/Islam :)

About the basics of Islam, read this
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Firstly, Praise to God. I am sure alot of other people will answer better than me, but I'll try. First off, for Muhammed (saw) in the bible, here is a very interesting video by a former Christan youth minister titled - "How the Bible Led me to Islam"

His story is so interesting because he figured out that a through read of bible itself made him realize something, and convinced him to study other religions in which he found finally found Islam, his story is something every typical Christian should hear.

Secondly, You said:

>I'd like recommendations for a quran translation.

I personally believe that people willing to learn about Islam should read the biography of Muhammed (saw) first to get a grasp of the message of Islam, how it spread, and how we come to respect this man as the greatest of all creation. The best book I recommend is Tariq Ramadan's Book about Muhammed and his life.

Once you've done that, I recommend an exegesis over a translation because your understanding is enhanced.

But a good translation is: http://quran.com
An exegesis (recommended) is: http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

Hope that helps.

u/nearlynoon · 1 pointr/religion

Boy was that the wrong question to ask. Wall of text inbound.

Judaism is my least-studied religion, but as I understand it Rabbinic literature is basically all commentary. The Mishnah, Tosefta, various Talmuds etc, they're all commentaries on the Tanakh. Of course, they are so old as to basically need their own commentaries, but there you have it. why_nn_doesnt_study_judaism.jpg

We Christians have a really different view on the 'Old Testament', and inter-commentary is pretty common in our scriptures. The New Testament may come at the end of our Bible, but it's the key to our way of reading the old scriptures as well, so start there. William Barclay was not super-dee-duper orthodox in his views, but he was a good Biblical scholar and I still like his 'Daily Study Bible' New Testament commentary for beginners. Patristics is a study of the development of early Christian orthodox thought, and consists mostly of reading post-NT commentaries by the Church Fathers, but those books are a giant money-sink so I'll let you get into that in your own time. 'Dogmatik' may be a bit heavy, but it's a good summary of our thought on our whole religion, scripture and all.

Islam is tricky, because the Qur'an is taken much more literally than orthodox Christians and Jews treat their scriptures, i.e. it cannot be translated out of Arabic, only interpreted. Maybe one of our Muslim friends can chime in with a better suggestion, but the version of the Qur'an used by my classes (which has some light commentary) is the Oxford World's Classics version. Quran.com can also be pretty useful since you can hover over an Arabic word and get its direct translation.

As far as Buddhism goes, I think the BDK English Tripitaka has some big flaws (it's also way incomplete), but it's pretty academic and a lot of its texts are the only versions available in English. Individual sutras are around, I always appreciate the work of the Sanskrit scholar Red Pine, he's done the Diamond Sutra and the Heart Sutra and maybe some others, from a Japanese Zen perspective. Buddhist scripture is sorta endless.

The only other religious texts I've read extensively are the European esoteric stuff I hope to do my graduate work in, in which case all the texts are weird, and all the commentaries are as weird or weirder. It's religious studies on Hard Mode.

I hope that gives you some places to start! And I hope I haven't scared you off! Good luck!

u/donkindonets · 1 pointr/islam

The Qur'an

A new translation by M. A. S. Abdel Haleem

Oxford World's Classics

Edit, third times the charm:
link to amazon

u/rgamesgotmebanned · 1 pointr/KotakuInAction

> Most your response was "omg stop being SJW!"

Don't insult me. Especially not when it's blatant lie, there for everyone to see. The main arguments of my comments were not "Stop being an SJW." Getting of to a good start.


> Nope. I just haven't been able to link and put forth my reasoning while also looking into where /u/rgamesgotmebanned was going with his reasoning. The facts are actually verifiable so I'll do that now in a quick fashion.

Hi, that's me. No need to talk in 3rd person.

>1953 Iran Coup and CIA admits its role

Who are you arguing against? I never said the CIA didn't topple the regime. I will withhold judgment on that. I said that the Ayatollah Khomeini and his religious goons, with arguable support of the people, are directly responsible for the years of theocracy Iran has suffered. We didn't bring him back out of exile. He came by himself on a lonely private jet from Paris and turned the green revolution into something that never should have happened (again) on this earth.

>The ISIS Crisis (Where I got the Coca-Cola quote) - Loretta Napoleoni

>Assess her arguments here where she talks about the origins of ISIS. The ISIS Crisis is a good one that goes into the regional issues that are being missed. I just can't find it online right now.

Why are you linking me this? Apart from a few mistakes she makes, this completely supports my position that a huge part of the motivation for terrorists and millitant jihadists is religious in nature. She even talks about how a huge part of the violence is sectarian and they want to create a Caliphate.

> Going into Iraq, there's a lot of issues with the map being "evenly divided" that you won't know unless you have feet on the ground. Different communities have boundaries enforced based on the US military and they're the worst arbiters in the region.

The worst arbiters in the region are, evidently, Muslims who think drawing the should look like this [NSFL]

> When you go to Syria, we're working with Al Qaeda so it makes it harder to understand who to advocate for in the Middle East since relations are FUBAR.

Directly taken from your linked article:

>Unless the money is actually in the U.S. financial system, you have to point out to these governments where the money is going and try to work with them to make sure it goes to legitimate groups

But "Oh no, the evil US are doing it!" Don't insult my intelligence and assume I won't read the links your provide.

>There's a reason that China and Russia said no to intervention in Syria where they didn't say it in Libya.

You are shifting the goalpost here. I said that China (and I will include Russia here) is not the first on my list of best examples on how to handle these things. Their track record is abyssmal. Why listen to them, they obviously don't know what they are doing or (more likely) have different goals from us.

> America left a mess. Which goes into how I said in the beginning:

>We're good at making Coca-Cola. We're bad at starting wars we can't finish.

Very sarcastic and condescending, but neither true not an argument in any way shape or form. You are also contradicting yourself. If you think all the interventions in the Middle East were mistakes, we are actually very good at starting wars we can't finish. Now I don't believe that; I just wanted to point out your either grammatical or logical mistake.


> The next comment was dismissal of anything I stated. So let's move on.

I hope the irony of dismissing my whole comment while complaining about dismissal isn't lost on you.

> Let's look here because he you doubles down:

>The idea that religious fundamentalism and violence is a consequence of failed foreign policy is both ahistorical and destructive.

> This is ignorant rhetoric IMO.

> Instead of adding context...

Which follows just a few lines below

>...(which he claims I didn't do by pointing out nothing wrong with my argument) he goes on to make an argument from age,

>Argument from age =/= pointing out that for causation you would at least require correlation, which is absent in so many cases of religious fundamentalism and violence.


>ignoring the very influence he admitted to such as the 1953 overthrow which allowed fundamentalism to invade in Iran. I find this disingenuous and misleading to people following the issue.

How far did you have to carry that goal post to go from causing to fundamentalism to allowing it? There obviously were religious fundamentalists in Iran before, who were able to welcome Khomeini with open arms.


> Let's continue:

> Another prime example

> This is disingenuous. He cites a few examples and basically apologizes for US intervention while downplaying it. Nothing about drone strike double taps which are a war crime. Again, US intervention.

To not be ashamed of the audacity to complain about disingenousness while misquoting me so severely.

Here is the part of my comment:

>Another prime example [of the fact that their ailments are religious and not terrestrial] is that when the US accidentally (and this should never happen) hits a wedding with dronestrike killing large numbers of innocent civilians, among the many children, what follows are slight riots in the immediate region. But when we accidentally burn the wrong book what follows are massive levels of violence and the burning of embassies.

  1. I am going out of my way to say that I do not condone drone strikes on civilians.
  2. I am not downplaying anything. I am alluding to the reactions of the Muslim world itself.
  3. I never said anything about war crimes.
  4. "Again, US intervention." Are you seriously insinuating that I was denying the drone strikes were American? Because if not, then what the fuck are you talking about? The question is whether the US foreign policy or independt religious fanaticism are the reason for terroristic attacks. I am showing how burning the Quran leads to a more intense response, than killing innocent children. How can that simple argument go over your head and hwo dare you to make it look like I am downplaying the deathtolls.


    > Their sufferings are relgious in nature and not terrestrial.

    > Why the hell are we talking about planets?

    Wow. Are you kidding me? Maybe English isn't your first language (it's not mine either), but I didn't expect you to not understand the meaning of terrestrial in a discussion about religion.

    > It has been shown time and time again that these are people who get upset (and I mean blow myself up in front of a school upset) when they aren't allowed to commint genocide in East Timor or when they can't thrown accid in the face of little girls or when someone listens to the wrong music and the government doesn't intervene.

    > What annoys me here is how we look at the most reactionary issues but claim that's the normal Muslim

    http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/ You should seriously look into who you are defending here. The normal Muslim is not your friendly neighbor who sometimes goes to the Mosque. The "normal Muslim" thinks the Quran is the perfect word of Allah and thereofre Sharia should eb followed to the letter. This includes all the offenses I listed and many more. Stoning adulterers, killing apostates, death penalty based on testimony and I could go on and on...

    >which ignores everything about the region and how it came to be due to not only America, It's a "think of the children" fallacy mixed with a genetic fallacy.

    Firstly, If you want to know how it came to be read some biographies of Mohammed and the centuries thereafter. Barbarism is the perfect description. Even the oh so great Loretta Napoleoni you refernced realises that islamic fundamentalism can be traced directly to it's origins and scripture. Secondly, I am saying that their goals, which directly come from their religious beliefs, are in complete oppostition to everything we would call a free society or a good life. So in some sense it is a "think of the children" argument, although I think "think of humanity" is a better fit.


    > But the next paragraph is rather telling in how it conflates regular Muslims with Islam with nothing backing it up. You asked ME to cite my sources. I'm more than happy to do so. But how the hell can someone get away with this:

    > Islamis fundamentalism (and this goes for most religions) is as old as the faith itself.

    > [citation needed]

    You already watched it (hopefully). I can dig up other sources if you want, but you seem to admire the good lady quite a bit, so I hope this is enough. I really recomend you read the Quran- it's a relatively cheap, quick and concise read and it will possibly open many your eyes to the nature of Islam you seem to reject with quite some willpower. I think reading the scripture should always be the first step in educating yourself about a religion.

    (cont)
u/ThisIsOwnage · 1 pointr/islam

My favorite english translation is definitely Abdel Haleem's, you can find it here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957

Why? Because it's so smooth and easy to read, click look inside and see if you like it.

u/Emptypotatoskin · 1 pointr/islam

The Qur'an: English translation and Parallel Arabic text https://www.amazon.com/dp/019957071X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_zVGNyb030XRBG

I highly recommend this text. MAS does a great job translating into modern English which makes understanding the Arabic meaning really easy

u/thelennon · 1 pointr/AskReligion

I don't know about your library, but this is an excellent copy you can purchase.

u/Jumping_Candy_Cane · 1 pointr/atheism

The KCA, properly understood, if sound, argues for a first cause.

Asking something like, "Even if I grant you the conclusion(defined as 'first cause') that 'god' caused the universe, it still remains: 'What caused god?'" is absurd.

This is like saying, "Suppose I grant you've proven a first cause, well, what caused the first cause?"

Also, this:
>everything needs a cause

Has never been advocated by any proponent of the KCA.

Also, he was hit with the KCA, not just a cosmological argument. The KCA has it's roots in Muslim philosophy, not Plato. The modern formulation is only 33 years old...

You aren't even right about the most recent update to the KCA...

cf.
This 'update' is Craig on steroids. I would know, I've read both...

Not only that but I've read and responded to some of the most outspoken critics, including: Wes Morriston, J. L. Mackie, Graham Oppy, also discussed by Oppy in

Also, the video you posted, the girl seems to be entirely ignorant of the published literature. Craig gives a robust series of definitions of "infinite" in his original 1979 publication. In the first 5 min of the video she shows her ignorance of this fact.

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about and so I find it unfortunate given your baseless conclusions that you would claim:
>philosophic discussion on theology is a dead end. There is no useful result forthcoming, so - and I feel this way too - it's time to abandon that discussion. I agree that's a bit unsatisfying.

u/TheSodesa · 1 pointr/Suomi

Tämä on juuri Harrisin ja Maajid Nawazin (jostakin syystä hyvin usein väärintulkittu) argumentti. Islamismi/poliittinen islam on ideologiana vähintäänkin ongelmallinen. Heidän kirjoittamansa lyhyt kirja kannattaa lukea, jos ei niin ole vielä tehnyt.

u/SomeRandomMax · 1 pointr/atheism

I'm a strong atheist who thinks the world would be far better off if we got rid of all religion, but I wholeheartedly oppose banning any religion.

Banning the religion only makes its followers outlaws. Most Muslims do not support Islamism today, but if you banned it, that number would skyrocket.

For those who don't necessarily understand the difference, Islamists are Muslims who want a Muslim state. Isis is the most prominent such group, but they are not the only one. Not all Islamists necessarily are violent, but they all are radical.

To answer your question... I don't know. Personally, I am a free speech advocate, so I genuinely don't believe that banning islamism is the answer. I think banning ideas will fail. I think it takes education and tolerance.

That doesn't mean don't be critical of Islam, but we need to avoid lumping everyone in together.

If you haven't read it, I recommend Maajid Nawaz excellent book Radical. He doesn't offer any magic bullet solutions, but reading his story helps you understand how a well off kid raised in a liberal Muslim household can end up a Islamist, and how we can change the dialogue to discourage it in the future.

He also did a short book with Sam Harris, Islam and the Future of Tolerance that goes into more detail on his views. Both books are very good.

u/throwaway111675 · 1 pointr/EnoughTrumpSpam

He literally wrote a book on the subject, and makes that distinction all the time.

u/Wildcat599 · 1 pointr/worldnews

Pleas do not put words in my mouth I never said Muslims were defending ISIS. What you tried to do was compare the two groups that are not equivalent in the modern crimes committed in there name.
I've heard people say that to and they are dumb people who can't own there shit.

Look I am atheist I don't even like religion to began with, but anyone can see that this religion needs some reform. Look I am not great at summing up my views on the internet if you want ill point you towards a short book that sums up my views.

https://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700

u/salamiphobia · 1 pointr/The_Donald

I agree with the tons of good names listed in this thread.


Here are mine:

Follow twitters, YouTube, FB, etc of anyone here.

-Milo (the Dangerous Faggot, YT, Twitter, Breitbart)
-Dave Rubin (@RubinReport, YT, He's the Liberal that Listens)
-Paul Joseph Watson (Prison Planet on YT/Infowars)
-Mike Cernovich (The Gorilla Mindset. Book, blog and Twitter)
-Stefan Molyneux (point by point evisceration of the left's lies. YT, Twitter)
-Stephen Crowder (weekly radio show, tolerant Christian conservative that still has his head attached to his body)
-Gavin Mcinnes (Vice news needs him back to fuck up the place, YT, Twitter)
-Ann Coulter's Twitter @anncoulter
-@pizzapartyben

The Rise of the Cultural Libertarians
This lists some key conservative figures that are on the side of free speech, and other classical liberal principles.

I'm gonna mention a few unaffiliated to trump, but hit a key issue of Trump's expertly:


ISSUE: SJW Feminism and PC culture

-Christina Hoff Sommers (Based mom) on Rubin Report or Joe Rogans Podcast or her own Factual Feminist, where she breaks down feminist myths with facts.

ISSUE: Islamic Reform/the danger of Defending and importing radical Islam.


u/Zemrude · 1 pointr/AcademicBiblical

I have stumbled across this book on Hadith, which isn't specifically Quranic, but it does contain a section on academic critical views of the Hadith and their vetting process in Islam.

u/internetiseverywhere · 1 pointr/islam

I read Asad's translation for every Surah not covered in Michael Sell's stunning translation

u/Harybutts · 1 pointr/islam

I don't know where you would get a free pdf, but Amazon has an excellent version here.

u/lordweiner27 · 1 pointr/ukipparty

I'm sick of this shit. Again, and again people are being arrested for posting 'offensive' things online.

http://www.yorkshirestandard.co.uk/news/19-year-old-released-on-bail-after-alleged-koran-burning-video-9133/

This is just the latest. Well, I'm going to make my own video and post it. It's the least I can do to stand up for freedom of speech in my country.

I hope at least a couple of you will join me. I love Muslims by the way and there are plenty of other holy books to burn:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Holy-Bible-Authorized-James-Version/dp/0007103077/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics-ebook/dp/B001ODEPPI/

So burn a holy book. Just take a picture of the book burning and post it online with why you're doing it. You don't have to post your name or other details if you don't want to. Just a pic of the book burning, should take less than ten minutes.

u/Peaceful_Muselman · 1 pointr/Hijabis

This one is recommended by AbdulNasir Jangda. I have it and it's very simple English and light to carry around. Also available on Kindle

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B001ODEPPI/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_t8QYAbSFSQ5VT

u/alittlebitmental · 1 pointr/islam

Do you mean Purification of the Heart in general, or are you referring to this book?

https://smile.amazon.co.uk/Purification-Heart-Symptoms-Spiritual-Diseases/dp/1929694156/

If you are speaking in general, do you have any good resources?

u/jasper_friendly_bear · 1 pointr/islam

It's still very much in print. It's available on Amazon in hardcover and as an ebook, as a PDF online (IDK if this is legit - I would buy the proper ebook). And if you live in the US of A, you can get a nice physical copy for about $10 from CAIR (edit: I think this is only if you're not Muslim).

https://www.amazon.com/Message-Quran-Muhammad-Asad-ebook/dp/B0037KMWG0

u/wile_e_chicken · 1 pointr/conspiracy

I'm not sure if this is heresy or something, but I found a Kindle edition. :D

https://www.amazon.com/Message-Quran-Muhammad-Asad-ebook/dp/B0037KMWG0

Thanks for the guidance!

edit:

Tons more formats, free download:

https://archive.org/details/TheMessageOfTheQuran_20140419/page/n1

u/HoioH · 1 pointr/worldnews

I recommend you read this book.

Edit: Or at least watch this video.

What I talk about comes here.

u/VaticanCattleRustler · 1 pointr/NeutralPolitics

I'd recommend reading Islam and the Future of Tolerance by Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz.

Sam Harris is a well known Atheist who had been extremely critical of Islam (Here's a clip of him on Bill Maher going up against Ben Affleck )

Maajid Nawaz is a former Islamist radical who has recanted and become a leading voice to reform Islam and incorporate modern secular morality.

All in all its a very informative read. They disagree on many things, but they have a constrictive dialogue about the issues that are being faced and the best way to move forward.

u/Santero · 1 pointr/Foodforthought

If you're interested in the topic, this was a very informative short book that I learned a decent amount from about radicalism and the motivations and goals of Jihadists and Islamists.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Islam-Future-Tolerance-A-Dialogue/dp/0674088700

u/S-uperstitions · 1 pointr/atheism

> He supports isolationism. Therefore, the implication is that religion can't be fixed - once a religious culture, always a religious culture. Again, hypocrisy. Supposedly an equal opportunity anti-theist on one hand, while implying religion is simply inescapable.

I never got that from his writings, but I did get that from his detractors. He is also doing the best that he can to reform islam, yet I hear that he is a closed minded bigot all of the time. I can only assume our sources are very different.

u/Kastan_Styrax · 1 pointr/KotakuInAction

>This is quite the heated conversation we're not having.

You understood exactly what I was saying. If any criticism of Islam is met with a "Islam's a good boy!" then its no conversation that matters.

>No your right. His official position is "Motherload of bad ideas."

Here's his position on Christianity.

Here's an excerpt from that video:

>Ok, just think about that. In vast numbers of societies, people would bury children in postholes, - people like ourselves - thinking that this would prevent an invisible being from knocking down their buildings. These are the sorts of people who wrote the Bible. If there is a less moral framework... I haven't heard of it.

He's against any religion, he's an atheist. But you criticize him only for his attack on Islam? I wonder why?

His point is that all religions suck, some more than others since their effects (or acts committed while using said religion for justification, as you like to put it) are greater than others. Islam merits his more recent focus due to said effects, though he has extensively criticized Christianity as well (more so than Islam, yet curiously didn't get called so many names).

He also supports Islamic reform, and has written a book, with Maajid Nawaz. And you've yet to tell me how exactly is Ben Affleck right, for calling him a racist and bigot. That was all Ben did, and you said he was right, criticizing only his behavior. So?

>>But if he called himself Islamic John, frequently recited Islamic scriptures, killed people according to said scriptures, etc... I would be inclined to believe that Islam had something to do with it.
>
>And I'm being xenophobic?

Why are you implying criticism of a religion is xenophobia? Because that's all I did on the sentence you were replying to. What country did I mention, for you to imply I'm being xenophobic? Is Islam a country now, as well as a race?

See, you are quick to assume anything is racism or xenophobia. How about we drop terms whose meanings you're obviously misusing, and stick to the arguments at hand?

>You means like these guys?

Yeah, the OIC. These guys right?

>or these guys?

Al-Azhar? The ones who refuse to fully disavow or excommunicate IS?

>or these guys?

Oh yeah, the Arab League, with good ol' Saudi Arabia in it, and Kuwait, the UAE, also Yemen, and Lybia, and Oman as well, Jordan and the list goes on.

>or these guys?
>
>or these guys?
>
>or these guys?

In the UK and North America, secular, multi-cultural countries without a majority Islamic presence.

>or these guys?

The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia? That reminds me of the pot & kettle idiom, really.

>or these guys?
>
>or these guys?

Also UK and North America. Same as above. The video you linked, btw, had this Qur'an passage at the start, which was the only implication that what ISIS are doing might not be true to their faith (though it implies everyone must accept Allah, so it doesn't hold much water) - the rest of the video was them stroking the UK's ego, their message wasn't directed at extremists.

I never said there aren't Muslims calling out against ISIS, the point is they're either not enough in number, relevance or credibility. They hardly disprove IS religious claims at all, what they're saying amounts to well-intentioned platitudes, instead of completely discrediting IS based on Islamic interpretations.

>You missed the entire point of my example. What if John didn't believe Allah told him to? What if Allah is Johns scapegoat?

Have you got a mind reading device to be so certain of what goes on in John's mind? Because I can say I'm basing myself over everything John says and does. You seem certain he's lying, with nothing but your feelings to prove it.

u/vpropro · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

I agree that it may, at first glance, seem way over the top to ban such a large, generalized group of people. I sort of appreciate his vagueness, though, in that he says we have to "figure out what's going on".

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf

the study is super long, but if you just skim through the graphs on the side you can get a lot of the meaningful info. Living here in America, I personally don't (think I) know anybody who shares pretty much any of the beliefs polled in the study, but actually thinking about how potentially dangerous some of those beliefs can be to our society is hard to even think about.


http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1458096350&sr=8-1&keywords=sam+harris+islam+and+the+future+of+tolerance

I read this book recently, and it was really great. It addresses the issues with the religion (with some subsets of its followers, I should say) and is all around really informative. After reading it (and looking at the statistics), I can't think of a better way to put it than "we need to figure out what's going on".
I hope that helps

u/iam_w0man · 1 pointr/TrueAtheism

Your premise isn't far from the truth OP, I think fundamentalism can bring out the worst in religion and there are certain religions that glorify violence. The two together can be a dangerous mix.

However, I think many problems are due to the lack of objectivity within religion, as you alluded to with the gold coin. There are fundamentalist interpretations that do not involve violence, there are even lawful ways to work towards a caliphate. It definitely makes a difference what ideas are garnering the most support at the time. We only need to look a few decades back on Islamic history to see that what were seeing today is comparatively unrecognisable.

You might be interested to read http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-A-Dialogue/dp/0674088700 - interesting read about this very topic.

u/Wootery · 1 pointr/worldnews

> they're really just using religion as a justification

No, they're not. This is a common misconception. They're genuinely motivated by their insane religious beliefs.

To be sure, there may be regimes (present or historical) which cynically hijack religion to control people, but ISIS is genuinely theocratic.

I strongly recommend these two books:

  • Heretic

  • Islam and the Future of Tolerance. (One of the authors has made extended excepts available for free.)

    > In any case, it's just a matter of them wanting their own land.

    Not really, no. They don't just want to take over Iraq and be left alone. Global jihadism means exactly that: the ambition to globally impose Islamism through the use of violence.

    ISIS isn't like Israel. ISIS don't want to just live peaceably in their own corner of the world.
u/Grabthelifeyouwant · 1 pointr/todayilearned

>Thanks radical Islam.

The problem is how pervasive Islamism has become. Even in Great Britain, one of the most Westernized countries:

>The results from NOP Research ... are startling. ... Forty-five percent say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments. ... almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror. ... Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law. ... Twenty-eight percent hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. ... Seventy-eight percent support punishment for the people who earlier this year published cartoons featuring the Prophet Mohammed. Sixty-eight percent support the arrest and prosecution of those British people who "insult Islam." SOURCE (Emphasis mine)

The United States has perhaps the lowest such rates among nationalized Muslims. The worry I have is that if we start letting in refugees en masse, they will most likely be further right than those in GB.

Modern Muslims are not the same as historical Muslims (aka the ones discussed by Jefferson).

Ninja Edit: If anyone wants a good look at the problems facing Islam and how they might get fixed, I recommend Islam and the Future of Tolerance.

u/LiftinGinger · 1 pointr/worldnews

Everyone here should read this book and get some perspective.

u/Phone1111 · 1 pointr/SandersForPresident

I'm not a scholar of Islam (but have read much on the topic) and it is certainly an ideological battle to a large degree. Similar to the moderate Christians pushing back against the extreme conservatism of evangelicals. Change has to come from within. http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-A-Dialogue/dp/0674088700

u/magic_beans · 1 pointr/news

If you have the time and inclination, please read or listen to Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue by Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz | October 2015 for some counterarguments to what you are saying from a former extremist.

For instance:
> I don't see any evidence of Muslims trying to change laws in western countries to make the nations legal code closer to Sharia law. Maybe some believe this and advocate it, but they're certainly a minority and I haven't seen any succesful attempt by people holding these views.

Polls of British Muslims immediately after 7/7 train bombings:

  • 70% felt that British citizens who insult Islam should be arrested and prosecuted
  • 78% felt that anyone who published the Danish cartoon should be punished (a significant number wanted them killed)

    > Suicide bombers and terrorist attackers are mentally ill

    This is one of the biggest misconceptions out there.

    Please note that I'm not trying to enter into an internet debate with you, merely providing you with a different point of view.
u/ChadwickHenryWard · 1 pointr/atheism

>contradicting stories throughout its sects, its theology is severely flawed, and not to mention, the bible sounds like a 9 year old wrote it.

You might want to read this.

u/BibleTwist · 1 pointr/atheism

Reading "Why I Am Not A Muslim" (link below) is the most informative book I've read about Islam to date. However when I went through my Qu'ran to highlight and bookmark passages I realized the author didn't have a proofreader before publication. I managed to find EVERY referenced passage usually a verse or two after his citation indicated. In a couple instances he even wrote them dyslexically and I found them by reversing the chapter and verse. If you can forgive that it's all you need to really know about Islam.
http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/1591020115

To really answer your question though, ISIS and their ilk DO NOT cherry pick their Holy Book. They use the "abrogation of verses" rule (which is the proper way to understand the Qu'ran) and only take Allah's last word on the topic. If you only focus on those sections then the Qu'ran becomes a very short read with very specific instructions, leading to the creation of nations like Saudi Arabia and groups like ISIS. Be glad that so far most Muslims actually DO have a heart and DO cherry pick from the Qu'ran. They're the reasonable ones, the peaceful ones, the sane ones... and they are the last hope for a bright future for Islam.

u/nasish · 1 pointr/IAmA
u/tenekeadam · 1 pointr/islam

If he wants to learn about Islam:
What Everyone needs to Know about Islam - John Esposito

If he wants to learn more about Muslims:
Who Speaks For Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think

u/Shinops · 1 pointr/worldnews

The US military kills innocent civilians all the time. We like to pretend 'smart' bombs never hit the wrong target but that's just children's fiction. Both sides kill innocents, we just do it with predator drones and bombers, and call it a necessary cost for our military actions. They do it with whatever means they have, which is whatever explosives they can acquire.

Christians, during recorded history, have engaged in suicide bombings. In fact, the first recorded suicide bombing happened during the crusades while fighting Muslims. Source I hate to use this line of reasoning, but for all either of us know, it was Christians who started this trend. If you spend some time searching the web this is not the only time Christians have engaged in suicide bombings. Not to mention, there is virtually no difference between suicide bombings and the Oklahoma City bombings, just as one example. The end result is casualties and history has shown that Christians are also capable of these acts.

I'd still like a source for your belief that Muslims have a higher percent of radicalism. As a contrary source, I strongly recommend that you read "Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think"
Book Of course you'll find people deriding the book, but please give it a look, I think you will be genuinely surprised at some of the statistics.

I used to think much like you before I heavily studied the issue and read books like this one. In fact, I very much see where you're coming from. The Muslim world is indeed rife with theocratic, totalitarian regimes, just like Europe once was. Islam is a newer religion than Christianity, they live in a worse part of the world generally, and in turn they have not progressed as fast as us. If anything we should sympathize with the average Muslim citizen who lives in said theocracy, and has been lied to since they learned to speak.

When Muhammad came along he was seen as a dangerous progressive, because it was the first time in the Arab world that women were given any rights at all. Today those beliefs have not kept up with Western progress, but for instance, women only gained the right to vote in the US in the 1920's, in other words we have women who were born without the right to vote. They will progress, but it's easy to cherry pick their worst acts and ignore our own.

The discrepancy is not as great as you believe, and the truth is still that Western and White civilization have committed their fair share of atrocities. Personally I'd argue that the Holocaust, Russian genocide, etc. are substantially worse than the suicide bombings you are so fixated on.

u/vicelio · 1 pointr/islam

> 'A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper..." (Bukhari 9, 88, 219).
>

Actually, if you read http://www.amazon.ca/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/178074420X

the author explains that hadith to have something to with the situation at the time when it was said so it's not a universal rule.

u/InMemoryOf · 1 pointr/islam

I appreciate your intellectual honesty and I didn't find any of your question insulting.

As for books/lectures, here's a few links to start things off, some of them might be what you're looking for.

Yasir Qadhi has a YTube channel and gave tons of interesting lectures (check this one in which we talks about the theological legitimacy of groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS)

Tariq Ramadan's work which is focused on Islam and modernity.

And although I haven't read it yet, I only heard good things about Jonathan Brown's "Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy".

u/Pardonme23 · 0 pointsr/news

Just so you know, someone else said this thread is full of people calling muslims [insert pejorative] and my immediate response was to denigrate the redditors calling muslims horrible names because Islamophobia has no place in my worldview. Its there for you to see, I can link it to you if you like. But as for your comment:

You're full of shit. The purpose of your words are to make you feel bad by avoiding actually critcizing Islam, not to describe reality. "No one had a problem with Muslims a few decades ago". Wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre. Go learn your history. Grow a pair and talk about reality as it happens, not with your quivering fence-sitting bs. Let's say you had a relative who was blown up from an Islamic suicide bombers. I guarantee you all your fucking bs "Are there bad muslims? Yes? Are there bad Jews? Yes" third-grade reading level moral relativism would immediately go out the window. GROW A PAIR. Learn your history, both past and current. Stop forming your argument on what makes you avoid feeling bad the most. I have plenty of Muslim friends. I have no qualms with them. Don't pretend to know me. Go read this book. Seriously. https://www.amazon.com/Islam-Future-Tolerance-Sam-Harris/dp/0674088700

u/marbleslab · 0 pointsr/unitedkingdom

> Using the term conservative and applying it to something that is worldwide can never be correct.

Actually, Majid Nawaz makes a very good definition of what is defined as a conservative Muslim worldwide. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to write the chapter of the book here, but there is a definite definition of what is to be considered a conservative Muslim. Just as the difference between Islamist and Jihadi. One wishes to spread Islam and convert the non-believers, the other wishes to do so using violence.

u/ThinkofitthisWay · 0 pointsr/islam

Salam bro, i hope you're being sincere in your path, but i urge to look at things objectively.

Also, maybe ask specific questions, because you're asking us a research paper.

As for the stupidity of people, i think you're being a pessimist, just like in the story of creation of men, God has appointed mankind as khalifas on the earth but the angels ask God:

> And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know."

Then God said:

> He said, "O Adam, inform them of their names." And when he had informed them of their names, He said, "Did I not tell you that I know the unseen [aspects] of the heavens and the earth? And I know what you reveal and what you have concealed."

They acknowledged the bad side of humanity, but they didn't acknowledged the good, intellectual side of it. You're doing the same.

I'd recommend wathcing this the purpose of life by Jeffrey Lang.

And check out his books:

Losing my religion: A call for help: http://www.amazon.com/Losing-My-Religion-Call-Help/dp/1590080270

Even the angels ask: http://www.amazon.com/Even-Angels-Ask-Journey-America/dp/0915957671

Struggling to surrender: http://www.amazon.com/Struggling-Surrender-Impressions-American-Convert/dp/0915957264/ref=sr_1_16?s=english-books&ie=UTF8&qid=1333097284&sr=1-16

u/Al-Suri · 0 pointsr/worldnews

>to reduce...

Unemployment is a significant indicator of the health of an economy, and it represents the number one concern among folks such as yourself regarding refugees. And Germany's economy is currently the fastest growing of the G7, with a GDP growth rate of 1.9%, its fastest rate in 5 years.

Sweden is also "growing strongly", according to an OECD report from last month.

>wage devaluation

I should have anticipated that you'd bring that up. The Economist (open in incognito, there's a soft paywall) gives a nuanced view on this issue and on the larger scale economic impact of refugees, but lays down the view that the fear over wages is largely baseless, as the effect is small and can even have positive side effects as it pushes natives into less manually intensive and even higher paying jobs.

In fact, the article also tackles an issue you bring up multiple times in your reply-- their drain on public finances. The article again provides a nuanced view:

>The influx will not be bank-breaking, however. In the very short run, the IMF estimates that refugees will add around 0.19% of GDP to public expenditure in the European Union (0.35% in Germany) in 2016. This will add to public debt, and given higher joblessness among refugees, unemployment will rise. But looking only at their fiscal impact is too narrow a focus. Later on, as the new arrivals integrate into the workforce, they are expected to boost annual output by 0.1% for the EU as a whole, and 0.3% in Germany. They should also help (a little bit) to reverse the upward creep of the cost of state pensions as a share of GDP, given their relative youth.

This is basically the gist of my message to you from before. I'm not claiming that refugees are going to be wowing Europe with an immediate and drastic improvement to the economy, just that it hasn't been stopping growth and that in the long run refugees may benefit their host countries.

>jews

The relationship between the Jews and Muslim society has historically generally been one of relative tolerance and intellectual and cultural exchange. In the 15th century, with the persecution and expulsion of Spanish Jews, many took refuge in Muslim lands, Aleppian Sephardim in particular had a unique tradition of lighting a thirteenth candle for Hanukkah as a symbol of gratitude towards their new community. Animosity between Jews and Muslims is more a product of the 20th century, with the Zionist movement and the establishment of Israel.

>gays

I recommend you read scholar Jonathan Brown's article on Islamic views on homosexuality. He writes that while mainstream Islam does uncontroversially see the act of liwat (sodomy) as a sin that may be punished if a person is accused of it in a court of law and views marriage as being between men and women, there are a multiplicity of views within mainstream Islam and not all of them prescribe death as a punishment for the act of liwat. Additionally, he provides historical evidence that Islamic society historically has been relatively accepting of homosexuality as a human phenomenon and that there were only rare cases of liwat being punished at all, as Shariah generally turns a blind eye to things that happen privately that are not perceived as harming people or the social order.

Of course, while all that certainly acts as a strong counter to your view that "Islam" (as if it's all one entity) believes in "killing gays" (as if extrajudicial or vigilante killing isn't something that Shariah historically has been very strict against), it does not do much to assuage fears that Islam is inherently homophobic in that it does not treat the homosexual identity as being equal to the heterosexual identity. Unfortunately, you'd be right to say that mainstream Islam does not view homosexuality the way it does view heterosexuality.

Beyond the mainstream of Islam, there are scholars and groups that are trying to argue that there is room for full gay-acceptance in the religion.

The take home message here is that it is not accurate to say that "Islam", as a unified entity, either condones the killing of gays or even discourages full equality of gays and straights.


>Islam doesn't tolerate...

If a Muslim is in a foreign land, the traditional view of the Shariah is that he/she is to respect the laws of the land. Meaning, you seem to ascribe to Islam a kind of inherent intolerance and hostility towards those not of the religion, but this view is inaccurate.

If you are referring to the dhimmi system, that system prescribes permanent protection, and that feature of the dhimmi system is part of the reason why Jews fared better under Muslims than under Christians. It's not just protection "for a time". Even then, however, moderate Muslims reject the dhimmi system as being unfit for modern states.

(refer to section III., A. and note 36 of the linked pdf)

Additionally, the same kind of argument I laid out in the last paragraph on Islam and homosexuality can be used to counter almost any absolute claim you make on Islam. The take home message here is that there is no reason to hold any particular hatred for "Islam", because there is no one thing called Islam and there is a lot of room for negotiation and mutual tolerance. In a similar way Salafism came to be the fastest growing Islamic ideology in the 21st century (though, note that it is still a minority view among Sunnis), shifts and trends can happen the other way. Another core component of my arguments is to recognize the reasons why Islamist ideology has taken such a hold after a period of liberalization-- especially the role the West, ironically, had in this change.

>They core belief system says to kill, enslave or convert everyone who isn't a Muslim, you are cherry picking instances where Islam wasn't as horrible as it could of been and equating that to all of Islam.

Where does it say that killing, enslaving, and converting non-Muslims is part of the core belief system? What I know is that the core of Islam is captured in the the Five Pillars and the Six Pillars of Iman. None of which even deal with non-believers.

And no, I'm not "cherry picking" here. Am I giving you specific examples, such as with Afghanistan? Yes, but if you did read the articles I link to, you would see that the examples are part of larger historical trends and realities.

>And if they had the means they would of enslaved or killed us all, what's your point, Islam has always been at odds with free countries I really don't care that we are at odds with them, they had just as much time to develop as the west did if not more, the middle east has been a shithole for a long time.

What is your evidence for this? I've given you my argument against this view and offered to send you a more in-depth scholarly article on the history of Islam and the West, and I don't see a lot of evidence that you've engaged with that argument all that much.

>what's your point

My point in here is to argue that there is no need for hostility towards the Middle East, Islam or Muslims, because even though current waves of extremist ideology seem to make reconciliation and coexistence impossible, there are grounds for mutual tolerance. The larger point in all of this is that your reasons for believing that this refugee's issues aren't "our problem" or for rejecting our moral responsibility towards refugees aren't sound.

>With or without the west the middle east would be a shithole today,

That is on about the same moral level as saying "That person would have been killed by person x anyway, so it's totally moral for me to have killed them". Regardless of whether or not you are right in your assessment, that does not translate to the moral permissibility of what the West did in the Middle East and does not absolve Western powers of the moral responsibility for the aftermath.

>personally I think

...

Dude, you can do better than to just sound off your own opinions. Did you do any research? If you don't like or care very much about the conversation we're having, we can just end it, I wouldn't see it as you being rude to me or something.

>Making it so your enemies wouldn't unite and attack you, oh the horror.

Part one of my whole argument last comment was to question your assumptions that the West and the Middle East even really have to be seen as enemies at all, and I don't see that you've engaged with that argument much.

Additionally, if this is what you consider the West's strategy to protect itself, then it's one big failure of a strategy. The turmoil in the Middle East caused in large part by Western intervention is not helping the West. Islamic terrorism is a household word now, that wasn't the case until after Western intervention in the Middle East. And this isn't even to get started on the refugee crisis in Europe.

u/leviathanawakes · 0 pointsr/exmuslim

So basically, you accept Quran, but anything more than that such as certain hadith, have to be taken with a pinch of salt and seen if it is really authentic. The way I go about it is,

  1. If a hadith talks about the world and clearly contradicts empirical evidence, such as ones against evolution, I don't accept it.
  2. If a hadith talks about actions etc , I'll look at if it has multiple reliable chains of transmission. (Mutawattir). If it doesn't, then you cant really enforce it.

    Most of the controversial issues regarding Islam stems from hadiths that are single-chain narration. That means only ONE person reported hearing it from the prophet pbuh, and ONE student from him, and so on. Sahih Muslim and Bukhari unfortunately do accept a lot of single-chain narrations.

    ​

    I personally am wary of accepting a single-chain narration.

    ​

    There's this good book that talks about all of these issues with hadiths etc by Jonathan Brown. Misquoting Muhammed
u/Aeromatic_YT · 0 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Here’s a translation; The Qur'an (Oxford World's Classics) https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0199535957/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_rIIkDb464N498

u/SAMIFUEL · 0 pointsr/DebateReligion

before assuming anything about the Qur'an I suggest you actually read it

u/unbanmi5anthr0pe · 0 pointsr/AntiPOZi
u/TheDynamicHamza21 · 0 pointsr/islam

>Also what is this I found called, "The True Religion of God?" by Dr. AB Phillips?

Dr. Bilal Philips has some Salafi leanings but overall most of his works is a good reference point. I wouldn't take every he writes as truth.


Also Islam House is a Salafi site. Salafi are a tiny minority of Muslims in the world yet they flood the internet with their propaganda. Only recently, within last five or years or so ,has traditional scholars has begun to refute their propaganda. My advice is stay away from any person who has ties to Saudi Arabia (Umm al Qurra University,Madeenah University,Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University) until you are grounded within traditional understanding of Islam.

Moreover watch out for anything from Dar Us Salam publishers, the largest English language publishers of Islamic Books, they have been known to rewrite traditional books from scholars to suit their Salafi ideology.

My advice to start with Treatise For The Seekers Of Guidance. Which gives an overview of traditional Islamic morals and behavior. As well as English language Qur'aan,which unfortunately all them have their bias and problems with them. The only three that I can recommend are M.A.S. Abdel Haleem translation , Muhammad Asad translation or Aisha Bewley's translation. Though all of them have their problems.


u/FacebookCEO · 0 pointsr/bestof

> I study Islam academically and I think I can answer this for you.


Lol appeal to authority and everyone is just sucking it up because it conforms to what they think. Meaning he can say things usually we would question but is now flying above our radar.

> My tutor actually has spoken on

How can you study academically (with any authority <-- the important part) and have a tutor?

> They fit within a framework that is Islamic (albeit a distinct brand of fundamental Islam) and their justifications are entirely theological.

This should have been a red flag on our radar except he appealed to authority so our radar is damaged a bit. If anyone is interested you can check out Islamic scholars refuting Isis theologically.

> Once you do that, (and it requires a basic understanding of fundamental Islam that I don't have time to write here), then it all makes sense.

Is not the first nor the last instance he has not had time to make sense.

> If I believed that the world was going to end and I had to obey the law of the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful deity in order to reach eternal paradise, I'd do whatever the hell was needed to get on his good side. If that means killing people, why wouldn't I? This world is just a temporary, physical one. It's worth it for infinity in paradise. And they are non-believers anyway, they know nothing.

No one is misunderstanding the concept of paradise.

> If that means killing people, why wouldn't I?

This is where another flag should have gone off. This is simply playing into the biases redditors have and /u/hdah24 knows this very well.

> Western Islam has to reinterpret and abstract the scripture so much in order to remodel the religion as acceptable to post-Enlightenment ideals, that it no longer makes sense to a lot of Muslims.

Appealing to authority with no evidence. So we can simply say the religion has not been remodeled and still makes sense to a lot of Muslims.

> So many of them would read the Qur'an and the Hadith collections and realise how far removed they were from the fundamentals of the religion.

Again appealing to authority. The Quran and Hadith are the fundamentals of religion. How can they be far removed from it? How does that make any sense.


Also, I find it interesting where we say we want a discussion but downvote anyone who disagrees with us


u/JeremyJWinter · -2 pointsr/stocks
u/ThatPhoneGuy · -2 pointsr/news

I don't see any proof, considering the majority of these fighters are lacking basic concepts of faith.

Now the question becomes, if you violate several sacred laws of Islam, yet still adhere to the five pillars (ironic, as killing and bettering your community don't go hand in hand) does that still make you a Muslim?

Am I God to answer that question? No. I'm simply pointing out the factual inaccuracies that some "credited" people on here love to copy/paste.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1908224126?pc_redir=T1

u/Zendani · -2 pointsr/islam

>Could you kindly point me to any content which I have copied and pasted from anti-Islamic websites please.

Here
and here

If you did the research yourself, then you didn't do a very good job of it and it would be quite obvious that you were looking for something to hate about Islam. Probably because you think all religions are the same, and Islam MUST be exactly like Christianity. Your lack of knowledge in Islam shows that. All of those "arguments" you posted are EASILY findable in Google, probably within the first page of results. It's the same arguments over and over again and it's become cliche to the internet Muslims. We just roll our eyes, like how you roll your eyes when a Christian comes to you preaching about Jesus. These so called "issues" have been refuted over and over again, and many of them can simply be refuted with just a basic understanding in Islam.

>If your holy book makes you look silly, why not pick a new one?

Looks silly to who? Someone who isn't Muslim? Why should I listen to them for?

>Please point me to better translations so I can learn.

Here is a good translation, with some commentary. If you want to go all out on commentary then get this. And this is the abridged version. It's translated from 11th century Arabic, but at least its 400 years newer than the Qur'an. You might be able to borrow a volume or two from your local mosque. However, do not make the claim that just because you read a couple of books on Islam, you are some sort of scholar. If I read "A Brief History of Time", it does not make me an astrophysicist.

>If pointing out what it says in your holy book is so irritating to you, what does that tell you about your holy book?

It tells me that the Qur'an was correct about non-Muslims after all. But since you read the entire Qur'an, you already know what I mean.

>further comment on your remark on the fairness of the Qu'ran's translations and scientific accuracy: why is it that the salt and fresh water thing and creationism are still taught in modern Islamic schools even in Europe?

I can't access youtube since I'm at work. Creationism in Islam is different than creationism in Christianity. Read this if you're interested.

As for the fresh water/salt water thing, this thread does a pretty good job explaining it.

Open mind, remember.