(Part 2) 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 products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.
I may not agree with Iran on much, but on this issue they are correct. For the extremists to succeed they need three things in addition to their extremist ideology, they need 1) Money, 2) Weapons and 3) Recruits, and the West has given them all three in spades.
There is a book I am constantly encouraging people to read, it is from one of my former Islam professors, Khaled Abou Fadl. It is called The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists. It outlines basically how we ended up at this point. Here are a few thoughts, and some passages from the book:
The current problems we face can be traced back to 'Abd al-Wahhab, the 18th century religious leader in Saudi Arabia who is the namesake used by the conservative religious movement popular in Saudi, the Wahabbis. He was particularly intolerant of anyone he considered un-Islamic:
> ‘Abd al-Wahhab and his followers often engaged in rhetorical tirades against prominent medieval and contemporaneous jurists, whom they considered heretical, and even ordered the execution or assassination of a large number of jurists with whom they disagreed. In his writings, ‘Abd al-Wahhab frequently referred to jurists as “devils” or “the spawn of Satan” (shayatin or a‘wan al-shayatin), and therefore removed any psychological barrier to violating the memories or lives of distinguished scholars.
What is interesting, is that when we go back and look at the historical record, al-Wahhab's brand of religious brutality was shocking to the Muslim world at the time when he first started implementing it:
> One of the acts that ‘Abd al-Wahhab committed in Arabia, which generated a great amount of turmoil and opposition, was the stoning to death of a woman accused of adultery. Historical sources state that no one had been stoned to death in Arabia in a very long time, and that many jurists were horrified by what they considered to be the inhumane execution of this woman. This historical report is intriguing, because today stoning people to death is carried out all the time in Saudi Arabia without raising as much as an eyebrow.
Many of us take for granted the brutality meted out in the name of Islam by Saudis, but historical record shows that things were not always like this.
Britain decided to support the Saud family as the ruling family on the Arabian peninsula, and once control of Mecca and Medina fell into the hands of these fanatics (around 1925), it gave them a platform to spread their message throughout the Muslim world, since these places are where all Muslims, from all backgrounds, go on pilgrimage. With Britain signing the Treaty of Darin and the Treaty of Jeddah, Britain essentially gave the Hijaz area to the Saud family, and thus the Wahhabis, giving the puritans control of the most important area for all of Islam. We need to acknowledge this folly, and that a major European power was instrumental in giving the puritans such an important prize.
The main issue is that Wahhabism is extremely intolerant of any view outside of its own. It is particularly critical of any view of Islam that is not consistent with the "spiritual austerity" that it preaches:
> The main theme of ‘Abd al-Wahhab was that Muslims had gone wrong by straying from the straight path of Islam, and only by returning to the one true religion could they regain God’s pleasure and acceptance. With a puritanical zeal, ‘Abd al-Wahhab sought to rid Islam of all the corruptions that he believed had crept into the religion; for ‘Abd al-Wahhab these included mysticism, the doctrine of intercession, rationalism, and Shi’ism as well as many practices that he considered heretical innovations.
So in practice what this meant was that anything considered un-Islamic by the Wahhabi standard was considered heretical. The tragedy of this is that it encouraged people to ignore 1200 years of amazing Islamic law and scholarship. Prior to the Wahabbi takeover, there was a richness and diversity in Islamic law that was a strength, but now that diversity is often demonized as un-Islamic. But that diversity is important if we are going to take Islam back from the extremists:
> The Shari’a was richly diverse. Indeed, it is difficult to convey to modern readers the degree of richness and diversity that the Shari’a enjoyed. The only legal tradition that I am aware of that comes close to the richness of the Shari’a tradition is the Jewish Rabbinic tradition, with its multi-interpretive methods and various competing interpretations. As in the Rabbinic tradition, the students of Islamic law considered a wide range of alternative interpretations and opinions on any particular point of law, and the various sages of Islamic law worked hard to earn the respect and loyal following of a number of students, who in turn worked to spread and develop their master’s intellectual heritage. The Rabbinic tradition, with all its various sages, methodologies, and legal determinations, collectively represented Jewish law. Likewise, the Shari’a contained a wide range of ethical and moral principles, legal methodologies, and many conflicting and competing judgments. This rich and diverse matrix of opinions and judgments was collectively considered to be God’s law. In fact, to help visualize the phenomenon that I am describing, perhaps I should mention my own personal library on Islamic law. It contains about fifty thousand titles, the vast majority of which were written before the sixteenth century and as early as the ninth century. The books in this library represent a variety of approaches, schools of thought, and opinions written over the course of several centuries.
Two major events occurred in the 20th Century that caused the Wahhabi view to gain ascendancy in the Islamic world. The first was when the British decided to switch from coal to oil in their navy. The second was the 1973 oil embargo. Because the Saudis had some of the largest oil fields in the world, the money poured into the hands of the puritanical-supporting regime. Now, with this massive amount of money, the Wahabbis were able to export their brand of Islam easily. They funded only those places of learning that would support their narrow worldview, and deliberately censored anyone against it.
But the Brits weren't the only ones contributing to the problem. Many western governments were making things much worse in their own ways. In addition to the entire world basically pouring money into Saudi Arabia through their dependence on oil, many governments supported despotic regimes that often engaged in torture. This practice of torture creates the very people we are trying to rid the world of:
> it is important to take particular note of the consequences of torture, which is a regular staple of despotic governments. State prisons where torture is regularly practiced have given birth to some of the most puritanical and extremist orientations in the Islamic world. Importantly, the very practice of torture generates narratives of torture, tales of horror that are transmitted through society and that become part of the cultural fabric, and that play a significant role in deepening the sense of stress, fear, and lack of self-worth.
This is step one in giving the extremists recruits. A person tortured for their beliefs will be very open to anyone who gives them the opportunity to attack their oppressors, and at that point terrorist activities seem much more acceptable because they are against what they view as a great evil. It is probably not a coincidence that the most notorious and dangerous extremist in the world right now, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, spent time in Abu Ghraib prison during a time when we know torture was occurring.
Now torturing people is not enough, extremists need more recruits than that. This is where civilian war casualties come into play. Recently we learned about an instance where an airstrike in Syria killed 100 civilians including many children. So now you have the family and friends of these innocent victims out there, trying to make sense of the slaughter. How many of those people will be sympathetic to the message of an extremist who whispers in their ear: "Are you upset with those people who killed your family? How about you join us in fighting them?" There will be people sympathetic to that message.
And finally weapons. It was announced that billions of weapons are being sold to Saudi Arabia. A country whose clergy praise the very conflicts that are destroying the Middle East.
So there you have it, this combination, this global endeavor, is making the problem of extremism worse. It's not just a Muslim problem, it's a world problem.
let's remember folks, Islamic anti-Semitism existed long before Israel and was this wasn't unnoticed by certain people.
I share your frustration and dismay. I'm not a Muslim either, but I often find myself having detailed conversations on Islamic theology and put in the position of a defender of the religion by virtue of having to correct so many wildly inaccurate assumptions and "proofs". The creators of hate sites like atlasshrugs, religionofpeace.com (to which a commenter below referred) unfortunately dominate the public conversation in the US on Islamic belief. Even people who simply seek to satisfy a natural inquisitiveness about a major world religion end up being directed to Islamophobic sources, and are subsequently disinformed (as opposed to misinformed, because much of this is deliberate misinformation). None of this is by accident: there is a lively and lucrative "Islamophobia Industry" in the US and Western Europe, and it abuses the masses' ignorance of Islam, of the standards of academic rigor, and even of proper argumentation form to sow suspicion, distrust, and even hatred among Western non-Muslims with regards to their Muslim fellow human beings.
Nathan Lean wrote a truly excellent and illuminating exposé on this cottage industry of anti-Muslim bigots selling hate for profit, called The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Hatred of Muslims. I highly recommend it to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, so as to better understand this enemy we share as a society valuing tolerance and acceptance.
Islamic anti-Semitism has a long history even before the modern era.
>I cannot trust that someone is the one true prophet of God solely because they said they were. I cannot just trust every book that says that it was divinely inspired by God. I perceive things critically, I cannot accept something just because someone told me to.
The Prophet ﷺ said he was the last prophet of God. He also backed up what he claimed. See: The Prophetic Truth: Proving Muhammad ﷺ's Prophethood.
What do you mean by "critically"? Naturalism?
>I also have no reason to believe in an afterlife. I care about my effect on this world and the people within it, not about some abstract afterlife. I wish to be good not to be rewarded with eternal bliss, but to help people live a better life, and to help them find God in their life.
What do you mean by "reason" exactly? Scientific evidence? Do you believe scientific evidence is needed in order to believe in a proposal? Without God, we are purposeless meaningless matter. It seems that you do believe in God, which is great, but why do you care about your effect on others and how do you know what good entails in the first place without Divine Revelation? One cannot simply rely upon society because that would be an appeal to popularity.
>Can I still convert?
No, you don't believe in what the Shahada entails and so it will be a hollow statement.
>I find the religion beautiful, I have absolute faith in God and I wish to embody the values that Islam encompasses.
Thats great.
> I won't believe in things that I cannot prove, though.
See above.
Consider listening to:
MGP#23: Thinking of Converting to Islam?
and reading:
The Divine Reality : God, Islam and the Mirage of Atheism
Islam and the Destiny of Man
:)
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
Islam: A Short History - Karen Armstrong
Islam: The Straight Path - John Esposito
The Autobiography of Malcolm X - Alex Haley
More advanced (should have some understanding of Islam before reading):
The Great Theft - Khaled Abou El Fadl
The Story of the Qur'an - Ingrid Mattson
http://www.amazon.com/Meaning-Holy-Quran-English-Arabic/dp/1590080165/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
There seems to be a lot of paper written and a whole lot of time wasted on something that "doesn't exist."
Surely another liberal hoax -- concocted with help from the Chinese.
Er zijn versies van de Koran in modern Engels met commentaar en achtergrond die wel interessant zijn. Ik heb zelf deze: https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Annotated-Interpretation-Modern-English/dp/1597841447
Dat zou ik aanraden ipv gewoon een vertaling te kopen
ROFL
Now go watch the debate Bill Maher had with Ben Affleck (if you haven't already) to see how right Maher was and how dangerously retarded Islamophilic liberals like Affleck are...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60
And if you haven't watched a lecture by the much-maligned Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch fame, you definitely should set aside the time to watch one of his lectures on YouTube. He's been the leading anti-Islam voice on the Right in America for about a decade. His books are a great read as well if anyone is curious about understanding the right-wing "Islamophobic" point of view.
Are you talking about this translation? If so, the translator is an Ahmadiyya and some of the views contained in the introduction and commentary are contrary to the beliefs of most Muslims.
There are people who prescribe the death penalty for apostasy in Islam, but I think a few things need to be taken into consideration here. I suggest anyone who is interested in learning about the issues of law and Islam pick up the book "The Great Theft, Wrestling Islam from the Hands of Extremists." It is written by a professor of law at UCLA, and it outlines how we arrived at the current situation today.
First and foremost, it is very important to take into consideration historical context. A long time ago the lines between apostasy and treason were blurry to say the least. It is important to note that often when a male was Muslim they were also expected to serve in the military on some level, and if they left the fold of Islam it was seen as joining the other side so to speak, and in some ways viewed as desertion.
This was especially true in the very early history of Islam when Jewish tribes we signing peace treaties then later breaking them with the Muslims. If someone were to leave and return to their Jewish tribe, it was seen as not just a matter of faith, but as a possibly treasonous/desertion act. There was great risk that these people could also go back to the other side and reveal military secrets, so it was seen as a possible act of espionage as well. It should also be noted the even the UK/US practiced the death penalty for things like treason and desertion, the [US executed a man in 1945 for desertion] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_the_United_States_federal_government#Military_executions) or the Rosenbergs being executed for espionage in 1953.
Now, it should also be noted that there was not always consensus about the appropriate punishment for apostasy. The Qur'an does not clearly state that death is the punishment for apostasy, in fact in pure faith terms the Qur'an often argues that we need to let people decide for themselves what their faith is, the Qur'an says, 'Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion,' [Qur'an, 109:6], and, "Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve,' [Qur'an, 18:29], and, 'There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is distinct from error' [Qur'an, 2:256]."
The justification for death for apostasy is based on a series of hadith, and I would argue that if you look at the historical context of the hadith it was much more a case of a blurred line between apostasy/desertion than clear cases of people simply changing their belief. There was not
widespreaduniversal consensus that death penalty was the only punishment for treason, in fact the very well respected 14th century Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyyah argued against the death penalty of apostasy. However, it was still a useful tool for state leaders to fight political opponents, so I think it is fair to say that the punishment of death remained alive and well under various rulers, and is still around today. But there are many Islamic leaders today who argue against the death penalty for apostasy in Islam.Questions like these are always interesting. When the followers of a religion, or any particular belief system do something does it reflect on the religion as a whole? For example an number of US military had Bible quotes on their rifle scopes which begs the question: Who would Jesus snipe? Obviously we would say no one, but how many people have died at the hands of people who proclaim themselves Christians over the years? How many have died at the hands of people who claim to be atheists? Jews? Buddhists? Name your belief system and we can find examples of people killing for it, I think it reflects more on the individuals perpetuating the acts, rather than inherent issues with the belief systems themselves.
I recommend these books:
and Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time
Side note on Quran translation:
Stay away from
Try:
Misc:
Movie:
> That's how Christianity was not too long ago
this is fundamentally wrong. the three canonical gospels fundamentally contradict each others' narratives at multiple points meaning that anyone who has read the whole thing knows for a fact that they have just read an impression of the truth - not the actual truth (nobody actually knows what the living christ said because nobody wrote it down for over 100 year after his death).
in contrast muslims believe that the koran is the literally perfect literal and complete word of god, sealed and unchangeable for all time.
I understand that you wish to be fair and do good but please educate yourself before making factually incorrect equivalencies in the future.
Which book is best for getting your friend to be open and honest with himself very much depends on his character, personality, preferences. Does he get easily offended when people contradict him, or does he carefully consider all arguments that imply he may be mistaken?
Either way, I don't think The God Delusion is the best book to give to him, since it primarily talks about Christianity. Many things are true for all religions, but I think a book dealing with Islam specifically would be better.
One option: Hamed Abdel-Samad – Islamic Fascism. He grew up in Egypt as the son (and grandson and great-grandson) of an imam and started learning the Koran by heart when he was three years old. He is now a humanist (and an atheist) and lives in Germany. I have met him in person, he is a great guy and a good writer.
Unfortunately, this was the only one of his books I could find that was translated into English. His book “Mein Abschied vom Himmel” (“My Farewell From Heaven”), in which he tells his own personal story that led him to becoming an atheist, or “Mohamed – Eine Abrechnung” (“Mohamed – A Reckoning”) would probably be better for your friend, because he could better relate to them, but to my knowledge they haven' been translated (yet?).
> We don't like it when anti semites take our religious texts out of context and meaning, so I'm not going to do it with Muslims.
Christians and Muslims had the same problem they needed the legacy of the Jews but not the Jews. The Pauline gospels were taken out of context by Christians to justify their hatred, and blood libel and Replacement theory were common Christian Ideas as were Passion Plays during Easter which sparked pogroms.
Islam also needed the legacy of the Abrahamic faith but not the Jews, both had the problem that the original Abrahamic faith didn't recognize their particular messiah/prophet which was (as they saw it) the inheritor of the faith line. So the existence of the Jews continued to deny the legitimacy of their claims. Islam generally regards the Jews as having "corrupted" the Torah to "hide" the fact that it talks about the coming of Muhammed. Since of course, it must have been foretold for it to be legitimate.
There is quite a bit of clear anti-Semitism outside the texts, which is very well documented:
When I get home to my bookshelf I can pull out dates, etc but here as some books on it:
The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History
Anti-Judaism
The largest issue with both traditions was claims of Jewish ancestry and "Judaising" being used to discredit early followers, in Christianity the used these claims to fight over initial thoughts as they hashed out core tenants of Christianity.
In Islam when they went through their own splits after the death of Muhammed, which some blame on the Jews since Muhammed had taken, forcefully, a "Jewess" as a wife and she eventually poisoned him (according to tradition). They used evidence of Jewish bloodlines of "taints" on particular groups that needed to not be followed or justified their removal. There are also some Suras that speak directly about a convert to Islam from Judaism as trying to "pervert" Islam because of his Jewish roots.
edit:
To add some more the Yellow Star used by the Nazis was first introduced in Baghdad by an Islamic Caliph since Jews (and Christians) were considered Dhimmi (second class citizens).
Also review: Muhammad and the Jews According to Ibn Ishaq by Joseph Spoerl originally published in The Levantine Review 2(1) 84-103 The Journal of Near Eastern and Mediterranean Studies at Boston College
https://jewishaction.com/opinion/legal-ease-whats-the-truth-about-muslim-anti-semitism/
Relevant translation and footnotes from Emerick's The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an in Today's English.
The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims
http://www.amazon.com/The-Life-Muhammad-I-Ishaq/dp/0196360331
http://www.amazon.com/Twenty-Three-Years-Prophetic-Mohammad/dp/1568590296
or This http://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/1un7co/wazzyms_faq_debunking_islam/
I agree that many are loud in good times, if you do something good it shouldn't be for popularity but for genuine good. But I also don't see the point of having to be loud every time something bad happens. There usually are press releases by orgs such as CAIR, ICNA, ISNA. Or if you go to well known American scholars' Facebook pages such as Omar Suleiman, Yasir Qadhi, they generally have a status regarding attacks. But I don't believe I have to go out of my way to openly condemn it, though I do and if someone asked me I would answer. But my words won't stop people like ISIS from being the shit bags they are and honestly I stopped caring what others think or me or my religion because generally people already have their minds made up. But I'd like to believe that if I was in a situation where an attack was happening, that I'd risk or give my life if it saved someone else's.
Also thought I'd leave this here: https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Shaykh-Muhammad-Al-Yaqoubi/dp/1908224193
It's basically a 150 page fatwa regarding ISIS by one of the former top scholars of Syria but it's also written in-depth and made to easily understand
Dhanyavaad, Fukitol13 Jee !
It is impossible to understand Islam without learning about the Story of Mohammed:
(Hindus tell the Story of Lord Rama in Ramleela every year. Muslims do not do a Muhammad Leela because they want to hide the Story of Mohaamed (The Perfect Man of Islam)
http://perfectmantruth.com/ )
​
Please see:
The Story of Mohammed by Harry Richardson
http://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.com/
​
Religion of Peace ? Islam's War Against the World by Gregory Davis
https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Peace-Against-Gregory-published/dp/B00Y2SXI4G/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=religion+of+Peace+gregory+davis&qid=1563211263&s=books&sr=1-1
​
Invaluable aid in learning about the Quran:
An Abridged Koran by Bill Warner
https://www.amazon.com/Abridged-Koran-Islamic-Trilogy/dp/0978552849/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=abridged+koran&qid=1563211002&s=books&sr=1-1
​
***************************************************************
No one will be ale to mislead you about Islam one you know the above.
Western "liberals" committed racial and civilizational treason when they mass imported Muslims to our countries and then protected them from criticism and promoted their insanely depraved religion.
Don't try to deny it. Western "liberals" routinely denounce people - like Robert Spencer and other Islam critics - as ignorant, hateful, crazy and racist Islamophobes whenever they point out how innately screwed up the Islamic religion is. Own it. Stop denying that you're directly responsible for this hostile colonization of the "infidel" West. And stop trying to brainwash everyone into thinking that Muslims mass immigrating to our countries is somehow "culturally enriching" us...
Islam is a 5th column. It always has been and it always will be. It is not a tolerant and moderate religion of peace that's no worse than Christianity. You're completely delusional if you genuinely believe that. Islam is clearly in a league all of its own when it comes to general fanaticism, violence and oppression.
There's no legitimate excuse for continuing to support this Islamic colonization of the West when accurate information about what Islam really teaches and what most Muslims really believe is readily available on the webernetz.
If you are genuinely ignorant and brainwashed about what Islam really teaches, simply type "Robert Spencer" into YouTube and watch some of his lectures. Or visit his blog called "Jihad Watch". Or read some of his books.
Tipo le 10 persone che ogni anno chiedono che cosa significhi destra o sinistra su questo subreddit e 80 persone gli rispondono confondendo il piano della semantica odierna con quello storico e quello filosofico. Ammazza che grande capacità critica che si sviluppa senza nemmeno le basi teoriche.
PS: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Engineers-Jihad-Connection-Extremism-Education/dp/0691145172
From another comment I made:
Don't stop here! The more you know the better you are!
There are so many more amazing ones but these are the ones I recommend!
I also would recommend reading The truth about Muhammad by Robert Spencer, I'm about 70% through and it is EYE-OPENING, and also blood boiling, really that man is so disgusting you can never see Muslims the same way ever again. Pick it up if you can.
My favorite bilingual translation of the Koran is a translation by Ahmed Ali. You can find it here: https://www.amazon.com/Al-Quran-Contemporary-Translation-Ahmed-Ali/dp/0691074992/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509781589&sr=8-1&keywords=ahmed+ali+quran
I assume you want English language material.
The most popular translation I see these days is by Abdel Haleem and published by Oxford University Press: http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Oxford-Worlds-Classics/dp/0199535957
It has some minimal footnotes. It's quite good (I use it myself).
I'd recommend you to get this app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.quran.labs.androidquran
Then after installing you can go to settings -> translation and get Haleem's translation. However I think the footnotes might be missing.
Also take a look at this: http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Annotated-Interpretation-Modern-English/dp/1597841447
I have not read it in it's entirety (yet), but I have read portions and so far it has been quite good. It seem to have been well received and has been recommended to me by a few people I know.
A Simple Koran
It is rearranged so that the sura are in chronological order for reading straight through and has inserted narrative information to give context.
An Abriged Koran is another version which has less repetition, so it's even easier to read.
"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"
I'd suggest buying Jonathan Brown's book Misquoting Muhammad which provides a very good introduction to the science of hadith, the formulation of the hadith corpus, and the application of it.
Martin Lings' Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources is popular for good reason.
But the best history book I've seen is the work of Dr. Ali M. Sallabi.
It's two volumes and like 2000 pages but it's fascinating read.
I have it on PDF if you want it.
**
For understanding context, Dr. Jonathan Brown is an excellent resource. He's got several books, including his most recent Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy (he's already working on 2nd edition lol...)
I'm aware, the picture you posted doesn't mention semites though, just anti-semitism, which I've never once heard be used to refer to Islamophobia. Searching "Islamic Antisemitism" just returns results like this or this, even searching "anti-semitic islamophobia" returns this or this.
There's a book called "An Abridged Koran" that supposedly takes out the redundancies and cuts the length by about half. People don't seem to like the author Bill Warner, though and cry bias. I don't know anything about the guy. Might be an interesting read. I have not read it.
https://www.amazon.com/Abridged-Koran-Islamic-Trilogy/dp/0978552849
I have read Twenty Three Years which discusses some of Muhammad's opportunism. None of this changes my mind. I don't expect perfection from anyone (since I am not Muslim). I am satisfied with someone who generally had a large positive impact on the world.
For most people in our apathetic Brave New World it asks a lot just to get people to go out an vote. Let alone fight in any way shape or form the doing of fascist regimes around the world.
For those who do care to invest time and effort the simplest thing you can do is educate yourself to the level you are already in regards to the bible. Have a gander at the Koran and read http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/0879759844
you should do your own research. if you want an accessible koran i recomend this one.
also - when reading anything about islam you should always keep in mind the koranic principle of abrogation. simply put, when two or more passages in the koran appear to contradict, the latter has absolute priority and completely nullifies all earlier competitors.
this is highly relevant because all the violent stuff is at the end when mohamed gained political power. at the start, when he was powerless, he was quite peaceful. that all changed the moment he gained power. his first act after gaining power was to murder 800 people simply for the act of not believing him to be a prophet. he did this literally immediately ie it was premeditated, politically motivated mass murder.
I didn't even think about commentary. I feel like a simpleton now!
I honestly have no issues with purchasing a Quran if it comes with commentary.
Highest reviewed one I could find was:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/091332101X?pc_redir=1408373579&robot_redir=1
Jumu'ah Mubarak
Today's Ayat for Friday, 2016-11-11 / 11 Safar 1438
"Be modest in your bearing, and subdue your voice. For certain the most repugnant of voices is braying of donkeys."
-- Luqman 31:19 as rendered by Ali Ünal
وَاقْصِدْ فِي مَشْيِكَ وَاغْضُضْ مِن صَوْتِكَ إِنَّ أَنكَرَ الْأَصْوَاتِ لَصَوْتُ الْحَمِيرِ
Study: http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/31/19/
Go deeper: http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/31/19/w4wcv.html
(please share)
Like IslamAwakened on Facebook?
I bought this translated Quran a while ago and it has completely changed my life.
https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/1450549535/ref=mp_s_a_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1497772197&sr=8-1-fkmr1&pi=SL75_QL70&keywords=quran+yahya+emerick
It is written in easy to understand English, explains the context in which many verses were revealed, has relevant hadiths in the footnotes and connects things to the Torah and Bible in interesting ways that might surprise you. It is very easy to read and I sometimes lose myself in it for hours.
It's written by an American Muslim revert so he explains common misconceptions very well. Just think of all those times you saw an ignorant comment on YouTube or Reddit, knew that it was untrue but didn't know how to argue back. Well Sheikh Yahya Emerick has arguments written for you in the footnotes.
Whenever I feel like I am going astray, I read this Quran and get hyped up again.
I also recommend Sheikh Mufti Menk's nightly taraweeh lectures. They're 30 minutes a night and cover various topics in the Quran. This is another motivation booster for me.
Even though you feel that you are going astray, the fact that you feel guilty and are fighting to do something about it shows that you are in a good place.
Inshallah, Allah will make it easy for you to worship him.
I hope you don't mind answering several questions.
This is the copy I have: https://www.amazon.com/Al-Quran-Contemporary-Translation-Ahmed-Ali/dp/0691074992/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1468624920&sr=8-1&keywords=quran+contemporary+translation
and my copy of the hadith: https://www.amazon.com/Translation-Meanings-Summarized-Sahih-Al-Bukhari/dp/1567445195/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1468624954&sr=8-4&keywords=hadith
I admit I haven't read this, but it seems tailored to the situation. I don't think you'll get very far criticizing the Qua'ran with her, it's only one aspect of why she believes and she'll fall back on the others.
Oh, it's everywhere. You can get it as an ebook on Google Play Books and Amazon Kindle. There's lots of cheap copies on ebay and Amazon. There's even a free android app with different translations and recitations.
The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History
Good book on the topic by an actual refugee who tried to teach about real Islam and its roots, had to leave his country (Egypt) because of threats from clerics.
https://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Fascism-Hamed-Abdel-Samad/dp/1633881245
Then he had to leave Germany as well, he was accused of "sedition".
http://gatesofvienna.net/2014/07/hamed-abdel-samad-says-auf-wiedersehen-to-germany/
See, if you knew what you were talking about you'd know that hadith science is not just sanad, it's also matn. When a hadith contradicts either the Qur'an or other hadiths (as this one does), then it means there must be some context or specificity that is missing from the wording of the hadith, and figuring that out is what scholars do. Don't take my word for it. Feel free to read more on the topic.
Now I'm sure that doesn't sit well with you because, ironically, like ISIS, Islamophobes can only accept one understanding of Islam, one without nuance or context that validates their own anti-Islamic position.
The Qur'an (2:282) is referring specifically to witnessing monetary agreements in an environment where women did not engage much in business, and were more likely to make mistakes due to their unfamiliarity. Which you realize, if, you know, you read maybe a couple of the verses around that one.
There it is again. Why is it that extremists are always so anti-context. Mystifying I tell you /s.
Also, get a life and stop brigading r/islam.
Everyone should read Islamic Fascism by Hamed Abdel-Samad
http://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Fascism-Hamed-Abdel-Samad/dp/1633881245
Hi again, I know I'm probably beating a dead horse here but the author does do more than just post a video and add a transcript. He does, in fact, contribute the following opinions. The first is above the video and transcript:
> I confess that I appreciate when Islamists are honest about what they believe and why they believe it, especially when it comes to the murderous nature of what they have been taught about jihad and following in the footsteps of their founder, Muhammad. That’s why the following video interview with Mullah Krekar that aired on Norwegian television, is so eye-opening for those who want to continually bury their heads in the sand concerning Islam. Not only does Krekar say it’s ok to kill non-Muslims, but adds, “Muslims have the right to Kill anyone who does not respect Islam.”
This he writes below the video and the transcript:
> If you still believe Islam is a “religion of peace,” perhaps you are just being willingly ignorant and blind about the matter. Thankfully, at least the State Department took the steps to designate open Islamic jihadi cleric Anjum Choudary as a global terrorist. Now, let’s see if President Donald Trump will make good on the promise to advance the bill to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror group.
That sounds like an fresh opinion which has generated a lot of discussion to me. Again, I ask you to please reconsider reinstating it. Whatever you decide, cheers.
Fair point on radicalisation vs terrorism, although I can't tell if the numbers are that different.
Still, depending on how you count it terrorists are between 9 and 14 times more likely to have engineering degrees compared to general population.
Original research here (I haven't read it, so grain of salt)
Dishonest Muslims and their race traitor libtard allies in the West have managed to brainwash the global masses into believing the completely absurd idea that Islam is inherently peaceful and moderate and that it's been hijacked and twisted by tiny minority of extremists.
People need to check out the work of Robert Spencer. He's been exposing the true teachings of Islam - mostly to far-right audiences - for over a decade. I read his blog almost daily. I've also read almost all of his books and watched several of his lectures on YouTube. I highly suggest that whoever is reading this comment at least read one of his books or watch one of his lectures in order to enlighten yourself about the true imperialist and oppressive teachings of Islam.
Muslims really are trying to subvert the West from within. We know that for a fact thanks to a secret Muslim Brortherhood document that was uncovered during an FBI investigation into the largest Islamic charity in America. In the document they lay out their goals for destroying Western civilization from within and they also listed a huge list of allied groups that include many mainstream Islamic organizations.
Sounds like a bullshit racist conspiracy theory, right? Look it up for yourself before you pass judgement. You'll discover that it's actually true.
I am in a similar boat to you and trying to connect back to Islam coming from an irreligious Westernized liberal Muslim household. My approach is to learn from the lessons of early Islam and how it was gradually adopted by the early Muslims. They focused on the core principles and basics and then gradually adopted more practices. The challenge for new converts or reverts is that it feels that you are literally drinking from a fire hose of things you need to memorize and practice and made to feel guilty for not observing this ritual or the next.
One of the most helpful books on Islam that I have run across is William Chittick's Vision of Islam which provides an excellent overview of the religion's vision for humanity and society. Chittick describes Islam in a way that none of the modern Muslim writers have been able to do who all seem lost in the weeds of rituals, rules and regulations, fear of punishment. https://www.amazon.com/Vision-Visions-Reality-Sachiko-Murata/dp/1557785163/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=vision+of+islam&qid=1570902335&sr=8-1
It gave me a perspective that was more holistic that allowed me to put the big picture into context. My objective is to get the basics of the core beliefs right and the core basic rituals before worrying about the rest. The essence of a man's faith and spiritual path is the inner belief and connection between you (God's creation) and God (the Creator).
I spent my life essentially outside the faith and I am not going to feel guilty that I am not doing enough on my journey back to reconnecting with God. I really don't care what other people or Muslims think of me because their opinions are entirely irrelevant since God is the only judge. I have also learnt that there is nothing that anyone can do in this life to earn enough points or blessings to make it into heaven...even the most devout will be deficient in their deeds and will have to depend on God's mercy. What is important is your personal core belief in the oneness of God (First Commandment) and your personal spiritual connection to God which is developed through prayer and meditation.
Keep it simple. Focus on your connection to God. Don't feel guilty about taking your time to walk your path.
(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:
----
Introduction book to Islam:
-----
Some popular videos on YouTube:
>PS:
>
>https://www.amazon.co.uk/Engineers-Jihad-Connection-Extremism-Education/dp/0691145172
Rilancio con: http://www.tylervigen.com
How about this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/0879759844
I think Ibn Warraq's book Why I'm Not A Muslim, is best by far.
http://www.amazon.com/Why-I-Am-Not-Muslim/dp/0879759844
I don't understand it used to be on kindle, i have an ebook version of it, yet somehow its been pulled, i smell conspiracy.
While we are on the issues of books, I would seriously suggest getting hands on Twenty Three Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad - Ali Dashti; translation by F.R.C. Bagley
Alternatively, you can also get the whole book as a free downloadable PDF file on scribd.
Must read for ANY muslim and non-muslim if you ask me.
Welcome Castro
"Understanding the Qur'an: Themes and Styles" by M. A. Abdel Haleem from Oxford is a useful book:
http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Quran-Muhammad-Abdel-Haleem/dp/1845117891
Prof. Abdel Haleem also produced a translation of the Qur'an which I have not yet read, but understand to be one of the best so far:
http://www.amazon.com/Quran-English-translation-Parallel-Arabic/dp/019957071X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411451704&sr=1-2
Happy reading :)
I like the translation by "Abdullah Yusuf Ali" especially the footnotes which explain a lot of the context, meaning, history [very enjoyable to read]
There are many publishers [all will have the same content] the main difference will be the text size, paper, cover.
see The Qur'an: Text, Translation & Commentary (English and Arabic Edition) 19$ hardcover
and The Holy Qur'an 8$ soft cover and smaller in size
You can also PM me if you want me to send you one.
Edit: reading the quran on its own in English might not deliver the full meaning, this why the explanations [tafsir] are so helpful, some of the links bellow will have explanations along with the text [most likely as an option in UI] as i mentioned above, "Abdullah Yusuf Ali" has a decent tafsir and easy to understand language.
This is who you're referring to right? https://www.amazon.com/Holy-Quran-Abdullah-Yusuf-Ali/dp/1853267821
Read every religious book and then read Christopher Hitchens. Probably check the local library?
Found this on Amazon
You need to discover the real spiritual Islam to get a better perspective. Unfortunately this is so carefully hidden from most Muslims that they don't even know it exists. A good book that I found very helpful in understanding the big picture was The Vision of Islam, by William Chittick. Brilliant book that provides a macro perspective on Islam's vision for human society. It was developed as a textbook at SUNY for an Islamic Studies course.
https://www.amazon.com/Vision-Visions-Reality-Sachiko-Murata/dp/1557785163
The authors' subsequent book elaborated on this point more. They believe the evidence suggests that the engineering mindset in particular, and STEM-focused education more broadly, tend to result in an attraction to absolutist perspectives on problem solving and morality.
This is my favorite -- Al-Qur'an: A Contemporary Translation
by Ahmed Ali. I've read several different translations, and most of them use archaic English and are difficult to understand. This translation by Ahmed Ali is very easy to read and is actually quite enjoyable. I've recommended it to others and they have also said the same thing. You can buy it from amazon -- a used copy is less than $1 plus $3.99 shipping.
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Al-Quran-Contemporary-Translation-Ahmed-Ali/dp/0691074992/
http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Theft-Wrestling-Extremists/dp/0061189030
"I'd recommend watching ANY ISIS video, and/or reading ANY Dabiq issue. Are you going to try and tell me that they're not "honest and realistic" about what the texts say?
At this point I'm breaking a personal rule to never engage with someone dishonest enough to claim Islam is perfect or otherwise should not be reformed. But let's keep this going, so that others on this subreddit have a record of how Muslim obscurantists argue."
They are not honest and realistic about the texts. I understand how you see things, you see that on the surface the Quran or Hadith says X or Y and then you see isis doing X or Y. It seems to be quite valid, right? No, its not. Here is some evidence: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com , in this letter to the leader of isis they are destroyed theologically. Here is a book written by Shaykh Muhammad al Yaqoubi that destroys them: https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Shaykh-Muhammad-Al-Yaqoubi/dp/1908224193/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1486931882&sr=8-1&keywords=refuting+isis . Here is a lecture speaking about that book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ3MEJ_maRc . Here is an excellent video that references several academic journals and deals with the arguments that someone like yourself would bring up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgsVa-khWp4 . That is in addition to the video on isis that I shared in my previous post. In short, there is a reason why someone like myself and many, many others aren't trying to kill people its because we are following an orthodox interpretation and methodology.
“Yes, you may say we have two alternatives,” he says. “We have the alternative of being Muslim extremists or being extremely Muslim. And I don’t accept the category of moderate at all because it is far from clear. Because when it is used usually by Western pundits and politicians, what is intended is anything other than a form of Islam that politically doesn’t obstruct present Western policies. And I don’t think that is a helpful way of developing a meaningful sense of priorities within a religion. So I don’t use this category ‘moderate’ Muslims at all. I think the ongoing face-off between radicals and the mainstream is a face-off between heresy and orthodoxy. Those are the terms which are more indigenous and authentic than ‘moderation’ and ‘extremism’.”
http://gulfnews.com/culture/people/cultural-investment-is-the-way-forward-1.696524
"So are reformers. They're well aware of what the texts (Quran & Hadith) say. That's why they're reformers."
If they were honest and realistic with the text then wouldn't putting out the idiocy that they do now.
" "Mental gymnastics" is an interesting term to use regarding the interpretation of epistemologically empty belief systems, i.e. religions. Muslims (Christians/Jews/etc) already have to play mental gymnastics to believe that texts clearly written by men were written/dictated by some omnipotent entity. So yeah, I don't see your position that reformers are "dishonest" as being even the slightest bit rational."
Whether you see my point is not really important a perusal of what these morons want to do is enough proof. Its mental gymnastics plain and simple.
"Nope. She only needs to change—or otherwise prevent the formation of—enough Muslim minds to make a difference. Devout conservatives by definition are largely not going to change. The goal, quite frankly, is to marginalize them and make them not representative of Muslims in general. And rightly so."
Have you ever seen any videos of her or Quilliam? They want to change Islam so that they can change the minds of Muslims. They first have to change Islam, which isn't possible. Their goal is explicitly to change the religion. To marginalize is also never going to happen, conservative Muslim have way more children and will continue to do so. We are growing, quickly. To try to side step this fact is quite sad, just look at the people who work at Quilliam, they always try (pathetically) to put things in religious terms. Why? Because they want to reach out to conservative Muslims and pretend that Quilliam is legitimate and mainstream.
"You are, and I've clearly demonstrated it."
No, you are delusional, you've demonstrated your delusion.
"If you want to call universal, equal human rights for all "liberal", then sure. Not only do they want that, but the entire world desperately needs it."
There is not much to really say here. We don't believe in many of those values and rights. Take free speech, you will never have absolute free speech such that there can be a billboard with cartoons of the Prophet (PBUH) in Medina, or gay marriage in a place like Mecca. It won't happen. And it is delusional to think that such things are possible. Serious question for you, do really think those things are a possibility?
"No, that's what obscurantists do. The first step to reform is honesty about what is being reformed. For example, to paraphrase Maajid Nawaz: if all the Sharia conditions are met, do you believe that chopping the hand off of a thief is the appropriate punishment?"
This is basically about hudud punishments. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/jonathan-brown/stoning-and-hand-cutting-understanding-the-hudud-and-the-shariah-in-islam/
"Almost. It's because they're honest about the texts, they honestly believe that these texts, and how they're interpreted today represent the one truth for all of eternity, and neither the texts nor the interpretations can ever be altered. The largest amount of dishonesty actually belongs to conservatives like yourself, because you fail to recognize that Islam has been reinterpreted many times throughout history, across many cultures. Which means that reform is absolutely something that is coherent and possible."
Let me be clear, there is a spectrum of interpretation, no problem. But, there will NEVER be an interpretation that allows a women to not wear a hijab or to eat pork or engage in same sex actions or to date or to believe in human evolution, etc. To try to get those things from the texts is mental gymnastics and ABSOLUTE dishonesty. Watch this debate between Shaykh Yasir Qadhi and Usama Hasan of Quilliam and if you are honest with yourself you will inevitably conclude that Hasan simply lies, misrepresents, and does mental gymnastics to try to prove that which is simply not possible. Islam cannot accept human evolution and just as it can't accept human evolution it can't accept the other things I mentioned. Here is the debate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbynBJVTWKI&t=2h22m22s . This debate is an excellent example of how the "reformers" are dishonest and for you to accuse me of dishonesty is incredibly rich and hilarious.
"Yep. ✊🏾✊🏽✊🏿✊🏼. This is exactly why I express solidarity with reformers."
The delusion knows no bounds. Your proving this in real time.
"And now you must stand up to the scrutiny of all of us: global civilization."
Your us vs them mentality is not going to get you anywhere, you must accept reality. Islam has endured through 1400 years of scrutiny and its not going anywhere anytime soon. Its best for people like yourself to reach out to scholars like Shaykh Yasir Qadhi or Shaykh Hamza Yusuf or your local Mosque and build bridges with conservative Muslims.
But do you see the key distinction?
The difference between massacring and executing? Muhammad didn't "rape" anybody (even by today's standards). Take a look at the Hadiths according to Aisha. Do you think if a woman were raped especially one of her age would be in any right state of mind to be talking about what Muhammad did in his personal life?
Moderate Muslims should be able to do whatever they want. But they need to take a really hard look at themselves and adopt the true practices of Muhammad: like greeting strangers with a smile, visiting people who literally lay thorns in his path, praying 5 times a day, speaking kindly to/of people. Point is, if Muslims actually followed the tradition of Muhammad accordingly, there would be no such thing as "moderate" or "extremist" Muslim, they'd just be Muslim. Nobody's holding a gun to anybody's head telling them to marry someone the age of Aisha. Likewise, nobody should be holding a gun/legislation to anybody's head telling them to not practice their faith (so long as it doesn't violate federal laws).
Any Muslim worth their salt will recognize that the true teachings of Islam aren't to practice their faith by the sword (or AK...or C4). Islam places much more emphasis on the soul and the relationship to God.
If you're interested, you should read Vision of Islam by William Chittick and Sachiko Murata. I took a course taught by him at my University. It's a really nice break down of the core of the Islamic faith and talks about the political movements of the 19th and 20th centuries that's led to the warped interpretation of the religion by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
PM me for PDFs of his other works. I'm not an expert on this but I would definitely like to talk more.
2:191- and slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the sacred mosque, unless they first fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them.
such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
2:192- but if they cease, allah is oft-forgiving, most merciful.
2:193- and fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression,and there prevail justice and faith in allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.
where does it in anyway mention to kill non-believers try reading an actual quran instead of reading bollocks on the internet.
here i will help you
Aymen Jawad Tamimi isn't a scholar of Islam.
Shaykh Yaqoubi IS a scholar of Islam, here he has comprehensively refuted Daesh: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Refuting-ISIS-Shaykh-Muhammad-Al-Yaqoubi/dp/1908224193
Daesh ARE the khawarij. Daesh DO assume shia and other Muslims to be kuffar by default.
So stop peddling nonsense and lies. Daesh are a criminal kharijite group, there is Ijma on it.
This is an example:
https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Shaykh-Muhammad-Al-Yaqoubi/dp/1908224193
http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Annotated-Interpretation-Modern-English/dp/1597841447
> If they were so far ahead and caliphates are the optimal political systems, why did they fall behind and get conquered in the first place? Something doesn't hold up in your chain of thought.
This is a very complex question but very simply and briefly, part of the reason is because in the 18th century, people in the Ottoman empire decided to "modernize" like in the West. Rather than giving their allegiance to their empire, ethnic groups gave allegiance to their local nations and nationalism started to surge. All of a sudden, there were groups of people within the empire fighting for independence. With the Ottoman empire essentially neutered and occupied, scientific output slowly dropped to zero and the British were able to divide and conquer the empire by bribing local groups to give allegiance to the British empire in exchange for independence. For example, the current ruling Saudi monarchy actually betrayed the Ottoman empire and colluded with the British empire so that they may gain power as kings.
> First, religions are dogmas: they're ideas that are believed despite not having rational bases. Being dogmatic in anything is bad, really, but it's particularly bad when it's applied to entire states. Good governance requires that one is able to rationally assess reality and act on it. Dogmas are obstructions to that.
I disagree that religions are dogmas (i.e. they are ideas that are believed to have a rational basis; see people like Al-Ghazali and the field of the philosophy of religion) but for the sake of argument, let us assume that religions are dogmas. There is not much belief involved in state-building. Building a road doesn't matter if you're an atheist, jew or muslim. Minting a currency? Again, not much belief involved. Economic growth? Setting up borders? Constructing districts and infrastructure? Postal services? Corporate regulations? A lot of this is just politics.
The usefulness in a theocracy is loyalty and unity. Foreign government wants to bribe the people under the president to perform a coup so that he can be replaced with a puppet that will bend over to said government? Not as likely to happen in a theocracy because it would be like stabbing your own brother and yourself in the afterlife for money in this life. If the Ummayad caliphate borders were to be redrawn in today's world in 2017, the caliphate would have between 700 and 800 million people living inside it. Just by virtue of the unity of such a large population (without even taking into account, the large amount of efficiencies we would gain from having such a large population unified and working together), the Ummayad caliphate would become a global power.
>You don't want your state going into war with another simply because it believes God will give it victory. This is what ISIS did and now it is on the brink of destruction.
ISIS's theology is heretical (Refuting ISIS) and it is a product of the Iraq war. But even if we pretend their theology is totally legit, dogmas are not exclusive to theists. China is the least religious country in the world (6%) and yet, it is one of the most superstitious.
> Second, power is always abused, no matter the political system. This is something we have to accept and work with instead of hoping that it won't occur in our favourite system. This said, the abuse will be worse in some systems than others. A theocracy has among the worst potential for abuse of all. The harder it is to challenge the decisions of the leaders, the worse the potential for abuse is. I can't think of any system where the leaders' decisions are harder to challenge than a theocracy; since they can claim to act in the name of God, and no one can oppose God, no one can oppose them. This, by the way, applies to any state that follows a hard set ideology by which the leaders can claim to act, for example North Korea.
First of all, this is not how theocracies work in Islam. Caliphs do not claim to be able to speak to God. This is heretical in Islam. Muslims believe the last prophet is Mohammed (pbuh) and therefore, anyone who claims to be able to speak to God after him is a heretic. In Islam, there is a concept called Shura which means "consultation". When the prophet (pbuh) created an Islamic state, he told each tribe to select one representative that will represent their tribe. When the prophet (pbuh) made a state decision, he would consult with those representatives to get their opinions for mutual consultation.
This edition is specifically written for Americans with none of the cultural background. It's very, very, very helpful, and worth the money.
Yusuf Ali's translation and commentary has been the standard, and is quite good.
A really amazing translation and commentary is Muhammad Assad's "The Message of the Qur'an". It's expensive, but not hard to "legally obtain" on the internet as a PDF.
Also, check out altafsir.org for a searchable database of tafsir ("tafsir" is the word for an explanatory or exegetical text) from multiple schools. It includes most of the best classical tafsir that have been used in Islamic education for centuries. I recommend that highly.
Thanks for the link brother I will check it out. Out of curiosity, have you heard of Jeffrey Lang (he has 3 books and many videos on youtube) and Charles Le Gai Eaton (also known as Hassan Eaton, he wrote a fantastic book on Islam)?
Dewrdman,
I'd recommend this. The translation is not the best but the commentary that comes with it puts it heads and shoulders over most other translations. Here's the official website. Make sure you don't get a copy with just the translation. The commentary is what you're really getting it for.
Best,
TheMuslimShrink
I must admit I am a really big fan of Hamed Abdel Samad, he has written great books like Islamic Fascism which go through the history of Islam and promote a reform on the political and legal parts of the religion. Also he contributes a lot to the debate about islam in Germany.
Unfortunately he gets fuck all support from the government, who instead give millions to Saudi and Turkish radical organizations like DITIB who run over 800 mosques in Germany filled with hate preachers.
People like this have never received any support... and they are the only ones with an organic and long term solution to the problem.
I know there's an edition in modern English translated by Ali Unal on Amazon, but I haven't had the opportunity to read it yet. Maybe someone else has...
For an excellent primer on the origin of Muslim extremism as a political tool, check out the book The Great Theft by Khaled Abou El Fadl.
"Here, he successfully argues that the extremist sects of Islam, mainly Wahhabism, blatantly defy the true values of Islam. He clarifies that Wahhabism was once an unpopular, fringe, cultlike movement, which only grew through a chance partnership with the Saudi Arabian ruling family. The discovery of oil created an unprecedented infusion of petro-dollars into the fledgling, conservative belief system. The point of the book, El Fadl writes, is to define "the reality of Muslim thought as it currently exists." He focuses on the extremists' "puritan" view, exposing the hypocrisies and inconsistencies inherent in their "imagined Islam." He doesn't offer specific solutions, but he raises the issues carefully and well. Though the writing can be dry and portions read like a law school lecture, overall El Fadl's book is a fulfilling read for moderate Muslims concerned about conservative leadership and any non-Muslims who want to inform themselves about the extremists' misuse of Islam."
Read the Qur'an with a commentary.
A really, really, really good place to start is "The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an in Today's English" by Yahiya Emerick". Written by an American Muslim for Americans with no background knowledge on Islam at all. It's really, really, really well done, and the best for people going in blind.
Yusuf Ali's translation and commentary is the standard, and the new Study Qur'an is wonderfully done and also recommended - but the notes may be a bit too specialist in tone. Pick it up in a book store and read a bit of it to see.
But yes, reading it front to back is perfectly fine. I have suggested maybe starting at "Joseph", as it's the only traditional style narrative in the whole book, and you skip the first 8 or 9 chapters that are a bit heavier in legalistic and ritualistic stuff, which some find challenging without any aides.
What about 23 years? I only started it and cannot give actually 100% advice to read it, but read people recommending it.
Yes! I really recommend Yahya Emerick's The Meaning of the Qur'an in Today's English: Study Edition.
http://www.amazon.com/Meaning-Holy-Quran-Todays-English/dp/1450549535/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1451188997&sr=8-2&keywords=yahya+emerick
Also, lectures by Nouman Ali Khan
I shall start with the Haleem version and go from there. Just to be sure this is said version? http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Quran-Muhammad-Abdel-Haleem/dp/1845117891/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450268403&sr=8-1&keywords=Muhammad+Abdel+Haleem
Their translation of the Holy Qu'ran have subtle differences when compared to the mainstream used one. It's known by many people to be better translated though
Ahmadiyya Holy Qur'an
http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Quran-English-Translation-Commentary/dp/091332101X/ref=pd_bbs_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208702621&sr=8-3
Yusef Ali Holy Qur'an
http://www.amazon.com/English-interpretation-Holy-Quran/dp/1930097468/ref=pd_bbs_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208702621&sr=8-11
All translations are........meh imo.
> 65:4 provides the waiting period for women who are not yet menstruating, i.e. children.
You are incorrect.
As for your women who have lost hope of menstruation,
and in case you have doubt, the prescribed period of waiting for them is three months,
As for those who are pregnant, the prescribed period is until the delivery of the child.
God will make things easy for him who is mindful of God.
Qu'ran 65:4
I requote: As for your women* who have LOST HOPE of menstruation,
You know what that means? It means older women. Not young girls who haven't reached puberty.
So sentientbear, you are incorrect.
Source From My Bookshelf
My full post here which is not surprisingly being downvoted.
It's disappointing. It makes the majority of this board seem ignorant and extremely bigoted.
What you're looking for is Abdullah Yusuf Ali's The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an. This translation underwent extensive scrutiny from different scholars and checked and double checked for accuracy in its commentary. It's the best translation + commentary in English, no other copy comes close.
If you want just the best translation, I'd recommend Zaki Hammad's The Gracious Qur'an. It's light on the commentary but the translation is the best out of all the ones in English.
The one you want to avoid is The Study Qur'an. It's making a ruckus because the editor is a big name in academia and they're trying to position the book as similar to the Study Bible but it falls short in so many ways. You'll be left more confused than you started and in the meantime, you'll have read more commentary than Qur'an.
this one ;)
The book ("Der Untergang der islamischen Welt" eng.: "The decay of the islamic world") by Hamed Abdel-Samad is only available in German. His book "Islamic Fascism" is available in English though. I bet it's interesting too.
http://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Fascism-Hamed-Abdel-Samad/dp/1633881245/ref=sr_1_1/181-5597179-6227443?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1449353523&sr=1-1
Though the part about Waraqa is only like 2-3 pages in the book anyway.
He is refering to this (arabic) book, which is banned in Lebanon:
"Priest and Prophet : Research On the Rise of Islam"
http://www.muhammadanism.org/Arabic/book/hariri/priest_prophet_book.pdf
There's also a French translation, none in English it seems.
So I had a similar though not exact issue. My problem is my defection was the result of a great deal of biased anti religious literature. To give it a bit more of a fair chance I looked around for pro/neutral to islam books (not just Quranic but around the theology and myth) and found a couple of interesting ones (that have yet to change my mind back):
The first, a bit heavy on rhetoric and logical leaps is: A young Muslims guide to the Modern world
Second interesting but haven't fully gone into yet is Humanism in Islam
*One thats been recommended as dry and information heavy is Vision of Islam (Visions of Reality). This is one I'm going to read into next as it looks promising.
I realise this isn't specifically Quran based but hope it helps.
Try reading Understanding the Quran: Themes and Style. It's a great primer to go deeper into the subject
I recommend the Quran first as Islam tends to be a hot button issue recently. Also it's quite different from the Bible. As far as translations go, the "default" one is the King Fagd Quran http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/996077015X/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1374528231&sr=8-2&pi=AC_SX110_SY190
But if you want one that has a shit ton of footnotes that explains what it's talking about get this one http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/091332101X/ref=mp_s_a_1_6?qid=1374528338&sr=8-6&pi=AC_SX110_SY190
i'm sorry...but Muslims are not what you are describing...please [everyone] read about islam first and then judge ! [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1557785163/qid=1141978986/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1?v=glance&s=books]
I suggest to you a book called "Engineers of Jihad." There are many rich, degree-educated Muslims in ISIS and many other Islamist groups. It follows the line of: engineers, medical doctors, Islamic studies graduates, as the bulk of degree-educated terrorists in the Muslim world. Many of ISIS's leadership indeed fit one category, the other, or both. Al-Baghdadi, for example, has a PhD in Islamic Studies. Siddiqui, Atta, most of the 9/11 hijackers. Imams, degree holders, and some petty criminals. Prior to ISIS, there were rich billionaires like Bin Laden, or PhD in Islamic Jurisprudence holders like Abdulla Azzam. Organised, extremely active groups, tend to hold these people. Nowadays the trend, in the West, is turning towards the petty criminal model. But this has been observed throughout the history of Islamism. The petty criminal wishes to go to Heaven and is accepted into a belief system that see's martyrdom as a pathway to Heaven, as per Qur'an Surah 47, just to mention one of the Islamic justifications.
And no, I agree. It's not purely ideology. It's coupled with other things. Grievances, persuasion, an identity crisis, etc. Again, the idea that poor standards of living and state-sponsorship absolutely leads to terrorism is incorrect and not an observed trend. It is a theorized trend by some (mainly social) scientists. Most grievances do not come from poverty in Islamic terrorism but from narratives of perceived oppression, exploitation, or religious duty. Sometimes this is facilitated by poverty or standards of living, or some other relative loss, BUT not always--and not commonly. Some Islamists believe it is fardh to attack disbelievers or subjugate them. This is highly ideological. There's no getting away from these ideas, we have to challenge them. To start, we have to admit that there is a problem here. We do, but instead of arguing the enemy ideology, we start discussing that of normal Muslims. Unfair. And your last point. I did not mention the majority of peaceful Muslims. I mentioned Islamists. Islamists are the problem. Rich, degree educated, or otherwise. Look through the lens of the divine. It's not that difficult to see the connection.
I'll offer you another book, which is pretty clear at explaining this: "How Radical Islam Works; Why It Should Terrify Us; How to Defeat It."
I dislike posting links because most people on Reddit are too stupid or lazy to actually devote time to read my sources. But whatever, knock yourself out. I doubt you will actually follow through.
https://www.amazon.com/Engineers-Jihad-Connection-Extremism-Education/dp/0691145172
There is a book called "Why I am not a Muslim" that, while perhaps biased against Islam, is worth a read.
There are plenty of traditional Islamic scholars that have refuted Da'esh in theology. Right now off the top of my head I can link you this book (its one of the most famous)
Refuting ISIS by Sh. Muhammad Al Yaqoubi
"...penned this second edition to further elaborate on many important topics, such as the prohibition of burning human beings, the abolition of slavery, and Islam’s position towards minorities. New subjects are also tackled, such as the invalidity of excommunicating Muslim rulers for not applying certain aspects of Shari’ah, Islam’s position towards democracy, and the prohibition of destroying pre-Islamic monuments and sacred sites. Several other topics benefitted from more rigorous proofs, especially the section confirming that ISIS criminals have left the fold of Islam and are no longer Muslims."
Have a read on the review on Goodreads and tell me what you think.
Edit: Formatting
No, you did read one hadith about Aisha saying she was six probably from a propaganda website and ignored all the other hadiths that contradict this one, that "6/9 years old" hadith is not reliable and not part of the earliest and most trusted hadith collection (Muwatta), Muslims who lived in Medina at that time rejected that hadith as fabricated and it came from Iraq and not Arabia.
Shit like that exists because of the shia/sunni split, of course Muslims couldn't resist fighting eachothers for power, Aisha was a political figure not a little girl and she led a rebellion that's why many slander hadiths exist about her. That specific hadith was canonized in the 12th or 13th century with the rest of bukhari by an Ottoman vizier iirc and had absolutely no value before that.
Early Muslims didn't give a shit about hadiths because of their unreliable nature, I doubt you're interested in reading anything that isn't propaganda but since it's my field I'll recommend you two books on this topic The Introduction of ḥadīth in al-Andalus by Isabel Fierro and Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy by Jonathan Brown
TL;DR : Hadiths were the equivalent of shitposting for early Muslims, Aisha was a strong political figure and many contradicting hadiths about her age exist.