Note: Having listened to this 2nd part I am particularly impressed by two statements of Sheikh Imran Hosein in particular: first, that the highest authority of the Quran allows for a free choice of religion, something I was not aware of, and second the Sheikh’s absolutely correct stance that the first ones to make a list of wrongs committed by Orthodox Christians against Muslims should be the Orthodox themselves. There is not only an impeccable logic to this, but is it also the correct moral stance. Heaving heard this appeal, I will now personally try to study this issue and I will also encourage other Orthodox Christians to do the same. I can already think of several historical examples, but I want to do some more research to get as complete a list as possible. Once I establish it, I will then post the results here, on the blog. If anybody reading this is interesting in helping me in researching this topic, please send me an email.
Washington is in an all out play to end Russia as a nation. They would like to take it down from inside, like Ukraine. Since this seems unlikely, then they wage all out economic warfare, which we can see in the sanctions. Lastly, they are building up NATO into an anti Russian crusade. The proxy war in Ukraine allows Washington to build up it’s armies right on Russian borders, which is taking place right now.
Russian reaction has been timid up to now. It actually looks like weakness, and this eggs Washington to push even harder, and is now upping the Ukraine war by an immediate arming of Kiev’s Junta Army. Training troops are arriving from all over the West to train up Ukraine’s army to take back Donbass by force of arms.
The last two days Kiev’s army has launched heavy tank and infantry attacks, along with the normal heavy artillery attacks. The reason Kiev attacks at night is because their tanks and infantry have just completed their outfitting with American Night Sites and Night Vision gear for infantry. Somehow the Rebels were able to hold the lines the last two days, but at heavy cost. America’s new high tech arms for Kiev are having an effect. Russia has sat and allowed this advantage to build, and the rebels payed with blood the last two nights for it.
Yesterday Russia finally woke up and rushed needed fighting gear to the rebels that allowed them to hold against these night attacks. But it was really close. Kiev nearly broke right into Donetsk. American weapons are only just beginning to flow in, and the US training for their army is just starting.
Look for the war this summer to be bloody in the extreme. Russia faces a choice, either take off the gloves and fully arm the rebels with modern weapons, not the old Soviet junk they have been getting, or watch Kiev’s American armed and trained army march through Donbass like Hitler through Poland.
The risk that Washington pushes to the brink of nuclear war is growing, they seem to know no limits now, Obama is the ultimate War Mongering Dr. Strangelove.
the only thing I disagree with is that Obama is the Dr Strangelove….he’s a puppet and that’s all.
is an AIPAC war simple: history books says it, clearly from 1917.
BBC on Abraham Lincoln
“People want to reach out to try to understand, who was this guy? Who was this man who by sheer force of his own power held this country together?” says Tetreault. “We all find some connection to him and that’s why I think the image of Lincoln will last forever and ever.”
The Americans appriciate to keep their country in one peace at the same time they encourage other countries to break up.
British contributed ( in the Baltics ) the break up and shrinking of Tsarist Russia, UKUSA contributed to break up of the Soviet Union and now they work togethether with the Natoists on break up of Russian Federation.
Very, very interesting interview!
I read somewhere that Genghis Khan made a point of picking his generals from different religions and somehow he successfully managed to make them fight side by side and often defend each other in battles.
Dialogues such as this one are very rare and important. Thank you!
The idea that religions can’t get along or races can’t get along is a western idea. Its a dominant aspect of Western civilization not so much of other cultures and civilization. It just so happens that it has so completely permeated the world now along with its carrier civilization, that we think of it as human nature. But if you go back in history to times when western culture and civilization did not dominate the world, you find that races and religions got along just fine most of the time. Of course there were exceptions to this rule. Like the Ottoman Turks, but they were clearly exceptions.
The concept of a master race to which all must bow and a master religion in which all must believe is a European bequest to the modern world.
Look up Sufis. They were muslims too. But they had a different interpretation of Quran – more inclusive, non-theistic, rational and liberal (for lack of a better word). More like muslim yogis.
Guess what, they were persecuted.
Here is a sample Sufi quote:
“so i left the mosque and went to the ale house. The sermon was interminably long and valuable time was wasting away.” – Hafiz
“I knocked on the and the door opened, but i found out that i had been knocking from the inside.” – Rumi
The Sufis were around long before Islam showed up. Their Mystery Schools span from the West coast of Africa to India. With the arrival of Islam they went underground. Their poetry/literature functions on three levels:
– love poems on the surface level
– Koran-tight on a philosophical level
– deep spiritual insights on an esoteric level only understandable by the initiates.
This way the Sufis managed to keep their tradition alive to this day. Western Christianity has unfortunately nothing like this.
Sufism is alive and well today. You both are rather wrong. Read about Sufism.
Not sure what Hadizt (sp?) is.
Hadith, The stories of the Prophets life as told by his companions and contemporaries.
sorry, I’m really dum…the Koran was written before Mohammed ?
I guess Mohammed wrote the Koran or at least it came through him, and the Haditz is something else.
The Quran – Muslims believe the Quran was verbally revealed by God to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel (Jibril), gradually over a period of approximately 23 years, beginning on 22 December 609 CE, when Muhammad was 40, and concluding in 632 CE, the year of his death.
… According to the traditional narrative, several companions of Muhammad served as scribes and were responsible for writing down the revelations. Shortly after Muhammad’s death, the Quran was compiled by his companions who wrote down and memorized parts of it.
Hadith are the collections of the reports of the teachings, deeds and sayings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. … The hadith literature is based on oral reports that were in circulation in society after the death of Muhammad. Islamic scholars then compiled these hadith together in collections.
Thanks for the definitions. I am no expert but recently I read a book by Reza Aslan titled “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam”. Some critics say that his interpretation of Islam is not mainstream, but the fact of the matter is that Islam, unlike Christianity, has no central authority to with a final word. (BTW, Aslan had some interesting interviews with the so-called journalists on CNN exposing their ignorance on religion. He is a professor of history if religions). This is a book very worthwhile to read…
Some of the things I had learned from this book includes: Hadiths were documented only after the Prophet’s death and without any regulatory oversight. As a result some seven hundred thousand hadiths were said to be circulating by the 9th century. For hundreds of years, anyone who had the power and wealth to influence public opinion on a particular issue and who wanted to justify his own ideas about, say the role of women in society, had only to refer to hadith. I am not sure when Muslim rulers started having harems, but it would be naive to expect them to encourage women’s rights at the expense of their pleasure. I am told that veiling of women is referred to in the Quran only once and that only related to the Prophet’s wives. And I don’t think it is different today on a host of issues either. It is indeed naive to consider everything “they” teach to be God’s words.
That’s why not all hadiths are to be taken at face value
not sure what fatwah means either…it had another word after it too.
by the way, I don’t disagree that Jesus will return…but the Christ Spirit ? The Son of God ? no.
He came once. He is here now as the spirit of God on the darling earth…he will re-appear to those with eyes to see and ears to hear…but not again in the flesh.
A fatwa is a legal opinion issued by an Islamic scholar pertaining to Islamic Law.
Concerning the return of Jesus in the flesh, he will indeed return as a person to prove that the Jews were wrong in rejecting him, and taking an impostor AntiChrist as the Messiah.
A fatwa,(Ruling) is a legal opinion. Key thing to understand. Is that fatwa’s, are based. On the scholars personal opinion. His opinion will be guided. By the school of thought he adheres to.
The opinions of a Deobandi scholar. Will be different from a salafi scholar.
dear Sheikh Hosein..I making many comments here…but I would like to thank you for your delightful responses to dear Saker’s questions….I find your answers very sane. Thank you for your time in giving us this video.
Thank´s Saker, this honourable man is dynamite….
Humor is always the halmark of a true intellectual, and the ability to play.
I fully suport sheik IH, and hopefully some readers fullows this, correction, not on whats sayed from IH, witch escatology is impecable and true, but to others to undrstand the nature of our creatore.
Whom I think to have a health sense of humore.
I have my self, by reasons of my own naivite, managed to be flatbroke for weeks and ended up with stealing food for just having something to eat, hunger is a great teacher, and gives the reality a fresh angle.
I comitted this because of consequencess of what Others did to me.
When does a crime become a crime, think about that, rampant sinkng poverty gives the criminal and the victim no other options in the fight for their everyday life.
Why do we have poverty, cheep labour.
Poverty corupts your soul as mutch as power corrupts the ritch.
Have that in mind when the day comes to judge anyone.
Compasion and Mercy, will be given to anyone whom them selfs have shown Compasion and Mercy.
To an old fart as me, cominion is an packt, between to creatures or expanded forther into the society, we may name it how we want, twist the narrative to suthe any perspective conisvable, but its stil a Man made cominion, and have nothing to do with the bond between You and our Creatore, that one is what matters.
When someone leves the teachings of God/Allah he is considered to be dead and not among the living, and that means simply, not to be putt to death by anyone, that alone is a hideous crime witch isnt alwed at all, but the Death sentence is done by the person HIM self, to Him self, By him selfs, since He walked away from the path of light and love.
Its NOT a sin to have doubts, we all have it from time to time.
And from period to period, people lead astray or walks astray, the knowledgable and those that gains more wisdom from this, always ends up in beliving the path.
The day of reconing come no matter what anyway, never forgett that.
MY God only asks One question, WHAT did YOU do to others.
And NOWHERE is it alwed to kill, no matter what, execpt in self defence.
A true worrier of peace/Islam/Christianity, will convince others by His virtue as a beliver on the path putt to you by Muhammad (pbwh) and Yeshua(pbwh).
To reconsile and forgive, isnt easy, never was and never will be, but this treshold once crossed, will sett you free, the future opens up, when the past is gone.
When both parts does it, we all will benefitt from it, even your enemy,whom is your own nabour.
Thats why they both putt that high, and shows them, and me, the truth about a person more than anything else, regarding religious practising, no matter what religion there is.
Its writen in male tense, not intended, but this goes to both.
is it not easier to not make war in the first place?
There is so much reconciling to do. Faith against faith. Divisions within each one. Peoples and nations against peoples and nations.
You are so very right, but there are so many directions in which to forgive. Can someone be forgiven if they have ot asked for it?
Thanks Mikael…nice comment…I agree….any true beleiver of any religion is a great person…that’s why I like the Sheikh so much….and like Ghandi said…its possible for civilized people to disagree.
I was watching Meet the Press Sunday and found it fairly comical when they got around to discussing Hillary Clinton. In fact, they replayed a SNL skit from Saturday night that made fun of Hillary and the fact that she is the only viable candidate for the Democrats because of the Clinton dynasty. The host of Meet the Press, Chuck Todd and his panel guests all had a good laugh “ha ha ha… yes that’s funny because it’s true ha ha ha”. And once they had a good if not awkward chuckle, one can only presume at the expense of the American people, they simply moved on and stepped over that giant elephant in the room. So despite the fact that we all understand something is incredibly wrong with the fact that Hillary has no challengers in a nation of 330 million citizens we are simply supposed to ignore this giant puss filled boil on the face of our democratic process.
Read more – 330 Million Citizens & Only One Democrat Interested In Being President:http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-14/330-million-citizens-only-one-democrat-interested-being-president
In spite of this below Jews support destruction of Russia and Nazi-Ukraine
A leader of Ukrainian Jews accused the head of the country’s security service of targeting Jews and legitimizing a militia that killed Jews in the 1940s.
Eduard Dolinsky, the director of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee, made the accusation on Facebook against Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, head of the Security Service of Ukraine, the news website evreiskiy.kiev.ua reported, after Nalyvaichenko said his organization needed to base its work on the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, or UPA, which murdered thousands of Jews in the 1940s.
“Instead of creating a modern, high-tech security service, Nalyvaichenko proposes the revival of highly questionable methods from 80 years ago,” Dolinsky wrote, noting this seems to include the “attitudes and actions of UPA against the Jews and the Poles.”
According to Yad Vashem, the men of UPA under Stephan Bandera “considered the Soviets and the Jews their main enemies.”
Read more: http://forward.com/articles/218652/ukraine-security-chief-blasted-for-targeting-jews/#ixzz3XNniZe1x
this poor jewish ukrainain is going to end up getting taken by the martial law…I wish there was something we could do about this…
Sheikh Imran Hosein: “How do we know the Koran is the word of GOD? Because it says so in the Koran, and it’s never been changed.” (except for some of the rules)…
This guy is really sincere and knowledgable about scripture, but is that the best you religionists got? Not very convincing.
Sheikh Imran Hosein is clearly speaking as a Muslim, he does not intend to debate the nature of the Quran, since his logical deduction starts with: the Quran is revealed from “above”.
How do you know that I am right? Because I told you so. How do you know that Mahomet is a prophet? Because he told us so. You don’t believe? Watch your head.
When Allah sent down the Quran, he makes it clear that mankind is free to choose whatever he wants to, but everything has its consequences.
“How do you know that I am right? Because I told you so. How do you know that Mahomet is a prophet? Because he told us so. You don’t believe? Watch your head.”
If you accepted the Quran as the Word of God and the truth, you have to accept what says. If you don’t, then you’re free to reject it. There is no compulsion in religion. The Sheikh had repeated this several times in the video. Did you even watch it?
“watch your head”??? Did you watch the video? He clearly said that the Quran says that there is no compulsion in religion. Neither is beheading for apostasy supported by Quran.
Not very convincing? The conviction comes from your own heart. You can keep it closed with clever words, or you can open it. When you hear a word that proclaims itself as true, you can ask your heart. Your own truth knows. In this age, many words proclaim themselves as true, but are in fact lies. Only your heart can help you here.
No one and nothing here exists to convince you of anything. You have a heart. Use it for yourself. And beware of clever words.
Gary, read the Koran and decide for yourself.
Dear Sir, thank you for answering Sakers questions. I am a Scandinavian Christian Swedenborgian and I, like many Russians, have respect for Islam. You are a good ambassador for your religion.
I have only read parts of the Koran and not in Arabic, of course. I have a question. The Koran says the prophet Muhammed was the last prophet. It is hard to imagine a new revelation without a prophet, but does the Koran also say there will never again be a new revelation?
I am not good at escatology, but I imagine that after a great calamity, the three monoteistic religions will start understanding each other better. Is there a reference in the Koran to the sun rising in the west? There is in the Bible and it has engaged scholars for centuries.
Some Christian leaders first saw the prophet as a protector. I remember the prophet dictated a letter of protection to the monks in a monastery in Egypt. The original is still kept in the old monastery. It is worth a read and needs to be known in the Muslim world.
We need to understand each other better and fast. In the 70s, an Iranian told me there would be many religious wars in the future. I did not believe it, but now I see terrible religious confrontations.
Your words about the Russians taking Constantinople are backed up by some Jewish prophecies in Europe. Stupidly, I did not save the link to the article. The gist of it was that when we see the Russians in Constantinople, we should take note. Big changes will come.
You raise a point I wanted to raise. At the Monastery of St. Katherine in Sinai there is a letter (or a copy) from the Prophet ordering that those of the monastery are indeed believers and must be left in peace. (I had an opportunity to visit there as well as to hang out with the Bedoins and their ‘desert ships’. Wonderful people.)
I also read somewhere that the Prophet commanded that Christian churches were to be protected, even if they were abandoned. Indeed, in Jerusalem, the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre have been held by one Islamic family for many centuries. From what I could see – relations between Shia and Orthodox Christians are very good. If some one can expand on this, the command that there be peace between Islam and Christianity, it would be appreciated.
BTW, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is a has a funny quirks to it, being jointly run by five competing Christian faiths. Brawls are not uncommon. At the entrance to the Church, on the face of the second floor stands a ladder. It’s been there for over one hundred years! No one can agree upon whose responsibility it is to take it down.
Czar Alexander I created the Page Corps. In its rules it is stated that Christian, Jewish and Muslim members were all equal and that there was no discrimination between them, that they should all respect each other and treat each other as equals. My maternal grandfather was in the Page Corps.
Of course, the emphatic pronouncements, sustained with vivid mimics and rolling of eyes, that the Quran is incorrupt and incorruptible should be take with a large pinch of salt.
Some noted scholars beg to disagree. One was Alfred Guillaume, perhaps the best-known and accepted Western scholar on Islam from the non-Islamic world, sketched this situation in his book “Islam”, thus:
“Before an authorized version was established under the Caliph Uthman there were four rival editions in use. These have long since disappeared, but we are told that they differed from the authorized version, some containing more and some less than the latter. When men who had learned one version came into conflict with those who possessed a rival version it was feared that scriptural exegesis would pursue the course it had taken among Jews and Christians who at that time accused the one another of corrupting and falsifying the sacred text. Uthman then entrusted a commission, in which Zayd took a prominent place, with the task of preparing a text which everyone must accept. Only the men of Kufa refused the new edition, and their version was certainly extant as late as A.D. 1000. Uthman’s edition to this day remains the authoritative word of God to Muslims. Nevertheless, even now variant readings, involving not only different reading of the vowels but also occasionally a different consonantal text, are recognized as of equal authority one with another. The old Kufic script in which the Quran was originally written contained no indication of vowels, and so the consonants of verbs could be read as actives or passives, and, worse still, many of the consonants themselves could not be distinguished without the diacritical dots which were afterwards added, when and by whom we do not know….Originally considerable freedom prevailed, until a later generation insisted on uniformity but never entirely achieved it…
The arrangement of the text is arbitrary and haphazard….The Muslim world has not yet come to grips with the problem which Christian Europe faced after the Renaissance, but signs are not wanting that thoughtful Muslims are seeking a way out of the logical impasse….Until all the rival readings scattered in manuscripts and books not readily to be consulted have been collected on a scale comparable with the critical apparatus of the Bible, and until a trustworthy lexicon of the Quran has been compiled, details–many of great importance – will remain obscure.” (A. Guillaume, Islam, pp. 57-60).
“Without diacritical marks a word could be read active or passive and many consonants could not be distinguished without the diacritical dots which were added afterwards, when and by whom we do not know.” (“Collection of the Quran” by John Burton).
Saint John Damascene who wrote a critique of the “heresy of the Ishmaelites”, in the first half of the 8th Century, quotes verbatim passages from the Quran. He quotes some which lack from the official version. “Most of the early original Qur’an manuscripts, complete or in sizeable fragments, that are still available to us now, are not earlier than the second century after the Hijra. [or 800 AD] (Ahmad Von Denffer, in his book, Ulum al Quran, in a chapter called, Old Manuscripts Of The Qur’an).
Some concrete examples, ironically just about the punishment for adulterers:
“Umar said: ‘Verily Allah sent Mohammed with truth and revealed the Book to him. Out of the verses, the Almighty Allah revealed. there was the verse of stoning to death. The Messenger of Allah stoned to death (Sahih Muslim, page 920) and after him we also stoned to death: And in the BOOK OF GOD stoning to death is a truth against one, who commits adultery. The verse was thus: ‘The old man and the old woman, if they have committed adultery, they stoned them both assuredly.’ ”
This passage too, is not in the Quran.
“There is a tradition from ‘A’isha, the prophet’s wife, that a certain chapter which now consists of 73 verses once contained no less than 200; and that when Uthman compiled the Quran, the missing verses could not be found. One of them was called the verse of Stoning, and is said to have contained the order to stone a man or woman who had committed adultery….This verse is said to have been part of the original Quran. Many early authorities say so, and what is very significant is that the first Caliphs punished adulterers by stoning; this is still the penalty prescribed in Muslim law-books, whereas the Quran (24:2) prescribed a hundred stripes.” (“Islam” by A. Guillaume, p. 191).
But any attempt at criticism (like the Biblical criticism) of the Imams, Mullahs, Ulamas history of Islam and Quran is qualified as Anti-Islamic, Islamophobic, Anti-Arabian, a dangerous aspect of “Orientalism” and an insult to the prophet (with unpleasant consequences).
What you need to know is that:
– There are no two versions of the Quran in the last 1400 years.
– Written Arabic has no diacritics.
– The diacritics were added to make it easier for non-Arabic speaking people to read.
– The dots are a part of the Arabic alphabets, they are not something else entirely.
– The Quran and the Ahadith are to different things.
– The Quran is the revealed scripture
– The Ahadith are reports of the prophet’s sayings and actions
– A number of Ahadith are fabricated, the Sheikh explained it in the video
In any case, I believe that the prophet would have had scribes in his lifetime to write down the Quran because it is the Word of God and he would have recognized it to be extremely important to write them down.
Well, it was demonstrated that the contrary is true. Reiterating the contested affirmation does not prove anything.
“The fundamental Islamic belief that no word of the Quran has changed is put in question by a rather unique ancient manuscript, a palimpsest, known as ‘DAM 0 1-27.1.’1 It was discovered by Muslims in 1972 at the ancient Great Mosque of Sana’a in Yemen. According to the latest academic studies, aided by the use of ultraviolet photography, this palimpsest contains many differences when compared with today’s Arabic Quran. They range from different and missing words and dissimilar spelling to a changed order of Surahs and words within verses. The find is part of a bundle of parchments thought to be the oldest surviving copies of the Quran.
The palimpsest ‘DAM 0 1-27.1’ has been proven to actually contain four different Qurans: A complete primary and secondary text, and both showing later corrections. Therefore we are not just dealing with one but four ‘bad copies’ within the first Islamic century. If the Uthmanic text had not yet reached the mosque, upon what basis were the corrections of the two different texts made?
Since even the secondary text with the corrections does not resemble the Uthmanic text 100%, the question arises as to why it was not corrected when the ‘Authorized Version’ arrived? To keep a different Quran in an Islamic centre of learning is a recipe for passing on false teachings. ”
Quran and Ahadiths:
In the introduction to the Mishkat, a collection of Hadis, we read:
“Indeed the Quran without the Hadis remains unintelligible in many cases in the work-a-day life of a man. It is the very injunction of the Quran to follow the Prophet in all his deeds and sayings. Therefore if the Quran is believed, there is no other alternative but to believe in the Hadis of the Prophet. ‘It behoves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice (in their matter) when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter; whoso disobeys Allah and His Apostle, he surely strays off a manifest straying.’ “(Sura 33:36).
“I have left you two things and you will not stray as long as you hold them fast. The one is the Book of God and the other the Law (Sunnah) of his Prophet.” (Mishkat 1:120, Volume I, page 173).
“Sunnah (or Sunnat) and Hadis are technically synonymous terms, but sunnah “implies the doings and practices of Muhammad.” (Sahih Muslim Introduction, page IX of Volume I). ‘It is thus a concrete implementation, a tangible form and the actual embodiment of the Will of Allah….”(ibid.). Literally it means a “path”, “way”, “a manner of life”.
If Mohammed is reputed to have done something it is “sunnah” to his followers. This obviously applies also in the negative sense: if Mohammed rejected or condemned something, it is forbidden to all Muslims.”
The Quran is the revealed scripture. We know that because the Quran says so!
Ugh, whatever man.
The Sheikh just said that if the Hadith is in conflict with the Quran, we reject it.
Why don’t you study about this subject yourself instead of copy-pasting someone else’s opinions. Make your own opinion because after all, God gave us intellect for a reason.
Nice copie past action!
I think you need a little objectivity and perhaps a hearing aid. Didn’t you hear: “no compulsion in religion.” So drop this “watch your head nonsense.” Are you a paid troll?
The Quran verse says “no compulsion in religion”, unless it’s abrogated by other verses (9:29 “Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, [even if they are] of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”; 8, 39: “And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah . And if they cease – then indeed, Allah is Seeing of what they do.”
Oh, yes, the good Sheikh says that Allah offers you the choice to accept or to reject Islam (in fact to “submit” – that is the meaning of Islam). He is less forthcoming to tell us what happens to those who “chose” to not accept.
On Muhammad’s orders, whenever Muslims conquer a territory in the name of Islam, its non-Muslim inhabitants are given three choices: 1) convert to Islam (“join the family”), 2) keep your religious identity but pay tribute (jizya, see below) and live as an “outsider,” a subjugated dhimmi or 3) execution!
What you need to know is that:
– no verse of the Quran may abrogate one another
– you cannot take one verse alone and use it to declare this and that
– you have to take the totality of the Quran and compare it with a certain verse
About verses 9:29 and 8:39, it’ll be painful for me to type everything here. It might take hours, so here you go
The above quotation exist in the context of a spiritual battle, monotheism was in struggle against paganism, which had basically devolved into demon worship. The point being that those who did not accept Allah as the one God we’re to be made separate such that their beliefs did not corrupt the common believer. This is not about hate, or intolerance, but spiritual/cultural survival. This probably won’t change anyone’s preconceptions but context is always good to have.
Great interview. Will there be a part III?
It would be easy to gush with praise here, but having watched this concluding part I can only acknowledge this to be one of the most uplifting talks I have ever heard. And I have sat before some very praiseworthy people.
Saker, I didn’t know how good your questions were until Sheik Imran gave his answers. What a courageous man he is, dedicated to the simple truth, in fact to the ever more simple, and most simple truths. I could come to admire this Islam doctrine, and in no small measure because of his teachings.
I’ve looked in vain for a force to oppose all that is wrong with fractional reserve banking, only to find that force, one billion strong I believe, in a spiritual teaching.
Forgive my ignorance if I say this wrongly, but if Allah wills it, may this force come into further power in this world. At moments such as this, I feel a cleansing breeze in the air.
In the end the whole exercise was rather disappointing. The good Sheik did not succeed to allay our suspicions against Muslims and Islam, and refused to answer the questions about their grievances against the Orthodox. Probably because he has not much to say about. It is a conundrum for him.
Uh, I’m pretty sure the saker asked him to say something about the grievances of the Orthodox against the Muslims, not the other way around.
I was reading a piece that discusses this very issue of Sharia Law in relation to ‘so called’ money.very interesting read.
“What surprised me the most was that, aside from mentions of gold in the journal, one thing he paid particular attention to was the repeated and frequent mentions of Sharia compliance and Islamic banking rules in the Central Banking Journal. Western central bankers have apparently been studying and discussing this stuff for nearly a decade now, and for good reason. According to the IMF paper, “Islamic financial assets have grown at double-digit rates over the past decade, from about $200 billion in 2003 to an estimated $1.8 trillion at end of 2013. (A large part of Islamic finance—around 80 percent—is composed of Islamic banking assets; the remainder is composed of Sukuk (15 percent, asset-backed or asset-based instruments), Islamic funds (4 percent), and Takaful (Islamic insurance).”
Islamic banking uses Murabaha, which is exactly Riba’ with another name.
Which means Islamic banking is going against the Quran by permitting Riba’.
Thank you for promoting peace between Islam and Orthodox Christianity. Generally most of the Muslims do not have any grudges or tuck with Christians,. whether Orthodox or otherwise, despite centuries of colonial rule over Muslim lands under the Christian flag. Muslims also do not look at Jews with hatred or anger because The Quran says that do not let your hate blind you. I think it will be very easy to achieve peace between the three religious groups if politics and money power has been taken out.
It is important that platforms such as yours initiate this dialog at the highest levels because all people of the world are suffering under the weight of money power and heavy handed governments who are themselves in the pay of the Money masters. All people want to live in peace and freedom and not be colonized. That is why the first declaration of Islamic faith is : “La Illah Ha Illal Allah” There is no other power to whom we bow besides the Creator.
Does anyone else see the dichotomy in the Sheikh proposing peace, harmony and alliance between Islam and Orthodox Christianity while his eschatology of The End Of Time promises the bloody annihilation of All Life?
The use of this eschatology and the alliances it requires seems to me to mirror in many ways the Xtian End Timers and their alliance with Israel especially those in the settlements. Both seem to offer their allies peace and support until the fanatically desired and militantly accelerated march to Armageddon and Judgment Day . Both offer their allies the same end, join the True Believers or off to the fires of Hades for most of them.
Jesus would return at the End Times to clarify the Truth. A Muslim-Christian war is completely avoidable as long as both sides don’t do anything stupid.
In Islam, the End Times goes like this,
(1) Jesus returns, and after a while;
(2) The historical process ends.
(3) The destruction of the material universe (therefore destruction of all life).
(4) Everyone is resurrected
(5) Judgement Day (self explanatory)
Muslim mercenaries destroyed the 2nd Rome. Now the totally faux mercenary IS wants to tear down the 3rd Rome. And why is ISIS systematically destroying ancient artifacts in Iraq? Who is running this show? What are you afraid of, Dr. Zaius? Why must knowledge stand still. What is in the Forbidden Zone that we are not allowed to see.
The more I listen to Sheikh Imran Hosein words, the more I admire him.
Next time ask him about why Muslims in Europe love Zionist “anti racism” and Zionist “multi-culturalism” so much and then ask him if their attitude regarding such things is just a case of “I take the parts of the Conspiracy that allows us to be the parasitic invaders”…
Interesting speaker, Sheikh Imran Hosein, I must say.
Can I perhaps have your questions as you did present them to this gentlemen?
Answers to those questions must go deeper than this well educated man can give.
After receipt I will study them well, compare them with Sheikh Imran Hosein’s answers in these YouTube-films.
It is most likely that my answers to you shall require additional studies, only intended for further sub-structuring and understanding!
I’ve really been enjoying these interviews and other talks by Sheikh Imran Hosein, but don’t recall him addressing the question of (so-called) “suicide bombers” killing women and children (not sure if he would accept that terminology, but would love to hear him speak to that directly).