No. Ikut current mores. Nowadays dah jarang perempuan dok kat rumah saja. Lepas belajar kerja and so on even until kahwin. So pakai cincin tunang (or kahwin) is consider menghebahkan dah.

How many of us still perform the traditional risik ?

Tak. Hebahkan tu tak bermaksud kita personally bagi tau kat semua orang.

Saya bukan anti hadis. Saya cuma anti pendapat yang meletakkan hadis adalah setaraf dengan Qur'an. Prinsip saya senang, selagi tak bertentangan dengan Qur'an saya terima jika untuk kebaikan, tak kira la Hadis ka, quote ka.

This post has been edited by aliesterfiend: Mar 26 2015, 05:19 PM

No 2, 3, 4 dan seterusnya tak boleh berlawanan dengan Qur'an.

Kawin dah, nikah pun dah, cerai pun dah, rujuk pun dah, cerai balik pun dah, nikah denagn orang lain pun dah.....

Bini hang ada mngidam apa ? My ex wife dulu suka ratah beras.

Yang itu betul. But hadiths are A who heard B who heard C who heard D and so on who heard the prophet said so and so. Since hadiths are not infallible every time some one quoted me and giving something like 'hadith nabi kata macam ni..." I will always ask for source. Hadith mana ? Sapa periwayat dia ? Apa relevant dia dengan ayat Qur'an which is infallible.

That's all.

Pascal's wager. Atau pun boleh cuba cari Kitab al-irshad ila-qawati al-adilla fi usul al-i'tiqad (A Guide to the Conclusive Proofs for the Principles of Belief.) oleh Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni. Ada juga narration dari (unverified)Ali r.a. : "The astrologers and the physicians both said the dead will never be resurrected. I said, 'Keep your counsel. If your idea is correct, I will come to no harm by my belief in the Day of Judgement, but if my belief is correct then you will be a sure loser by not believing in that day.'" (Ihya of Al-Ghazali).

In my 20's I was practically (nearly) agnostic. It was after a lot of reading and research on my own that I've become a practicing muslim. One of the principles I read was the pascal's wager.

Basically there's no need to argue with atheist as they're guided (or misguided) by reasons so if you want give them something that they can reason with. The good thing is that while pascal's wager was base on Christianity, the principle can be applied in any religions that believe in the afterlife. There's also atheistic wager as counter measure for the atheist but the principle is more base if one came from Christianity and none from Islam.

Few middle easterners here in my office that I observe always in state of absolution, not just before perform prayers. Kalau terkentut, terkencing, berak afterwards terus ambik wudhu. Maybe their culture macam tu ?

Kalau tak salah even Tun M is like that (dengar cerita, can't verify of course).

This post has been edited by aliesterfiend: Apr 6 2015, 10:39 AM

Cultural I guess. Tapi tak salah. Mungkin dapat pahala lebih I don't know.

Dah nama pun sunat maknanya bukan la kena.

Aku sunatkan hang lagi sekali mau ?

This post has been edited by aliesterfiend: Apr 7 2015, 09:49 AM

Ypu probably should reread Surah Al-Ikhlas. If there is one very thing that a muslim can't compromise it's the oneness of God. There is no god but God. You are indeed correct there's only one God.

I can follow the teachings of Buddha (whichever applicable) and I am via the teachings of Muhammad is also following the teachings of Moses and Jesus (just Jesus, not Paul ). But I do not pray to them. I do pray for them (parts of doa, just tirual stuff) but I only pray to God, and God alone.

In Islam however there is only one teaching of Islam, whether via Abraham, via Moses or Jesus. I wouldn't even be surprised if Siddiharta was indeed a prophet sent by God since there are messengers sent to all the people throughout time though only specifically mention by name in the Qur'an were the jewish prophets.

And, indeed We have sent Messengers before you (O Muhammad(P)); of some of them We have related to you their story and of some We have not related to you their story, and it was not given to any Messenger that he should bring a sign except by the Leave of God. So, when comes the Commandment of God, the matter will be decided with truth, and the followers of falsehood will then be lost. (Qur'ân 40:78)

The difference is that every other messengers before Muhammad were sent to their specific people/tribe. This may look a bit bias on first look since why did all other prophets were only sent to their specific tribe/nation but Muhammad to all mankind. However we can take a look back throughout history and compare the period when these prophets came from. The time Muhmamad came is the time where there was actually time where the whole world is truly connected. There's even descriptions that the Vikings have reached the Americas by the 7th and 8th century while none before that. East and west travel was more common from the shores of Spain up the the very end of China.

Compared that just to the turn of the millenium, Hell, even many non Christian europeans themseleves don't even believe that Jesus actually exist.

His teachings are good, true and in fact we can find a lot of similarities with Islam especially the fardu ain part (how one should conduct oneself). It's just that praying to him (Buddha) is wrong instead of following his teachings.

We are basing our arguments base too much on English translations which religion is mean as some sort of rituals on the spiritual side when in Islam (yeah, this is an Islam thread so Islamic concept takes precedence ) the ad-din (or religion) means the way of life. Way of life in the physical world which directly related to the spiritual side. Yes as the nature of the world itself is about order, it is then up to use to decide in which order that we follow.

We can't say we are Malaysian for example without acknowledging and to the best of our ability follow the Malaysian constitution and law. Likewise, we can't say that we believe in God without acknowledging and to the best of our ability to follow God's command. There is no other 'religion' besides Islam that to have a direct source from God (which is Qur'an). Even Christians acknowledge that the Bible are work of men, albeit 'inspired' by God.

This somehow reminds me about the 'question' posed that Jesus is either what the Christian believe him to be or the greatest hoax of mankind.

Those people simply forgot and probably refuse to accept that he can both be neither a hoax nor a god.

Actually I would prefer to use Allah if speaking in Arabic or Malay and use God if using English. Much simpler. This probably comes because of the Allah in the bible issue. My stance is simple. Allah is not a Malay word and Arabic word so obviously it's not exclusive to the Malay/muslim only. Yes the word Allah exist in Arabic bible.

However, I still have not read or hear any satisfying answer why that has got to do with using the word in the bible here especially Tuhan is already a word for God in Malay and Malay has been using the word Tuhan and only until the coming of Islam then Malays started using the word Allah. This got nothing to do with acknowledging whether there exists other tuhans or gods but simply to differentiate between the old hindu beliefs (of the Malaysa that time) and the new beliefs base on Islam.

In any case, Christianity does not come here via Arab merchants but first by Portugese conquitadors and later by Dutch and English. Certainly none of them are using the Arabic version of the bible and most probably were not coptics or any eastern rites but rather catholic, protestant and other western version of Christianity.

Simply said, Islam is about balance. Balance towards one own duty, balance towards one duty to the family, to the community and allt hese combined reflects our duty to God.

Reading is good. I like reading.

Starbuck KLCC.

KLCC pun ada masjid dengan surau apa.

Nak jihad wang tak mampu. Nak jihad senjata mata rabun. Jihad keyboard saja lah.

Sapa solat kat suar KLCC hari ni ?

Just would like to share. Sorry if been posted already before.

A way of life.