What is Islam?

Quote :

You've said that all Muslims agree about "all
his books" and then say in a different paragraph that "his books"
include the Sunnah. The only way that those two statements can be true
is if the Shiites claim that the Sunnah are included in "all his
books". They do not. Additinally, they don't agree that Ayisha Hadiths
should be included as Hadiths.

Hadith are not necessarily Allah's [swt] books.
Ahadith come from the life, sayings and mannerisms of the Prophet [saws] and have been historically reported.
Whilst they are actions that show love for the last Messenger of Allah [swt] and that's why they are good deeds.
Just a little nit-picking for clarity.

Quote :

Shiites also don't agree that Mohammed is God's
last messenger, although Mohammed was God's last prophet. Try talking
to an Ishmaili in particular to see what I mean.

Ishmaili are Shi'a now?
Also the Shi'a do believe Muhammad [saws] was Allah's [swt] last messenger. It's part of the shahada which they share with us Sunnis. They believe that he had a different successor.
I know little of Ishmaili belief. I admit.

Quote :

This is also why (even if present company might
be excepted), it's generally true that a Muslim presenting him/herself
as a Muslim will fail to identify themselves as either Shiite or Sunni
Muslim, even when attempting to explain Islam to someone who knows
nothing about it, and the person getting the explanation doesn't know
enough about it to ask.

Where have you seen this?
I've never seen it. Even when I was a curious non-Muslim Atheist investigating Islam.

http://sunniforum.com
http://shiachat.com

I'm quite certain people of those forums are quite open about their sect too.

Quote :

Out of all them prophets and messengers, were any ever women?

We don't know who all of them were, where they were sent or the work they did.
Allahu alim.

Quote :

No book is sufficient to prove itself in the
secular sense. As a believer, you invariably beg the question, and
that's not proof--that's begging the question.

Look at the Qur'an and science.
Try and find a contradiction, I implore you.
Then look at things like modern Embryonic development, the Big Bang and many others of this nature.

I'd like to point out, I am an ex-Atheist and was inquisative much like your are seemingly.

Quote :

Ayisha.

Aisha, may Allah [swt] be pleased with her, was not a Prophet.
That would mean there is a Prophet after Muhammad [saws].
She was merely a narrator of literal tons of ahadith because of her living with the Prophet.

Quote :

I didn't say that I recognize that it has been
unchanged. All I said was that measures had been taken to avoid
corruption. There exist Hadiths found to be corrupted and although the
written transcript of the Quran hasn't changed, certain recitations
HAVE. There is a significant difference between the way it's recited
in, say, Saudi Arabia and in Malaysia or Indonesia. Still different,
Tunisian. Still different yet, Morrocan. Etc.

I do hope you're speaking due to accent.
Otherwise I'd like you to tell me how you know this.
I've never noticed any difference, from all the backgrounds of the people I've heard reciting the Qur'an.

Some ahadith have been found to unreliable, yes.

Another long response I find necessary to segment, especially since it's quite late where I am at present.

First, I know that Quran recitations are different between regions because I listen to them on the shortwave radio international bands. I hear the Quran for myself. Muslim nations broadcast on extended hours during Ramadan, and one can tune in to each nation to make the comparision.

I have also read about how Arabian Sunni Muslims take issue with the localized version of Indonesian Islam, which Indonesians claim is Sunni.

The Quran began as a recitation with strict delivery prescripts, and in Arabic text may seem unchangeable because of the very shortcomings of text in its failure to convey vocal inflections. Anyone with a shortwave radio can tune in and hear for themselves how the recitation has become different, depending on the country.

I don't know for a fact that Ishmailis aren't Sunni as such, but I do know that they declare that Mohammed is God's messenger, but add that Ali is God's friend, protector of faith (wali). I know of no Sunni who makes such declarations about Ali. I have every reason to believe Ishmailis are Shiites.

If Mohammed was the last messenger, then how can religions like Christianity be a deviation from Islam, wouldn't Islam be in effect the last religion founded, and likely deviations from the rest?

Having no female messengers or prophets just means the religion is just like Christianity in the sense it couldn't allow a woman to be important as such to be a messenger of 'god', this to me is just another patriarchal hierarchy, which I'm sorry to say, is quite wrong. Any real, all loving 'god' would've sent an equal amount of men and women to spread 'his' laws or whatever.

And what's with organised religion anyway? Why do we need a set of rules if god loves us so much, surely this is a clear message that he does not trust 'his greatest ever creation'? And if god loves even non-believers, why did he send prophets and messengers in the first place?

Nuthouse Orderly wrote:

If Mohammed was the last messenger, then how can religions like Christianity be a deviation from Islam, wouldn't Islam be in effect the last religion founded, and likely deviations from the rest?

Having no female messengers or prophets just means the religion is just like Christianity in the sense it couldn't allow a woman to be important as such to be a messenger of 'god', this to me is just another patriarchal hierarchy, which I'm sorry to say, is quite wrong. Any real, all loving 'god' would've sent an equal amount of men and women to spread 'his' laws or whatever.

And what's with organised religion anyway? Why do we need a set of rules if god loves us so much, surely this is a clear message that he does not trust 'his greatest ever creation'? And if god loves even non-believers, why did he send prophets and messengers in the first place?

Heh--you've hit on the reason why I wanted to keep the issue of Hadiths separate from the other parts of the discussion I was having with Sayf. Note that I hadn't addressed that part of his response as yet.

The women that were significant in Islam have been relegated to the back of the Muslim bus, so to speak, in the Hadiths. However, were it not for Ayisha and Fatima in particular, there'd be no Sunni/Shiite split. And Ayisha presents more than one issue for Islam as a whole: her age when she was married to Mohammed after his first wife died.

Even the Shiyat recognize Mohammed as the last "messenger", and yet in the part cited by Sayf, there are thousands of messengers. He may have been the last prophet, but by no means the last messenger, for if that were true, there'd be no sainting of either Ayisha or Fatima. And yet they remain sainted and at the root of ancient Sunni/Shiya contention.

Shiites weren't always called "shiites"--originally, they refered to themselves as Fatimites. Mohammed had no intention of rendering females as less than fully human with less than full human rights, but that's what eventually happened due to another of Islam's fall from grace: Sharia.