RE: Pride Hath a Fall in Indo-Pak War
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I agree with your other points, but let me correct one thing regarding Surah Tawbah Ayat, which you mentioned, and basically, you are saying that Islam teaches terrorism.
Does Surah Tawbah teach terrorism?
ChatGPT said:
No, Surah At-Tawbah (Chapter 9 of the Qur'an) does not teach terrorism. Like many verses in religious texts, it must be understood in its proper historical, linguistic, and theological context.
Key Points:
- Historical Context
Surah At-Tawbah was revealed during a time of intense conflict between the early Muslim community in Medina and the pagan Quraysh of Mecca and other hostile tribes.
Many of its verses deal with warfare, treaties, treachery, and the rules of engagement.
These were situational commands aimed at specific enemies who had broken treaties, attacked Muslims, or plotted against them.
- Misinterpretation
Verses such as 9:5 ("the verse of the sword") are often quoted out of context by extremists and critics alike.
The verse says:
"Then when the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them..."
But this follows verses explaining that these polytheists had broken peace treaties and attacked Muslims first.
- Rules of Warfare
Even in Surah At-Tawbah, warfare is conditional:
Against those who broke treaties (9:4)
Only after fair warning (9:5)
If they repent or seek peace, they must be left unharmed (9:6)
“If any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection... then convey him to a place of safety.” (9:6)
- Islamic Scholarly Consensus
Mainstream Islamic scholars across Sunni and Shia traditions reject terrorism as un-Islamic.
They emphasize that Islam permits self-defense, not aggression, and upholds justice, mercy, and peace.
Summary:
Surah At-Tawbah does not teach terrorism. It addresses specific historical conflicts and sets conditions for warfare. Like any sacred text, its verses can be misused by extremists when stripped from context — but that is a misrepresentation, not the true teaching of Islam.
If you're encountering claims or confusion around this topic, I can help break down specific verses or common misconceptions.**
👉pravesh bhai Esi comment mat karo ki jis se apne hi desh me log aapas me ladne lage
I disagree.
The whole internet is filled with apologists twisting and turning every word. (Which generative engines like ChatGPT have been trained on, also ChatGPT is not going to hurt any religious sentiments, it is one of their policies.)
I fully understand the context and have done extensive research. I stick to my judgement. I would call a Spade a Spade no matter what.
Agree to disagree, bhai.
So the internet is wrong, and you are right?
Surah tawabah puri live war me release huva tha aur war me ek dusre ko fulo ki malaye nahi pehanai jati.
You should also think by putting yourself in the other person's place to understand the whole thing.
And ye aadhi adhuri line uthake hate mat felao pura chapter dala karo.
Ese to har chij galat hi dikhai degi.
I don't care about what the internet says, I do my own research independently. (If everyone calls a Spider a monkey, would it be a monkey... I hope not)
I would recommend you to read the early interpretations (tafsirs) too and how these verses were (and still are in many cases) taken as commandments for the time immemorial to come. Apologists had to come with 'softer' interpretations just to not sound barbaric and abide by the modern era and human rights.
Ever wondered what motivates many of these terrorists? Not everyone is going to be like that, but certainly these verses help them push over to the other side.
I don't want to get into the debate. Maybe it is my interpretation? Who knows.
I respect your views and I hope you respect mine.
No one is stupid enough to call a spider a monkey.
From where are you doing your research?
Internet?
Share those early interpretations here, I will answer all of them.
If this were true, every Muslim would be a terrorist. And you need to do more research on this topic that who creates terrorist groups and funds them, and you will see the business in it. Regarding the Kashmir issue, all this is happening because of the greed for land old Indo-Pak conflict. And these terrorists who attacked Pahalgam spread this propaganda so that people in India get divided, and congratulations, people like you are also creating division in the country. So we don't need an enemy when we are fighting with each other.
In my view, which I shared, you will never find that I disrespected your religion or your book; that's why you are respecting it.
But I can't respect the thought in which someone calls my religion's holy book a terrorist book. It is my record that I have never said bad words to any religion or any holy book, and I would never accept it.
I also don't want to do this, but you are directly calling the Quran a terrorist book, so that is why I replied. Otherwise, I have no personal issue with you, and I also did not want to debate here.
I don't believe in any religion nor said every muslim is a terrorist.
In short, I will say many religious books like quaran do approach violence in a way that would never be acceptable to a modern liberal view.
No one is fighting. We are just having a civil conversation. Agree to disagree?
(Btw, just one attack wasn't the reason for my views, they were formed before this incident)
Edit: Sorry, I missed one thing. My research were mostly books. Read Tafsir Al Jalayan and Tafsir Ibn Abbas, none of them mentions about the use of context with this quote + they add more hardline interpretation.
Regarding fighting, I meant to say whole country.
I know We are not fighting. Just discussion 👍
How much research have you done on religion?