(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 1) That is not correct.

lol. You probably need to elaborate more on that

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 2) There is no suggestive clothing anymore. Any way of dressing that remains "normal" has to be enough. 

The Qur'an explicitly commands women to cover themselves. what are you talking about ?
If you understand Arabic, that's the verse about the hijab :  وَقُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ
Notice the part in bold, it uses the term khimar, which means the full hijab.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 3) Well. I mostly focus on the book itself. What you are referring to here is “hadith” that is, the teachings that were supposedly given by the prophet while he was alive. But the prophet had forbidden that any of his non-formal teachings other than the Kuran would be written down. 

He forbade his companions to write his teachings when/after he recites the Qur'an, because the two might be mixed up. This restriction is lifted after his death according to scholarly consensus.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: Academically speaking, it is a monumental task to determine which hadith is true

Yeah, that's why we have a science of hadith. Hadith scholars who are much smarter than you and me took care of that.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: . I mostly focused on the Kuran itself (like the prophet himself wanted future generations to do) 

How do you know what the prophet wanted if you reject his sayings ? 

What a joke

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: So my view is less traditional, more rational and more rationally debatable if you like

Your view is simply Quranism, and I assure you it's a dead end. The Qur'an doesn't tell you how to pray, nor specifies the number of prayers, and boom quranism is toppled.

(September 20, 2022 at 12:49 pm)Eclectic Wrote: I remember about 20 years ago, Erdogan announced that he wanted to make the hijab compulsory, and I saw on the news that millions of people took to the streets (ithink in Istanbul) and said they did not want the hijab.

But yesterday and today in Tehran, only a few thousand people came to the street to protest the murder of Mehsa (Jina) and to protest the hijab law!
The secular people of Tehran are very lazy, but the secular people of Turkey immediately come to the streets by the millions and give the message that we do not want hijab!

You are talking about the Gezi protest. I was there it happened in 2013. In fact he wanted to destroy a historic park near the İstiklal Street in İstanbul to make it into a shopping mall complex (or something like that - In order to be able to make more money to spend on another useless project that would further enrich some of the pious businessman working hand in hand with his political party) and he failed. The ruling İslamist party in Turkey has much subtler ways of gradually promoting the Hijab in order to be able to use it as a way of rallying more voters. They can be compared to the rule of Modi in India. The ruling A.K. Party is a so called “traditionalist” movement that is nothing like a populist movement to the core. The foreign parallels of Mr. Erdogan are Victor Orban in Hungrary of Mr. Vladimir Putin in Russia. But as you said, we won’t let him do whatever he likes.
 
Iran on the other hand freed itself 40 years ago from the rule of a dictatorial monarch, only to fall in the grasp of political islamists. They are more like Venezuela and the Venezuelan Maduro experience. Perhaps even worse.
 
And another issue: Political islamists are operating in networks. At least this is my own personal conspiracy theory. I firmly believe that the İslamic Brotherhood in Egypt etc. are being funded by countries like Iran, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
 
Another note on Iran: To see that political Islam is doomed to fail from the start think how stupid one has to be to bring an oil rich nation on the brink of collapse. Oil and Gas means a steady influx of money no matter what you do. They should have been like Qataris, not knowing where to put their money so putting it into F1 tracks, artificial islands, gigantic Aquariums and record breaking skyscrapers. But as far as I know, nothing has been built in Iran since the time of the Monarch.

(September 20, 2022 at 3:45 pm)R00tKiT Wrote: Your view is simply Quranism, and I assure you it's a dead end. The Qur'an doesn't tell you how to pray, nor specifies the number of prayers, and boom quranism is toppled.

It would not be a problem that magic book doesn't tell people how to pray or how many times to pray.  It's unclear why you think it would be.

How does not having some article of your own beliefs contained in the quran, topple belief in the quran....? Are you, as a muslim, quite certain that magic book is incomplete?

(September 20, 2022 at 3:45 pm)R00tKiT Wrote:

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 1) That is not correct.

lol. You probably need to elaborate more on that

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 2) There is no suggestive clothing anymore. Any way of dressing that remains "normal" has to be enough. 

The Qur'an explicitly commands women to cover themselves. what are you talking about ?
If you understand Arabic, that's the verse about the hijab :  وَقُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ
Notice the part in bold, it uses the term khimar, which means the full hijab.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: 3) Well. I mostly focus on the book itself. What you are referring to here is “hadith” that is, the teachings that were supposedly given by the prophet while he was alive. But the prophet had forbidden that any of his non-formal teachings other than the Kuran would be written down. 

He forbade his companions to write his teachings when/after he recites the Qur'an, because the two might be mixed up. This restriction is lifted after his death according to scholarly consensus.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: Academically speaking, it is a monumental task to determine which hadith is true

Yeah, that's why we have a science of hadith. Hadith scholars who are much smarter than you and me took care of that.

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: . I mostly focused on the Kuran itself (like the prophet himself wanted future generations to do) 

How do you know what the prophet wanted if you reject his sayings ? 

What a joke

(September 20, 2022 at 6:11 am)Leonardo17 Wrote: So my view is less traditional, more rational and more rationally debatable if you like

Your view is simply Quranism, and I assure you it's a dead end. The Qur'an doesn't tell you how to pray, nor specifies the number of prayers, and boom quranism is toppled.

1) I am willing to have a friendly debate with you but there is something I have to ask you: Are you a political islamist or a member of any sect that claims to explain religious teachings to you?
- I have to be very strict on that. I don't believe in Religious institutions. and for political Islam, a leading islamic scholar that I am reading on a regular basis claims that anyone who uses the religion or the faith for his/her own political or personal aims is not any different from the Pharaoh Ramses II in the story of Moses. 
 
So let's be clear on that. If your answer on that was to be positive, the Kuranic order to me is "And you should tell them: Your religion is for you, and my religion is for me” That’s how I am seeing it.
 
 
(Sorry, if there are any mistakes, my Kuran is a translated version but I can occasionally check for the English version online in the future if this debate continues)
 
2) There has been a period during which the female relatives were in physical danger because of opponents to the teachings of the prophet (I will not say s.a.v. everytime – s.a.v. means “peace be upon his name” it’s a sign of respect used by Muslim and non-Muslim populations in the past), Those opponents could potentially harm his female relatives. So he told them to cover up entirely in order not to be recognized in public.
 
Other wise the main guideline in the Kuran is “Cover your intimate parts” (see how cleverly expressed and relative this guideline is)
 
3) The ordinary man has still no mean of knowing which hadith is true and which one is not.
 
But the second thing is: There are many African and Arab Muslims that I am regularly seeing in and around the place where I live. I have to say from the beginning that if you have a more traditional interpretation of Islam and if that works fine with you, I have absolutely nothing against it. The only thing is this:
There is also a verse in the Kuran (In fact there are several) that say that one should not simply perpetuate religious practices of the past because it came to you from your parents or your society (In the verse it says “from those who came before you”). So you have, as a holder of faith, the duty to question and meditate on everything that has been passed on to you as “religious tradition”.
 
Fasting for instance, is good for the digestive system as a whole. So it is a good religious practice. But do you know what they do in Egypt (and many Arab countries). They simply play with the clock, go out to the street in the night, and sleep during the day when they should be fasting while being active and thus educating and learning how to be the master of their own “nefs” or Ego.
 
So there are differences in interpretation as I have said from the very beginning. I totally don’t believe in “My way or the highway” approach in religious issues (or any issue in general).
 
4) Yes. But I am not a hadith scholar. So I will have to trust someone if I decide to believe in it. And I don’t want any intermediary between me and God. In fact, I disagree with the notion of there being somebody between me and God. There can only be the two of us. That’s my approach on this subject.
 
5) No. But the Kuran come directly from the source, and is therefore universal and for all mankind. The prophet was a man like you and me who was born in a culture, in a society, in a historical context.
I also don’t mess too much with the details. You must have heard the story on “the Satanic verses”. I simply don’t have time for such things. I focus on “what is there for me?”. That’s my biggest issue. And I actually don’t have time for anything else.
The prophet might have said something to the the Arabs of the 6th Century AD. In may have been still relevant in the 10th century AD (The time of the first Crusade), but do you believe that all of those sayings (wich are almost all, unproven) are still relevant in the 21st century? I chose not to believe that. J
 
6) In the end, we as men (and women) we don’t really get to know who is right and who is wrong do we?
 
So I know I have been a little harsh on the Hijab issue. But there is a certain theocratic and political islamist view in this world, which is a serious danger for all mankind and I a willing to fight this political ideology. So no one (not me either) is against the hijab if that’s in your belief system. It’s not the object. It’s the political ideology that is looming behind it in many cases. So that’s my main issue.
 
And if you are ok with a certain belief system. That’s fine with me too. I am only sort of keeping my right to criticize and I want this issue (and all other religious issues) to not be taboo and dogmatic subjects but to be debatable and I want to be able to talk about these issues anytime I want to.
 
That includes, say, The call to prayer. DO I have to hear it 5 times a day or what if is was heard only at the time of the Friday prayer when most people actually go to the mosque and pray.
 
See: I want to able to ask these questions and to debate these issues. I don’t believe in those rigid orders (outside those clearly mentioned in the Kuran itself) that comes from this or that famous personality in the past. I Simply don’t care. See what happens in Irak and in almost all Muslim nations. Do you think we would be in this situation If we were always totally right about anything and everything and everyone else was simply wrong?
- No I don’t think so.

(September 21, 2022 at 11:33 am)Leonardo17 Wrote:

(September 20, 2022 at 12:49 pm)Eclectic Wrote: I remember about 20 years ago, Erdogan announced that he wanted to make the hijab compulsory, and I saw on the news that millions of people took to the streets (ithink in Istanbul) and said they did not want the hijab.

But yesterday and today in Tehran, only a few thousand people came to the street to protest the murder of Mehsa (Jina) and to protest the hijab law!
The secular people of Tehran are very lazy, but the secular people of Turkey immediately come to the streets by the millions and give the message that we do not want hijab!

You are talking about the Gezi protest. I was there it happened in 2013. In fact he wanted to destroy a historic park near the İstiklal Street in İstanbul to make it into a shopping mall complex (or something like that - In order to be able to make more money to spend on another useless project that would further enrich some of the pious businessman working hand in hand with his political party) and he failed. The ruling İslamist party in Turkey has much subtler ways of gradually promoting the Hijab in order to be able to use it as a way of rallying more voters. They can be compared to the rule of Modi in India. The ruling A.K. Party is a so called “traditionalist” movement that is nothing like a populist movement to the core. The foreign parallels of Mr. Erdogan are Victor Orban in Hungrary of Mr. Vladimir Putin in Russia. But as you said, we won’t let him do whatever he likes.

You said right. The demonstrations were carried out in year 2013

There is a strong social cohesion technique that is being used here. In fact Narenda Modi’s Populist, Hindu nationalist party in India is using exactly the same technique. The first step is always social media and the Internet. They send their armies of trolls to create the impression that “Everybody in India believes in the homogenous Hindu society as promoted by Narenda Modi and his Hindu nationalist party”, next step (or the prior step) is the media. Once you have political power it is more than easy in developing democracies into saying only what you want them to say. Very much like the republican, Donnald Trump supporting media in the U.S. Than you start using more tools of social cohesion. You keep pumping nationalism and religious ideals to you people even if they are increasingly poor and even if every policy undertaken by the government is either robbery of complete failure.
I will have to give some details on that: There is an inflation of popular series in Turkey today. And many of them are historical series on earlier Turkish History. 90% of them are based on lies. Meaning, that they are simply not true. But people are watching these series because they have been already surrounded in every front: Education, Social media, usual media, television and finally entertainment. This technique is not Indian but Russian. Putin uses the exact same technique on his people. It comes probably from soviet perhaps even Tsarist times. An ingenious method of authoritarianism.
Finally the headscarf comes as a Italian style / medieval Arab technique of social cohesion. Fascists during the ascent of Benitto Mussolini to political power in the 1930’s used to wear black shirts. In fact black shirt was synonymous with fascist. There is this idea of homogeneity. The message is “we are here, we are all the same and we are an army”. The more middle-eastern style usage of the headscarf is more middle-eastern in nature. The idea here is “erase women, control women, control 50 % of society”. The idea here is medieval in nature. And therefore it is a very strong political symbol also. In fact, it is the pillar of the ideology of political Islam which, as I said before, is nothing but religious dictatorship. It’s Bashar Al-Assad (Syrian Ruler) without the secular-looking aspects of government.

Conlusion:
In my culture, the headscarf is some sort of cultural element. Many women in the country wear it (and they should wear it because anyone working in the outside in our climate needs to have some simple and adapted type of clothing). No one has ever had anything against it. It used to be banned in public institutions and public bodies until this Modi-style populist government legalized it hoping to gain more support from conservative people. Than starting from the 90’s there started to be these “islamists” who hate the republic, hate laicity and hate the Turkish nation as a whole. I believe them to be backed respectively by Iran, the Arab world and Russia in many ways. From that period on, the headscarf became a political symbol. In the 1990’s it used to mean “I am an Islamist, pro-theocracy person”. Today the meaning is “I am a Supporter of the AK political party, I believe in (lies about) earlier Turkish states like the Ottoman Empire, I am a strong nationalist and defender of traditional national values (another lie), and I am an Islamist (another lie and misunderstanding, I already said that Islam has nothing to do with it)”. The aim being to constantly convey a certain political message, to show their unity (which is also another lie because different religious sects and nationalist groups are in fierce competition for their own personal interests. Nationalist were mixed into scandals involving the leader of a mafia boss who – for some reason – has even started to post youtube videos about the scandals of the current government. And one prominent islamist sect has even attempted a military coup against the ruling islamists party. So it looks as if they like one another, basically there are very strong rivalries. Just like the Entourage of Vladimir Putin and his Oligarchs who are murdering one another and then putting the blame on ukranians – who have said they have nothing to do with it -).
So they want cohesion and uniformity, they want to give a very strong political message through a very strong symbol that is being used since centuries in the middle-east and above all they are talking to me; I mean to Turks who still believe in Democracy and Laicity. What they are saying is: “See, we took your country, my headscarf was forbidden and now it is not, we are going to subvert this country and turn it into Saudi Arabia” while keeping the phony rhetoric “Oh I am wearing the Arabic Hijab but I am a Nationalistic / republic-loving even –secular- person” (Just like MAGA Americans, their basic nature is lie, self-deception, phoniness, superiority complex and even more lies).
The truth is, unlike the traditional Turkish women, which has and has always had the right to choose on the way she dresses. (In ancient times there was a whole fashion industry with so many types of head coverings dresses that were so carefully designed and, yes so beautiful in many ways. That was of course, before the polarization of the female dress and the female body in general.) But these guys, they have been put in Islamic schools from the age of 7. They have been indoctrinated. So of course, If you ask them they will tell you “Oh I fell free being covered all over the place, I am doing this because I believe I am not a decadent western woman but a pious Ottoman woman”. An I am not making fun of them saying this. This is sad. Education should be free, secular, scientific and unbiased. 1) Who sends his/her daughter to a school like this? Who wants to indoctrinate them from the very beginning of their lives? And 2) This is what I call a Narrenda Modi style of governance. Yes there were some religious schools in Turkey before, “secular” putchist military leaders opened them. But this ruling Ak Party even opened exclusive male and female religious schools 20 years ago. Now they have armies of brainless zombies basically in every university. So this is the reward of being “patriotic”, conservative, and “religious” for AK party voter and the crown of their victory is the Hijab. Because basically they have nothing else. The economy has collapsed, the army is gone, the EU membership bid has been frozen, the country is isolated and is increasingly turning to China and Russia for foreign support (By the way, Imperial Russia was the enemy of the Ottoman Empire. And China, 1) They are currently murdering and assimilating their Turkic Uygur Minority, and 2) Early Turkish States were in constant war with China. In fact, even the Great Wall was built to deter the Turkic and Mongol tribes of the north from entering China).
And one last anecdote: If you believe in a religion that criticizes everything that is good and wants to punish basically everything you want to do in your life (which is not the way I understand Islam and the Kuran) you have to learn to be a good liar and you have to learn how to fake it. See, there was this 2018 movie with Russell Crowe and Nicole Kidman called “Boy Erased” about a Homosexual boy (Jared Edmons) who was put in a school to “correct himself”. The solution Jared Edmonds and his friends had in this re-education center was to pretend and to “fake it until they make it”. Well, this is the main current in misinterpreted monotheistic religions, even in dogmatic forms of Judaism. Since everything is a sin, and you are bad and disgusting and a sinner and detestable because of you original sin (etc. etc. etc.) the only solution is to lie. You have to be a lier from the very first day of your life and you have to be damn good at it.
So this is why, like everything that comes out of their mouth is totally not true and even the ideal society that they want to create (which is nothing short of an Adolf Hitler style heaven-on-earth style society) is a complete fiction and a lie. These people are liars. Any deeply conservative, deeply nationalistic and deeply religious or religious oriented person in this world is a liar. We have to see this. I am a moderately conservative, moderately patriotic and moderately religious person. What I am saying is: Anyone who is going really deep into these things is a fake. They are fakes and they are liars. All of them.
So one aspect of the issue is this: We have to look whether the headscarf is cultural or sincerely religious, or if it is politicized. If it is politicized, I don’t see why anybody, even in the West should tolerate it.

I have read the 30 / 30 rule. But I think this addition will be useful for anyone interested in the subject. Sometimes I tend to overwrite and over express myself. I am not a very knowledgeable man on the subject either. Yet this video is short and the presenter is very accurate in making her point. So if the administrator decides to allow me: