Deep into Druze faith

X

Xynus87

New Member
Bruh. Then explain good intentioned violence
Other than self defense.
When someone kills someone for self-defense it is violence, but it's in not in evil intentions. Similarly fighting the Meccans was a must. It's crucial to understand the 7th century Arabian society and its hierarchy, all of this affected the environment where Islam was supposed to be nurtured and it was on the contrary to lots of these principles and ideas.
 
  • Advertisement
  • X

    Xynus87

    New Member
    القول ان المسيحية انتشرت بالعنف يدل على جهل الوقائع التاريخية التي تثبت عكس ذلك، اما الاشارة الى الحروب الصليبية فالمعروف ان هذه الحروب والنزاعات لم يدعو لها السيد المسيح ولا الإنجيل المقدس ولا اشترك فيها الرسل وهي حدثت بعد اكثر من الف سنة على انتشار المسيحية وبعد اكثر من ٤٠٠ سنة على سقوط آخر معاقل المسيحية في الشرق وبعد ان تعرض الغرب المسيحي للغزوات المتتالية، اما الحروب والغزوات عندغيرنا فقد دعت اليها كتبهم وقامت فور انطلاق دعوتهم الدينية وقد قاد الكثير منها مؤسس هذه الدعوة وخلفائه المباشرين بينما عندما استل بطرس سيفه وقطع اذن العبد ملخس الذي جاء لكييسلم المسيح في جبل الزيتون زجره يسوع وقال له : «رُدَّ سَيْفَكَ إِلَى مَكَانِهِ. لأَنَّ كُلَّ الَّذِينَ يَأْخُذُونَالسَّيْفَ بِالسَّيْفِ يَهْلِكُونَ! ، لذلك لا مجال للمقارنة بين الدعوة الى الصفح والمحبة والدعوة الى قتلالناس وحملهم على تغيير معتقداتهم بالقوة والعنف
    We can flip this easily, was the Prophet alive during these campaigns? Did he command them?
     
    NewLeb

    NewLeb

    New Member
    Bruh. Then explain good intentioned violence
    Other than self defense.
    I wouldn’t know, but there is no advocation for evil-intentioned acts of violence in the Qur’an. The violent verses only relate to war.
     
    Saqar18

    Saqar18

    New Member
    this is mainly because they are usually at the service of the political leadership du jour. in Christianity and in particular for people of the cloth, their commitment to God outranks everything else including political allignments, and consequently neutralizes their alliegences, as they thrive to remain independent and outside the spheres of political influences, though there are some minor exceptions here and there.

    it is not the case however with the druze clergy, they have their political alliegiences, in a system where the backing of the clergy consolidates the leadership itself and even forms its cornerstone. today, in the feuds between erslan junblat and wahhab, the clergy is also divided between them, with jumbi having the lion's share of course.
    I think for the druze its a matter of survival, and they unite from old to young in times of crisis and yes they do have their leaders they back, however. As myso has said before. The people rally behind the baik when needed.

    Druze shaykhs dont need to sit at home and refrain from interfering to maintain their peace. Druze shaykhs are in constant union with themselves and their beleifs.
    Wether in peace or in conflict. They intervene when the need arises. And are some of the first to take on the attack.

    Their faith allows them to act in self defense. Which also is why you see them rise.
     
    Saqar18

    Saqar18

    New Member
    When someone kills someone for self-defense it is violence, but it's in not in evil intentions. Similarly fighting the Meccans was a must. It's crucial to understand the 7th century Arabian society and its hierarchy, all of this affected the environment where Islam was supposed to be nurtured and it was on the contrary to lots of these principles and ideas.
    I disagree.

    Self defense is not violence. It is "counter" violence.

    Lets continue the focus on bani maroof as this thread was made for.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I think for the druze its a matter of survival, and they unite from old to young in times of crisis and yes they do have their leaders they back, however. As myso has said before. The people rally behind the baik when needed.

    Druze shaykhs dont need to sit at home and refrain from interfering to maintain their peace. Druze shaykhs are in constant union with themselves and their beleifs.
    Wether in peace or in conflict. They intervene when the need arises. And are some of the first to take on the attack.

    Their faith allows them to act in self defense. Which also is why you see them rise.
    it is partly a matter of survival, however the very sect originated in a very politically charged atmosphere, where the first notion of the faith was founded on the divine nature of el-hakem bi amr el lah, the fatimid caliph. many of the druze dogmatic practices and beliefs originated from their daily struggles, like the notion of not accepting any converts into the faith, that was a compromise to appease some of the oppression from the islamic surroundings, same as not preaching, nor accepting any converts, nor even marying outside the sect. the whole movement was indeed intertwined with politics and theological evolving with the needs of the hour. even the name druze that they adopted was intend as a pejorative identification by their muslem persecutors. All that lead to a closer involvement of the druze clergy in politics and even matters of war. The fact remains however that to a Christian in particular, in this day an age, the expectation is that the religious institution is not politically at the service of the ruling class, which is not the case in the druze religious institution where the issues consisting the core have a more temporal nature.

    the little information we have indicates that a person from central asia played a major role in establishing the faith, later known as muhammad el darazi, or muhammad bin isma3il el darazi, who saw the caliph el-hakem bi amr el lah a reincarnation of buddha, and considered him to be a living god, something that was a recipe for trouble in the Islamic community despite being adopted by a group of religious figures, and led to a political unrest in cairo that lasted until the caliph’s mysterious disappearance in 1021, but not before banishing darazi himself due to an internal conflict within the leaders of the newly established faith seeking to gain favor with the caliph. from there on darazi was considered to be some sort of a heretic even within the community he helped established, and later on as persecution grew, their moslem oppressors started referring to the followers of the new sect pejoratively as “druze”, the name stuck as time went on.
     
    Last edited:
    modesty

    modesty

    Well-Known Member
    We can flip this easily, was the Prophet alive during these campaigns? Did he command them?
    Yes of course he commanded many campaigns
    غزوات الرسول ومعاركه منهم من يقول انها ٢٩ ومنهم من يقول اكثر، اشترك هو شخصياً ب ٧منها، استمرت هذه الغزوات ٨ سنوات

    بلغ ضحايا هذه المعارك اكثر من الف قتيل والاف المسبيين من الاولاد والنساءوهذا عدد كبير فيالجزيرة العربية

    هذا ما عدا الثورات الداخلية من حروب الردة بعد موت الرسول وغيرها التي استمرت حواليالسنتين من ٦٣٢م الى ٦٣٤م

    عدد غزوات ومعارك المسلمين العسكرية هو ٥٤٨ منها ٢٠٠ معركة في اسبانيا لوحدها

    اما الاغتيالات والتصفيات فحدث ولا حرج اذ نادراً ما نجح خليفة باكمال حكمه واخص بالذكر ماحدث لعلي بن ابي طالب وعائلته احفاد الرسول​
     
    𓍝𓂀𓄃𓇼

    𓍝𓂀𓄃𓇼

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    What Paraclete Dark Angel said is laced with grave errors as usual. But hilarious, nonetheless.

    Al Hakem reincarnation of Buddah? :lol:
    Al Hakem a living God? :lol:
     
    Last edited:
    modesty

    modesty

    Well-Known Member
    We can flip this easily, was the Prophet alive during these campaigns? Did he command them?
    The Muslims fought the total of twenty nine (29) battles during the life of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) from which some were fought by the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) himself and from which some were lead and/or participated by the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) which are :
    • The battle of Waddan (1 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bawat (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Asherah (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr Al-Kubrah (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Saleem (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Qaenaqaa' (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Saweeq (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of the Amr (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bahran (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Uhud (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Hamraa' Al-Asad (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Al-Nazeer (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of That Al-Reqaa' (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr Al-Akherah (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of Domat-Ul-Gandal (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Khandaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Al-Mustalaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Qurayzah (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Lehyan (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of The Qird (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Hudaybeyah (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of Khaibar (7 Hijri).
    • The battle of Umrat Al-Qadaa' (7 Hijri).
    • Fath Mekkah (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Haneen (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Taa'ef (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Tabuk (9 Hijri).
    Twenty seven (27) battles from the twenty nine (29) battles were fought with the attendance of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) himself not as a fighter, but rather a leader or something else with only nine (9) of them being fought by the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) himself using his sword which are :
    • The battle of Badr (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Uhud (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Khandaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Banu Qurayzah (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Mustalaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Khaybar (7 Hijri).
    • Fath Mekkah (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Haneen (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Ta'ef (9 Hijri).
     
    Saqar18

    Saqar18

    New Member
    it is partly a matter of survival, however the very sect originated in a very politically charged atmosphere, where the first notion of the faith was founded on the divine nature of el-hakem bi amr el lah, the fatimid caliph. many of the druze dogmatic practices and beliefs originated from their daily struggles, like the notion of not accepting any converts into the faith, that was a compromise to appease some of the oppression from the islamic surroundings, same as not preaching, nor accepting any converts, nor even marying outside the sect. the whole movement was indeed intertwined with politics and theological evolving with the needs of the hour. even the name druze that they adopted was intend as a pejorative identification by their muslem persecutors. All that lead to a closer involvement of the druze clergy in politics and even matters of war. The fact remains however that to a Christian in particular, in this day an age, the expectation is that the religious institution is not politically at the service of the ruling class, which is not the case in the druze religious institution where the issues consisting the core have a more temporal nature.
    the little information we have indicates that a person from central asia played a major role in establishing the faith, later known as muhammad el darazi, or muhammad bin isma3il el darazi, who saw the caliph el-hakem bi amr el lah a reincarnation of buddha, and considered him to be a living god, something that was a recipe for trouble in the Islamic community despite being adopted by a group of religious figures, and led to a political unrest in cairo that lasted until the caliph’s mysterious disappearance in 1021, but not before banishing darazi himself due to an internal conflict within the leaders of the newly established faith seeking to gain favor with the caliph. from there on darazi was considered to be some sort of a heretic even within the community he helped established, and later on as persecution grew, their moslem oppressors started referring to the followers of the new sect pejoratively as “druze”, the name stuck as time went on.
    "many of the druze dogmatic practices and beliefs originated from their daily struggles, like the notion of not accepting any converts into the faith, that was a compromise to appease some of the oppression from the islamic surroundings, same as not preaching, nor accepting any converts, nor even marying outside the sect. the whole movement was indeed intertwined with politics and theological evolving with the needs of the hour."

    You're off a little.
    They didnt stop converting.
    They faced harrsasment everyday, they were the powerhouse, and then they suddenly were militarily facing off with a powerhouse, yet the call still was going. underground, they even brought it back out again once caliph al-mustasim came to power.
    It didnt stop, call was "suspended" a couple of times. 1st time due to ad-darazi corruption. Second time it went undeground was because of the ali-az zahir's massacre. Third time was before ali az zahir died, he sent out another hit on bani maroof. It was revived

    The call *closed* because it did it completed its job.
    It isnt because out of fear or oppression. Did you know? When the brutality softened a little, the call was revived.
    hamza ibn ali is the spearhead of the call. He was the speakerphone of the call. It was his leadership. Not ad darazi, hes a hijacker.

    Hamza called his movement "al-mwahiduun" thats who they are.

    "where the first notion of the faith was founded on the divine nature of el-hakem bi amr el lah, the fatimid caliph"
    Nope. Off again.
    The first notion is knowing god is One. Second notion is to recognize his gods will. Third is to realize everything comes from and returns to their origin.
     
    Saqar18

    Saqar18

    New Member
    The Muslims fought the total of twenty nine (29) battles during the life of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) from which some were fought by the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) himself and from which some were lead and/or participated by the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) which are :
    • The battle of Waddan (1 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bawat (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Asherah (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr Al-Kubrah (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Saleem (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Qaenaqaa' (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Saweeq (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of the Amr (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bahran (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Uhud (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Hamraa' Al-Asad (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Al-Nazeer (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of That Al-Reqaa' (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of Badr Al-Akherah (4 Hijri).
    • The battle of Domat-Ul-Gandal (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Khandaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Al-Mustalaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Qurayzah (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Bani Lehyan (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of The Qird (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Hudaybeyah (6 Hijri).
    • The battle of Khaibar (7 Hijri).
    • The battle of Umrat Al-Qadaa' (7 Hijri).
    • Fath Mekkah (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Haneen (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Taa'ef (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Tabuk (9 Hijri).
    Twenty seven (27) battles from the twenty nine (29) battles were fought with the attendance of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) himself not as a fighter, but rather a leader or something else with only nine (9) of them being fought by the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) himself using his sword which are :
    • The battle of Badr (2 Hijri).
    • The battle of Uhud (3 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Khandaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Banu Qurayzah (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Mustalaq (5 Hijri).
    • The battle of Khaybar (7 Hijri).
    • Fath Mekkah (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Haneen (8 Hijri).
    • The battle of Al-Ta'ef (9 Hijri).
    I always wanted to know if he killed someons.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    "many of the druze dogmatic practices and beliefs originated from their daily struggles, like the notion of not accepting any converts into the faith, that was a compromise to appease some of the oppression from the islamic surroundings, same as not preaching, nor accepting any converts, nor even marying outside the sect. the whole movement was indeed intertwined with politics and theological evolving with the needs of the hour."

    You're off a little.
    They didnt stop converting.
    They faced harrsasment everyday, they were the powerhouse, and then they suddenly were militarily facing off with a powerhouse, yet the call still was going. underground, they even brought it back out again once caliph al-mustasim came to power.
    It didnt stop, call was "suspended" a couple of times. 1st time due to ad-darazi corruption. Second time it went undeground was because of the ali-az zahir's massacre. Third time was before ali az zahir died, he sent out another hit on bani maroof. It was revived

    The call *closed* because it did it completed its job.
    It isnt because out of fear or oppression. Did you know? When the brutality softened a little, the call was revived.
    hamza ibn ali is the spearhead of the call. He was the speakerphone of the call. It was his leadership. Not ad darazi, hes a hijacker.

    Hamza called his movement "al-mwahiduun" thats who they are.
    not sure what that changes. no matter how you describe it, they stopped converting and preaching to prevent instigating problems with moslems, leading to restricting marriages to within the followers of the druze faith, and that with time became the norm.

    "where the first notion of the faith was founded on the divine nature of el-hakem bi amr el lah, the fatimid caliph"
    Nope. Off again.
    The first notion is knowing god is One. Second notion is to recognize his gods will. Third is to realize everything comes from and returns to their origin.
    the first notion of the faith in terms of chronology not in terms of theological doctrine. the first the sect came into being was through the notion that the fatimid caliph elhakem bi2amr ellah is is a divine incarnation. this is a historical fact.

    as to the theology itself it is an interesting mix from everywhere, integrating greek philosophy, hindou mysticism and as well as buddhism, along with some islamic notions. the secrecy and the fact that they had to go underground many times is very understandable in this region of the world, though in this day and age the norms of the faith can be presented on the internet without fearing repercussions, as is the case in this thread.
     
    Last edited:
    modesty

    modesty

    Well-Known Member
    I always wanted to know if he killed someons.
    Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, of Jews one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was 1000 Jews killed for remaining loyal to Judaism.
    as for others there are plenty of evidence about killing people.
     
    X

    Xynus87

    New Member
    Yes of course he commanded many campaigns
    غزوات الرسول ومعاركه منهم من يقول انها ٢٩ ومنهم من يقول اكثر، اشترك هو شخصياً ب ٧منها، استمرت هذه الغزوات ٨ سنوات

    بلغ ضحايا هذه المعارك اكثر من الف قتيل والاف المسبيين من الاولاد والنساءوهذا عدد كبير فيالجزيرة العربية

    هذا ما عدا الثورات الداخلية من حروب الردة بعد موت الرسول وغيرها التي استمرت حواليالسنتين من ٦٣٢م الى ٦٣٤م

    عدد غزوات ومعارك المسلمين العسكرية هو ٥٤٨ منها ٢٠٠ معركة في اسبانيا لوحدها

    اما الاغتيالات والتصفيات فحدث ولا حرج اذ نادراً ما نجح خليفة باكمال حكمه واخص بالذكر ماحدث لعلي بن ابي طالب وعائلته احفاد الرسول​
    Not these campaigns, I'm talking about the Islamic conquests out of Arabia.
     
    X

    Xynus87

    New Member
    I disagree.

    Self defense is not violence. It is "counter" violence.

    Lets continue the focus on bani maroof as this thread was made for.
    Define violence first.
     
    Last edited:
    Saqar18

    Saqar18

    New Member
    not sure what that changes. no matter how you describe it, they stopped converting and preaching to prevent instigating problems with moslems, leading to restricting marriages to within the followers of the druze faith, and that with time became the norm.
    the first notion of the faith in terms of chronology not in terms of theological doctrine. the first the sect came into being was through the notion that the fatimid caliph elhakem bi2amr ellah is is a divine incarnation. this is a historical fact.
    I disagree. Al-hakim is a "maqam". A station to reflect gods truth onto the believers.
    He isnt saying "i am the lord"
    He is saying "approximate yourself with the lord."
    Just like how a word is a station for its meaning. For example "Tree"

    "like the notion of not accepting any converts into the faith, that was a compromise to appease some of the oppression from the islamic surroundings, same as not preaching, nor accepting any converts, nor even marying outside the sect"

    This changes alot. You were suggesting that the faith stopped converting because of fear of oppression. Not true.

    However, thats not the case. The call was conclused because the job was done. End of proselytizing because they reached who they needed to reach.

    Divine incarnation is what ad-darazi was preaching. Which in the end had him killed.
     
    Top