Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2006/10/26 01:22If a person passes wind whilst doing ghusl from janaabah, does that invalidate the ghusl?.
Answer :
Praise be to Allaah.
Passing wind is one of the things that invalidate wudoo? but it is not one of the things that invalidate ghusl. Based on this, if a person touches his private part, urinates or passes wind whilst doing ghusl, he should complete his ghusl, then do wudoo? afterwards.
The basic principle is that if ghusl is done following major impurity, then it suffices for wudoo?. If a person is junub (impure following sexual activity) and he does ghusl, then that suffices for wudoo?, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
?If you are in a state of Janaaba (i.e. after a sexual discharge), purify yourselves (bathe your whole body)?
[al-Maa'idah 5:6]
He does not have to do wudoo? after doing ghusl, but if one of the things that invalidate wudoo? takes place whilst doing ghusl or afterwards, then he has to do wudoo? for prayer. But if he does not break his wudoo? then his ghusl from janaabah suffices for wudoo?, whether he did wudoo? before ghusl or not. But it is essential to pay attention to rinsing the mouth and nose, because these are essential for both wudoo? and ghusl.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
maf
User Karma: 41
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2006/10/26 01:24I think another point worth bringing up in this thread is I've just watched the Dawkins documentary I posted the links to and I'm struck by how most of it was showing the illogical inconsitences of Christianity but there wasn't a lot about Islam.
If a person passes wind whilst doing ghusl from janaabah, does that invalidate the ghusl?.
Answer :
Praise be to Allaah.
Passing wind is one of the things that invalidate wudoo? but it is not one of the things that invalidate ghusl. Based on this, if a person touches his private part, urinates or passes wind whilst doing ghusl, he should complete his ghusl, then do wudoo? afterwards.
The basic principle is that if ghusl is done following major impurity, then it suffices for wudoo?. If a person is junub (impure following sexual activity) and he does ghusl, then that suffices for wudoo?, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
?If you are in a state of Janaaba (i.e. after a sexual discharge), purify yourselves (bathe your whole body)?
[al-Maa'idah 5:6]
He does not have to do wudoo? after doing ghusl, but if one of the things that invalidate wudoo? takes place whilst doing ghusl or afterwards, then he has to do wudoo? for prayer. But if he does not break his wudoo? then his ghusl from janaabah suffices for wudoo?, whether he did wudoo? before ghusl or not. But it is essential to pay attention to rinsing the mouth and nose, because these are essential for both wudoo? and ghusl.
I saw your post and Dawkins did mention Islam but it was a very small part of the show.
He could maybe argue that it was aimed at a UK audience and only 5% or whatever are Islamists so it was relative but given only 10% people in the UK attend a Christian church regularly then maybe it was a bit of a cop out. Christians are an easy target for the athiest. We know the subject because on the whole we were taught it as kids and you can attack it because it's not racist or bigotted to attack your own.
Surely Dawkins whole premise was that the superstitions of extremists were dangerous and stupid and in the UK at least most religous extremists are muslim.
If a milllion people believe that there are talking gnomes and fairies that live beside their house I may laugh at them but it really makes no odds to me one way or the other.
The Golden Rule once again. If there are millions of Christian hypocrits I may mock them privately but it's all kind of irrelevant to me.
When they start blowing themselves up on subway trains or threaten people because they don't like their art the it does start to worry me.
That's the crux because suddenly as a liberal libertarian I suddenly feel dirty and bigoted because I'm saying I don't like elements of another culture and start to sound like the racist people I hate.
It's much easier to attack your own I guess.
It's a minefield.
I realise the US is a different environment because your muslims have been fairly safe so far and you have had some christian nuts.
That's probably Europes fault for exporting most of our superstitious nuts a couple of centuries ago.
Similarly why is Holland so laid back? They sent their nuts to South Africa...
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Sesh
User Karma: 8
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2006/10/26 01:59In a similar vein I was listening to the BBC today and they went live to the premier of the Borat movie where they interviewed him. In his comic persona he made some insane comic attacks on Jewish people. Immediately after he finished speaking the commentator explained earnestly how the person Sacha Baron Cohen saying these terrible things was Jewish so it was ok.
I'm not saying I disagree with that approach and I'm all for mocking everyone but taking a step back it's all a bit odd. Kind of like the whole nigger thing where it's an intolerable term to use unless you are black.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
maf
User Karma: 41
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2006/10/26 11:12Sesh, I think you are right. There is an imbalance in criticism with Christianity and Islam. I think one of the major factors is our population is mostly Christian. However, Islam is obviously more destructive than Christianity. If anything Penn/Richard should be focusing more time on Islam. ...but it may be a fear issue as well... People who criticize Islam receive more threats than those who criticize Christianity.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Shodan2020
User Karma: 3
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2006/10/29 16:51Sesh wrote: I think another point worth bringing up in this thread is I've just watched the Dawkins documentary I posted the links to and I'm struck by how most of it was showing the illogical inconsitences of Christianity but there wasn't a lot about Islam.
Sam Harris' book "The End of Faith" talks a lot about Islam.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Raugust
User Karma: 2
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2007/02/20 20:09mwfte wrote: I also love the fact that he says the Bible (or any religious text) isn't a good place to get morals, then quotes the Golden Rule, which is an idea that came from Judaism. First, the fact that a religion got something right doesn't mean religions are a good place to get morals. Religions teach both good things and bad things; this means that relying on religion for your morals can lead you to do evil. (For example, it can lead you to stone heretics, or to suicide-bomb bus stations.) If your friend Ted said one good thing and one bad thing, would you be justified in accepting everything Ted says as good? Of course not. For the same reason, it is unreasonable to accept all religious claims as good. Religion is not the source of morality.
Second, Judaism is neither the origin of the Golden Rule, nor even the first time the Golden Rule was written down. Leviticus, where the Golden Rule was written, dates to around 1280-650 BC. However, the Golden Rule is also found in. an ancient Egyptian poem, The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant, which dates to 1970-1640 BC, anywhere from 300 to 1300 years before the Jewish variant. To say that this ethical rule is religious in origin is thus factually inaccurate.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
maf
User Karma: 41
Re:Penn.Jillette.Radio.Show.2006.10.25 - 2007/02/20 21:34I also love the fact that he says the Bible (or any religious text) isn't a good place to get morals, then quotes the Golden Rule, which is an idea that came from Judaism.
The golden rule is not from the Judaism. It existed before Judaism. Look it up.
Religion is philosophy, but a horribly flawed one. Yes, it has trinkets of wisdom, but fails to bring that wisdom together in reality. Instead it fills in the gaps with god.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
