Do not take them as friends verses

Believer, go away....

believer wrote: Yes any parent Christian, Jew, Muslim would not want their children to "hangout" with satan worshippers, hypocrites that twist their faith, etc.

Nobody is talking about children, let alone Satan worshippers or hypocrites.  Although I have to say that your concern for your children is overblown.  I regard the opportunity for children to meet and interact with others of different faiths as a good thing, a necessary part of the education system.  If Islam is the truth, then all you need to do is teach your children to recognize the truth.

Shasta'sAunt wrote: Disbelievers of what? This specifically means belief in God. What other context could it possibly have? Belief in God is a matter of faith, pure and simple. There is no other meaning here.

Belief in God is a matter of faith, but friendship is not (well, maybe faith of a different kind).  It would be tempting to suppose that any reference to "believers" would mark the whole passage as applicable only to matters of faith (e.g., "when you meet the unbelievers, smite the necks [of their faith]..."), but I don't think anyone would buy it.

This was clearly a case where the Muslims sought out a Christian as a protector, but one who was known far and wide as a king who practiced justice and truthfulness. If it had been forbidden by God for Muslims to seek friendship or protection from any Christian or Jew The Prophet Mohammed would never have sent the Muslims to King Negus for protection.

And yet he did, and yet the verse clearly forbids it.  The case you are talking about occurred early in Muhammad's career, when he was still weak and in need of alliances.  Sura 5 (which we are discussing) was revealed much later, after Muhammad became strong enough to repudiate those alliances.

Israfil wrote: Believer, go away....

Believer was asked to take this discussion to a separate thread, and so he did.  Unfortunately, he put it in the "Islam for non-Muslims" section, which is really intended for education, not debate.  I don't suppose a moderator could move it?

peacemaker wrote: According to most of the commentators (e.g., Tabari), this means that each of these two communities extends genuine friendship only to its own adherents-i.e., the Jews to the Jews, and ,the Christians to the Christians-and cannot, therefore, be expected to be really friendly towards the followers of the Qur'an. ...this prohibition of a "moral alliance" with non-Muslims does not constitute an injunction against normal, friendly relations with such of them as are well-disposed towards Muslims

Exactly.  In other words, we can be civil and polite to one another ("normal, friendly relations") but we can never be really friendly.

To anyone who thinks the verse prohibits friendship,

Without arrogance and only in the spirt of qualifying the below:
I speak and read Arabic. Unlike the second hand information Ron will call authoritative, I don't have it translated/interpreted/read for me, and I didn't learn it as some arabic-illiterate being fed knowledge at the end of the Saudi spoon.

In my life, wali is never used for friend. Never.
In everyday speech: It is used (if it is used) nowadays to refer to impressive leader type (Sids, Moulays, Grand Imams, etc.) Moulay Idriss the second, who founded Fes and was part of Morocco's first dynasty is an example of someone one would call a wali. A modern example of a wali in this context could be the king as well as the Prime Minister Abbas El Fassi. The word also implies a spiritual guide of sorts, to distinguish from someone who was strictly just a leader.

Words that are used to describe friend.love: saHeeb, sadiq, aziz, hub.

Again, I have never heard the word wali used in any other context than that of a 'master'-type.

I do sympathize with people who have their Quran pre-chewed by the Saudi army of interpreters; they are sure to get the most vitriolic reading out of them.   

Finally, in practicality - it should be understood that although the jews and christians are not the majority here in Morocco - they are not shunned, antagonized or considered beneath befriending; the story of Andr� Azoulay as a generic starting point for 'wali-like' Jews here and the Village of Hope for Christians.

Ron, though at sober times, you seem like good egg. But you certainly have nothing to teach anyone here about Islam - so there is no point in you defending it... in regards to our defense, we'll all be fine without you, thanks.

Believer, you seem mean.
Either that, you are incapable of sustaining critical thought to grasp what has put before you.
In this case, you'd probably rather find yourself the first of the two.

** regarding the above arabic words, I am referring to the trilateral roots of wali, shb, etc. and all of their permutations.    

*** Ron, at least stop misquoting Burke, esp. since the bogus attribution was pointed out in an earlier post. You can be forgiven for being a lazy, sloppy thinker in a foreign language, but you're not getting a pass in english.












Edited by Jamal Morelli - 02 November 2008 at 3:47am

I think some times we just have to lift our head up, open our eyes and look around. The answers are there. Look at those leaders of Muslim countries who has given themselves up into the protection of none-believers and what is happening in the result. May be its a warning against. May be that's what it means!

Edited by honeto - 28 October 2008 at 6:41pm