Australian Politics Forum

Gaybriel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1191

Re: pbuh
Reply #15 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:11pm

I have deleted some pointless comments- the back and forth gets old.

Quote:

So no current women only men?

Grendel- I'm not sure what you mean here. The term pbuh is used for both women and men of certain standing as explained before. Such as prophets or admired figures in history. You will note that the position of these people in history applies across the sexes.

So both men and women for whom this blessing applies are not 'current'.

Soren wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 6:42pm:

pbuh - it is so false, ostentetiously insincere.

Who can imagine that any really pious person would abbreviate a blessing, make it into an anagram! The very idea of a blessing is to pronounce, to breathe, to embody the blessing in one's life, the breath, to en-soul. To pause and honour.

People who pepper their writing with pbuh are merely jostling and shouting to the gallery, yet in their hearts there is room and time for an anagram only. If they can't be faggged to utter a brief blessing in full, they should leave out the phoney, impious burping.

hmm- I personally don't see abbreviation as a lack of respect. nor do I see it as a cry for attention- as it's pretty much standard

it's just a part of the evolution of language since the internet (unless this has also been done in writings before?). The way people communicate changes over time, but this does not necessarily detract from the message itself.

If I write 'lol' I know it stands for 'laugh out loud', or 'brb'- be right back. the abbreviations themselves do not obliterate the meaning or intent behind what is being said.

sure if someone is just throwing things out in a tokenistic fashion then I see your point- but how do you know this? can you judge the intention of others or what they feel in their heart (or think in their mind) as they write something?

personally when I write I hear myself speaking the words in my head, same if I abbreviate something.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: pbuh
Reply #16 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:19pm

dear me puhlease follow the conversation... first I asked if there were women with pbuh, then I asked if there were current women as well as current men... it aint difficult English.

You know apart from the long dead? Which were the examples given. Context dear girl... good grief.

Always the apologist always taking the one side always making excuses for your buddies. Grin

just don't say you dont...

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: pbuh Reply #17 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:21pm OH AND BTW GAYBRIEL I NOTE ITS OK TO DELETE MY REPLIES BUT YOU LEAVE THE ORIGINAL FLAME... mod: personal attack and you wonder why you are seen as biased and an apologist
Back to top	« Last Edit: Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:52pm by Gaybriel » IP Logged

Gaybriel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1191

Re: pbuh
Reply #18 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:51pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:19pm:

dear me puhlease follow the conversation... first I asked if there were women with pbuh, then I asked if there were current women as well as current men... it aint difficult English.

You know apart from the long dead? Which were the examples given. Context dear girl... good grief.

Always the apologist always taking the one side always making excuses for your buddies. Grin

just don't say you dont...

I did read your comment within context I just must have misinterpreted it.

when you said "So no current women only men?" I thought you believed there were men to whom it applied (in the present), but that it did not apply to women in the present.

hence my answer

my apologies for misunderstanding your question, but I'm sure you can see how the phrasing led me to the assumption you were asking specifically about women

Back to top

IP Logged

Gaybriel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1191

Re: pbuh
Reply #19 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:54pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:21pm:

OH AND BTW GAYBRIEL I NOTE ITS OK TO DELETE MY REPLIES BUT YOU LEAVE THE ORIGINAL FLAME...

mod: personal attack

and you wonder why you are seen as biased and an apologist Cheesy

you're right soren I should have adjusted that- I was debating what to do with that in my mind

I have fixed it now.

you are always welcome to pm me as well if you have problems with my modding.

I hope you will notice the replies I deleted were not just yours.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: pbuh Reply #20 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:07pm oh dear... yet grendel isn't soren and soren isn't grendel... and yes your modding leaves much to be desired.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gaybriel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1191

Re: pbuh
Reply #21 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:13pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:07pm:

oh dear... yet grendel isn't soren and soren isn't grendel...

and yes your modding leaves much to be desired.

ugh- sorry grendel. like I said v tired

bed time I think!

feel free to pm me with your complaints about my modding, or alternatively you can post in the new thread I have put up in extremism exposed

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: pbuh
Reply #22 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:45pm

Gaybriel wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 10:11pm:

[color=#ff0000]
[quote author=soren2 link=1226633200/0#10 date=1226652179]pbuh - it is so false, ostentetiously insincere.

Who can imagine that any really pious person would abbreviate a blessing, make it into an anagram! The very idea of a blessing is to pronounce, to breathe, to embody the blessing in one's life, the breath, to en-soul. To pause and honour.

People who pepper their writing with pbuh are merely jostling and shouting to the gallery, yet in their hearts there is room and time for an anagram only. If they can't be faggged to utter a brief blessing in full, they should leave out the phoney, impious burping.

hmm- I personally don't see abbreviation as a lack of respect. nor do I see it as a cry for attention- as it's pretty much standard

it's just a part of the evolution of language since the internet (unless this has also been done in writings before?). The way people communicate changes over time, but this does not necessarily detract from the message itself.

If I write 'lol' I know it stands for 'laugh out loud', or 'brb'- be right back. the abbreviations themselves do not obliterate the meaning or intent behind what is being said.

sure if someone is just throwing things out in a tokenistic fashion then I see your point- but how do you know this? can you judge the intention of others or what they feel in their heart (or think in their mind) as they write something?

[quote]

How do i know this??? If pbuh and lol or brb are in the same conceptual ballpark for you then that just demonstrates what I was saying.

How can pbuh be anything but tokensitic? It's the equivalent of saying 'by golly' or 'gosh' all the time. Stupid. Either you mean peace be upon him. Or you mean pbuh, that is, you can't be fagged to take the extra TWO seconds out of your life and actually sanctify what you are noddding towards. It is a pretence of piety. It is a spiritual burp.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gaybriel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1191

Re: pbuh
Reply #23 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:47pm

Soren wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:45pm:

How do i know this??? If pbuh and lol or brb are in the same conceptual ballpark for you then that just demonstrates what I was saying.

that was merely my comparison, admittedly a poor one- and particularly seeing as I am not muslim, this again is not reflective of the intention of muslims who use it

Quote:

How can pbuh be anything but tokensitic? It's the equivalent of saying 'by golly' or 'gosh' all the time. Stupid. Either you mean peace be upon him. Or you mean pbuh, that is, you can't be fagged to take the extra TWO seconds out of your life and actually sanctify what you are noddding towards. It is a pretence of piety. It is a spiritual burp.

I respectfully disagree but will think about it more also

Back to top

IP Logged

abu_rashid Gold Member Offline Aussie Muslim Posts: 8353	Re: pbuh Reply #24 - Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:54pm In the end writing is just a representation of words, and words are just a vocalisation of concepts. So I really can't see why you think it's any less spiritual if someone takes another step at further encoding their thoughts and concepts. As Muhammad (pbuh) himself said "All actions are [judged] by their intentions"
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: pbuh Reply #25 - Nov 15^th, 2008 at 12:13am ok Aboo lets assume you pray 5 times a day. Would it be acceptable to juast say prayer 1. prayer 2 prayer 3 prayer 4 prayer 5 I mean you've got the intention, concept and the representation. How can it be any less...?
Back to top	IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: pbuh
Reply #26 - Nov 15^th, 2008 at 12:22am

abu_rashid wrote on Nov 14^th, 2008 at 11:54pm:

In the end writing is just a

representation

of words, and words are just a vocalisation of concepts. So I really can't see why you think it's any less spiritual if someone takes another step at further encoding their thoughts and concepts.

As Muhammad (pbuh) himself said "All actions are [judged] by their intentions"

So it's ok to make the shahada simply " tingbgmitmog " rather than say
There is no god but God, Muhammad is the Messenger of God”

or to make it easier to say,

ting bog mit mog

I like that.

ting bog mit mog.

As long as you feel it, mean it, it's OK.

Back to top

IP Logged

abu_rashid Gold Member Offline Aussie Muslim Posts: 8353	Re: pbuh Reply #27 - Nov 15^th, 2008 at 12:23am Since prayer is not writing, it's quite a different issue. Writing is by it's very nature compacting of something more, down into a symbolic representative form. Written language is symbolism, so long as the written language conveys the exact same meaning then it's served it's purpose.
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: pbuh Reply #28 - Nov 15^th, 2008 at 12:29am Oh no it is not... nice try no prize btw you said and I quote... Quote: In the end writing is just a representation of words, and words are just a vocalisation of concepts. Vocalisation... hmmm... vocal...is..ation.... hmmm... I take that as speech. Oh dear you are having difficulties.
Back to top	IP Logged

abu_rashid Gold Member Offline Aussie Muslim Posts: 8353	Re: pbuh Reply #29 - Nov 15^th, 2008 at 12:33am Grendel the discussion is not about saying "pbuh" though, it's about writing it. Yes I am having difficulties keeping myself patient with such childish and mindless banter.
Back to top	IP Logged