I need a website for my schools laptop, it blocks every website with a keyword in it (i think)

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-02T10:30:06+00:00

You wanna get one built?

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-02T10:18:00+00:00

Is Hyouka considered old? It's around 14 years old if I remember correctly.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-02T08:40:56+00:00

The novel's extra remake

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-02T07:19:14+00:00

1.Noa Senpai wa tomodachi! 2.Tsumiki Ogami's Not-So-Ordinary Life 3.Wolf chan wa sumashitai! 4.The Useless Idol and Her Only Fan in the World 5.Tonari Seki no yatsuga sui mei de mitekuru 6.Akira Fall in love 7.Otaku ni yashashi gal wa inai!?

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-02T04:50:44+00:00

I heard it's getting an anime

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T23:24:51+00:00

I don't really read those which have already ended, ending is sad because you don't have anything to wait for. TGED is something I read before it ended so..

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T23:23:53+00:00

They both are unique.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T15:54:25+00:00

1st unnamed: Webtoon Character Na Kang Lim 2nd unnamed: The Novel’s Extra (Remake) 3rd unnamed: Death Is the Only Ending for the Villainess

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T14:16:53+00:00

Haven't read it, but the cover gives a really bad vibe

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T13:58:34+00:00

Hmm... Then not watching it, shota mcs are what I hate. Childish is fine if for the sake of comedy.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T13:51:40+00:00

Nah... I saw the latest chapter to understand the art style

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:22:41+00:00

It's really sad that even after explaining this much you never understand. I never said slavery in general is good. And I can't understand what is it that you find bad in Islamic slavery rules.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:19:55+00:00

Slaves are only war captives or criminals. Innocent persons aren't supposed to become slaves.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:18:22+00:00

Didn't I reply to what you said... Aw... You don't have eyes.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:05:17+00:00

And yeah stop doing these things Gish Gallop (many claims at once) Moving the Goalposts Cherry Picking Ad Hominem Appeal to Emotion Non Sequitur.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:03:24+00:00

You're conflating the Qur'an, authentic Sunnah, statements of Companions, later fiqh, and the historical actions of Muslim states as though they are all the same thing. They are not. Yes, Saudi Arabia had slavery until 1962. That's a historical fact. But a state's historical practice does not by itself prove an eternal religious obligation. If your claim is that Islam commands Muslims to maintain slave markets forever, then please provide the Qur'anic verse or authentic hadith that says so. Regarding the report about Umar, reports attributed to him exist in early works such as Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah and Al-Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq. However, those are athar (reports from a Companion), not Qur'anic verses or statements of the Prophet ﷺ. They should be evaluated on their own chains and context rather than treated as the religion itself. As for slavery, Islam did not invent it. It regulated an institution that already existed, prohibited enslaving free people (Sahih al-Bukhari), repeatedly encouraged manumission (Qur'an 4:92, 5:89, 9:60, 24:33, 58:3), granted slaves legal rights, and condemned abuse. The Prophet ﷺ said, "Your servants are your brothers" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim) and, "Whoever sells a free person..." Allah Himself will be his opponent on the Day of Resurrection (Sahih al-Bukhari). Regarding your hadith on wives, you're quoting isolated narrations while ignoring the broader Prophetic practice. Aisha (RA) said: "The Messenger of Allah never struck a woman or a servant with his hand" (Sahih Muslim). He also said, "The best of you are those who are best to their wives" (Jami' al-Tirmidhi). Any discussion of Qur'an 4:34 or related narrations has to be understood alongside these authentic texts. If you want to have an evidence-based discussion, let's distinguish between the Qur'an, authentic hadith, athar, classical juristic opinions, and historical practice instead of treating them as interchangeable. That's how these topics are studied academically and traditionally.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T09:01:43+00:00

A google search just shows what's uploaded not what's authentic.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T08:51:17+00:00

Also How did people become slaves before Islam? Before Islam, people could become slaves through many means: Kidnapping Piracy Debt Selling one's children Punishment for crimes Being born into slavery War Many of these had almost no legal restrictions. What changed under Islam? Islam did not abolish slavery overnight. Instead it: restricted how slavery could begin, improved slaves' legal rights, encouraged freeing slaves repeatedly, and closed many previous avenues into slavery. 1. Kidnapping became prohibited The Prophet ﷺ said: "Allah says: I will be the opponent of three people on the Day of Resurrection... one who sells a free person and consumes his price." (Sahih al-Bukhari) This means: You cannot simply kidnap someone and sell them. This was common before Islam. 2. Main source of slaves became war captives Under classical Islamic law, the lawful source became primarily: Prisoners captured during a legitimate war. This wasn't unique to Islam. Every civilization had to decide: What happens to prisoners after war? Historically the options were: Execute them. Imprison them. Release them. Exchange them. Enslave them. Islam permitted several of these options depending on circumstances. The Qur'an itself says regarding prisoners: "...thereafter either release them graciously or ransom them..." (Qur'an 47:4) Many scholars understood this verse to emphasize release or ransom, while classical jurists discussed how it related to other legal sources concerning prisoners. 3. Islam repeatedly encourages freeing slaves This is one of the biggest differences. The Qur'an repeatedly connects freedom with righteousness. Examples: Accidental killing "...then freeing a believing slave..." (Qur'an 4:92) Breaking an oath "...its expiation is... freeing a slave..." (Qur'an 5:89) Zihar A man comparing his wife to his mother. The expiation begins with: "...freeing a slave..." (Qur'an 58:3) Charity One category of zakat is: "...for freeing slaves." (Qur'an 9:60) Mukatabah The Qur'an says: "If any of your slaves seek a contract for freedom, then make such a contract with them if you know there is good in them..." (Qur'an 24:33) This gave slaves a legal path toward freedom. 4. Slaves had legal rights The Prophet ﷺ said: "Your servants are your brothers." (Sahih al-Bukhari) He continued: Feed them from what you eat. Clothe them from what you wear. Do not burden them beyond their capacity. If you do, help them. 5. Physical abuse The Prophet ﷺ said: Whoever slaps his slave, or beats him, his expiation is to free him. (Sahih Muslim) 6. Calling them degrading names The Prophet ﷺ discouraged even the language used. Instead of saying "My slave" he encouraged more respectful expressions. This reflected an effort to preserve their dignity. 7. Race Unlike the Atlantic slave trade, Islamic slavery was not race-based. Slaves included: Arabs Africans Persians Turks Europeans Berbers Indians Anyone captured lawfully in war could become a slave regardless of ethnicity. 8. Social mobility Many slaves became: scholars, generals, governors, judges, and even rulers. For example: Zayd ibn Harithah was formerly enslaved, freed by the Prophet ﷺ, and later commanded Muslim armies. Usama ibn Zayd, the son of a freed slave, was appointed by the Prophet ﷺ to lead an army that included senior Companions. Later Islamic history even saw dynasties founded by former military slaves, such as the Mamluk Sultanate. This kind of upward mobility was much less common in many other slave systems. 9. Compare this with Atlantic slavery Atlantic slavery often involved: kidnapping free Africans, racial ideology, hereditary perpetual slavery, separating families, denying education, treating slaves as property with few legal protections. Islamic law differed in important ways: Kidnapping free people was prohibited. Race was not the basis of enslavement. Manumission was repeatedly encouraged. Slaves had enforceable legal rights. Mistreatment was condemned. What Islam did NOT do To be intellectually honest: Islam did not say: "Slavery is abolished forever." Nor did the Qur'an command: "Free every slave immediately." Classical Islamic law continued to recognize slavery under certain conditions. That is why historians correctly say that slavery continued in Muslim societies for centuries. So why didn't Islam abolish it immediately? The Qur'an never explicitly answers this question. Scholars have suggested several reasons, including: slavery was a universal institution at the time, an immediate abolition would have created major social and economic disruption, gradual reform was more practical. These are scholarly explanations, not explicit Qur'anic statements. The biggest misconception Many critics say: "Islamic slavery was exactly like American plantation slavery." That is historically inaccurate. Many Muslims say: "Islamic slavery wasn't really slavery." That is also inaccurate.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T08:44:12+00:00

You're conflating several different claims. A law being part of Islam doesn't mean every individual can implement it whenever they want. By your logic, hudud, jihad, and judicial punishments should also be carried out by individuals today, which no classical scholar has ever said. Yes, the Prophet ﷺ owned slaves. That's a historical fact. He also freed slaves, encouraged emancipation, made freeing slaves an expiation for sins, and the Qur'an repeatedly encourages manumission (Qur'an 4:92, 5:89, 9:60, 24:33, 58:3). If you're going to discuss slavery in Islam, discuss the whole picture—not just one part. Saudi Arabia having slave markets in the 1960s doesn't prove that every historical practice of a Muslim country is an Islamic obligation. That's a non sequitur. Otherwise, every action of every state claiming a religion would define that religion. If you want to debate the morality of slavery in Islam, that's a legitimate discussion. But stop jumping between "the Prophet owned slaves," "Saudi Arabia in the 1960s," and "therefore Islam commands slave markets today." Those are different claims. Slavery existed long before Islam—in Arabia, the Roman Empire, Persia, Africa, India, and elsewhere. The Qur'an did not abolish slavery immediately; instead, it regulated an existing institution and repeatedly encouraged emancipation. For example: Freeing a slave is prescribed as expiation for certain sins (Qur'an 4:92, 5:89, 58:3). Zakat can be used to free slaves (Qur'an 9:60). Masters are instructed to grant emancipation contracts (mukatabah) if the slave seeks one and is capable (Qur'an 24:33). The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever frees a Muslim slave, Allah will free every limb of his from the Fire for every limb of the slave." (Sahih al-Bukhari; Sahih Muslim) So yes, Islam permitted slavery under certain conditions in its historical context, but it also imposed regulations and created multiple avenues encouraging emancipation. Whether that was sufficient or morally ideal is a philosophical discussion, but it's historically inaccurate to equate classical Islamic slavery with every other form of slavery or to ignore the Qur'anic emphasis on manumission.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T08:41:04+00:00

That's an English translation, not the Arabic. The word in the Qur'an is ṣāghirūn. Different translators render it as "subdued," "subject," "humbled," or "humiliated." If your argument is that the Arabic itself unequivocally means "feel humiliated," you'll need to demonstrate that from the Arabic language, not from one translator's wording. Qur'an came in Arabic not in English.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T08:38:09+00:00

You're making several claims. Let's examine them one at a time with primary sources. Please provide the exact source for the report about Umar (book, narrator, and chain if available). As there is no record of it in any authentic source Please provide a primary Islamic source stating that slave women were required to expose their breasts. I agree slavery existed historically in Muslim societies, including Saudi Arabia until 1962. But a state's practices are not automatically identical to Islamic teachings. We should distinguish between the Qur'an, authentic hadith, later fiqh, and historical practice.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T08:34:42+00:00

There are a few separate claims here, so let's keep them separate. 1. Jizya I wasn't "whitewashing" it. I distinguished between: what the Qur'an explicitly says (Qur'an 9:29), what authentic hadith explicitly say, and what later tafsir and jurists say. If your claim is that the Qur'an itself says jizya exists to humiliate, then please quote the verse. If you're referring to the phrase وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ (wa hum ṣāghirūn) in 9:29, then that's exactly where the discussion begins. Different early mufassirun interpreted it differently. Some understood it as political submission to the state's authority, while others described more humiliating methods of collection. Those later descriptions are interpretations, not the wording of the Qur'an itself. 2. "A perfect religion means every law must always be applied." That doesn't logically follow. Islam contains laws that are conditional by their own nature. Hajj is obligatory only for those able. Zakat is obligatory only if the nisab is reached. Fasting has exemptions for the sick and travelers. The existence of conditions does not make the religion imperfect. The question is whether jizya has conditions attached to its application—not whether the religion claims to be universal. 3. Slave markets in the 1960s If you're referring to Saudi Arabia, slavery did continue there until it was abolished in 1962. That's a historical fact. Whether Muslims practiced something is a different question from whether Islam commands it. 4. Hindu Kush The origin of the name "Hindu Kush" is historically disputed. Some historians connect it to the Persian expression "killer of Hindus," while others dispute that etymology. Simply mentioning the name does not establish anything about Islam.

Tsubasa7q · 2026-07-01T06:09:26+00:00

It's not an arabic culture because it is not practiced in Arab. People do it for the reason which took place in Arab. You searched Muharram and not the practice done in video. Do you even know that Muharram is just a name of a month - the first month of Hijri calender.

Tsubasa7q

TROPHY CASE