General Issues / Questions

I was under the assumption that kings and queens were in the wrong, most notably the monarchy in Saudi Arabia, because all sovereignty belongs to God, right? This is what I understand from the Quran Kings definitely are in the wrong because "whenever they enter a contry, they corrupt it and turn the noblest of its people into the most abject." (2734) They act as if they were the shepherd and the people their sheep with no say in the government. So God urges people to assert their right to have their say O you who have attained to faith! Do not say, "Watch over us," but rather say, "Take us into account." (2104) The best type of government is democracy thru consultation O Prophet! "Take counsel with the people in all matters of public affair." (3159) True believers are those "whose rule is consultation among themselves." (423 As for sovereignty, some of it is ONTOLOGICAL which solely belongs to God; like making the religious laws (4221), granting life and dealing death, and causing the sun to rise in the east (225. God never allows men to have a share in His rule of this sort. (1826) But He does allow them POLYTICAL sovereignty. He may even allow a king to rule a country on condition that he does not confuse his human political sovereignty with God's ontological sovereignty. (225 Peace, Hasan

Peace. Lets all just leave it at that, and check this thread occasionally till for somebody to come up with numbers, theres just no point in arguing in the air. As far as prophets and messengers goes, the best thing to do is to constantly re-evaluate our own knowledge, and seek the truth. If we are sincere enough believers then the God will package the answers to us. Peronally, I believe with much certainty that there is a difference between prophets and messengers, but if anybody can prove using the Quran that they are one and the same then I am willing to change my views, but as it is, the evidence from the Quran tends to show a difference. May the God forgive me, Nural, and others if we are wrong, but I must suggest that we all go to the Quran for the truth, instead of gripping common ideas, (while respecting each others views at the same time ). May I also add that it was perhaps a bit harsh to accuse my good friend Nural of being a cult member, him and myself have worked very hard over the last few months to get ourselves out of sectarian hold, whilst maintaining an open mind to new knowledge, and I myself would not be at ease if someone said that I am a cult member. Please refrain from using rough lanuguage with the intent of harm or without. Peace. Natu on the line.

Peace, There are many people who play with verse numbers and confuse many people with so called miracles but these are mainly all just numerology and have no significance. Although men added the verse numbering to make things easier the order of compilation is Divine, we might have added the numbers to make references but the first verse in the Quran is always the first and the seventh is always the seventh, that doesn't change does it? I am not sure about how people worked out where a verse starts and stops, are there full stops?! So maybe someone can explain how these were decided on previously. The only thing that really interests me personally is the count of letters in the initialed chapters. Look at Layths article '19 fact or fiction' and also Richard Voss's articles on 19.org in the article section. These articles assess what was controlled by GOD and not man, the count of certain letters in the initialed surahs. Peace Nural

Salaamun alaikum Layth, Tell me where you are having the problems and I will look into it. From my side I have seen the fit to be quite well. Well, at this point, I think you and I are defining muhkaam and mutashabih in 2 opposite ways ! For you, 'muhkaam' is something happening in the world, and thus defined and mutashabih are laws similar to this. Ok, I think you have support for this in 10/109 which says Follow thou the inspiration sent unto thee, and be patient and constant, till God do decide for He is the best to decide. If you notice, 'hatta yahkum Allah' (until God decides) shows that 'hukm' of Allah is something which actualises in the world (like his punishment). So your definition of muHKAMaat may have to do with actualising events in the world. The problem is, actual LAWS are also considered hukm. For example, 4/64-65 speaks about a judgement delivered and how imaan ties back to submission to that judgement. I guess what Im trying to say is, 'muhkamaat' doesn't seem to have 'sphere'. Its sphere is the totality of the book. However, this doesnt negate the fact that suras 4,5,6,8,9 doesnt have the letters and they are dealing with mostly laws. Need to continue research , insha Allah. thanks and peace.

Yep still in the West End, and have developed much of my understanding further since then, although the basis is the same. Dhul was banned from the forum sometime ago - I cant remember exactly why - personal attacks in his postings I think. Saw that coming, methinks ?

Peace KGB, I have no problem with objective analysis, nor do I have a problem with constructive criticism, nor do I have a problem with a friendly reminder. But what you said was neither of the above. You said, According to Qur'an, he do not have the "faith" and Allah (SWT) is putting screens before his eyes, deafness in his ears. Why, because you feel he's trying to prove the Qur'an is fallible? Is this the new criteria? The truth withstands all atempts to undermine it, because the truth is absolute. So even if Layth was trying to undermine the credibility of the Qur'an, which I highly doubt, then the validity of the Qur'an should stand on it's own legs, and would in fact strengthen the faith of a believer. Remember, we're told to verify all information, and verification begins with questions. But more importantly, you have casted judgement on a person based on your assumptions of what that person's intentions are, and somehow you twisted this idea of yours as something that's supported by the Qur'an. You did not establish your case in the least, yet were quick to judgement, calling it your objective analysis. I find this irresponsible and cheap. I sincerely hope you will prove me wrong and support your claims, as I do not enjoy feeling this way about someone, even someone I've never met in person. May peace be upon you, Tay

I frequently visit, bitorrent community forums. An Iraqi forum, Sacramento Kings basketball forum and other bball forums.

So who here is a messenger? I can only answer for myself - I am not. And thats the truth. wink Peace

Asalaamu alaikum, Thank you for posting this message. This can definitely benefit those who read it. I was just reading and studying that particular ayat the other day. It baffled me for a moment because, at face value, it does seem contradictory. I also considered that the clue was, perhaps, in the Arabic. At any rate, from the english translation, I came to the conclusion that. since the ayat isn't flawed, our definition and concept of good and bad must be. Allah is above any and every concept of reality we can think of including good and bad. So my train of thought was All is God. All is Good. There is no "Bad". Bad is a human cognitive construction that man has created to explain that on this Earth that we disagree with or don't fully understand. Also, because of free will, Bad is something that is uniquely human and can, also, be present in our behavior. So is "ALL" everything outside of our free-will and behavior? This is the question I have now. The "lack of good" translation is interesting. Gotta ponder it. Again, thanks for sharing your knowledge wink

I might be wrong but I dont think he is kissing them into mouth but in the chins......its just that this picture making it seems like he is kissing them in the lips or mouth...and its duration was maybe less than a second but when frosen by a photos in the manner like this it may seem like an act...he is an older man maybe he wasnt able to target the chin precisely or missed the traget in the hurry whatever, i am of opinion one should not consider this as a sexual offence....SEE that chapter 24 its very very dangerous to accuse without witnesses( and this photo surely isnt a witness) best wishes

Peace brother Layth, Your entire post is becomming a 'play on words'... Is 2667 playing with words when it makes clear to us that 2610-67 is ONE "aya(t)" despite being several "verses"? Are the dictionaries playing with words when they tell us that "aya(t)" means "sign" NOT "verse"? Brother, try to address the issues raised by the parts I quoted from the great reading instead of focusing on style over substance. You admit that the Quran was revealed in verses (and rearranged), yet you want to call those verses as 'signs/ayat' and then make as if the whole affair is insignificant. My whole post was to demonstrate that there is a difference between "aya(t)" and the man-made separation into alleged verses. I care about 'authenticity' and 'facts'... Everybody cares about that. Even Sunnis never say "we care about 'fraud' and 'fiction'." But then they fail to address the facts presented by the great reading and instead focus on nice sounding slogans. The partitioning into "verses" has ZERO effect on authenticity except for those who want to remove parts of the message such as 9128-129. I know that you are not one of those. So what is the big deal about "verses"? If the Scripture was revealed in verse form (which we know it was) then I would like to know where those verses ended and where they began... Verses are sometimes meaningless half sentences without a subject or an object. Since, we know that "signs" were revealed over a period, by saying that "signs" and "verses" are the same thing what you are implying is that The God revealed meaningless half sentences only to complete them a few months (or years) later. Again, you are ignoring to address the examples that I provided from the great reading that prove that several verses can constitute ONE "aya(t)" and that there could be several "aya(t)" in ONE verse. If you want to know when a sign/"aya(t)" begins and ends then the first step is to understand that "aya(t)" means "sign", a fact that, if I didn't know you better I would have thought that you are hopelessly ignorant of. But instead, I think that you know it but for some strange reason choose to neglect it. You seem to think this is a trivial persuit, yet to a student of the Scripture nothing in the way God's words were revaled is 'trivial'. I referred you to The God's words that prove that several alleged verses can be ONE sign and vice versa. Instead of focusing on what "I think", please address those non-trivial words. The history of the language, the history of the revelation, the history of its progression...All these are part and parcell of the where, why, when of one of the most significant events in human history...God's communication with mankind through His prophet. The Scripture encourages all forms of research, verification, and inquiry...Not the opposite...Never the opposite. So start researching by addressing 2667 and defining what an "ayat" means based on the consistent internal evidence from the great reading NOT based on the inconsistent man-made verse markers. I hope this helps. Peace and all best wishes, Ayman

do you believe a messenger has to bring something new to the table in order to be such?In the Quran, when Moses brings Pharoah the truth I believe that there is another believer who concealed his faith but already knew the truth, when he speaks out to his people does he then become a messenger? Salaam Peace thats the crux of it for me - since all messengers are delivering the same essential message then the need to bring something 'new' to the table cannot be a prerequisite. But if you accept someone's claim to be a messenger than you are including as part of your understanding of the deen of Allah that He has sanctioned a new messenger to come forth. Even tho the message doesnt change that will inevitably effect how you think of Allah and his relationship to His creation. Like idolfree I don't believe that messengers are superheroes - but they are special since God sends them. Which is why I'm cagey on claims to messengership. I must say for me M.Mehdi's posting of (6.93) makes it all really clear. Praise God for guidance peace asdfjk

peace brothers Damon & Truth, All, I ordered my copy of Asad's translation about 3 weeks ago and received it today. Its bigger than I thought it would be. Its 7 volumes in one big book, 1200 pages. It states its from "the book foundation" and they are registered/based in the UK. http//thebook.org/ Wakas

salam bros, Thanku very much 4 ur replies but im not afraid of anyone. Rather id like ppl 2 call me personally from al over the world so tht i can listen 2 their views n discuss things with them. So if anyone wld like 2 call me,chat with me on msn or yahoo or skype ur welcome. My ID on all these is 'idmkhizar'. GOD Bless!

Paix Farouk, could be much worse! What did you expect ? Elke

Buzzin

Peace. Thanks idolfree, I knew there would be something fishy going on with 'skies' and 'heavens'. Thanks everyone. Peace. Natu on the line.

Peace to you, I understand where you're coming from. I get so frustrated too because people do not listen, even when you show them to their face Quranic verses which back up our anti-extra quranic hadith stance. Truth is, we'll probably most likely never change most people's minds. I haven't really been successful with this and I think it causes me more stress trying to show these people instead of just leaving them alone. If they don't get it, I am not responsible for them. As for your parents, Here's my story I finally gave up this past year trying to have any sort of political discussion with my stepfather, as it would turn into him shouting at me. He's a Bush/Limbaugh/Hannity lover/supporter. And every time someone beheads someone in Iraq, he makes sure to point it out to me to show me "how bad those muslims are." And then he expects me to apologise to the whole world for the beheading of someone, or for any terrorist act which a so called Muslim might do, just because I choose to follow Islam. In other words, I'm responsible for all Muslims' actions because I am one. I've learned to bite my tongue and not get into any political discussions with him when I'm at his house or his office, as hard as it is to not say anything. The truth is, I know I won't win, because he shouts instead of discusses. I realise he's the one with the problem, not me. Like you said, it's probably best to just keep your thoughts to yourself. One day, God willing, they will see the light. But to keep the peace and keep from letting yourself get frustrated, stay quiet. And as they start in on their hadith lectures, recite Sura 1 and Sura 94 to yourself over and over. It will be like a mantra and calm you down. Sura 94 094.001. Have We not caused thy bosom to dilate, 094.002. And eased thee of the burden 094.003. Which weighed down thy back; 094.004. And exalted thy fame ? 094.005. But lo! with hardship goeth ease, 094.006. Lo! with hardship goeth ease; 094.007. So when thou art relieved, still toil 094.008. And strive to please thy Lord. Once you get out on your own, things will be easier in that you won't have to deal with that anymore and if you do, all you need to do is say, "Goodbye, I'm going home!" I hope this helps you.

Hello All, Ash, Tay, Naxus, Nural - Thank you for your kind responses. I wish to learn from you all too. Debate and discussion about God will always be an endless debate because there are infinite number of ways to discuss the infinite God. But each time we debate and discuss God, little more understanding of the divinity enters our heart and soul....

Peace, i read in the Quran that God sent one of his angels to clean Mohammed's heart 3 times so he wont become bad. can someone verify this for me please? Since you've read the above in the Quran, please bring forth the surah/verses for the burden of your statement. roll Perhaps someone can verify/clarify then.