Questions/Comments on the Quran

Except that there is no mention of any fruit in the quranic story of Adem and (mind you) his mate* If Adem is us, instead of our primeval father/ancestor, then who's "our" mate (in metaphor) ?! Are we not labeld 'Adem's descendants' (bny adm) in the Quran ?! Reassess.

rlz, I have noted that your replies are often rash. This post of yours was a borderline lie (assuming you read the article). You claim my identification of whom 171 is referring to is based on hadith/tafsir, yet in the article it explicitly states the Quranic evidence, and even discusses Moses as an option. Quote Who does 171 refer to? It can realistically only be Moses or Muhammad. Moses because he is mentioned in the next verse and it begins with "wa/and" implying a link to what was said previously. Muhammad because when AQ uses 3rd person singular delivery with the term "abd/servant" and does not explicitly name the abd addressed, it always or strongly points to the messenger of Quran, i.e. prophet Muhammad. Please see all occurrences here Our abd - 223, 841, His abd - 181, 251, 3936, 5310, 579, God's abd - 7219. Note how the start of the very next chapter, 18, and also 25 begin in a similar manner to 17. This weighs 171 in favour of referring to prophet Muhammad. It is clear from 171 the reason given for taking His servant from A to B was to be shown some of God's signs/ayat. Hence a possible link to Moses in 172 with "and We gave Moses the decree/writ", however if so, this would make this the odd one out, as when AQ discusses revelation it does not use these terms nor describe anything similar. Unless a link and explanation can be found of course. Thus, if anything, 171 seems to imply some other kind of signs/ayat. AMAH is NEVER mentioned along with Moses elsewhere in AQ, and in fact is exclusively mentioned along with the messenger of Quran. Taking these points into account, this weighs 171 significantly in favour of referring to prophet Muhammad. Secondly, I offered a simplified list of questions for which to check your understanding of 171 and provide a reply. You ran (like a zebra?) from it. Please note, if future posts from you are similar I may not reply at all. Let me make it clear what I think is going on - I know those questions are difficult for you and Timotheus (and others who hold your views) to reply to, hence the silence.

The Quran is the Quran. the Kitab is the Kitab, one is a recitition, and one is a book of that recitition. more or less. God says he Sent down the Quran, He also refers to it as The Book. a book is a book. an audio book is a recitation of a book (i.e. Quran) an e-book is just a book on a computer. I dont understand if this is a question, statement or neither or both? He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verseswhich constitute the essence of the scriptureas well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in thisall of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed. what is evident to me is that A.L.M and such is a test for people. its a grat distraction from the whole message of the Quran which is nothing mythical, mystical or hidden, its just clear and straightfoward.

Peace What is the definition of gossip? Roshan

Peace Wakas, Good/nice analogy. I think one of the biggest secrets to improving ones critical thinking skills is to discard/abandon things one has learned in the past, in order to get an empty mind. As the saying goes, "Only an empty bowl can be filled." Also, I think one can improve ones critical thinking skills by increasing ones knowledge about different things. The Quran seems to suggest that reasoning-abilities are related to ones level of knowledge. Quran 2943 Such are the examples We cite for the people, but none reason except the knowledgeable.

Peace fye. The objective is to try to understand what Qoran is really saying. I do not know about symbols? If you understand the message, that is the important thing.. GOD bless you Peace.

So We revealed to Moses , "Strike the sea with your staff." And it split in two, each part like a towering cliff. And We brought the others right up to it. We rescued Moses and all those who were with him. Then We drowned the rest. There is certainly a Sign in that yet most of them are not believers. Truly your Lord is the Almighty, the Most Merciful. (Qur'an, 2663-6 So how did Moses rescue the Jewish nation from the Egyptians? He enchanted the Egyptian people with his own experiences and split them apart ? I think. http//pemberushistory1.wikispaces.com/The+Nation+Splits+Apart So is the Sea the people/Nation of Egypt? Splitting some siding with Moses so they are eventually set free? yes like prophecy it always happens the same way america was a bunch of reds (radicals, rebels) their was a sea of americans and they split union verse the confederates. it always happens the same way in the quran, the messenger of ALLAH at the time was Abraham, Lincoln; haman was the rich cotton and tobacco union and pharaoh was the master of slave masters each slave master handled a group to his particular work. one builted pyrmids (possible the cigarettes), the others picked cotton. like with a big company, every army, mass slaving, and big corporation is broken into a hiearchy. ceo (pharaoh), treasurer, (haman), regional "man-a-gers" (in control of men in a particular region), then your boss down the line cracking the whip on your back to make their money...(that cracker! ) so yes africans again, a prophet/Messenger, a pharaoh getting people to worship a another white man (a god king ) .... it's pretty much what happened the first time, i wonder what will happen when the hispanics start to out number the men of pharaoh.

Peace And when a scripture came to them from God, authenticating what is with them; while before that they were mocking those who rejected; so when what they knew came to them, they rejected it! God?s curse be upon the rejecters. 289 Why is 'yastaftihuna' being translated as 'mocking' here? Yusuf Ali, Pickthall & Shakir translated it as 'praying/asking for victory/triumph'. And the translation of Khan & Hilali I wouldn't recommend to anyone, but I'll quote them anyway And when there came to them (the Jews), a book (this Qur'?n) from Allah confirming what is with them , although aforetime they had invoked Allah (for coming of Muhammad Peace be upon him) in order to gain victory over those who believed, then when there came to them that which they recognised, they disbelieved in it. So let the Curse of All?h be on the disbelievers. (Unfortunately this sunni-INTERPRETATION of the reading is the most spread in the Arabic world, if I'm not mistaken) But back to my question... Is 'mocking' a possible meaning of this word? I don't speak, but I have some basic knowledge of Arabic. And I think I recognise the word 'fath' in 'yastaftihuna'. But can anyone who speaks Arabic tell me which is the most accurate translation? Wilson sunnis? ALLAh instructs you in the quran to have nothing to do with those who divide themselves into sects..... practice some self-restrain and ignore their writings and there workings

Thank you Osman for bringing some sense into this conversation... Bkanwar and Abdun Nur Please bring some examples of the changes between the original Quranic Arabic and our modern intepretation of this so that we can see exactly what you are talking about. And no one constructed Arabic grammar books "out of fear". This is all conspiratorial nonsense. Were the first English grammar books and German grammar books written out of fear? Or were they just simply written so that people can understand grammar better? Everything always has to be a conspiracy with you guys.. I do not know how many examples will it take, but since you asked for it one more time, for the sake of totally na?ve of subject and language. Following are two example posted on this very board. One for years and one recent. Bring your linguistic arguments, why these meanings are wrong? Regards, Recent one "731 A desire for you to pay attention, one who is fallen behind due to an exaggerated sense of self pride, egotism. This combination of words in Arabic grammar terminology is called . Which simply is understood as a particle for raising attention. Simply ?O you?. However, paying close attention to the word makes it abundantly clear that it has three of the words of same class or meaning i.e., raising attention, , and . There is no reason in the world to say ?O you? like traditional translation claims. Therefore, let us look up these as separate words. is used to raise attention of everyone, irrespective of proximity to the caller ?all near and distant?. Besides being used as it is also used in sense of meaning ?one who?. is used to wake someone up from sleep. Keeping all the discussion above in mind the only fluent way to translate ?A desire for you all to pay attention?. This is a combination of and which here is not used as a definite article (traditionalists who object to linguistic analyst of word Allah, where I contend that its is a contraction of &#1609 have themselves translated here as (which I am glad they have as it strengthens support from current translation of Quran for can be contracted and used as ) it is followed by a verbal noun from 2nd form of root . The root meaning as ?He limped, by reason of pride or self-conceit, in his going. So let us put together as literal translation, ?O you one who limped behind by reason of pride in moving.? Please compare, it with following. ?A desire for you all to pay attention, one who is fallen behind due to an exaggerated sense of self pride, egotism.? Please decide for yourselves is later an interpretation or just a better translation. Therefore, for people not to keep complaining that English in not comprehensible. (All references will be made available upon request)." Old one is here, http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599853.msg237622#msg237622

The most important commandment, next to cling unto your Rabb with all your heart and all your soul, is to treat your neighbor as yourself. Most people underestimate that commandment and somehow overlook it. It is often apparent in the tone and treatment of people in general. The Rabb surely judges between us but we should not take our exclusivity for granted. We have nothing to win by hostility and thought that is supercharged by our instinctive drive. The Mosaic Decree is good advice on how to combat that instinctive drive, i.e. the parameters that are stumbling blocks for us. Many people fail to uphold them, and many Muslims have done away with them. Particularly it is not many people who seek to uphold the "treat your neighbors as yourself", for is every person with a different opinion an enemy? It is surely detrimental to make enemies from right to left; does not grow the Spirit at all. Mr. Jesus/Yesua advised also to treat your enemy as yourself, to care for him or her even if he or she does not love you. It does not help that the sectarian interpretation of Quran has done away with it even if it is mentioned explicitly already in the second chapter, when you can read it properly. But we all choose where we put our trust, but I trust in what I teach and from what communique I have had with the Rabb. Empathy is the stressing point that we should struggle for, empathy is what the animal Homo Sapiens lacks by its primitive nature when it goes in for its own ego. Having grand empathy is truly amazing. If you can even behave towards your enemy then you have taken a great step towards empathy. The one who has to be hostile towards his/her enemy is not complete in terms of empathy. The one who can stretch out his/her hand towards his/her worst enemy when this person desperately calls out for help when about to drown is truly there. The one who can forgive a person who has acted very badly is a strong Spirit. Be safe Amenuel

Of course I cannot confirm or deny what you said below for am just a student and have no grasp of the history as well as Arabic language. However I live among bedu arabs and I known their traditions and how they look at Quran and sunna, at least the ones around me, they do have the Quranists opinion but they would not go far as your thoughts go regarding Muhammad peace be upon him and his companions. I guess I do not know whats in your head, and knowledge in full so I can not deduce anything for now. I understand your situation and the deception from sectarian sources is really bad. Well, the Beduin Arab tradition is in many cases the source to the mainstream interpretation because these were the people it was supposed to appeal to. I have no problems with Arabs as ancestry because it is a noble people with such background from Abraham. But there is a difference between real Arabs and wannabe Arabs, particularly when it comes to Spiritual level. There is also a mysticism behind the Arab people. In recent time I have grown in interest of this people, not contemporary people but the ancient people. For example, you said Muhammad which is mentioned in Quran on several occasions (with names like Muhammad,ahmad, mudasser, You, etc etc) is NOT the muhmmad that is portrayed in the Islamic world that we know of. How do you clarify the revelation of Quran on Muhammad? Do you actually believe in every verse of quran that is there in the book that we know of today, if yes then you must have a different interpretations when events and stories and names are mentioned in quran with respect to the messenger Muhammad. I have not yet encountered any passage of Quran that seems deliberately changed or added. However, the book does differ vastly from how people generally decipher its passages to the point of it being completely incompatible with the Islamic tradition and revealing a faith that is very Gnostic in style and follows similar tones as those Jesua/Jesus taught. The focus is very much on spirituality and personal conduct in many different scenarios and the second chapter alone contains like three lectures that stretch over dozens of passages each. I am at a loss as to what is your point of view about the physical nature of Islam? You said a prophet can not order killings but then the sources for this could be hadiths, where does it mention in Quran that Prophet muhmmad ordered killings of Christians. What about the verses in quran where Christians and jews are mentioned with names and muslims are warned never to take them as companions? The interpretation may be different but the fact remains about naming people/sect/nations? These were historical accounts over data that stems from a person called Muhammed. In Quran the prophet is very bitter in tone and "God" is very hostile and full of hate, and it shows that it tries heavily to rally for war which is contradictory to the taught style of the prophets who preached something else. Would you please clarify your belief about Quran, who brought it,on whom and who is Muhammad as the one mentioned in Quran? and how come the history is so different from what you believe... yet I like to know how do you interpret the context/history of Quran as it was revealed and the people of that time?? The Holy Spirit made it written. I do not know Muhammed at this time, I need more data. The traditional Muhammed is not an authentic prophet that is for sure though, very unrighteous man. I understand why there is so much blackmailing by Christians etc. I need to get to passages containing the word Muhammed (which can be both a name and a standard word like every other name in Arabic), although I have received inspiration that Muhammed is a real person but the question is who. I am asking these questions because I really like the way you address the soul and body concepts but then am at a loss with respect to your concepts about Quran linked to Muhammad and companions,, what is the physical TRUTH then? what has happened in actual fact and where are the sources for your belief? I wish I owned a time machine and could go back right to the action, but I can base my resultant reinterpretation to the conclusion that something is very fishy about the mainstream tradition concerning Muhammed since it is incompatible with basically everything that the mainstream doctrine stands for. The Author of Quran does not Use any reference to any separate Hell Spit out as much hatred as there is in the mainstream interpretations, not even a tiny percentage Say its followers are to abide in some paradise Have any separate mystical figure called Satan as an enemy to mankind Mean there is a person called Ebless Say afterlife means living in a Worldly/physical paradise Diminish the importance of the Mosaic Decree, i.e. the Ten Commandments or what Jesua/Jesus teaches in the Injeel as a way of elaboration on the ancient Decree Have such exaggerated emphasis on shirk/idolatry, it is mainly a distraction and "dubious" practice according to it Go against its own commandments (hypocritical) by making God jealous and emotional in any way when people go against His will Mention warfare even half as much as the traditional interpretation, it is perhaps a minority number of passages at most, the culprit is an interpretation error with qatal See Himself as a separate entity but repeatedly talks about a union (ahad) of Itself in Allah, for those who do like Him There are also factors that the interpreters did miss completely or partially that the Author of Quran wants to proclaim The Body is your main adversary (the word for Body is misinterpreted as paradise ironically enough) You were placed in your Body and the World to intentionally be deluded through a special test You are a Spirit but you are made to believe that your Body is the real you That your Spirit was made in God's own image Satan is your instinctive drive Instincts (Shaytiin) are a real problem for you The World is just a contradiction and was made to intentionally corrupt and deceive The World attachment is Jahannom (explained as testing ground) Those who fail the test have to experience being attached to the World continuously (Jahannom) As long as the Spirit is not destroyed there is always a chance for salvation, although the chances are obviously slim for huge sinners that may be reborn blind or utterly handicapped. Takes strong willpower. If you succeed you are an angel/maleikateh and you exist in God as your own independent (sub)Consciousness, bodiless/ethereal and you rule alongside God in symbiosis as the mirror outwards People who do not realize God's plot or who they are, are referred to as lifeless (al-mowt) Teaches that you are a son/daughter of God if you nurture your soul, and can become as perfect as God That Isaiah as a prophet is mentioned in Quran, and the initials (Ya Siin) of chapter 36 refers to him. That He (God) is referred to as Father already in the second chapter of Quran That Bani Israel is a metaphor for "Children of the Chief", i.e. Children of the Lord" (God) and this does not have any biological ties to any people Okay. I suppose I could easily double the list, but it is enough for now. Be safe Amenuel

Corrupted or not, the Bible should be looked at, and the people with what I consider a good heart will reject most of it with abhorrence. It doesn't matter the source, the source is always the same. What it says? Lots of wicked and despicable things.

Thanks! That looks promising.

My personal opinion The dream was a channeling from the NEGATIVE 5th DENSITY ENTITIES (shayateen of jinn) from the Orion Constellation and a POSITIVE WAHI prevented Abraham from committing a murder. Here we are with the science fiction again ... http//i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/554/facepalm.jpg

You may wish to first begin with defining what you mean by "slave", and what is the Quranic term you are referring to. You may be surprised at how helpful that is. See this excellent past discussion http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9600888.0 Thanks Wakas, it was a good thread. I noticed you pointed out that it wouldn't make sense to free a slave where they had willingly made an agreement to serve (which could be for a number of reasons) so from that I can see it is important to be clear on what I mean by using the term slavery. Rightly or wrongly I wouldn't consider a deal made by one person who owes another to work off that debt slavery unless certain rights were being taken from that person alongside. For example if the person is held captive in anyway, unable to communicate freely, unable to choose for themselves who they socialise with, what the eat, how they keep their money, I guess those things would be examples. But then today there are many agreements, military would be a good example I guess, where many rights are taken from people when they 'sign up' but they are usually aware of those things and thereby agree to the them. A.W. thanks for you post and I am sadly aware of slavery's continued existence so I'm with you on that wholeheartedly. You wrote "Bear in mind though that certain jobs, such as servants at a household is also understood to be slavery. That doesnt mean that all of those households are horrible to their slaves. Often these unfortunate people dont have the means to be independent. So, freeing them can also be understood to give them the means to become independent." I don't feel that someone who is a servant should be considered a slave unless they are being treated as such, in which case I would consider that wrong. I hope I'm understanding you correctly, but isn't to say that they may not have the means to be independent suggesting that they are being treated as slaves, as opposed to workers with lives and rights? The should be working in someone's home as a servant with pay and the right to family, friends, choices and so on. Man of Faith Thanks for your input. "Yes, slavery has always been wrong. Many people are also confused by the ancient kind of employment that involved several years of servitude but where the servant was let free for a compensation. Ancient world contract." I admit I don't know much about any ancient world contracts but what you describes sounds fine to me, unless there is 'servitude' that is somehow forced and where basic rights are taken away from the person. I guess that is where my issue begins. runningwithzebras I apologise for my overly blunt comments to you, you do indeed have a right to express yourself, and I appreciate you trying to help. While I note you believe that the threads discussions are entirely related, for me, perhaps because I don't claim to be proficient in the study of Quran, nor do I really enjoy getting bogged down in it, it has ended up too complex (for me). Frankly when this happens, as it seems to often do on here, it makes wonder - I mean, how in gods name is Quran supposed to be advice for all time if we have to expend this much effort to understand anything - and even then, as evidenced here, nobody can agree on anything! Please understand from the above that I'm stating how these situations make me 'feel', not trying to prove anything regarding Quran.

Those that contradict and theorize against Virgin Birth are liars and are condemned?cursed We the believers concatenate in Ayah 16-7 three groups of people while praying for guidance on the High road that keeps leading safely and straight to the destination of peace and tranquility. "This is the Path journeyed by those upon whom You the Exalted showered blessings. This Path is other than of those who made themselves liable to criminal cognizance/arrest; And nor is of those who are the neglectful wanderers lost in directionless bewilderment." The text of Grand Qur'aan is structured in such superb manner as if it were sequenced coherently to educate and portray to us these three types of people. The episode of Virgin Birth is mentioned in detail to refute the lies and slanders of one group of the posterity- the sons of Iesraa'eel?Jews in common parlance. They are the people who have rendered their selves liable to criminal cognizance - arrest by the decree of Allah the Exalted . This group of the posterity- the sons of Iesraa'eel?Jews in common parlance had refused to accept and believe in Easa alai'his'slaam as Al-Messiah and the elevated Messenger of Allah the Exalted Thereby, a group of Bani Iesraa'eel believed while their other Group had refused to accept and believe. They mocked the belief of Virgin Birth of the believers and theorized that it was borrowed from the Pagan's belief of virgin birth of some of their godheads. There is also a reference of such belief of Pagans in Grand Qur'aan Virgin Birth of Easa alahissalam

edited wrong post

To start with, the Qur'an has its own system for naming people which is nto subordinate to any other system. Secondly, indeed, the 3isa in the Qur'an is not the gospels Jesus. Also, there is not such a thing as Abrahamic faiths. Ibrahim did not invent a religion, and his was not a particular religion but the universal religion revealed to all the peoples in the world. The Qur'an is the revelation made to serve as a khatam, seal of any other revelation, to distinguish the autehtntic from the spurious. So whatever there is in any "book", in any other purported revelation the seal of its authenticity and integrity is its agreement with the Qur'an. The Qur'an is not there to be granted authentiity by any other revelation but the other way around. So thanks for the help giving category to the Qur'an by making it an offshoot to the bible, but there is no need of it and least of all to make it a monopoly of certain peoples or certain places. Salaam

Peace, great debate, I was thinking of exceptions and remembered Where do women fit into this inclusion/exclusion scenario? This day good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking lovers. And whoever denies the faith - his work has become worthless, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers. God bless peace

Seriously, are you drunk or using somekind of drugs? Weeds? Knowing this world, I had no idea, how should I do it. I still cant understand that yet. Haha no drugs at all, maybe just mentally retarded or something.