Hot/"ramadan" Answer

belH

Mecca Climatological Data
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun J ul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Record high ?C (?F) 33 (91) 35 (95) 38 (100) 40 (104) 42 (10 47 (117) 42 (10 42 (10 42 (10 41 (106)
Nov Dec Year
41 (106) 34 (93)
Average high ?C (?F) 29 (84) 29 (84) 29 (84) 33 (91) 35 (95) 37 (99) 40 (104) 37 (99) 36 (97) 35 (95) 33 (91) 32 (8 33 (91)
Average low ?C (?F) 19 (66) 18 (64) 19 (66) 21 (70) 23 (73) 24 (75) 26 (79) 27 (81) 25 (77) 23 (73) 22 (72) 19 (66) 22 (72)
Record low ?C (?F) 13 (55) 13 (55) 13 (55) 13 (55) 16 (61) 19 (66) 21 (70) 23 (73) 21 (70) 20 (6 17 (63) 12 (53)

Rainfall mm (in) 5 (0.2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 25 (1.0) 31 (1.2) 61 (2.4)

Why are you so lost; it was not Mecca, but Madena; The Madena Weather is simmilar to Jordan.
Now go and find the same information for Madena and post it if you are looking after showing the truth
yes

progod

Peace,

As i said before a Quranic month can be seen two ways

The verses where making up for days of fasting ONLY, is feeding a person for each day. 1 person for 1 day and 60 persons for 2 months.
In the dictionaries shahr (month) is said to be 29 days (and all of the other meanings of shahr). Those days are inherently islamic days, from sundown to sundown. But as I said 29 Islamic days implies 30 Quranic ones.

In the end as explicit as it may be it is still an issue of study and honest interpretation. And this will always be the case for books under scrutiny. From the Quran to national constitutions. The Quranic day is not as explicit for most Muslims who still believe in the Jewish based Islamic one. And there are plenty of other Quranic things that reveal themselves with honest study. It's about trying not to interject our own conjectures yet still trying to be honest and put the pieces together.

Godbless,
Anwar

belH

Peace,

In the end as explicit as it may be it is still an issue of study and honest interpretation. And this will always be the case for books under scrutiny. From the Quran to national constitutions. The Quranic day is not as explicit for most Muslims who still believe in the Jewish based Islamic one. And there are plenty of other Quranic things that reveal themselves with honest study. It's about trying not to interject our own conjectures yet still trying to be honest and put the pieces together.

Godbless,
Anwar

Good Words. sun
And may God lead you and all of us to the Honest Truth.
Peace

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace to all,

The word "ramadhan" itself refers to intense/extreme heat, so how can it not refer to a hot time of the year? There is no proof in the reading that "ramadhan" was the name of a pre-qur'anic month. The verse simply says "shahru ramadhan".

(1) If "shahr" refers to a "month", then the scriptures refers to an intensely hot month.
(2) If "shahr" refers to a full-moon, then the scripture refers to a specifically hot time period of the full-moon, or perhaps a "scorching hot/red moon".

Either way, given the root of the word "ramadhan", it would have to occur during a hot time period.

Also, even the traditional submitters base their calculator for "shahru ramadhan" on witnessing/sighting the moon. That is what the reading instructs us to do - whoever "sights/witnesses" the moon was to fast the period, according to the scripture. Whether you choose to sight the full-moon or the new crescent moon is completely up to you, but the full-moon would definately be easier to see than the new crescent moon. And regardless, the determination for the "shahr" isn't based on an arbitrary timetable - it's based on witnessing the moon, regardless of if "shahr" means "month" or "full-moon"...

Sawm cant mean fasting from food. If the poor must fast because they can not afford to feed others, then why is feeding them an expiation? how can we feed them if they are supposed to be fasting? Sawm must mean abstaining from something else

hmm Good question. May The God guide all of us to the truth.

Peace,

Ahmad

Soof

Peace,

As i said before a Quranic month can be seen two ways

The verses where making up for days of fasting ONLY, is feeding a person for each day. 1 person for 1 day and 60 persons for 2 months.
In the dictionaries shahr (month) is said to be 29 days (and all of the other meanings of shahr). Those days are inherently islamic days, from sundown to sundown. But as I said 29 Islamic days implies 30 Quranic ones.

In the end as explicit as it may be it is still an issue of study and honest interpretation. And this will always be the case for books under scrutiny. From the Quran to national constitutions. The Quranic day is not as explicit for most Muslims who still believe in the Jewish based Islamic one. And there are plenty of other Quranic things that reveal themselves with honest study. It's about trying not to interject our own conjectures yet still trying to be honest and put the pieces together.

Godbless,
Anwar

Peace

OK but how did Muhammad and his followers know how to fast when there were no Classical Arabic Dictionaries explaining what a month is? Does it say 60 persons for 2 months? is my main query, or is it something that everyone should know automatically whilst reading the Qur'an? If it comes from a dictionary that comes after it then that is subject to great sceptism. You are right, there are things in the Qur'an that require in depth study and personal opinion, but a duty that God says is very good for us (although not compulsory) should be made crystal clear besides the fact that God says the Qur'an is clear guidance. The description of the fast should be clear in how and when to do it and this description should be relevant and universal at the time the Qur'an was revealed as well as after.

Peace

progod

Peace,

OK but how did Muhammad and his followers know how to fast when there were no Classical Arabic Dictionaries explaining what a month is?

They didn't need Classical Arabic dictionaries because they spoke Classical Arabic. We need the dictionaries because we don't speak it anymore unless we learn it (inclduing the Arabs of today). They knew that a month was 29 (Jewish based, now called Islamic) days. When reading the Quran and figuring out that the Jewish-based way there were counting days was incorrect then they could have made the connection. The book was for our last prophet to preach it and for the whole community to study it and enact it. I honestly dont' think they realized this. In the Islamic histories (admittedly hadeeth based) the months were taken off of the pagan system (of adding months in certain years) after our last prophet passed. So I think this challenge fell on the shoulders of the generations after our last prophet and they made the wrong decision. The other conclusion would be that our last prophet with the believing community did make the correct changes but later generations opted for the pre-islamic nomenclature of months and the lunar system, keeping off addition of an extra month (making it a fully lunar calendar), but using foreign calendars for the solar system. Which is not entirely far-fetched seeing that the nominal Musilms (the Ummayads and others) tried to bring things back to the Jahillyah system as soon as the last prophet passed away.

Does it say 60 persons for 2 months?

Yes. 584 However, he who does not have the where?withal shall fast for two consecutive months before the couple may touch one another again; and he who is unable to fast shall feed sixty needy ones

Here it is. If you can't fast for 2 months to atone for the sin in the previous verses, then you can expiate the daily fasting for 2 months by feeding 60 people

589 is the vers that has been use against me in the argument. It reads
Allah will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful.

But I have continued to argrue here that in this verse we are not expiating any fast. The breaking of our oaths is worth feeding 10 people in need or JUST clothing them, or freeing someone in bondage. But if we can't do that we can fast for 3 days. So here we are not making up for any fasting. Whereas before if we can't fast then we expiate for the fast. That is the difference.

Here are the two verses that lay down the rule 2183-2184

is my main query, or is it something that everyone should know automatically whilst reading the Qur'an?

Lisaanul-Arab. I saw it in another dictionary as well. i don't have acceess to it any more. I think it was mu'jamat al-lughaat.
This is a meaning that was once automatically known. In MSA (modern standard Arabic which is the closest thing to Classical Arabic still spoken) a month is known either as an Islamic month, a western one or any number of days around 30 days in general. But we are talking about in the past here. And the Classical dictionaries tell us what people considered a month in the past amongst Classical Arabic speakers. We are speaking of a time period of over 1400 years. For that reason we are referring to dictionaries that tell us how people automatically understood these word 1400 years ago. Hence the Classical Arabic dictionary.

If it comes from a dictionary that comes after it then that is subject to great sceptism.

I understand your point here. The fact here however is that it was being documented how Arabic was blending and changing and how in certain places it wasn't. We are at the point now (and have been for centuries now) where Arabic has totally blended and evolved everywhere, except in the academic and scholarly field, where they maintained what was once the natural language of all Arabs but is now an archaic Arabic like Elizabethan English is archaic to us. Hence MSA was derived after many official councils on the Arabic language in the 20th century to install an official langauge in the education curriculum and media use based in most part on the now archaic (Classical) Arabic found in the Quran, pre-islamic poems, the hadeeth and other discourse of people after that. This was done to respect the history of Arabic literature and to mitigate some of the many subtle differences and the somtimes stark differences between the blended evolved Arabics (often called dialects, 3aamiyah or darijah) of different regions (these are known as Khaliji (gulf), Maghribi (incluses hassaniyyah and shuba), Misri (includes Sudan and Egypt), Yamani (includes Soqotri and Mehri which are technically different languages than Arabic, Soqotri has more Arabic in it I believe), And Saudi (also a product of mixing because of the inflow of non-Arabic or dialect speaking Muslims from all of the conquered Arabic territories))

That is the history. All Classical Arabic dictionaries were dedicated to reaching the people who still spoke Classical Arabic after the Quran and checking, analyzing and recording their use of the language. Reading the prefaces of Lisan-Al-Arab or lane's lexicon will give you a better picture of how early the works are and the situation of Arabic at the time. These dictionaries are all after the Quran, but Classical Arabic was still being fluently spoken after the Quran. Seeing that there were few educational institutions early on besides Quranic schools, the widely spread rumorous hadeeths prove this point as well. The Hadeeths are pure rumor and all of them are in Classical Arabic, which confirms the language's existence as a commonly spoken language among Arabs and especially bedouin Arabs.

Now to put these dictionaries under skepticism would be equal to putting our dictionaries like webster and oxford's under criticism and saying that they don't apply to works like the constitution or other English works pre-1800. But a good dictionary like Oxford for instance (which is the one we would refer to for archaic Englsh works) dates meanings and quotations, espeically if they come from interpretations of religious or political scholars where the words have been embellished upon and changed from their original meanings.

So I hope you understand that

The effort of any dictionary is to record the use of the langauge it has dedicating itself to.
If there were reasons to suggest differences in language B as it is spoken as opposed to records of how it was spoken before (Quran reciters, pre-islamic poem reciters being the ones to refer to) they would have been noted, and they were noted.
Dictionary writers checked with people who lived during the time of the prophet or shortly after his death as to how they used their language and their words.
All this may resemble the hadeeth but there is a major difference between verifying rumors and what people heard about the prophet and history surrounding him and how they spoke to each other and used their everyday words with each other(and being able to recognize if it is the same langaue as the Quran or not).
The Bedouins of that day were recorded as still using the same language and language structure as that found in the Quran, pre-islamic poetry and the hadeeths (as an every day house and street language in addition to a literate one for those who knew how to write) up to 300 years after the death of the prophet. After that the blended Arabic of the city areas where different cultures and ethnicities met and lived together (a result of Arab imperialism, Arab importation of foreign slaves as servants, international trade and the attraction of non-Arab Muslms to Arab centers of commerce and learning) began to fully affect bedouin speech as well.

You are right, there are things in the Qur'an that require in depth study and personal opinion, but a duty that God says is very good for us (although not compulsory) should be made crystal clear besides the fact that God says the Qur'an is clear guidance.

I hate to say this but that is a bias of yours. You are requiring that God make what he says clear to the corrupt and the uncorrupt a like. The Quran says that the corrupt intentionally twist its words after understanding them, and also says that many of the corrupt fail to understand even it's clearest mandates. How can we know when the corrupt do understand but are twisting on purpose? We can't, because they won't openly admit this. To those of us who are honest that is heart-wrenching because we want to believe that all humans will be honest when it comes to these sorts of discussion, but I've learned that that just will not happen. And if someone doesn't understand because they don't want to, it is also impossible to get them to admit that. So i understand you but that is why it is up to the honest to be honest with themselves, clear themselves of bias and alternative agendas and to be on the look out for those who are also honestly searching, studynig, analyzing and concluding.

To me alternative agendas are easy to spot, but it is impossible to get people with these agendas to admit it to others, let alone themslves. I understand your sentiment, but it is not the Quran, it is the people.

The description of the fast should be clear in how and when to do it and this description should be relevant and universal at the time the Qur'an was revealed as well as after

These are all your requirments and expectations. Honestly instead of demanding this of the Quran, demand this of your understanding of the book and its issues. That when you come to a conclusion it be as clear, unbiased and as non-convaluted as possible, and agrees with every Quranic verse on the subject and that it be as universal as possible. Remember that the Quran is for those who use their 3aql, not those who refuse to or choose to abuse. Unfortunately since we cannot control how justly and fervently peeople use their 3aql we can't guarantee that they would have understood this at the time of the Quran's revelation or after. That they understand the Quran as best as they can is all I think is required. So if the people at the time of its revelation honestly thought that their Jahillliyah month of Ramadan is what was meant then they did their best. If they realized that just 30 days during their local summer is what was meant then I think they were more correct in that estimation. If they though that the Quran validated their month names but not the way they added months to keep their year solar and that was their most honest assessment then they did their best. SO for those of us that realize something is wrong with the traditional islamic system it is up for us to honestly and unbiasedly investigate and try to arrive to the truth of the matter. BUt for those who don't realize I'm sure God accepts their fasting as he accepts ours if we our honest about our conclusions.
Do you see my points here?

Godbless,
Anwar

Samia

Yes. 584 However, he who does not have the where?withal shall fast for two consecutive months before the couple may touch one another again; and he who is unable to fast shall feed sixty needy ones

Here it is. If you can't fast for 2 months to atone for the sin in the previous verses, then you can expiate the daily fasting for 2 months by feeding 60 people

Salaam Anwar, all

I know you expect me to respond, so I did not want to disappoint you ;D. However, my question is not linguistic, but something that I was thinking of. I mentioned that I opted for the option of feeding the poor, but the verse does not say how many poor people, but mentions (compensation of feeding a poor) 2184. I personally took it as a collective plural, although it could be just one.

My question Does it mean fasting is only one day, or this sawm is not even "fasting from food and drink" but something else, or is it a third understanding? What do you think?

unknownuser

Peace everyone,

The word "ramadhan" itself refers to intense/extreme heat, so how can it not refer to a hot time of the year?

The word July comes from Julius Caesar - it's also the name of a month.

There is no proof in the reading that "ramadhan" was the name of a pre-qur'anic month.

They called the months something back then and those names were passed down.

Whether you choose to sight the full-moon or the new crescent moon is completely up to you, but the full-moon would definately be easier to see than the new crescent moon.

Are you sure? Is this a full moon?

http//i35.tinypic.com/dbntlk.jpg

On different days you would see a 99.7% full moon.

The new moon waxing crescent (D in DOC) is much easier to tell...

http//fredkleinastro.com/images/MoonAndVenus.JPG

Peace

Soof

Peace,

They didn't need Classical Arabic dictionaries because they spoke Classical Arabic. We need the dictionaries because we don't speak it anymore unless we learn it (inclduing the Arabs of today). They knew that a month was 29 (Jewish based, now called Islamic) days. When reading the Quran and figuring out that the Jewish-based way there were counting days was incorrect then they could have made the connection. The book was for our last prophet to preach it and for the whole community to study it and enact it. I honestly dont' think they realized this. In the Islamic histories (admittedly hadeeth based) the months were taken off of the pagan system (of adding months in certain years) after our last prophet passed. So I think this challenge fell on the shoulders of the generations after our last prophet and they made the wrong decision. The other conclusion would be that our last prophet with the believing community did make the correct changes but later generations opted for the pre-islamic nomenclature of months and the lunar system, keeping off addition of an extra month (making it a fully lunar calendar), but using foreign calendars for the solar system. Which is not entirely far-fetched seeing that the nominal Musilms (the Ummayads and others) tried to bring things back to the Jahillyah system as soon as the last prophet passed away.

The Dictionary question was rhetorical by the way...
Your mentioning the actions of Muhammad & his followers at that time cannot help. Otherwise I might as well turn to a Hadith to explain to me. The Qur'an has always explained itself and never needs another story to clarify it. So my point is not to say that it I require things from the Qur'an or that I have a biased opinion that the Qur'an should be straightforward. There are the cornerstones and the ambiguous but all duties in the Qur'an are made very clear and very detailed (hajj, inheritance, divorce, orphans, marriage) so following through the fasting duty must be clear (which I believe it is, I never said I haven't got my own understanding I was just asking of yours). You mention Muhammad and the people making corrections and changes but this is meant to be the Worldwide religion, are we to accept that the month we use for the duties of GOD is in the hands of Man to correct? If a muslim who has no knowledge of this history or hadeeth but knowledge of the moon and the sun and its cycles comes to the Qur'an alone, how does he deduce what a month is?

Yes. 584 However, he who does not have the wherewithal shall fast for two consecutive months before the couple may touch one another again; and he who is unable to fast shall feed sixty needy ones

Here it is. If you can't fast for 2 months to atone for the sin in the previous verses, then you can expiate the daily fasting for 2 months by feeding 60 people

589 is the vers that has been use against me in the argument. It reads
But I have continued to argrue here that in this verse we are not expiating any fast. The breaking of our oaths is worth feeding 10 people in need or JUST clothing them, or freeing someone in bondage. But if we can't do that we can fast for 3 days. So here we are not making up for any fasting. Whereas before if we can't fast then we expiate for the fast.That is the difference.

Here are the two verses that lay down the rule 2183-2184

Fair enough.

I understand your standing point on the dictionaries. I use them and lane's lexicon frequently. The best way in the end to decide is to collect like verses together and compare. Then come to the best conclusion.

I hate to say this but that is a bias of yours. You are requiring that God make what he says clear to the corrupt and the uncorrupt a like. The Quran says that the corrupt intentionally twist its words after understanding them, and also says that many of the corrupt fail to understand even it's clearest mandates. How can we know when the corrupt do understand but are twisting on purpose? We can't, because they won't openly admit this. To those of us who are honest that is heart-wrenching because we want to believe that all humans will be honest when it comes to these sorts of discussion, but I've learned that that just will not happen. And if someone doesn't understand because they don't want to, it is also impossible to get them to admit that. So i understand you but that is why it is up to the honest to be honest with themselves, clear themselves of bias and alternative agendas and to be on the look out for those who are also honestly searching, studynig, analyzing and concluding.

Yea, but you misunderstood, I'm not asking God of anything, I already know God makes things clear to those who are mindful, who study and reflect

Who hear advice and follow the best thereof. Such are those whom Allah guideth, and such are men of understanding.
3918

But what is corrupt? Corrupt is to use an external source to explain the Qur'an. Eventually you (not you personally) will twist the words of the Qur'an to match the external source, case in point the Hadith. So MY point is saying coming to the Qur'an alone, God says HIMSELF that he will make things clear for the believers and no MAN should need to, how can a man of lower intellect and fewer words explain to me any better than the Almighty, Most Wise? To say that I require Him to do this or that is neither here nor there, He tells us what He will do with his revelation, it's not bias at all. There are countless verses I shouldn't have to quote them to you, they are not demands at all nope, they are descriptions of the Qur'an!

So in conclusion God makes cornerstones of the Qur'an very clear, among them being the duties and guidelines to live by. Indeed there are subtleties that must be discussed but this does not detract from the final point, that fasting is good for us and we should observe it at certain periods of our lives. It is only when you use EXTERNAL sources that you corrupt God's word and things become unclear such as making Ramadhan a stand alone word that isn't translated (agree?). The closest thing to an uncorrupt external source is a Dictionary but even then their are interpretations that creep in from Hadith. God makes it plain and clear that we should come to understanding using the Qur'an ALONE. (obviously yt ou need an understanding of the Classical Arabic language as a pre-requisite)

What do you think about MaAAdoodatin particularly denoting few and not counted? (lanes lexicon) Also, just because someone fasts the month does not necessarily mean the WHOLE month.

Peace

ayman

Peace Nun,

They called the months something back then and those names were passed down.

What did they call them? It is not like we don't know. There are many Arabian pre-quranic inscriptions that have dates and names of months so this should be easy for you to find. In fact, I think I posted the names here on this forum in the past. Amongst those names you will not find any month named Ramadan.

Are you sure? Is this a full moon?

I have never heard two people disagree on when the full moon occured. So yeah I am sure. Also, based on the term "ramadan" the full-moon we should use is going to be more red and lower on the horizon than the nearly full one the next day, even though they might be close in percent illimunated.

The new moon waxing crescent (D in DOC) is much easier to tell...

Did you see it this year if it is so easy to tell? Did you ever see it? Probably not. How come every year there are so many disputes about the start and end of so-called Ramadan if it is so easy to tell?

Peace,

Ayman

Soof

updated response to Progod

The Dictionary question was rhetorical by the way...
Your mentioning the actions of Muhammad & his followers at that time cannot help. Otherwise I might as well turn to a Hadith to explain to me. The Qur'an has always explained itself and never needs another story to clarify it. So my point is not to say that it I require things from the Qur'an or that I have a biased opinion that the Qur'an should be straightforward. There are the cornerstones and the ambiguous but all duties in the Qur'an are made very clear and very detailed (hajj, inheritance, divorce, orphans, marriage) so following through the fasting duty must be clear (which I believe it is, I never said I haven't got my own understanding I was just asking of yours). You mention Muhammad and the people making corrections and changes but this is meant to be the Worldwide religion, are we to accept that the month we use for the duties of GOD is in the hands of Man to correct? If a muslim who has no knowledge of this history or hadeeth but knowledge of the moon and the sun and its cycles comes to the Qur'an alone, how does he deduce what a month is?

Fair enough. But that verse is referring to a punishment that is separate from Ramadhan, with a separate purpose (God says fasting is good for us but it is also used as a punishment so we recognise the error of what we are doing). It may well be 60 days in this case. Does this mean that it is so?

Why is it described here as fast for two consecutive months in this verse yet in the verse regarding ramadhan it says whoever witnesses the month should fast it?

How do you witness a month?

Why do some people say Witness, some people say observe and some people say are present? Does this mean the whole month? If you take it as 30 days why doesn't God say if we can't fast the month then feed 30 Needy People? when in fact it says

(Fast) a certain number of days; and (for) him who is sick among you, or on a journey, (the same) number of other days; and for those who can afford it there is a ransom the feeding of a man in need - but whoso doeth good of his own accord, it is better for him and that ye fast is better for you if ye did but know
2184

Does this mean the fast is one day according to your logic?

I understand your standing point on the dictionaries. I use them and lane's lexicon frequently. The best way in the end to decide is to collect like verses together and compare. Then come to the best conclusion.

Yea, but you misunderstood, I'm not asking God of anything, I already know God makes things clear to those who are mindful, who study and reflect

Who hear advice and follow the best thereof. Such are those whom Allah guideth, and such are men of understanding.
3918

But what is corrupt? Corrupt is to use an external source to explain the Qur'an. Eventually you (not you personally) will twist the words of the Qur'an to match the external source, case in point the Hadith. So MY point is saying coming to the Qur'an alone, God says HIMSELF that he will make things clear for the believers and no MAN should need to, how can a man of lower intellect and fewer words explain to me any better than the Almighty, Most Wise? To say that I require Him to do this or that is neither here nor there, He tells us what He will do with his revelation, it's not bias at all. There are countless verses I shouldn't have to quote them to you, they are not demands at all nope, they are descriptions of the Qur'an!

So in conclusion God makes cornerstones of the Qur'an very clear, among them being the duties and guidelines to live by. Indeed there are subtleties that must be discussed but this does not detract from the final point, that fasting is good for us and we should observe it at certain periods of our lives. It is only when you use EXTERNAL sources that you corrupt God's word and things become unclear such as making Ramadhan a stand alone word that isn't translated (agree?). The closest thing to an uncorrupt external source is a Dictionary but even then their are interpretations that creep in from Hadith. God makes it plain and clear that we should come to understanding using the Qur'an ALONE. (obviously yt ou need an understanding of the Classical Arabic language as a pre-requisite)

What do you think about MaAAdoodatin particularly denoting few and not counted? (lanes lexicon) Also, just because someone fasts the month does not necessarily mean the WHOLE month.

Peace

anthonywallace

Peace Nun,

Did you see it this year if it is so easy to tell? Did you ever see it? Probably not. How come every year there are so many disputes about the start and end of so-called Ramadan if it is so easy to tell?

Peace,

Ayman

This is the year of a dispute, for all I know. I believe you started this dispute this year...Thus I never knew of it to be a dispute...every year as you say...

peace

progod

Peace,

i want to answer Samia first and say that the fast is daily. The fast is only for 1 day duirng daylight hours (hence you break it the same day), and you fast each day for the whole month. So you are not fasting the month, you are fasting during the daylight hours each day during the whole month. So, Quranically, fasting only relates to one day of fasting, because you break your fast each night and start a new one the next day for a month during Ramadan. Hence if you don't fast, you feed one person for every fast you don't do during that month.

The Dictionary question was rhetorical by the way...
Your mentioning the actions of Muhammad & his followers at that time cannot help. Otherwise I might as well turn to a Hadith to explain to me. The Qur'an has always explained itself and never needs another story to clarify it. So my point is not to say that it I require things from the Qur'an or that I have a biased opinion that the Qur'an should be straightforward. There are the cornerstones and the ambiguous but all duties in the Qur'an are made very clear and very detailed (hajj, inheritance, divorce, orphans, marriage) so following through the fasting duty must be clear (which I believe it is, I never said I haven't got my own understanding I was just asking of yours). You mention Muhammad and the people making corrections and changes but this is meant to be the Worldwide religion, are we to accept that the month we use for the duties of GOD is in the hands of Man to correct? If a muslim who has no knowledge of this history or hadeeth but knowledge of the moon and the sun and its cycles comes to the Qur'an alone, how does he deduce what a month is?

Ok, I didn't know that was rethorical. As for the story, I'm just giving possiblities for why Islam has done this whole Ramadan thing incorrectly and unquranically (I'm not saying that God won't accept the traditional way from sincere servants). No we don't need this when approaching the Quran, just trying to give possiblities for why it hasn't been so clear too many in the past and what could have gone wrong. Ther are even debatablities on hajj, inheritance (some people say it doesn't add up), divorce, orphans and even marriage. I'm sure we could find those points that some people will not let go and force into unsolvable ambiguities. But you and I understand why that is. The fasting duty is clear it is just that you have come accross camps of people who want to take any hint of an ambiguity and use it to help their agendas. As for this being a worldwide religion I agree. i believe that those instances of the Quran that cannot be seen from a universal point of view are there to serve as universal lessons on how we are to approach or view the issues involved. Again those scenarios were to explain what could have gone wrong during or after the prophet's time that bliinded them to the inherent universal application of these passages. As for knowing what a month is, that is cultural. And it was in the culture and therefore in the language of the pre-islamic Arabs that a month was 29 sunset to sunset days, and analyzing what that translates into when converted into Quranically mandated sunrise to sunrise days we get 30 days, that in addtion to the fact tha the Quran gives us clues on to this meaning. So the Arabs of that time had in their minds many things when they thought shahr and they had a few defintions for what a month could be as well, one of which translates into 30 sunrise to sunrise days.

Fair enough. But that verse is referring to a punishment that is separate from Ramadhan, with a separate purpose (God says fasting is good for us but it is also used as a punishment so we recognise the error of what we are doing). It may well be 60 days in this case. Does this mean that it is so?

It is not a punishment but a compensation, an atonement. The fact is that in chapt. 2 with those verse i gave you how to fast Quranically is given to us, as well as how to compensate for our missed fasts. So with that verse we see clearly how 2 months of fasting is being equals to 60 daily fasts.
Hence if 2 months is 60 days, 30 days is a month.

hy do some people say Witness, some people say observe and some people say are present? Does this mean the whole month? If you take it as 30 days why doesn't God say if we can't fast the month then feed 30 Needy People? when in fact it says

In my opinion because people like to argue about simple things. Shahdia is both to witness and to consciously be in the presence of. There are alot of things I wish God had said in ways that people could not make room for doubt. But this book is for those who use their 3aql. Also the fast is not for the month. The fast is for each day during the month. You are fasting daily for 30 days. You are not fasting for the whole month. I think there will be those cases where people can stand to fast part of the month. And that can be any number of days. Hence the Quran is dealing with each daily fast.

But what is corrupt? Corrupt is to use an external source to explain the Qur'an. Eventually you (not you personally) will twist the words of the Qur'an to match the external source, case in point the Hadith. So MY point is saying coming to the Qur'an alone, God says HIMSELF that he will make things clear for the believers and no MAN should need to, how can a man of lower intellect and fewer words explain to me any better than the Almighty, Most Wise? To say that I require Him to do this or that is neither here nor there, He tells us what He will do with his revelation, it's not bias at all. There are countless verses I shouldn't have to quote them to you, they are not demands at all no way, they are descriptions of the Qur'an!

Yes, the Quran explains itself. I think knowledge of the universe also makes the Quran even more clear to us. When we meet people that the Quran describes it makes it all the more clear what the Quran is talking about, even though it was clear before we me those people. It's just we didn't fully grasp the gravity of it. I also think that sometimes hearing others' honest and insightful opinons on the Quran can help us understand what we didn't see before in the book, as long as we come to see the same thing too by honestly analyzing and scrutinizing. Again, clear is only as clear as the human mind that reads it. I've seen people contort clear mandates over and over again. And the Quran says that there will be those who distort it. So even knowing that God will make the book clear to those who approach it corretly, that is, as a whole and taking what is best, in context and consistent with the rest of the book, there will be those who will try to pick and choose and make us doubt if the book is really clear or not. In the end that is up to you and the circle of people you come to trust to conclude on, being honest and sincere with yourselves.

So in conclusion God makes cornerstones of the Qur'an very clear, among them being the duties and guidelines to live by. Indeed there are subtleties that must be discussed but this does not detract from the final point, that fasting is good for us and we should observe it at certain periods of our lives. It is only when you use EXTERNAL sources that you corrupt God's word and things become unclear such as making Ramadhan a stand alone word that isn't translated (agree?). The closest thing to an uncorrupt external source is a Dictionary but even then their are interpretations that creep in from Hadith. God makes it plain and clear that we should come to understanding using the Qur'an ALONE. (obviously yt ou need an understanding of the Classical Arabic language as a pre-requisite)

I can agree to that mostly. As for interpretations from hadeeth. I think there are few examples of this. For instance not even the defintion of Islam in the Hadeeth as the five pillars has found its way into the dictionaries I have used. Shafi's interpretation of the word has, but his saying is cited clearly as his interpretation of the word. So dictionaries are not as guilty of this as they have been made out to be on this forum. That is mainly because hadeeths rarely try to redefine words. The scholars are the ones who, expounding upon a word in the Quran, try to redefine it. Hadeeths are just rumors of what the prophet and his companions did and said. I haven't seen much interpretation of single words in the Hadeeth, which is why they rarely find their way into the dictionaries. Now the hadeeth are used for linguistic reference. So if the hadeeth used the word 'to walk' dictionaries will quote the hadeeths usage of the word to walk if it clearly gives away the correct meaning and usage of the word. But there is nothing wrong with that because the hadeeth is in Classical Arabic as well and can be used as a linguistic reference. The opinions and facts of the hadeeth are what are dubious because of the fact that they are rumor. You wouldn't doubt the grammar of a a rumor, you doubt the message that it is trying to convey.

What do you think about MaAAdoodatin particularly denoting few and not counted? (lanes lexicon) Also, just because someone fasts the month does not necessarily mean the WHOLE month.

I wote about this earlier. The word can mean counted/numbered and few. Just like the English word 'numbered' can be used in the expression 'your days are numbered' to mean 'you have only few days left to live.' But that doesn't change the meaning of 'numbered'. I explained everyting in lisan al-arabi (if lane's lexicon only says few then it is an incomplete entry, and that is not the end of the world because you have to check more than oen dictionary soemtiemes to get all the meaings. The dictionary is only as good as its compiler). ANd yes the goal is to fast the whole month. That is the implication. Now that might not happen for many reasons and the Quran gives the scenarios. But I think fasting each day for a whole month is the implied message. Because that would leave it too ambiguous and we wouldn't know what to do. So if some says fast during September, he could mean only to fast for a part of it, but if he doesn't specify any part than the whole month is naturally implied. Again, the fast is daily so that is why compensating for the daily fasts during ramadan is dealt with day by day.

Godbless,
Anwar

belH

Peace Nun,

What did they call them? It is not like we don't know. There are many Arabian pre-quranic inscriptions that have dates and names of months so this should be easy for you to find. In fact, I think I posted the names here on this forum in the past. Amongst those names you will not find any month named Ramadan.

Why you keep hammering us with un-Quranic proofs? Why do you rely on Hadiths and rumers? Have you been advising people to not follow Hadiths and rely on Quran when speaking about religion?
Are the names you posted came from stories and hadiths or from Quran?

I have never heard two people disagree on when the full moon occured. So yeah I am sure. Also, based on the term "ramadan" the full-moon we should use is going to be more red and lower on the horizon than the nearly full one the next day, even though they might be close in percent illimunated.

brickwall Again...No Quranic proof

A Warrning to you From Your Lord

(&#65279 (&#65279 (&#65279
And among men is he who disputes about All?h, without knowledge or guidance, or a Book giving light (from All?h), (22-
Bending his neck in prid, and leading (others) too astray from the Path of All?h. For him there is disgrace in this worldly life, and on the Day of Resurrection We shall make him taste the torment of burning (Fire). (9)
That is because of what your hands have sent forth, and verily, All?h is not unjust to (His) slaves. (22-10)

Did you see it this year if it is so easy to tell? Did you ever see it? Probably not. How come every year there are so many disputes about the start and end of so-called Ramadan if it is so easy to tell?

Peace,

Ayman

Happy Ramadan

If you want to sight the Moon yourself, please Feel Free, it is Fun

http//aa.usno.navy.mil/idltemp/current_moon.php

Or will you reject technology as Mulas Do rotfl

ayman

Peace everyone,

I think that at this stage, it is best to summarize all the different viewpoints on the timing of the abstinence so that people can see the essence of each and not get distracted by all the noise. There are basically four points of view

The traditional timing

We all know the traditional timing so I am not going to waste time on explaining it. Also, everyone who has read the great reading knows that the traditional point of view has zero support in the great reading and this is what has prompted many people here to search for a better one based on the great reading. Basically, the traditional timing has the following problems

Assumption that ?ramadan" is meaningless

It assumes that the word ?ramadan? in 2185 is meaningless and thus that the god could have said ?bla bla bla?, as long as it came after the month named Shaaban, which brings us to the next point.

The traditional timing is 100% arbitrary

In reality, the only thing that the sectarian Ramadan is based on is when Shaaban occurred and this in turns depends on when Rajab occurred and so on.

So if one follows this back, one can see that in fact Ramadan is dependent on when the new era was made to start. Many people mistakenly believe that Islamic Calendar starts with the alleged date of migration of the prophet. However, even this arbitrary start is false since Muharram was selected as the start of the era and not the supposed date of migration of the prophet.

It is an indisputable fact that had the new era been made to start according to a different marker such as the date of first revelation or the date of birth of the prophet or the date of the final victory of the prophet, etc. then people here who happily embrace the traditional timing would have been fasting in an entirely different month. So for example, had the beginning of the new era been set to 3 years earlier then they would be fasting in what was Shaaban a month earlier. In addition to the beginning of the era, the order of the months in this new era is completely arbitrary. So what sectarians are doing right now is essentially fasting a completely random month and this is a fact that only the most ignorant and dogmatic would dispute.

The traditional timing ignores the fact that the year is certainly solar in the great reading

According to 1712, daylight and night are used to determine the number of years. Since day and night are a function of the sun and not the moon, then the year is certainly solar or luni-solar.

The traditional timing violates 936

By assuming that the word ?shahr? means a lunar month and given the fact that the year is solar as shown in (3), the traditionalists actually count 12.3 months in a year and not exactly twelve.

The traditional timing creates a contradiction between 2185 and 971

On the one hand, traditionalists claim that according to 2185 the great reading was descended in a month while 971 clearly says that it was descended in one night. This false understanding creates a contradiction in the great reading.

The traditional timing creates a contradiction between 2185 and 2184

Traditionalists claim that according to 2185 the abstinence is for a month while 2184 is clearly saying ?a few days?. Some try to make up excuses by making up a new meaning for ?ma3doodat? as ?any number?. So now they create another problem by implying that the god is giving superfluous useless information. This false understanding also creates another problem further down in 2185 when the passage mentions ?completing the count?. If the count is already known as ?30 days? or ?29 days? then both ?any number? and ?completing the count? become useless and unnecessary information.

These are just 6 problems with the traditional understanding and I am sure that there are more but I already wasted enough time stating what should be obvious to everyone but unfortunately isn?t as evident by all the confusion. So let me move to the next point of view on timing

The timing according to Anwar (ProGod)

Basically, Anwar acknowledges the meaning of ?ramadan? so this way, at least initially, he avoids issues (1), (2) and (3) in the traditional timing. However, his theory still suffers from the following problems and he later reintroduces issues (1), (2) and (3) as we will see below

Anwar?s timing violates 936

He invents an imagined meaning for ?shahr? as a 30 day month when it is an indisputable reality that no lunar or even solar calendar has constant 30 day months. So he actually counts 12.17 of his imaginary months in a year and not exactly 12.

The closest calendar to what Anwar is proposing is the ancient Egyptian calendar, which had twelve 30 day months and a thirteenth month that lasted only 5 days. This 5 day month was a national holiday that they conducted festivals on.

Unlike ancient Egyptians, Anwar is completely silent on what he is doing with the extra five days. I am really surprised given how several here are jumping to make up non-existent issues to criticize the timing that I proposed that no one has pointed his attention to this glaring issue of the missing five days. It probably has to do with people unconsciously focusing on the point of view that has more merit and is thus more threatening to their status quo. At any rate, back to Anwar?s five vanishing days. If he ignores them as he seems to be doing then his calendar will very quickly be out of sync with the seasons and thus he has unknowingly reintroduced traditional problems (1), (2) and (3) into his theory.

Anwar?s view is one that I am particularly familiar with because at one point perhaps five years ago or so I used to have the same exact view about the timing and the ?30 day? fixed month. Fortunately, I was able to progress with the god?s guidance beyond that understanding.

Anwar?s timing creates a contradiction between 2185 and 971

Anwar claims that according to 2185 the great reading was descended in ?30 days? while 971 clearly says that it was descended in one night. So like traditionalists, this false understanding creates a contradiction in the great reading.

Anwar?s timing creates a contradiction between 2185 and 2184

This is the same exact traditional problem (6) discussed above in the Traditional Timing section.

The timing according to Layth

At one point Layth was embracing the same understanding that I had except that he had the scorching full-moon ending the restricted full-moons instead of beginning them. Now, in his latest article about the so-called Night of the Decree, he has presented a new understanding. The underlying premise of Layth?s understanding is his interpretation of 1925.

He bases his entire thesis on when the palm trees mature. However, even if we assume that this is the correct interpretation then the harvest season when the palm trees mature varies greatly. There are hundreds of varieties of palm trees (there is over 100 varieties in Iraq alone). They mature at different times and are harvested at different times ranging from June through end of October. So the timing is uncertain. Add this to the fact that the time of the pregnancy is also somewhat variable and we have the interaction of two uncertain variables.

There is also another major problem. When one sees a palm tree with fully ripened dates, you can often see some ripened dates which had fell by themselves to the ground. However, if you have seen a mature palm tree up close and you actually tried to shake it, you would very quickly realize that this is not an easy matter like shaking a twig. Their trunks are not easy to shake even for a fully able strong man, let alone a woman in labor! Why do you think we see people climbing up palm trees to get the fully ripened dates during the harvest season instead of seeing everyone simply hugging a palm tree and shaking it? So how things happened in 1925 could be very different from what is normal and would more likely involve some divine intervention to cause it to happen. So the entire episode of pregnancy, labor and dates falling down from the palm tree could very well involve some divine intervention and thus be different from what would normally happen.

In addition, Lyth?s timing suffers from the following problems

Assumption that ?ramadan" is meaningless

Like traditionalists, Layth assumes that the key word ?ramadan? in 2185 is meaningless and thus its meaning has nothing to do with his timing.

Layth?s timing creates a contradiction between 2185 and 971

Layth goes back to the meaning of ?shahr? as ?month? so this again creates a contradiction between 2185 and 971

As for any other issues, I am not really sure since Layth ends the article with the following statement

?This night is not only a blessed night in itself, but it also would bless the period around it explaining why the fast has been commanded to occur in the month of Ramadhan in which the Night of Decree is contained?

He doesn?t tell us when this supposed ?month of Ramadhan? starts or ends. So the reader is left with no information whatsoever on when it starts or ends or how long the abstinence is for. Given this deliberate vagueness then Layth is probably aware of those issues and couldn?t address them at that time. I am hopeful that he can address them in the future.

The timing according to Ayman, Marie, Zenje, and many others who contributed to this present understanding

First of all I would like to say that all good comes from the god and I don?t deserve any credit except for mistakes. In fact, one of the ideas that led to this understanding came at a time over four years ago when I was holding the same view as Anwar and I was debating with a Sunni on another forum that the month is 30 days. The Sunni fellow kindly pointed to me that one of the meanings of ?shahr? is moon and the moon cycle is not 30 days. I checked Lisan Al-Arab and indeed the meaning of ?full-moon? was right there. This led to shifting my mindset from thinking about ?shahr? in terms of the vague term ?month? and manmade calendars to god-given natural cosmic phenomenon.

Of course, this timing mechanism doesn?t suffer from any of the above problems. It naturally solves the problem of when the night of measure is without making any extra effort or speculating about uncertain factors. It is the only understanding that doesn?t violate 936 and in fact based on 936 simply and elegantly maintains the timing of the restriction in sync with the seasons.

I hope this helps everyone.

Peace,

Ayman

unknownuser

Peace Ayman,

What did they call them? It is not like we don't know. There are many Arabian pre-quranic inscriptions that have dates and names of months so this should be easy for you to find. In fact, I think I posted the names here on this forum in the past. Amongst those names you will not find any month named Ramadan.

Any evidence the word Ramadan is used in pre-quranic inscriptions, writings etc., as red hot?

If you have information to substantiate your theory then lets see it.

I have never heard two people disagree on when the full moon occured. So yeah I am sure. Also, based on the term "ramadan" the full-moon we should use is going to be more red and lower on the horizon than the nearly full one the next day, even though they might be close in percent illimunated.

http//science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/24jun_moonillusion.htm

Editor's Note If you miss the moon illusion on June 24th, try again on June 25th or 26th -- two nights with nearly-full moons. Or wait until July 23rd when the second full moon of summer arrives.

Did you see it this year if it is so easy to tell? Did you ever see it? Probably not. How come every year there are so many disputes about the start and end of so-called Ramadan if it is so easy to tell?

It is 2008 and we have precise tools; thousand years ago they did not.

http//www.calculatorcat.com/moon_phases/phasenow.php

Why do all lunar calendars start with new moon waxing crescent and end with waning crescent and not full moon to full moon?

Peace

ramzi

SO for those of us that realize something is wrong with the traditional islamic system it is up for us to honestly and unbiasedly investigate and try to arrive to the truth of the matter. BUt for those who don't realize I'm sure God accepts their fasting as he accepts ours if we our honest about our conclusions.

Yes, I like this statement )

Regards

Ramzi

ayman

Peace Nun,

Any evidence the word Ramadan is used in pre-quranic inscriptions, writings etc., as red hot?
If you have information to substantiate your theory then lets see it.

There are many words in the great reading not used in pre-quranic inscriptions. So using your logic you might as well reject all of them.

As for the names of months, it is perfectly normal that we have these since many inscriptions end with the author writing "this was written on such date in the month of x in the year x". NONE of those months is named Ramadan. More importantly, the common meaning of the common noun "ramadan" fits in 2185 so the great reading confirms the meaning. On the other hand, you have ZERO evidence for the traditional timing from the great reading.

http//science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/24jun_moonillusion.htm
Editor's Note If you miss the moon illusion on June 24th, try again on June 25th or 26th -- two nights with nearly-full moons. Or wait until July 23rd when the second full moon of summer arrives.

The nearly full moons on the 25th and 26th were not as symmetric as the 24th one. Also, they will not take a path as low on the horizon as the one on the 24th and thus will not appear as vividly red as that one. So unlike the new-moon there is more than one factor and they all converge at the right time.

It is 2008 and we have precise tools; thousand years ago they did not.
http//www.calculatorcat.com/moon_phases/phasenow.php

The god's commands apply equally a thousand years ago as now. You never saw the new moon and you will probably never see it in your life. So you are arguing about something that you never witnessed and never will. On the other hand, everyone can easily witness the scorching full moon and I have witnessed it every year with my family since 2005.

Why do all lunar calendars start with new moon waxing crescent and end with waning crescent and not full moon to full moon?

All calendars are manmade. The god doesn't give us calendars or prohibit us from using any calendar. He gives us clear cosmic phenomenon for the purpose of timing the fast and the restriction on hunting wild life. Thus, the people of the book timed the major festivals according to the full moon. This further points to the full-moon being the original marker as confirmed in the great reading.

As I said and explained in the article and in the above posts, you have ZERO evidence for the completely arbitrary traditional timing from the great reading. So you are defending something which is indisputably completely arbitrary and entirely based on manmade decisions. Therefore, I would suggest that you study and come up with the correct timing based on the great reading before criticizing from the indefensible traditional position.

Peace,

Ayman

Samia

Peace,

i want to answer Samia first and say that the fast is daily. The fast is only for 1 day duirng daylight hours (hence you break it the same day), and you fast each day for the whole month. So you are not fasting the month, you are fasting during the daylight hours each day during the whole month. So, Quranically, fasting only relates to one day of fasting, because you break your fast each night and start a new one the next day for a month during Ramadan. Hence if you don't fast, you feed one person for every fast you don't do during that month.

Salaam Anwar
You conjecture about shahr = month; two shahrs = two months
1 month = 30 days

two months = 60 days. You have no proof of any of the above, not even from Classical Arabic dictionaries.
Then you treat the conjecture as fact and force it on the verse of "ramadaan" !
How about this conjecture
shahr full moon
sharain mutataabi3in (two consectutive shahrs) one month
"man shahida minkumul shahra falyasumhu who ever amongst you witnessed the full moon should fast it) = one day
no fasting = feeding one poor
not fasting one months (two consecutive moons/shahrs = 30 days) feed 60 poor because this is a punishment, so it should be tough).
Better than your conjecture, but still a conjecture.

progod

Salaam Anwar
You conjecture about shahr = month; two shahrs = two months
1 month = 30 days

two months = 60 days. You have no proof of any of the above, not even from Classical Arabic dictionaries.
Then you treat the conjecture as fact and force it on the verse of "ramadaan" !
How about this conjecture
shahr full moon
sharain mutataabi3in (two consectutive shahrs) one month
"man shahida minkumul shahra falyasumhu who ever amongst you witnessed the full moon should fast it) = one day
no fasting = feeding one poor
not fasting one months (two consecutive moons/shahrs = 30 days) feed 60 poor because this is a punishment, so it should be tough).
Better than your conjecture, but still a conjecture.

This is not conjecture if we make up for a daily fast by feeding 1 person then making up for two months of fasting by feeding 60 people is making it obvious that 2 months = 60 days. Hence . . .
Shahr can mean full moon, but i don't think it means that in the Quranic contexts of fasting. Fating any month, like I said is fasting each day within it. That is why expiation for fasting is done on a daily basis. I don't expect you to want to understand me, if think about it. Read thos scriptures more carefully and see what is being said. The month here is any month during summer. I would disagree as to whether you conjecture is better than my conclusion. However, I have never known you to be very sensible on any issue when it comes to these kinds of discussions. So believe what you will. May God guide us all. For those who see my point, thank you for studying the issue honestly. This is not an issue of making up things. It is an issue of trying to pull what is most logical out of the Quranic verses and put it into practice. I am not conjecture here I am concluding on facts. Those facts are

To fast, Quranically, for a month is to fast each day during that month. That explains why expiation for missed fasts is dealt with on a day by day basis. Technically you are not fasting all of Ramadan because you are fasting the nights. So whereas you can say you are fasting Ramadan as a generality or a stereotype and not be incorrect, the specifics of the matter is that you are only fasting daily, and specifically during the daylight hours of Ramadan. I don't see what is so hard to understand about that.
This Quranic usage and its equating 2 months of fasting with 60 daily fasts shows very clearly what the Quran thinks of the word shahr (It's a 30 day period).
The word shahr has many different meanings, but the above shows that in the matter of fasting a 30 day period is what is preferred. The Quran's usage of the word shahr seems to be more conducive to a 30 day period than any moon phase. Remember that shahr can mean crescent moon as well. and in that case we can go back to the Islamic method of counting from crescent moon to crescent moon. As I said from the above i think the Quran prefers 30 days for a shahr. That is my conclusion. I think that is pretty simple and don't see how I can be accused of conjecturing here..
I am not an anti-traditionalists nor a pro-traditionalists. But I do beileve in logic, evidence and sound analysis of issues. I don't think it's necessary to go left field with my analysis unless there is no other way to make something in the Quran make sense, and stay consistent. I think the interpreting full moon here creates too many inconsitencies, Quranically and logically. But Ayman, Samia and anyone else are entitled to their opinions I just hope we all try to keep it logical, simple and consistent.

I think I've made my pints clear in this topic, see them if you will or dismiss them if you will. The honesty and integrity of your reasons and intentions that lead you to your conclusions is what God will judge you by.

Godbless,
Anwar