Hot/"ramadan" Answer

ayman

Peace Truthseeker,

No, this has not been answered. We can count a fraction of an object too in terms of that object. I know that 1/6 month is not a month but we can COUNT fractions of a unit in term of that unit. For example a hypothetical week can have 4 and a half days, so the count of days in that week will be 4 and 1/2 days. Similarly, if a month is always 30 days then the COUNT of months will be 12 and 1/6 months in a solar year and not 12.

Exactly, we all routinely use expressions such as "half a month" so certainly fractional units in a continuous measure such as "month" are possible and are to be counted. The only way to count exactly 12 is if they were not continuous but binary 0 or 1 events. There is no "1/6 of an event". In other words, either you have the full-moon event (1) or you don't (0). Only then there is no fraction.

As Ayman has pointed out already, your definition of "shahr" as a "month of 30 days" is completely arbitrary without any quranic backing. How can we witness an arbitrary man made time period of 30 days? This man made month of 30 days will fall on different days depending on when the month is arbitrarily started. You still haven't answered the question that Ayman asked When exactly will you start your arbitrary month of 30 days in the summer season? From what point will you start counting your 30 days? Please give quranic evidence for the exact time when you are going to start your arbitrary month.

Exactly, Anwar couldn't answer my question, because he can't.

Anwar, for the last time please tell us when your arbitrary 30 day scorching month starts and when it ends. Tell us also when your arbitrary four restricted 30 day months start and end. Remember, they can't be arbitrary, otherwise the restriction on hunting would be violated.

NO CLASSICAL ARABIC DICTIONARY DEFINES SHAHR AS "A MONTH ALWAYS CONTAINING 30 DAYS". That is purely your novel innovation based solely on using al-quran in a faulty manner.

Exactly, Anwar is lecturing Siki "I don't trust you when you say this" but then he turns around and trusts himself not just for saying it but for actually building his entire theory around it.

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Good double team AND assist! I envisoned Truthseeker11 going up with the ball and passing the assist to Ayman and BOOOM! It was a brick! Ah well, nice try. That was like an NBA Pippin/Jordan assist (I'm showing my age, sorry). I guess I should congratulate confused. But to come back to serious land for a bit, Mrs. (or is it Ms.?) truthseeker11, sorry about the assumption that you were a male. All i can really say is oops, my bad. Everyone is entitled to a simple mistake like that, but I do apologize. And why the male chauvinism comment? That wasn't necessary. I admit to a certain degree of chauvinism but I wouldn't try to make it too deep or try to push the point that I'm some sort of misogynist. You didn't but I got the vibe . .(for all that means, my vibes don't seem to be too accurate after getting your gender wrong).

Despite that I'll respond when I get the chance but I'll do my best not to write a book and just respond to the main points of both yours and Ayman's comments. Otherwise I'll be on the computer all day trying to basically reiterate and reword some of the things I've already said but which have not been understood. I'm pretty convinced now that if I haven't been understood by now I never will be. But I guess I feel the need to respond in order to pull my points out of the mud that has just been thrown on them. In any case I'll take my time on the response because seeing how this conversation has gone it has just become a very low number on my priority list. Take that as you will but I'd like to just clarify my points, I won't get personal like you guys want me to by continually calling me out by name (something I asked for restraint on and which I have done my best to avoid), and then I'll try (and I say that with an emphasis on the y) to withdraw from this very, very long-winded topic.

Again and as always I'll give that joyful farwell . . . (I'm trying to keep things upbeat)

sun Godbless,
Anwar

the_seeker

Salaam Anwar & everyone,

In the interest of everyone, can you just please answer the inquiries put forward by thruthseeker11 pointblank. Let the truth stands on its own merits.

Is there a way where we can download the thread on this topic in notepad/word form? Is there such a way? Any help is much appreciated.

O0 RAMON O0

*when i was barely 9 years old, i entered a church & then suddenly a healer-supposed-to-be-with-the-spirit-of-the-infant-jesus exclaimed "may kalabang pumasok (an enemy just entered)"... i never realized until these period in my life that I could have been viewed as an anti-Christ...but then Jesus is not God & there is no second coming except the Day of Resurrection of all. Does that make me an anti-Christ? Then, the fake healer is right all along. Sorry, this should be in the intro yourself thread...but couldn't resist validating the afro icon...wait till I get blind...is that on the left or right eye....? jedi

May God be with you all...SALAMUN ALAYKUM...

ayman

Peace Ramon,

Is there a way where we can download the thread on this topic in notepad/word form? Is there such a way? Any help is much appreciated.

A possible simple way that you can do right from you browser is to click File > Save As... and then in the dialog box go to the "Save as type" pull down menu and select "Text File (*.txt)". You can then open the text file in Notepad.

The problem is that you would have to repeat this for each page and there are now 42 pages as per my last count. A workaround this is to instead use the above procedure when you are posting a reply because when you post a reply all or most of the thread history appears in a single web page but it will be in reverse chronological order.

Either way you would need to do some cleanup in Notepad to end up with a nicely readable text by getting rid the menu labels and other generic page labels and because the images are going to appear as funny characters.

I am sure there are utilities or plugins out there that would allow you to do more but this is a simple thing that you can do right from your browser if all you need is a text file.

Peace,

Ayman

the_seeker

Peace Ayman,

Thanks! No sweat...I will do it so I can save the discussion on my mobile. It takes about 4 hours of travel time from home to work & vice-versa. Need to maximize time...death comes like a thief in the night jedi

Peace everyone! )

ramon

progod

Peace,

The only question I have not explained fully in Ayman's and Truthseeker11's posts is the origin of a 30 day month and why it is Quranic.

I have already explained how the Quran likens a shahr to 30 days and in what contexts so there is no point in repeating that. And as far as the Quran being revealed in one night and hence shahr must being full moon . . . just because the Quran was revealed all at once in one night does not mean that it wasn't repeatedly revealed which is what the Quran implies. I believe that that whole period of repeated revelation so the prophet wouldn't forget lasted 29 days after the first revelation.

Now I've explained where I got 30 days from. No it is not an Anwar month as this is not a fanciful innovation by Anwar. So I take offense to that and it is obvious why, there's no back-peddling that eptithet. But to get to the point, in addition the Quran's implication that a month is 30 days I would have been forced to leave that as just a hunch, without outside linguistic evidence, because I don't and never will use the Quran as a dictionary (that is unless it specifically says X means (or is supposed to mean) Y. Otherwise context definitions in my opinion or very wrong.) My second hunch were two hadeeths, one that referred to fasting in Ramadan when you don't see the ending waxing crescent of the new month and another I read that spoke of a month of 30 days. But I am not willing to put the contents of these hadeeths as proof of my conclusion among people who will call the hadeeth every perjorative in the book (when we just don't trust their historical and religious (including interpretations of religious topics) authenticity not their linguistic authenticity). Obviously I don't agree with everyone's specific negative opinions about the hadeeth. But that is not the point. SO whereas I think the hadeeth are valid as a linguistic source I understand that many here would not accept them and I'd be wrongly branded as a hadeeth follower and conversation would come to a hault. If anyone is going to use these hadeeths against me don't waste your finger-power because I'm not using them in my argument. (I would however like to point to one of Layth's early strokes of genius when he pointed out a hadeeth's usage of asba'a to get at the meaning of saabi'oona as 'religous deviant' (deviant not necessarily in a negative sense but in the sense of different from the majority or previous religions mentioned in a certain context), which is equivalent to the other box we might fill out on a form.)

So when I saw in the dictionary how there was a definition of 29 days I definitely felt that my argument had been close but still wrong. Then I was blessed with an insight. That insight was that a day in the Islamic sense (and for what we know in a pre-Islamic sense as well) is a Judaic sunset to sunset day. And I remembered how the Quran says that a day is from sunrise to sunrise. So I plotted out sunset to sunset days and then plotted out the sunrises that would correspond those sunsets if these days were counted in a Quranic way. And that is how my 30 day month was confirmed. So no, the dictionary does not say 30 days is a month. But it does say that 29 sunset to sunset days is a month and 29 sunset to sunset days corresponds to 30 sunrise to sunrise days. This is not the same kind of correlation as 'feeling extreme heat' = 'the color red/orange' leading to Ramadan = 'Redishness/Orangeness' which is at the basis of the shahru ramadaana = Red/Orange Moon conjecture.

So here's the point (accept it if you will or reject it if you will). Without using the Quran if I read in the dictionary that a month using the Judaic formula (which is the islamic formula as well) is 29 days, and I translate those same 29 days into a sunrise-based formula those 29 Islamic/Judaic days will equal 30 sunrise-days. The dictionary assumes the Judaic concept of a day when it defines shahr. But if we translate that into the sunrise concept of a day, for 29 Judaic days we get 30 sunrise-days. I'm not going to be too repetitive here because I think that's clear.

In the end the question is not if I'm pulling my definition of shahr from the Quran, it's whether I'm pulling my definition of yawm from the Quran. That I admit to and so far I have seen no opposition to it. But I will go dig up the verse again which I believe to be a command of how we are to count days from sunrise to sunrise and I will look through the dictionaries to see if that meaning is possibly included in the dictionaries.

Godbless,
Anwar

ayman

Peace Anwar,

You still haven't answered anything

When does your arbitrary 30 day scorching month start and when does it end?
When do your arbitrary four restricted 30 day months start and end?

Instead, you are again repeating discredited arguments. 30 Sunni days encompass 29 "quranic" days or vice versa (since it works both ways) and 29 Sunni days (as the dictionary says) actually encompass only 28 "quranic" days and so on. Combining the Sunni "day" (which you admit is false) with the "quranic" day to get to your month is still a discredited argument. Falsehood + Truth <> Truth (if you get what I mean).

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Wow, you're really getting out of hand. I'll ignore the caps. Now these are separate questions but they are finally straight up. But let me preface them with the fact that these are separate questions from what you two were asking me before, unless I missed something. if I did please just send me a quote from when you or truthseeker11 asked me these before. A quote will be enough, save the smart-alleckey comments or false accusations.

You still haven't answered anything

When does your arbitrary 30 day scorching month start and when does it end?

Now I do not believe in a scorching month. Nor is it arbitrary. Very, very disrespectful my friend, and it doesn't convince me that this is a sincere question. I'll answer it for those who are sincere. I believe in a month during a scorching period of time, i.e. summer. That is clear but in case you think it wasn't I'll reword it (I'm sure I've said this before but I'd have to go comb through my old posts. But if you missed it I can give you the benefit of the dout). During the summer anyone can pick any 30 consecutive days to fast in. Summer is different for different areas and as far as I know every summer lasts more than 30 days. So when it's summer in your neck of the woods fast 30 days of it. That's it.

When do your arbitrary four restricted 30 day months start and end?

Again I'd like to point out the disprespect and the nasty attitude involved in this question. Saying arbitrary is just mean-spiritied and disingeniuous. As for the 4 restricted months. 1 of them is the month we fast during summer. The other 3 are the months of pilgrimage outlined in Surah Al-Quraysh as being in both winter and spring (saif used to mean spring in the Hijaazi area and not summer). I think you pointed out in one of your old posts how qaidh is really summer. And i looked this up in Lane's lexicon. I'll admit I'll need to go review it again so that I can answer any and all specific and even contorted questions about saif being spring in surah al-quraysh without ambiguities. But naturally since it falls in both winter and spring it would fall in equal parts on the dates before and after the spring equinox.

Instead, you are again repeating discredited arguments. 30 Sunni days encompass 29 "quranic" days or vice versa (since it works both ways) and 29 Sunni days (as the dictionary says) actually encompass only 28 "quranic" days and so on. Combining the Sunni "day" (which you admit is false) with the "quranic" day to get to your month is still a discredited argument. Falsehood + Truth <> Truth (if you get what I mean).

It shows from this last commment that you understood none of what I said, or you are intentionally trying to confuse it. All you have to do, and anyone can do this is write down sunsets and start day 1 on the second sunset, follow that through until you get 29 complete days. Then look at that and add all the sunrises that are apart of those days Quranically. You'lll get 30 days. Believe it or not, reject it or accept it. That is how it is. If you are honest about it you will see.

In the meanwhile take a chill pill and cool it with the caps. Thanks.

sun Godbless,
Anwar

ayman

Peace Anwar,

Thank you for finally answering the questions.

Now I do not believe in a scorching month. Nor is it arbitrary. Very, very disrespectful my friend, and it doesn't convince me that this is a sincere question. I'll answer it for those who are sincere. I believe in a month during a scorching period of time, i.e. summer. That is clear but in case you think it wasn't I'll reword it (I'm sure I've said this before but I'd have to go comb through my old posts. But if you missed it I can give you the benefit of the dout). During the summer anyone can pick any 30 consecutive days to fast in. Summer is different for different areas and as far as I know every summer lasts more than 30 days. So when it's summer in your neck of the woods fast 30 days of it. That's it.

What disrespect? Look up the meaning of "arbitrary" in the dictionary, it is not a dirty word. Is stating facts disrespectful? You know very well that summer lasts for three months (longer in tropical areas). So which 30 day period out of the 3+ months should we witness so that we fast in it. Randomly picking up any 30 consecutive days in the summer to fast is in fact arbitrary. So your answer in fact confirms what I and others have observed.

Again I'd like to point out the disprespect and the nasty attitude involved in this question. Saying arbitrary is just mean-spiritied and disingeniuous. As for the 4 restricted months. 1 of them is the month we fast during summer. The other 3 are the months of pilgrimage outlined in Surah Al-Quraysh as being in both winter and spring (saif used to mean spring in the Hijaazi area and not summer). I think you pointed out in one of your old posts how qaidh is really summer. And i looked this up in Lane's lexicon. I'll admit I'll need to go review it again so that I can answer any and all specific and even contorted questions about saif being spring in surah al-quraysh without ambiguities. But naturally since it falls in both winter and spring it would fall in equal parts on the dates before and after the spring equinox.

So again, assuming that your reading of the passages is even remotely correct, your four restricted months can be any random four of 9+ months that constitute summer, spring and winter. So they are in fact arbitrary (no caps) ) .

It shows from this last commment that you understood none of what I said, or you are intentionally trying to confuse it. All you have to do, and anyone can do this is write down sunsets and start day 1 on the second sunset, follow that through until you get 29 complete days. Then look at that and add all the sunrises that are apart of those days Quranically. You'lll get 30 days. Believe it or not, reject it or accept it. That is how it is. If you are honest about it you will see.

But your starting point is the dictionary which says 29 days (from sunrise to sunrise). So 29 days from sunrise to sunrise is in fact 28 "quranic" days from sunset to sunset. Had the dictionary said 31 days (from sunrise to sunrise) then you would be correct. Write it down and check.

Peace,

Ayman

siki

Brother Anwar, salam

I see you faltering(a rare occurence), and that also , Terribly.

Bother Ayman, salam

I have a question for you, "Period for fasting happens to be in the first time slot of Hajj, what should hajjees do?

siki

ayman

Peace brother Siki,

I have a question for you, "Period for fasting happens to be in the first time slot of Hajj, what should hajjees do?

It depends on what you mean by "hajj". The article on the timing doesn't reflect my latest understanding on the "hajj". If you read the passages on "hajj", you will see that 90% of them have to do with sacrificing livestock and eating from it and feeding the poor. What do you call such an event where livestock and free food are a central part? It is called a feast. In fact, the word "hajj" in Hebrew literally means "feast". Since "hajj" was known since the time of Abraham then it is natural that the people of the book would know about it. The people of the book had those harvest feasts during the summer every year (while they never went to a stone cube, let alone spun around it or kissed it). So if "hajj" means feast then there is no issue during the period of abstinance in having the daily feast after sunset. This is when most people eat dinner anyway.

Peace,

Ayman

Umm_Tariq

Peace Anwar,

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Like I said I want to hear the other argument's side on various points.

I take this stance because I do not believe that the Quran defines words. It uses Arabic words in the same ways that can be used outside of the context of the Quran. So examples on how the Quran defines the verb shahida or any other verb or noun from its usage is futile and a mute methodology to me because the Quran uses its words and verbs in the same way the Classical Arabic language (represented by pre-Quranic and early Islamic Arab society) can use them, not the other way around.

Of course the reading is using a language that was already present but I definitely believe that the god will use them PRECISELY and properly. The words can be used outside in the same way but not always how they are used outside, especially in our times, is reflected in the reading and there are many examples of this. I certainly don't have access nor the time to try and find and read pre-quranic writings and such but I trust that the god's book is sufficient in trying to understand the words it uses by looking at how they are used. Also I know that many non-arabic speaking countries, like Indonesia etc. use the reading to teach themselves arabic and the 'proper' grammar.

The comment was not meant to offend you, but definitions of words based solely on interpretations of Quranic usages of those words is fraught with holes, potential problems and room for abuse. I only need remind of the Salat as connection or method theories to prove my point. The Quran is not a dictionary.

I'm not offended at all but I was really amazed that how the reading uses a certain word doesn't matter to you. I only see room for abuse for those who want to abuse but for a sincere study of the reading, where then should be the starting point if not from the guarantee that the god is precise and we can trust how He uses words? Your main basis seems to be a Judaic definition when we KNOW that the previous scriptures have been corrupted and they have added beliefs not authorized by the god. We see how many of their erroneous beliefs and practices were incorporated into islam through hadiths. How could you possibly convince anyone to use a Judaic definition and not the reading's usage? You were given a clear example that your hypothesis that the reading supports a 30 day month doesn't work in all cases so it can't be right. If that was the pattern that the god intended it would work in all of those examples so how can you ignore that? The reading is not a dictionary but it still even exposes the corruption in man-made dictionaries, alhamdulillah!

Why does the god Himself give us the advice to 'arrange similar verses' if it doesn't mean anything? If it's "So examples on how the Quran defines the verb shahida or any other verb or noun from its usage is futile and a mute methodology to me..." and "but definitions of words based solely on interpretations of Quranic usages of those words is fraught with holes, potential problems and room for abuse."

You didn't 'answer' my point about ma'duudaat you just gave more info. My point was that it was a clue for 'shahr' being 'full moon'. I see that you are willing and acknowledge there are going to be possibilities of meanings for many words but I believe the final criterion is how they are used in the reading, that either supports a choice or it doesn't. That's where the 'arranging' comes in.

We see this in everyday usage of the word 'numbered' and we need to expect that when we read the Quran's words.

This assumption to me is very dangerous, what do you base it on? 'Everyday usage' is subjective. I expect the great reading to be the truth, precise and consistent. If I find that the reading does not support an 'everyday usage' I will discard the 'everyday usage' and go with how the reading uses whatever word.

Making a competitive comparison between arabic grammarians and the quran is completely illogical. The fact is that the Quran never dedicated itself to explaining Classical Arabic words and grammar, it just used them to get its point accross.

I would never do that! The arabic grammarians will always LOSE! ;D It's not dedicated to that but since it's 'precise' I can expect that the reading's usage is certainly the truth and true grammar and not the other way around.

Grammarians made it a point to record how Classical Arabic words were used and how its grammar was used. So it is never a Quran vs. Grammarian scenario, that sort of scenario is completely nonsensical.

Yes, it has that 'man-made' element and that's why it's not the final authority. It's not a vs. scenario per se but we will inevitably have to compare the two and the reading will have to win out.

The question here is what does the Quran mean when it refers to shahr.

This is the crux of this debate/ discussion so what should be the final criterion? I've pointed out how your theory of 30 day month partially based on a certain hypothesis surrounding certain verses pertaining to fasting doesn't work in all cases so you have went 'outside' the reading as well to try and make your hypothesis have more weight. confusedconfused I can't agree with that methodology the conclusion I want isn't supported by the reading except if I make up some theory from certain verses, I will ignore the contradictions/ inconsistencies it makes in the reading and I will look elsewhere to make may conclusion strong and make it 'look like' the reading supports my conclusion. o Wow, I can't do that.

I think it is clear from all I have presented in my previous posts that the Quran prefers the meaning of 30 sunrise to sunrise days in its context. And I think it is confirmed in the fact that using this conclusion we will always only have and be able to count only 12 shahr in the year, not a shahr more or less. And so I don't have to explain later, the naturally occurring extra 5 or 6 days after the 12th shahr are never to be ignored but the fact is that they will never constitute a shahr or an extension of any shahr because the Quranically preferred shahr is 30 (sunrise to sunrise) days. No more, no less.

Like I said, it's good to look at all of the possibilities and keep it open, the reading will inevitably narrow it down. ) I must agree however that those extra 5 or 6 days, if intended by verse 936, it would have been included. It seems, in my opinion, by all of what you have posted, that you don't believe in the preciseness of the god's book. This then is why we disagree. If shahr is taken, out of the possibilities, to be 'full moon' and it leaves nothing left uncovered and keeps consistency in the reading, then why would it be rejected for something else? If the god says 12 shahr, 12 full moons are EXACTLY that, nothing more, nothing less. Why would you bring an opinion that leaves some extra, that brings inconsistency in other verses? ???

Umm Tariq

progod

Peace,

Wow, Ayman. This is becoming quite disgusting. I can't say anything without you twisting what I said and then claiming I said what I didn't.

I could call your taking out the 13th month arbitrary, because the Qurand doesn't command mankind to do anything in 936 but states a fact since when God made the heavens and the earth and how doing otherwise would be going against the system God put in place since the beginning. But you know what I still am not going to stoop and say it is arbitrary, not because it is not, but out of respect that you honestly think that this is correct. It is obvious that it is wrong but it is disrespectful to call it arbitrary as if you just pick it out of the air. That is in essence saying that your decision is whimsical, and it is an insult to your motives. You are not stating facts at all, and you are intentionally twisting the things I say which is in reality just plain old malciousness.

Randomly picking up any 30 days in the summer is not my arbitrary position, which is what you really want to say. It is the Quranic injunction, to fast 30 days in the summer. So if anything don't call me aribitrary on the my conclusion, maybe you really want to call God that. You are the king twister of words. I see it. I hope other see it, and I pray you come around.

All of my points concerning the 4 sacred/restricted months is based on Quranic verses. The 3 holy months during spring and winter are in the surah quraysh. If you want to discuss that we can but don't go trying to confound the issues into one pig hodge-podge which needs to be broken up an sorted out issue by issue. 'A month in summer' is the meaning of shahru ramadaana. The 30 days in a shahr is based on the natural conversion of 29 sunset to sunset days into 30 sunrise to sunrise days.

And speking on that here is where you try to twist my words on the last issue, you said in your last post
But your starting point is the dictionary which says 29 days (from sunrise to sunrise). So 29 days from sunrise to sunrise is in fact 28 "quranic" days from sunset to sunset.

If you said this on accident I can forgive you but if you did this on purpose you need to come around and ask God for forgiveness for these vile tactics. This is NOT what I said. I said, and have alwasys said, that the dictionary assumes 29 sunset to sunset days and if that is translated into sunrise to sunrise days (the Quranic version of a day) then converts naturally into 30 days. Please do not twist my words, nor ask me to map out anything based on your twisting of my words. You have been doing this for a long time and I can't believe you have a following with this type of dishonest behavior at work. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and take it that you misunderstood what I said so here is the map. T stands for tuloo3 ro sunrise and G stnad for ghuroob or sunset. T(1) is the completion of first sunrise day and G(1) is the completion of the first sunset day (The dictionary's day).

T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T

So in the dictionary's day (the Islamic and Judaic day) the first sunset which starts the day falls Quranically withing the context of the previous sunrise and the next one.

SO I welcome everyone to count and see for yourselves that 29 Dictionary days (Islamic and Judaic) fall within the context of 30 surnise days (Quranic days).

And so there is no tmore twising A QUranic day = sunrise to sunrise day and a Dictionary (islamic & judaic) day = sunset to sunset day not the otherway around. Ayman was twisting my words.

As for Siki,

Why the instigatory comments? I'm faltering? I have never been clearer, but I can tell you this I am tiring of negatve comments by people like you, as well as having to untwist my words everytime a Scorching Full Moon defender responds to my posts.

Godbless,
Anwar

progod

Peace,

I see a confusion between the Quran's role as an example of impeccable Arabic and a methodology for interpreting the Quran based on context guessing at words. The two are not the same. And people who use the Quran to learn good Arabic are using dictionaries or translations to understand the definitions of words and just imitating the grammar involved in how words are put together using Qurnic sentences and phrases as a template. So I am afraid you are confusing issues here.

I have no clue what you mean by Judaic definition. If you could explain I'd appreciate it. As for a 30 day shahr working in all cases this came down to the words in English that I was choosing to communicate this concept. And I did my best to explain that whenever the Quran created a compensation or subsittute for a fast it was clear that it was on a daily basis. The few context that didn't work according to my opponents on the issue have no compensation or subsitute for fasting, fasting is always the very last option which cannot be subsituted. So I was not proven wrong that in the Quran fasting is dealt with on a daily basis and that 2 shahr in this context is made equal to 60 days. My opponets take all the contexts where fasting is the last option and read it backwords and then use this backwards logic to say I have been proven wrong and that is just not the case. You can't read passages backwards and expect to get the right answer. In all those passages they point to fasting can be compensating by nothing. It is the absolute last form of redemption. Look and you will see.

The Quranic advice to arrange similar verses has to do with defining and clarifiying the TOPIC, not defining and clarifying words. In the cases where a topic consists of one word we are only narrowing down the defintions found in the dictionaries, seeing which meanings the Quran prefers in its contexts.

As for ma'doodah you can't make up your mind about a topic and then take one meaning and act like it is a clue to the decision you've already decicded on. That fact is that ma'doodat does not have to mean few and as counted/numbered it can be a clue that 30 days is what is meant as well. You see what I mean you can't single out a meaning like that for the theory you prefer and act like that is a clue when it has other meanings that can work for other possibilites as well.

As far as the every day use of numbered being a dangerous assumption. You are pitting the bigger language against the Quran again and it doesn't work like that. The Quran is going to chose a meaning from the words of the bigger langauge that it is using, and use all of those meanings or certain meanings. And context narrows down meaning it does not define in and of itself. in the case of ma'doodaat there is no proof that the meaning has been narrowed down to 'few' in the context of the Quran, because the other meanings can work just as well with the other meanings of shahr besides full moon.

Anwar Making a competitive comparison between arabic grammarians and the quran is completely illogical. The fact is that the Quran never dedicated itself to explaining Classical Arabic words and grammar, it just used them to get its point accross. Umm Tariq I would never do that! The arabic grammarians will always LOSE! Grin It's not dedicated to that but since it's 'precise' I can expect that the reading's usage is certainly the truth and true grammar and not the other way around.

Your answer makes it clear that you are doing just that. The point is that unless the Quran says 'wordA equals wordB'' or ''wordA equals sets of wordsC"
then you cannot guess at definitions from context. Context only narrows down the definitions already found in the dictionaries. So the Quran can if it wanted to invent its own meanings but it would have to specifically say that a word means such and such for that to work. Otherwise if you don't use dictionaries or some other form of valid linguistic resource (the dictionary writers used native speakers of Classical Arabic) outside of the Quran to point to the meanings of the words in the Quran being used in the Classical Arabic langauge at large then you will be just guessing meanings and claiming that they are Quranic definitions becuase you guessed at them in the context of the Quran.

Yes, it has that 'man-made' element and that's why it's not the final authority. It's not a vs. scenario per se but we will inevitably have to compare the two and the reading will have to win out.

Compare what two? You cannot compare a composition in any language to a book dedicated to the meanings of the language at large. That is like comparing any any book you read to the dictionary and expecting for the meanings of the words to be different? Apples and Oranges. You can't guess at words in the context of the Quran then look at the dictionary, possibly find a different meaning and then say that the dictionary loses when the source of the definition is YOU, not the Quran. You see what I'm saying?

As far as 936 I have been clear on this. A 6th of a 30 days is not 30 days. So if a shahr is 30 days and there are 12 of them then 5 or 6 days extra does not change the count of the 30-day shuhoor involved. But having 13 natural full moons in the year when God says in 936 that there have only been 12 since he created the heavens and the earth (i.e. before mankind began to count) and then saying that we can just not count the 13th moon because 936 is a command when it is not, it is the statement of a fact since the creation of the heavens and the earth, well, that is just plain old manipulation.

I understand that human beings have this attraction to exact perfection and exact numbers. But the fact that seeing a shahr in the context of the Quran as 30 days adds nothing and takes nothing away and still mainatins the count of shuhoor as 12 in the year, I think that is pefect in and of itself and steers us away from human manipulations that ingore the reality of the matter.

Here are the facts

If shahr is full moon then there have been 13 shuhoor since the creation of the heavens and the earth, and at the very least God has been counting 12 despite the fact that he created 13. So what would be the point of that? Why would he create 13 and only count twelve? Just like why would he give mankind a brain and then ask us not to use it to know of Him? This is Trinitarian logic. Check 936
If the dictionary references ramada as the feeling or sense of extreme heat. Then how does anyone have the right to imply that because of two usages that MIGHT involve the redness of the eyes or redness of the thighs changes the meaning of the word and makes it imply redness? Redness is never mentioned in the definition and I still dout that it is a requisite that someone's eyes turn red when they feel hot. I'm sure everyone has had that experience where you're eyes burn for a little bit and no-one you ask notices any difference. As for the meaning of the thighs feeling extremely hot when rubbed, note that redness again is not mentioned in the definition and people with very dark thighs (and there were a number of very dark Arabs thoughout Arabia during the prophets time and before ('Antar's nickname was ghuraab (crow) because he was so black) don't get red thighs. So how can we imply redness from only 2 usages of the word that don't have to include redness? Whereas all references deal with the sensation of extreme heat.
Seeing shahr as 30 days within the context of the Quran, with the verses referring to compensation/substituion for fasting being referenced and with the natural conversion of 29 sunset days to 30 sunrise days fixes the count of shahr as 12 with the 5 or 6 days left over not comprising a shahr in any way. They are counted and at best can be seen as transitionary days but this defintion goes along with the Quran in every way.
Shahru ramadaana is the fasting of a month during summer. Ayman would use the word aribitrary as a trigger word to make others think that I made this decision arbitrarily and then have his cover up as picking any random 30 days during the summer to fast as arbitrary (triigger-word again). But if God is saying you can pick any 30 days to fast during the summer than the issue is not arbitrary any more but the freedom God has given us to start and stop our fasting during summer according to what is best for us. Freedom to choose, not arbitrariness.

Also I would love to ask you to talk to Ayman about how he deals with the case endings of shahru ramaadana and the like. I'm sure he'll try to attack me on it instead of allowing to you ask him and have him answer. But when he tells you how he feels the original Quran and Classical Arabic in general had no case endings and that he takes his evidence from Arabic inscriptions as well as the well known ommision of case endings during the wuqoof in Quranic recitation and ignores all of the other case endings besides the wuqoof that are always used in recitation, as well as the fact that if an inscription says 3amala or shahrun no only are the case endings absent but the internal vowels as well, giving you just 3ml and sh-hr and giving absolutely no clue at all of how to pronunce these words THEN you will understand the underlying faults in all these conclusions of his. As always . . .

sun Godbless,
Anwar

I'm not going to be able to review this post thoroughly for spelling mistakes so if you misundestand anything or think I made a mistake in my wording please send me a pm or a response asking me to clarify. I type relatively well but I make a lot of mistakes and sometimes use inexact word choices that others will misunderstand. I think I did relatively well on this post. It took me over an hour. Enjoy.

Now, let the senseless attacks and twisting of my words begin!! jedi

ayman

Peace Anwar,

Wow, Ayman. This is becoming quite disgusting. I can't say anything without you twisting what I said and then claiming I said what I didn't.

So "arbitrary" is disrespectful while "disgusting" is not! You are again showing your double standards of not accepting any criticism but then lashing out at others.

I could call your taking out the 13th month arbitrary,

You could by disregarding the difference between "3idat" and "3adad" and assume that the god uses those two words haphazardly.

because the Qurand doesn't command mankind to do anything in 936 but states a fact since when God made the heavens and the earth and how doing otherwise would be going against the system God put in place since the beginning. But you know what I still am not going to stoop and say it is arbitrary, not because it is not, but out of respect that you honestly think that this is correct. It is obvious that it is wrong but it is disrespectful to call it arbitrary as if you just pick it out of the air. That is in essence saying that your decision is whimsical, and it is an insult to your motives. You are not stating facts at all, and you are intentionally twisting the things I say which is in reality just plain old malciousness.

Arbitrary doesn't mean malacious. The 7 days of the week are arbitrary does this mean that you are malacious for following the week? The sectarian timing for the fast is arbitrary it doesn't mean that they are malacious. It simply means that they and you don't know the correct timing.

Randomly picking up any 30 days in the summer is not my arbitrary position, which is what you really want to say. It is the Quranic injunction, to fast 30 days in the summer. So if anything don't call me aribitrary on the my conclusion, maybe you really want to call God that. You are the king twister of words. I see it. I hope other see it, and I pray you come around.

The god often commands us to do things in an arbitrary way. For example, 941 "anfiru Khufafa wa thuqala", so in this case they are told to go out in any arbitrary way between light and heavy and all that matters that they go out to fight. On the other hand, we are not told to fast any arbitrary 30 day period in summer (which could be up to 6 months in tropical areas) as long as we fast.

All of my points concerning the 4 sacred/restricted months is based on Quranic verses. The 3 holy months during spring and winter are in the surah quraysh. If you want to discuss that we can but don't go trying to confound the issues into one pig hodge-podge which needs to be broken up an sorted out issue by issue. 'A month in summer' is the meaning of shahru ramadaana. The 30 days in a shahr is based on the natural conversion of 29 sunset to sunset days into 30 sunrise to sunrise days.

Anwar, you have effectively abrogated the restriction on hunting with your arbitrary "restricted months". According to you in the same way that every person can fast whatever 30 day period they like in the summer, every person can cease hunting any additional three 30 day periods they like in the spring and winter. So essentially the hunting restriction is no more since if I can't hunt today because it is my 30 day period but my son or my brother can then he would go out and hunt for the both of us.

And speking on that here is where you try to twist my words on the last issue, you said in your last post
If you said this on accident I can forgive you but if you did this on purpose you need to come around and ask God for forgiveness for these vile tactics. This is NOT what I said. I said, and have alwasys said, that the dictionary assumes 29 sunset to sunset days and if that is translated into sunrise to sunrise days (the Quranic version of a day) then converts naturally into 30 days. Please do not twist my words, nor ask me to map out anything based on your twisting of my words. You have been doing this for a long time and I can't believe you have a following with this type of dishonest behavior at work. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and take it that you misunderstood what I said so here is the map. T stands for tuloo3 ro sunrise and G stnad for ghuroob or sunset. T(1) is the completion of first sunrise day and G(1) is the completion of the first sunset day (The dictionary's day).
So in the dictionary's day (the Islamic and Judaic day) the first sunset which starts the day falls Quranically withing the context of the previous sunrise and the next one.
SO I welcome everyone to count and see for yourselves that 29 Dictionary days (Islamic and Judaic) fall within the context of 30 surnise days (Quranic days).
And so there is no tmore twising A QUranic day = sunrise to sunrise day and a Dictionary (islamic & judaic) day = sunset to sunset day not the otherway around. Ayman was twisting my words.

Anwar, it doesn't matter. 29 days sunset to sunset are going to contain 28 days sunrise to sunrise and 29 days sunrise to sunrise are going to contain 28 days sunset to sunset. If we say that the dictionary definition is sunset to sunset or G-G, then here is the dictionary definition

G T G(1) T(1) G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G

How many T-T are in here? Can't you count them? The answer is 28.

In order for you to arrive at 30 days, you have to start from a dictionary definition of 31 days. This is indisputable. This entire discussion is also besides the point since your very basis of 30 days is founded on shaky grounds and you ignoring that A=B and A=C then B=C.

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Ayman why do you refuse to get this?

If you map out the 29 G's involved in a sunset to sunset day and then include all of the sunrises connected to those sunsets, you get 30 Quranic/sunrise days. You need to add a T to the front of and the end of the following

G T G(1) T(1) G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G

Why? Because the first G of the Islamic/Judaic day is naturally inside of the Quranic day that started at sunrise and ends at the next sunrise being T G T and not G T. The last G of the Islamic/Judaic day also belongs inside of the Quranic day that began the sunrise before it, and ends on sunrise the next day. Hence you should have T G T at the end, not T G. Therefore you cannot take those two T's out and be honest with this issue.

So it shoud be T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T

And not what you have because, I will repeat, you are forgeting that the first G is inside of the first Quranic day that began at sunrise and the last G inside of the Quranic day that will end the following sunrise.

As for disgusting and me being hypocritical about offensive descriptives, I do find how you twisted my words in the last post disgusting. I also find these long and invetibale diatribes disgusting as well. I hate having to untwist my words with most of the responses to my posts here. But I don't find your conclusions disgusting. You were implying that my conclusions were arbitrary. If you deny that I will be skeptical, but I will be forced to forgive you. I think your choice of words was loaded. Like using the word tactic instead of strategy. So picking any 30 days within summer is not an arbitrary choice. Whereas the particular thirty days we pick to fast during the summer may be an artibtrary choice for us. There is a difference in these two phrasings (whether you believe me or not), and you were not making that clear. Let me state that again so you cannot try to say I'm contradicting myself because you didn't understand it. The Quranic command as I see it of picking any 30 days during the summer is not arbitrary, whereas the particular set of 30 days within the summer that we decide to pick is. If you understood that you were not making your understanding clear to me. Why am I having to clarify your use of words? You should be looking for where I may have misunderstood you and helping to forge an understanding not letting these misunderstandings stand and seeking to take advantage of them.

From your words here I can now assume that you do understand what I am saying
On the other hand, we are not told to fast any arbitrary 30 day period in summer (which could be up to 6 months in tropical areas) as long as we fast.

But you point out these six months as to make it seem too long a period. But what God says goes. So even if summer is 6 months, we can pick any 30 days during those 6 months to fast, whether that sits well with you or not is a personal issue. But up until now you have not proven that ramadan can't mean summer, nor have you proven that shahr cannot be 30 days. You have only been twisting my words, repeating my points with opportune ommisions or denying what I've been saying in order to give the impression that you've dsproven these ideas. Denying and misconstruing do not equal disproving.

And I wasn't saying that arbitrary means malicious. I never said that. I am saying that your generalizing this concpet as arbitrary was a malicious choice of words.

I find it funny that you expect ny ideas to go along with your expectations and conclusions (almost as a requisite for being correct) about the ban on hunting. When fasting and when in the months for pilgrimage we are not to hunt, simple as that. So whenever you chose to fast during the summer making sure you have a full 30 days to fast, you, yourself, and anyone fasting along with you are not to hunt. Along the same lines, we are not to hunt during the 3 months for pilgrimage where our local spring equinox falls in the middle of these 3 months so that the time of pilgrimage falls in both winter and spring per Surah Al-Quraysh. I know you have these ideas about the ban on hunting following general patterns in the animal world for mating, times of plenty and times of scant, but these are your ideas which you pull from modern (albeit ecologically sound) policies of hunting bans and permits, rather than the Quran. These ideas are not in the Quran but you are forcing them into the Quran because that's how you think it should be. I'll admit that these are good intentions but they are just not Quranic injunctions when it comes to the prohibition of hunting during the sacred/restricted months. And by the way if you know you are not to hunt but you send someone else to go out and hunt for you that is obvious dishonesty. Imagine living among Christians, pagans or Jews (and early Quranists in Mecca did) who do not follow our book and we tell them to go out and hunt for us when we are not allowed to hunt. Is that right? Obviously not. So I don't see how you can assume that something like that would ever be Quranically permissable by following my understanding of the sacred/restricted months and what our Quranic duties in them are. The only other possiblity that you are implying is that we absolutely ban hunting for everyone during these times of prohibition even if they are not observing the hurum and that we impose Quranic injunctions onto those who don't follow our book, which I am adamantly against.

I don't think God uses 3adad and 3iddah haphazardly, rather I think you are exaggerating the differences in the meaning and usage of these two words to justify your ideas. Especially since in the context of 936 this difference is irrelevant because the counting is God's, since he created the heavens and the earth, and not man's. The difference between "3adad and 3iddah is exactly equal to the difference between a count of something and a number of something. Whereas I recognize the miniscule difference between the two words, as many people here in the U.S. say, "It's the same difference."

n order for you to arrive at 30 days, you have to start from a dictionary definition of 31 days. This is indisputable. This entire discussion is also besides the point since your very basis of 30 days is founded on shaky grounds and you ignoring that A=B and A=C then B=C.

I've shown you above probably for the 3rd time that you do not have to start from 31 sunset days to arrive at 30 sunrise days. But because you omit from the proper mapping out of this and refuse to understand the logic behind it you keep getting the wrong answer. I explained it earlier in this post and I'm gonna revisit it one more time.

Once you have mapped out all of the sunsets involved in 29 sunset-days to get the correct conversion to sunrise-days you have to include ALL of the sunrises associated with those sunsets in terms of a Quranic day.
What does that mean? It means that if an Islamic/Judaic day starts with a sunset you have to incude the previoius sunrise. Why? Because that sunset is inside of a sunset day that already started.
Here it is (G= sunset and T = Sunrise) G T G(1) = Sunset to sunrise to sunset. That is one Islamic/Judaic day. But a Quranic/sunrise day is T G T = sunrise to sunset to sunrise. You cannot have a Quranic day without this equation, and as you see any sunset is already inside of a Quranic day that started at the previous sunrise.
So If you have a sunset day of G T G, that naturally transates into two sunrise days, i.e. T G T G T. Why? Because no sunset can stand alone in a Quranic day without already being apart of a sunrise-day that began the sunrise before. And the sunrise after that sunset officially ends that Quranic day. Get it?

So count it again T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T

See it now?

Godbless,
Anwar

ayman

Peace Anwar,

If you map out the 29 G's involved in a sunset to sunset day and then include all of the sunrises connected to those sunsets, you get 30 Quranic/sunrise days. You need to add a T to the front of and the end of the following
Why? Because the first G of the Islamic/Judaic day is naturally inside of the Quranic day that started at sunrise and ends at the next sunrise being T G T and not G T. The last G of the Islamic/Judaic day also belongs inside of the Quranic day that began the sunrise before it, and ends on sunrise the next day. Hence you should have T G T at the end, not T G. Therefore you cannot take those two T's out and be honest with this issue.
So it shoud be T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T
And not what you have because, I will repeat, you are forgeting that the first G is inside of the first Quranic day that began at sunrise and the last G inside of the Quranic day that will end the following sunrise.

This is not based on the dictionary. What I gave are the 29 dictionary days which contain 28 "quranic" days. What you did was extend the dictionary days. If you had no preconception of 30 days and you simply looked up the meaning in the dictionary, then you wouldn't get 30 and you would get 28 sunrise to sunrise days within the dictionary's 29 days based on your theory. It is useless to reason with you.

As for disgusting and me being hypocritical about offensive descriptives, I do find how you twisted my words in the last post disgusting. I also find these long and invetibale diatribes disgusting as well. I hate having to untwist my words with most of the responses to my posts here. But I don't find your conclusions disgusting. You were implying that my conclusions were arbitrary. If you deny that I will be skeptical, but I will be forced to forgive you. I think your choice of words was loaded. Like using the word tactic instead of strategy. So picking any 30 days within summer is not an arbitrary choice. Whereas the particular thirty days we pick to fast during the summer may be an artibtrary choice for us. There is a difference in these two phrasings (whether you believe me or not), and you were not making that clear. Let me state that again so you cannot try to say I'm contradicting myself because you didn't understand it. The Quranic command as I see it of picking any 30 days during the summer is not arbitrary, whereas the particular set of 30 days within the summer that we decide to pick is. If you understood that you were not making your understanding clear to me. Why am I having to clarify your use of words? You should be looking for where I may have misunderstood you and helping to forge an understanding not letting these misunderstandings stand and seeking to take advantage of them.

Yeah right. An arbitrary choice is not arbitrary.

From your words here I can now assume that you do understand what I am saying
But you point out these six months as to make it seem too long a period. But what God says goes.

The god doesn't say things without a reason. According to you the hunting restrictions have no purpose and effectively you have voided and annuled them.

So even if summer is 6 months, we can pick any 30 days during those 6 months to fast, whether that sits well with you or not is a personal issue. But up until now you have not proven that ramadan can't mean summer,

You are contradicting yourself again. The word "ramadan" can't mean "summer" even per your mangled understanding. In case you haven't noticed, summer is longer than 30 days.

nor have you proven that shahr cannot be 30 days.

It can't mean 30 days, unless you invent your own meaning for the word "shahr" as you are doing and failing miserably at it, I might add. On the other hand, I don't have to cling to straws like you to invent anything, the meaning of full-moon is right there in the dictionary and it fits all the contexts in the great reading.

You have only been twisting my words, repeating my points with opportune ommisions or denying what I've been saying in order to give the impression that you've dsproven these ideas. Denying and misconstruing do not equal disproving.

No, disproving equals disproving except of course to the one who is clinging to straws and being disproved you.

I find it funny that you expect ny ideas to go along with your expectations and conclusions (almost as a requisite for being correct) about the ban on hunting. When fasting and when in the months for pilgrimage we are not to hunt, simple as that.

Why? What is the purpose of the hunting restriction if according to you everyone can hunt whenever they want? They can delay their own personal hunting restriction if they feel like hunting this month. As I said, you have practically abrogated the hunting restriction.

So whenever you chose to fast during the summer making sure you have a full 30 days to fast, you, yourself, and anyone fasting along with you are not to hunt. Along the same lines, we are not to hunt during the 3 months for pilgrimage where our local spring equinox falls in the middle of these 3 months so that the time of pilgrimage falls in both winter and spring per Surah Al-Quraysh. I know you have these ideas about the ban on hunting following general patterns in the animal world for mating, times of plenty and times of scant, but these are your ideas which you pull from modern (albeit ecologically sound) policies of hunting bans and permits, rather than the Quran. These ideas are not in the Quran but you are forcing them into the Quran because that's how you think it should be. I'll admit that these are good intentions but they are just not Quranic injunctions when it comes to the prohibition of hunting during the sacred/restricted months. And by the way if you know you are not to hunt but you send someone else to go out and hunt for you that is obvious dishonesty. Imagine living among Christians, pagans or Jews (and early Quranists in Mecca did) who do not follow our book and we tell them to go out and hunt for us when we are not allowed to hunt. Is that right? Obviously not. So I don't see how you can assume that something like that would ever be Quranically permissable by following my understanding of the sacred/restricted months and what our Quranic duties in them are. The only other possiblity that you are implying is that we absolutely ban hunting for everyone during these times of prohibition even if they are not observing the hurum and that we impose Quranic injunctions onto those who don't follow our book, which I am adamantly against.

Yes, if you really have faith in what the god is telling you then we absolutely should ban hunting for everyone during the restriction period, in the same way that stealing and killing is banned on everyone.

Do you go hunting deer in rural PA outside of the hunting season and you tell the park rangers "I am a follower of Anwar's interpretation of the book and therefore you can't impose your hunting restrictions on me"?!!

I don't think God uses 3adad and 3iddah haphazardly, rather I think you are exaggerating the differences in the meaning and usage of these two words to justify your ideas.

At least there is a difference and I am not making up completely baseless meanings and then working backwards to find any straw to hang to.

Peace,

Ayman

truthseeker11

Peace everyone,

After the latest posts and clarifications by Anwar, following are the 10 holes in his defective logic about this issue

10 REASONS "SHAHR" CANNOT BE "30 DAY MONTH"

1 - 936 uses the word "3iddat"/count and not "3adad"/number. It makes a big difference contrary to what Anwar keeps saying. If it had said "3adad"/number, then the number of "30 day months" in a solar year can be 12 but the "3iddat"/count of "30 day months" in a solar year is 12 and 1/6 and not 12, and would thus contradict al-quran. Anyone with an understanding of basic mathematics knows that a time period can be counted in fractions, and that there is a difference in count of something versus number of something. God did not say "there are 12 shuhoor", but says "the count of shuhoor is 12".

2 - There is no DIRECT COMPENSATION for fasting anywhere in al-quran except in 2184, so 583-4 or 589 cannot be used as reference to deduce something pertaining to compensation for fasting, or the meaning of "shahr".

3 - When different alternative compensations are stated for a certain negative behavior, all the alternate compensations are EQUIVALENT, and the order of mentioning them does not matter. 583-4 talks about compensation for estranging one's wife, and the different compensations are all equivalent, no matter what the order. 589 talks about compensation for breaking oath, and the different compensations are all equivalent, no matter what the order. If A=B, and B=C, then A=C, and C=A, and C=B, and B=A. According to 589, the ratio of fasting to feeding the poor is 13.33. Using this ratio, 60 people would equal 18 days, which would make 2 shahr equal 18 days and each shahr equal 9 days ! Because there is a discrepancy in the ratio of fasting to feeding people obtained from 583-4 and 589, neither can be used to define the meaning of "shahr".

4 - No Classical Arabic Dictionary defines "shahr" as "month always containing 30 days". 29 sunset to sunset days can never be equated to 30 sunrise to sunrise days, but can be equivalent to 29 sunrise to sunrise days, or can contain 28 sunrise to sunrise days. This logic of 29 sunset to sunset days being equated to 30 sunrise to sunrise days is the most absurd and ridiculous argument I have ever heard in my life, and cannot possibly fool any educated person even with elementary knowledge of counting.

Where in al-quran it says that a day is sunrise to sunrise? It could be sunset to sunset, as sunset has been mentioned in the context of timing of salat, but cannot possibly be sunrise to sunrise.

5 - Arbitrary starting time of four 30 day months will abrogate the hunting restriction commanded in al-quran. If everyone can arbitrarily determine their own starting time for the 30 day period during summer, and also arbitrarily determine their own starting time for the four restricted 30 day periods over a 9 month period, then it is a fact that hunting animals will continue at all times by some people, and therefore there will be no practical hunting restriction at all. This would abrogate the hunting restriction according to al-quran, and is mockery of God's signs at the highest level.

6 - Why can a menstruating woman wait for 56 days but a menopausal woman whose menopause is doubtful has to wait 90 days? The meaning of "month of 30 days" in 654 would result in a major inconsistency in al-quran, because then the minimum waiting period for menstruating women would be the time period between 3 menstruations or approximately 56 days but the waiting period for menopausal women would be 90 days.

7 - All 30 days have to be witnessed in order to witness a month of 30 days. No one can witness a month of 30 days just on seeing the first day. The only way to fulfil 2185 will be to witness all the 30 days first and then start fasting, but then how long do we fast? If we start fasting during that 30 day month, then we are violating the command to witness it first. Hence it is impossible to witness the 30 day month before fasting AND fast during it.

8 - 2185 tells us to fast it and not fast in it. How can a person fast for 30 days non-stop? The usage of "fast it" obviously implies that "it" is an event/marker, and not the time period for fasting.

9 - It is a ridiculous redundancy to say "complete the count" after saying "whoever among you witnesses the month of 30 days then fast it" (meaning fast for 30 days). There is no clarification needed to complete the count if it is already stated to fast for 30 days.

10 - 2185 mentions DESCENT of al-quran, and not repetition or compilation. Where in al-quran does it say that it was repetitively descended each day for 30 days? 443 and 971 clearly tell us that the descent was in a single night.

ayman

Peace Truthseeker,

10 REASONS "SHAHR" CANNOT BE "30 DAY MONTH"

There are many more than ten. For example, we are told that the crescents are used as timing devices for the people and for the feast ("hajj&quot. Anwar completely ignores the moon cycle. He has also not said exactly when his solar year would start. The start of his solar year would determine when the 30 day periods would occur. So this is another arbitrary factor since he doesn't precisely specify it. Also, the feast/"hajj" is said in the great reading to be in KNOWN "ashhur". By making those "ashhur" up to each person, they become unknown because we can't read people's minds. etc. etc.

At this stage, I don't think that we can convince Anwar of anything. However, if he is serious about finding the correct timing of the restriction and the fast, then he should try to at least figure out a timing that wouldn't abrogate the restriction. Because fasting a random month is one thing but violating the god's restrictions is unacceptable and has specific legal consequences (see 595). A not well known arbitrary restriction period that is left up to each person's desires would make a mockery out of the god's law.

Peace,

Ayman

truthseeker11

Peace Ayman,

Thanks for drawing attention to the additional reasons. I should have titled it "at least 10 reasons"!

Another point came to my mind while I was pondering over 973. Why would God compare a night with "months"? It would be more consistent and make more sense to compare a night (which contained the scorching full-moon - 2185) with 1000 full-moons, rather than 1000 "months".