Hot/"ramadan" Answer

[ayman]

Peace Eid,

Please you are in denial and know very well all these refer to AH...
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/jones.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/kuficsaud.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/wadi1.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/urwa.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Inscriptions/hajri.html
http//www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Papyri/jerus.html

Only the unpublished inscription of Urwa mentions Hijra. So it remains to be seen if it indeed mentions it. Even if it did then this doesn't prove that this date is not arbitrary nor that the prophet actually migrated on 1 Muharam 0 AH. In fact, even the traditionalists defending your arbitrary sectarians calendar admit that he didn't. The writings from the Romans indicate that the kingdom of the Arabs started invading their teritories in 620-21CE, which is before the traditional Hijra. Certainly, before the "hijra" there was no such Arab Kingdom or invasions of Roman teritories. There is nothing in the great reading telling us that the new era should start a couple of months before the supposed date of the "hijra". It is the same as no one knows for sure when Jesus was born and the god has not told us to use such time for anything so the Common Era is similarly completely baseless and arbitrary.

How many times did I post that long list of moon data with all the dates? For the nth time it?s the moon cycle ? IT IS NEVER IN SYNC WITH THE SOLSTICE! Why even to explain that new moons happen after the solstice, before the solstice, at the solstice, which you are clearly obsessed with the solstice latching on anything having to do with it and in clear denial ? you know exactly that I?m telling the truth.
Let me know if you need me to post that again and highlight for you each 1st month after the solstice ? if you cannot see or refuse to see that all the dates perfectly align to PERF 558 and the new moon cycle then nothing more to say.
Again, no need to lie about sheep receipts, deaths, dates of battles which perfectly align themselves with a lunar new moon crescent calendar.

What are you babbling about? The fact that Muharam 1 of the first year of the new era was the first new moon crescent after the summer solstice is indisputable. You even said YES that it was. Later on it wasn?t in sync with the solstice is what I said. At the starting point it was in sync and then of course as the purely lunar calendar was adopted, it diverged three years later exactly as expected.

There are no event dates that perfectly align with PERF558. All your arguments around PERF558 are circular. You don?t have the Gregorian calendar dates for any of those events (Badr, Uhud, Hijra, etc.) so that you can validate against. All we know from PERF558 is that the new era must have started on so and so date in the Gregorian calendar. This is all.

There is no information his death only tradition and that he was succeeded by his sons, Yaksum and Masruq; including Stuart Munro-Hay, "Abraha" in Siegbert von Uhlig, ed., Encyclopaedia Aethiopica A-C (Wiesbaden Harrassowitz Verlag, 2003) who dates his death after 553 based on an inscription.

What does Abraha?s death has to do with anything? Moreover, the date of his death as 553CE further confirms that there is no way that Muhammed was born in 570CE on the year of Abraha?s expedition who has been dead for 17 years! So either the traditional history (including chronology of ?hijra? and so on) is false or if the traditional history is correct that he was born on the date of that event then Muhammed was born 18 years earlier.

In addition it's a Semitic language obviously some words include Aramaic and Hebrew along with Persian borrowed words. That proves nothing. The only certain is Ramadan, why 11 other are named as such; who knows perhaps did not want to continue using month names associated with paganism as the current days and months of the western calendar.

Why is the only certain Ramadan? Like the other 11, it is never mentioned in any pre-Quranic inscription. At least with the others, we know that the Arabs used Rabi Al-Awwal and Rabi Al-Thani for their 6 seasons (not months). With Rabi Al-Awwal (first grazing) in spring while Rabi Al-Thani (second grazing) in early fall. In fact, the only thing certain about ?ramadhan? is its meaning, which indicates a time of heat and not an arbitrary time.

You are forgetting they knew when Ramadan was obviously so all that was correct moving forward.

1. They choose the year of the migration
2. 1st month to start the new era
3. The order of the months based on Ramadan

You are essentially admitting that when your so-called Ramadhan occurs depends on three arbitrary factors, which is what I have been saying all along. So you surrender to the fact that if the year of PERF558 was chosen to start the new era then Ramadhan would be a completely different month now and according to you would not be ?correct?.

1. Who are those mysterious ?they?? Don?t say that it was prophet Muhammed without any evidence from the great reading. Otherwise you might as well believe in Sira and Hadith nonsense. Even traditionalists don?t claim that the prophet did such a thing and they say Umar did it. You have essentially put your faith in some unknown guys supposed knowledge.
2. Why was it more correct for them to choose the year of migration to start the new era as opposed to any other date?
3. Did the god authorize them to use the first year of migration?
4. Did the god authorize them to use Muharam as the first month and not the actual month of migration?
5. If the order of the months is based on so-called Ramadan then why is it not the first month?
6. In fact, it is the other way around. Your arbitrary Ramadhan is based on the arbitrary order of the months. If the order of Shaaban was moved to after Ramadhan instead of before it then what you would now be fasting in what would have been Shaaban.

All we need is one reference point which is PERF 558 and new moon data, roll it all back confirms the dates.

No you use only one reference because you are building a circular argument. Here is the baseless stuff you posted

12-Aug 2. Safar Sept 9 (26 Safar AH 1) Hijra
24-Feb 9. Ramadan March 17, 624 (17 Ramadan 2 AH) Badr Battle
14-Mar 10. Shawwal March 19, 625 (3 Shawwal 3 AH) Battle of Uhud
25-Feb 12. Dhu al-Hijjah Prophet's final sermon 9th of Dhu al-Hijjah, 10 AH
24-May 3. Rabi' al-awwal 8 June (12 of Rabi? al-Awwal, 11 AH) prophet left (pbuh)

All that PERF558 can tell us is the day 1, month 1 of the first year of the new era.

1. Do you have any evidence that the Hijra took place on 12-Aug, 622?
2. Do you have any evidence that the Hijra took place on 26 Safar (which doesn?t match the date from PERF558 or the traditional date given for migration in Rabi Al-Awwal)?
3. Do you have any evidence that the battle of Badr took place on 17 Mar, 624?
4. Do you have any evidence that the battle of Badr took place on 17 Ramadan 2 AH and not 7 Ramadan or whatever AH month or year?
5. Do you have any evidence that the battle of Uhud took place on 19 Mar, 625?
6. Do you have any evidence that the battle of Uhud took place on 3 Shawwal 3 AH and not 17 Ramadan or whatever AH month or year?
7. Do you have any evidence that the Prophet's final sermon was 22-Feb, 632?
8. Do you have any evidence that the Prophet's final sermon was on 9th of Dhu al-Hijjah, 10 AH?
9. Do you have any evidence that prophet Muhammed died on 8 June, 632?
10. Do you have any evidence that prophet Muhammed died on 12 of Rabi? al-Awwal, 11 AH?

No you don?t. So as I said, you are essentially building a circular argument. Whatever date you put, for example, for the death of the prophet will match with some date in the Gregorian calendar. But unless you have evidence saying that the prophet died on June 8 then you have not said anything other than building a circular argument.

As already stated there was no corruption PERF 558 absolutely confirms that it was a new moons calendar in use and not what you imply -- has ZERO to do with solstice

No PERF558 only tells us the start of the new era. I can say that the prophet died on 21 of Ramadhan, 632 and you can?t use PERF558 to prove me wrong.

I never implied that the Umar calendar uses anything other than the new moons. This is why three years after its initiation its start no longer came after the summer solstice. You are actually confirming this.

and 1712 does not have to state the obvious?

You mean it doesn?t have to state what is in your imagination.

I have to focus on work, like you have to fly around and this stuff is taking too much time going in circles.
Take care, have nice fast whoever is observing it.

May the god bless you in your work and travel and provides you from his bounties. I know how hard it is to keep everything balanced with work and travel.

If the traditional timing is so solid and is not an arbitrary manmade house of cards then it doesn?t need you to defend it anyway. Generally, I think that people who have been defending it probably have bigger issues to worry about than the timing. They need to stop relying on what some unknown guys knew and start relying on what they know from the god through his book and creation.

Peace,

Ayman

[Prince]

Peace all,

Before i quit posting in this thread, here is a quick summary from quick duck )

1- shahar means obvious, and the only phase when the moon is obvious is the full moon phase.

2 - 1712 tells us that the year is to be calculated using the night and day. thus the only explanation is that the year is solar. wich is completely in sync with the natural god's law of seasons. But some of you keep ignoring this.

3- When you finally realize that 'shahr' means full moon, then you will be able to count exactly 12 in a solar cycle (ie. between 2 solstices) as per 936

4 - the ADJECTIVE Ramadan (hot/scorching) looses its identity if the fasting period drifts all around the year, so it's logical and OBLIGATORY that the fastin period should always occur in the same season.

5 - 936 is clear about the fact that the "four restricted full moons" have to be consective. So again they must be in the same season to preserve the wild life they are meant for. The fact is that sectarians (there are plenty around here) are completly ignoring it.

6- Both hajj and fasting are described as being for a "numbered days" ("Ayyaman ma3doodat/easily counted" as the opposite of "ayyaman 3adeeda" which translates "numerous days&quot. Therefore, "numbered days" is to be 3 days min - 10 days max . Moreover, God told us that hajj is to be completed in 10 days . in the other side, we're told that we must complete the count for fasting period. It leaves no doubt that fasting period is also for 10 days.

7- God tells us that the crescents must be used for timing purposes and for the hajj. So how can you use crescents to count Exactly 10 days for hajj (and fasting as well) if not by starting the count from the full moon marker ? (Surprisingly, the time frame between the full moon stage, and "descending phases"/manazila, down untill the first next crescent is exactly 10 days). Does it ring any bell ?

8- 2184 says that those who can afford IT (fasting ) but with great difficulty may substitute it with feeding the poor, Although fasting is better for them. So there's no retribution for not fasting, but a reward/benefit for it.

9- Since the so-called islamic calendar is prooved to be 100% arbitrary and contradicts the quranic teachings, then it is not worth following it.

10 and last - GOD does not change the condition of any people unless they themselves make the decision to change. If GOD wills any hardship for any people, no force can stop it. For they have NONE beside Him as Lord and Master.

Enjoy your own Ramadan, see you in another thread...

Peace

This makes more sense than the traditional sectarian way of calculating ramadhan. peace

PEACE

[guest]

By his post, Ayman just wanted to show you that Guest and you suffer from hero-worship fetish. So he replaced words in your very prior post to show you that it sounds the same. that's simple

Salam

Peace quickduck,

You know very well that Ayman cannot get anything right. You should let him speak/write. That way it is more fun. He is Mr. contradiction. And you are following him. Why are you speaking for him. Did cat got his tongue? You are the one who is worshipping Ayman, we worship the lord of universe.

[guest]

2- you're talking about the 100 % full moon which you were able to calculate using NASA websites. But what about old civilisations ? What about common people ? what about those who don't have broadband internet a few clics away from their fingers ?

Peace quickduck,

A full moon means 100% disk illumination. Ask your master, he will confirm it. The question you posed should be directed to Ayman. And yes I agree with you that common people and old civilization would not be able to determine a full moon accurately thereby defeating Ayman's screwed-up theory. Finally, you found a contradiction in Ayman's theory but were not intelligent enough to realize it.

[guest]

Peace all,

Before i quit posting in this thread, here is a quick summary from quick duck )

1- shahar means obvious, and the only phase when the moon is obvious is the full moon phase.

2 - 1712 tells us that the year is to be calculated using the night and day. thus the only explanation is that the year is solar. wich is completely in sync with the natural god's law of seasons. But some of you keep ignoring this.

3- When you finally realize that 'shahr' means full moon, then you will be able to count exactly 12 in a solar cycle (ie. between 2 solstices) as per 936

4 - the ADJECTIVE Ramadan (hot/scorching) looses its identity if the fasting period drifts all around the year, so it's logical and OBLIGATORY that the fastin period should always occur in the same season.

5 - 936 is clear about the fact that the "four restricted full moons" have to be consective. So again they must be in the same season to preserve the wild life they are meant for. The fact is that sectarians (there are plenty around here) are completly ignoring it.

6- Both hajj and fasting are described as being for a "numbered days" ("Ayyaman ma3doodat/easily counted" as the opposite of "ayyaman 3adeeda" which translates "numerous days&quot. Therefore, "numbered days" is to be 3 days min - 10 days max . Moreover, God told us that hajj is to be completed in 10 days . in the other side, we're told that we must complete the count for fasting period. It leaves no doubt that fasting period is also for 10 days.

7- God tells us that the crescents must be used for timing purposes and for the hajj. So how can you use crescents to count Exactly 10 days for hajj (and fasting as well) if not by starting the count from the full moon marker ? (Surprisingly, the time frame between the full moon stage, and "descending phases"/manazila, down untill the first next crescent is exactly 10 days). Does it ring any bell ?

9- Since the so-called islamic calendar is prooved to be 100% arbitrary and contradicts the quranic teachings, then it is not worth following it.

Peace quickduck,

You are shaking hand with the devil.

[ayman]

Peace Nabil,

I am very curious of Ayman's answer to this.

The great reading didn't descend on our lap from the sky. It came through Muhammed, the messenger of the god. I think that Farida is confused because I said that many of the so-called Sahaba probably didn't exist. Since she hero-worships those people, this made her confused. What I am saying is not something amazing or extra ordinary. For example, many researchers think that Abu Hurayra didn't exist and was invented by later generations.

I am also aware of Ayman's positions regarding certain matters in the Quran to be metaphorical / allegorical, and there was a fierce debate between members as to the fact if previous Prophets such as Abraham, David,
Solomon and even Jesus ever existed, or if they were a combination of characters, or an invention of religious leaders... this was of course something the large majority in Free-minds forcefully rejected.

All those messengers certainly existed. I don't remember taking part of any such debates and if I ever were then this is what I said.

Ayman proposed a metaphorical explanation to the reality of Jinns and Angels (i.e. that they do not actually exist but in your head as fantasies), this was too forcefully rejected, but he still has some followers.

I never said anything about the Biblical mythical beings wearing white robes and having halos on their heads commonly named Angels and neither did the great reading. The word "malaika" literally means controllers. The controllers are very much real and have nothing to do with fantasies. You can see them performing their duties in everything that happens in the universe.

As for "jinn", you know what pushes you to do wrong and it is not ghosts or aliens. You know the truth and you know where all falsehood comes from.

Now if your analysis / accusation is correct, and he starts arguing that Mohammed is an allegorical figure, then we will act when this happens.

No Muhammed the messenger of the god was a real person. On the other hand, it is sectarians like the people that Farida blindly follows who have fantacized a false Muhammed who split the moon and sits next to the god and takes them into paradise on the day of the account! This false Muhammed, like all idols, is a product of the fantasy/"jinn".

Otherwise, as of now, I find his argument on the counting of the years and months using his quranic and cosmological insights together with the fast directives sound.
For me it is akin to RK, with whom I did not agree with on many points, but who opened my eyes on some.
Ayman does not also always follow a strict scientific method when he peppers statements around, which for me does no good to his credibility.
But he does take risks, and is not paid for what he does. With many of us acting out of fear of the unknown just to defend our status quo, I think he, Layth, Edip Yuksel and a few others have done a lot of good to the Monotheist cause.
If your grave accusations are correct, you will still need to provide proof, i.e. e.g. that he is on the pay roll of some dark agencies.
Salam and Allah's protection to all of us...

I think that Farida's "dark agency" accusations are probably the funniest and most bankrupt argument I ever heard on the issue of the timing or any issue for that matter. I hope that you agree that the intelligent reader will recognize that such absurdity doesn't even deserve a reply. As for the unintelligent reader, well we can't help them anyway. As usual, none of those clapping for Farida have attempted to correct her. It shows that they don't really care about her since when someone I care about makes a mistake I try to correct them. I actually feel bad for Farida.

5913. ...You think they are together but their hearts are dispersed, this is because they are people who do not reason.

Peace,

Ayman

[Ex-"Quranist"]

Peace quickduck,

A full moon means 100% disk illumination. Ask your master, he will confirm it. The question you posed should be directed to Ayman. And yes I agree with you that common people and old civilization would not be able to determine a full moon accurately thereby defeating Ayman's screwed-up theory. Finally, you found a contradiction in Ayman's theory but were not intelligent enough to realize it.

rotfl rotfl bravo

[afridi220]

Peace all,

Before i quit posting in this thread, here is a quick summary from quick duck

1- shahar means obvious, and the only phase when the moon is obvious is the full moon phase.

2 - 1712 tells us that the year is to be calculated using the night and day. thus the only explanation is that the year is solar. wich is completely in sync with the natural god's law of seasons. But some of you keep ignoring this.

3- When you finally realize that 'shahr' means full moon, then you will be able to count exactly 12 in a solar cycle (ie. between 2 solstices) as per 936

4 - the ADJECTIVE Ramadan (hot/scorching) looses its identity if the fasting period drifts all around the year, so it's logical and OBLIGATORY that the fastin period should always occur in the same season.

5 - 936 is clear about the fact that the "four restricted full moons" have to be consective. So again they must be in the same season to preserve the wild life they are meant for. The fact is that sectarians (there are plenty around here) are completly ignoring it.

6- Both hajj and fasting are described as being for a "numbered days" ("Ayyaman ma3doodat/easily counted" as the opposite of "ayyaman 3adeeda" which translates "numerous days&quot. Therefore, "numbered days" is to be 3 days min - 10 days max . Moreover, God told us that hajj is to be completed in 10 days . in the other side, we're told that we must complete the count for fasting period. It leaves no doubt that fasting period is also for 10 days.

7- God tells us that the crescents must be used for timing purposes and for the hajj. So how can you use crescents to count Exactly 10 days for hajj (and fasting as well) if not by starting the count from the full moon marker ? (Surprisingly, the time frame between the full moon stage, and "descending phases"/manazila, down untill the first next crescent is exactly 10 days). Does it ring any bell ?

8- 2184 says that those who can afford IT (fasting ) but with great difficulty may substitute it with feeding the poor, Although fasting is better for them. So there's no retribution for not fasting, but a reward/benefit for it.

9- Since the so-called islamic calendar is prooved to be 100% arbitrary and contradicts the quranic teachings, then it is not worth following it.

10 and last - GOD does not change the condition of any people unless they themselves make the decision to change. If GOD wills any hardship for any people, no force can stop it. For they have NONE beside Him as Lord and Master.

Enjoy your own Ramadan, see you in another thread...

Peace

bravo now waiting to get some bashing from Faridahttp//img32.imageshack.us/img32/4852/bepolite.gif

[Muse]

I would just like to add something to the discussion on the real meaning of Ramadan. I have just read a book entitled "Islam a concise introduction" by Neal Robinson and according to him, Ramadan does indeed mean "scorcher" and in pre-Islamic Arabia, since the Arabs operated with a luni-solar year, it was a direct reference to the midsummer month. After arriving in Medina, Mohammad ordered his followers to fast on Ashura (the Jewish Day of Atonement). Shortly afterwards, Ashura was identified with the tenth of Muharram (the first month of the Muslim Year). However, after the Muslims broke up with the Jews, the obligatory month-long fast of Ramadan was instituted and the observance of Ashura became optional. Here is how Neal Robinson explains it

1- prescribed fasting on the Jewish Day of Atonement. The reference to "days" implied that the Muslims also fasted in the period leading up to it. In addition to Ashura, they may have fasted on the first three days of every month, as some traditions suggest.
2- was added, instituting the fast of Ramadan.
3- was added to make clear that fasting should not begin before dawn.

In addition, shortly before the Prophet died, he received a revelation which abolished the lunisolar calendar and replaced it with a purely lunar one. This had the effect of making Ramadan migrate through the seasons as it does now.
For those who don't know, the break between the Muslims and Jews occured as a result of Mohammad's followers attacking a caravan in Medina, which resulted in bloodshed. Hostilities began to arise between the two groups, and according to the author, God ordered the Muslims to distinguish themselves from the Jews this is why the qibla changed from Jerusalem to Mecca, and the days of fasting changed from the Ashura to the Ramadan that we know today.

Another interesting remark according to Neal Robinson, some commentators cite a tradition to the effect that the first Christians were ordered to fast in Ramadan, but that finding this too arduous, they moved the fast to the spring and extended it by twenty days as a penance for what they have done. From what I have understood, the writer does not find this account historically accurate (?).

I hope that I was clear enough for everyone to understand. I am only relating what I read, in case someone might be interested in a different view.

Peace,

Muse

[noble]

Peace Ayman,
I have been very confused and messed up too in my life, you know, so I do tend to forgive up to a large point.
Again off track, Jinns' cosmogony in the Quran convinces me that they are other beings, and in fact the truth
about them is probably far more fantastic than I may imagine, and among other things they seem to have the ability
to seep into humans dna in subjects of particular weaknesses/boodlines, but this is very classified research results.

[ayman]

Peace Progressive1993,

Since you bothered to give a little more thought and accordingly decided to change your response, I will reply to you this time. But be forewarned that if you do not read 1712 intelligently without preconceptions and instead keep repeating the same thing over and over again, then I will resume ignoring you.

Let me change my reposne (above) a bit, which was to the following
In the lunar calendar, night and day are also used to calculate the days of the year - it's not like the sun is ignored.

No they are not used to calculate the days of the year. There is no such concept as a "year" in a lunar calendar. One can easily make a purely lunar calendar with 1, 2, ... 13, 14, 15, ...etc. lunar months. There is no inherent number of cycles that one must "reach" or "break" at such as 12 in a purely lunar calendar. You have essentially been counting lunar cycles since year 0 AH and it doesn't matter what you call them or if you reuse the names every 12 names since their names are meaningless anyway. This is why the lunar calendar is 100% dependent on the actual month 1 that you started counting from. In order to count 12, you have to have a start and an end for the population that you are counting from. There is no such thing in a purely lunar calendar with no inherent start or end.

It is your imagination that says that we need the solstices for that we need the solstices for that, or other things of the like.
If we use our brains, we can incorporate the counting of alternating nights and days to calculate the number of days in a year, using the lunar calendar - it's simple.

In a purely lunar calendar the day and night cannot tell you the number of years. There is nothing inherent in day and night from which you can figure out the lunar cycle or that you need to stop counting after 1, 2, ?12 or 13 or 14.. etc. lunar cycles.

1712 mentions ONLY the day and night as a way to determine the number of years. No full-moon no crescent no any moon. How can you determine the number of years using ONLY the day and night? This is the question. We should not try to change the question to match our preconceptions.

The answer is that the way to determine the number of years using ONLY the day and night is to count the interval between the longest/shortest day/night (i.e., the solstices). If you have a better answer then I am all of it but don?t try to change the question.

936 The count of the months with God is twelve months in God's book the day He created the heavens and the earth; four of them are restricted. This is the correct system; so do not wrong yourselves in them. Fight those who set up partners collectively as they fight you collectively. Know that God is with the righteous.
We know that one year consists of 12 lunar months- each 24-hour day is counted by alternating night and day. You count the days in the 12 lunar months and then you have the number of days in a year.

In order to ?count?, you need to know the population that you are counting out of. This is not about labeling a month XYZ, ABC, KMN... and then repeating again 12 months later the labels XYZ, ABC, KMN... since XYZ, ABC, KMN... are meaningless and you can just as well call ABC as CBA or XYZ or RST. So just repeating the meaningless labels while endlessly continuing to count out of an endless population is not counting 12. This is why the present day sectarian Ramadhan is 100% dependent on when month 1 was. You are now counting month # 17169 and haven?t stopped the counting at 12. If you took month 2 as month 1 then the present sectarian Ramadhan would have been month 17168 and you would be fasting next month. So as I said, because you haven?t stopped counting with 12 as ordered in 936 and instead kept counting, your present day month #17169 is tied to your month 1 and can never be independent from it. So you have now been violating 936 for the past 17157 lunar months.

I hope that my reply has been professional and courteous. If there is anything in it that is not clear then I will try to explain but I will not go in circles and repeat things that were already explained numerous times on this thread.

Peace,

Ayman

[Ex-"Quranist"]

I would just like to add something to the discussion on the real meaning of Ramadan. I have just read a book entitled "Islam a concise introduction" by Neal Robinson and according to him, Ramadan does indeed mean "scorcher" and in pre-Islamic Arabia, since the Arabs operated with a luni-solar year, it was a direct reference to the midsummer month. After arriving in Medina, Mohammad ordered his followers to fast on Ashura (the Jewish Day of Atonement). Shortly afterwards, Ashura was identified with the tenth of Muharram (the first month of the Muslim Year). However, after the Muslims broke up with the Jews, the obligatory month-long fast of Ramadan was instituted and the observance of Ashura became optional. Here is how Neal Robinson explains it

1- prescribed fasting on the Jewish Day of Atonement. The reference to "days" implied that the Muslims also fasted in the period leading up to it. In addition to Ashura, they may have fasted on the first three days of every month, as some traditions suggest.
2- was added, instituting the fast of Ramadan.
3- was added to make clear that fasting should not begin before dawn.

In addition, shortly before the Prophet died, he received a revelation which abolished the lunisolar calendar and replaced it with a purely lunar one. This had the effect of making Ramadan migrate through the seasons as it does now.
For those who don't know, the break between the Muslims and Jews occured as a result of Mohammad's followers attacking a caravan in Medina, which resulted in bloodshed. Hostilities began to arise between the two groups, and according to the author, God ordered the Muslims to distinguish themselves from the Jews this is why the qibla changed from Jerusalem to Mecca, and the days of fasting changed from the Ashura to the Ramadan that we know today.

Another interesting remark according to Neal Robinson, some commentators cite a tradition to the effect that the first Christians were ordered to fast in Ramadan, but that finding this too arduous, they moved the fast to the spring and extended it by twenty days as a penance for what they have done. From what I have understood, the writer does not find this account historically accurate (?).

I hope that I was clear enough for everyone to understand. I am only relating what I read, in case someone might be interested in a different view.

Peace,

Muse

If you acknowledge that the Quran was authored by God, then you wouldnt believe this BS.
I don't have any time to explain why, now... maybe tomorrow.

Peace

[Muse]

If you acknowledge that the Quran was authored by God, then you wouldnt believe this BS.
I don't have any time to explain why, now... maybe tomorrow.

Peace

I am sorry, I thought I was clear when I said that I was RELATING what I had READ in case somebody was INTERESTED in a DIFFERENT point of view.

Peace and Happy Ramadan,

Muse

[Rami]

I am sorry, I thought I was clear when I said that I was RELATING what I had READ in case somebody was INTERESTED in a DIFFERENT point of view.

Peace and Happy Ramadan,

Muse

Piece of advice, don't act like a cronie if you don't want to get bullied in this thread. rotfl

[unknownuser]

I am sorry, I thought I was clear when I said that I was RELATING what I had READ in case somebody was INTERESTED in a DIFFERENT point of view.

Peace and Happy Ramadan,

Muse

Peace

Piece of advice, don't act like a cronie if you don't want to get bullied in this thread. rotfl

rotfl rotfl

[Ex-"Quranist"]

I am sorry, I thought I was clear when I said that I was RELATING what I had READ in case somebody was INTERESTED in a DIFFERENT point of view.

Peace and Happy Ramadan,

Muse

Sry, didnt read the whole thing - didnt have much time,

But...

that doesnt change the fact that it is total BS, does it? (Includes the abrogation theory, doesnt know that fasting in the 9th month of the lunar calendar is an ancient monotheist practice, etc.)

Have a nice Ramadan peace

[hope4]

Peace quickduck,

You know very well that Ayman cannot get anything right. You should let him speak/write. That way it is more fun. He is Mr. contradiction. And you are following him. Why are you speaking for him. Did cat got his tongue? You are the one who is worshipping Ayman, we worship the lord of universe.

Peace Guest

I thought we all worshiped the LORD OF THE UNIVERSE as He created everything, we also know Him as the LORD of the HEAVENS AND THE EARTH and Everything between it. Everything He created is a sign to us if only we knew how to intepret it.

May God help us and have mercy on us and guide us.

Peace

Hope

[ayman]

Peace Muse,

Welcome to the thread and I apologize for the rudeness of Progressive1993. Hopefully, you have read enough of the thread to understand his frustration.

I would just like to add something to the discussion on the real meaning of Ramadan. I have just read a book entitled "Islam a concise introduction" by Neal Robinson and according to him, Ramadan does indeed mean "scorcher" and in pre-Islamic Arabia, since the Arabs operated with a luni-solar year, it was a direct reference to the midsummer month. After arriving in Medina, Mohammad ordered his followers to fast on Ashura (the Jewish Day of Atonement). Shortly afterwards, Ashura was identified with the tenth of Muharram (the first month of the Muslim Year). However, after the Muslims broke up with the Jews, the obligatory month-long fast of Ramadan was instituted and the observance of Ashura became optional. Here is how Neal Robinson explains it
1- prescribed fasting on the Jewish Day of Atonement. The reference to "days" implied that the Muslims also fasted in the period leading up to it. In addition to Ashura, they may have fasted on the first three days of every month, as some traditions suggest.
2- was added, instituting the fast of Ramadan.
3- was added to make clear that fasting should not begin before dawn.

I think that if one reads between the lines, one can see traces of the original timing amongst the corruption. Using Gregorian to Hijri converters, Muharam 1 of the first year of the new era converts to the first new moon crescent after the summer solstice. So originally the marker for the beginning of the year was the summer solstice. If the actual start of Muhrram was the scorching full-moon (shahr ramadhan) then indeed the Muslims would have fasted in the days leading up to and including the tenth of the first month (Muharram). At that time people would have still known the ramadhan/scorching full moon as the event marking the start of Muharram and not as the name of the month. Also, by its name ?Muharam? would make more sense as the first of the restricted period and not the third.

In addition, shortly before the Prophet died, he received a revelation which abolished the lunisolar calendar and replaced it with a purely lunar one. This had the effect of making Ramadan migrate through the seasons as it does now.
For those who don't know, the break between the Muslims and Jews occured as a result of Mohammad's followers attacking a caravan in Medina, which resulted in bloodshed. Hostilities began to arise between the two groups, and according to the author, God ordered the Muslims to distinguish themselves from the Jews this is why the qibla changed from Jerusalem to Mecca, and the days of fasting changed from the Ashura to the Ramadan that we know today.
Another interesting remark according to Neal Robinson, some commentators cite a tradition to the effect that the first Christians were ordered to fast in Ramadan, but that finding this too arduous, they moved the fast to the spring and extended it by twenty days as a penance for what they have done. From what I have understood, the writer does not find this account historically accurate (?).
I hope that I was clear enough for everyone to understand. I am only relating what I read, in case someone might be interested in a different view.

There was definitely no break between the Muslims and the Jews. The relationship soured during the Abbasid period and this is when those traditions about the Jews were invented. On the other hand, the Romans and the Jews themselves speak of a very strong alliance between the Jews and the Arabs well into the Umayyad period. For example, here is what the Jewish Rabbi Simon ben Yohai wrote around 680CE- describing the second king of the Arabs ('Umar I)

?The second king who arises from Ishmael will be a lover of Israel. He restores their breaches and the breaches of the Temple. He hews Mount Moriah, makes it level and builds a mosque (hishtahawaya) there on the Temple rock, as it is said "Your nest is set in the rock."? (Source Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw it).

Umar was clearly a champion of Zionism. The Romans equally talk in their writings about being invaded by an alliance between the Jews and the Arabs. They speak for example about the Jews and the Arabs upon defeating them and entering Jerusalem going to a place that the Romans used as a dump and cleaning it up and building two shrines side by side, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. For all we know, Umar himself might have been an Arab-Jew who converted but still harbored Zionist ideas.

I think that the corruption of the timing can be understood in light of this relationship between the Jews and the Arabs (who reverted to their pagan tendencies after the death of the prophet). I briefly provided some thoughts here

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9188.msg220236#msg220236

Peace,

Ayman

[farida]

Peace Nabil,

The great reading didn't descend on our lap from the sky. It came through Muhammed, the messenger of the god. I think that Farida is confused because I said that many of the so-called Sahaba probably didn't exist. Since she hero-worships those people, this made her confused. What I am saying is not something amazing or extra ordinary. For example, many researchers think that Abu Hurayra didn't exist and was invented by later generations.

All those messengers certainly existed. I don't remember taking part of any such debates and if I ever were then this is what I said.

I never said anything about the Biblical mythical beings wearing white robes and having halos on their heads commonly named Angels and neither did the great reading. The word "malaika" literally means controllers. The controllers are very much real and have nothing to do with fantasies. You can see them performing their duties in everything that happens in the universe.

As for "jinn", you know what pushes you to do wrong and it is not ghosts or aliens. You know the truth and you know where all falsehood comes from.

No Muhammed the messenger of the god was a real person. On the other hand, it is sectarians like the people that Farida blindly follows who have fantacized a false Muhammed who split the moon and sits next to the god and takes them into paradise on the day of the account! This false Muhammed, like all idols, is a product of the fantasy/"jinn".

I think that Farida's "dark agency" accusations are probably the funniest and most bankrupt argument I ever heard on the issue of the timing or any issue for that matter. I hope that you agree that the intelligent reader will recognize that such absurdity doesn't even deserve a reply. As for the unintelligent reader, well we can't help them anyway. As usual, none of those clapping for Farida have attempted to correct her. It shows that they don't really care about her since when someone I care about makes a mistake I try to correct them. I actually feel bad for Farida.

5913. ...You think they are together but their hearts are dispersed, this is because they are people who do not reason.

Peace,

Ayman

3545 And if God were to punish the people for what they have earned, He would not leave a single creature standing. But He delays them to a predetermined time. Then, when their time comes, then God is Seer of His servants

[farida]

Peace Muse,

Welcome to the thread and I apologize for the rudeness of Progressive1993. Hopefully, you have read enough of the thread to understand his frustration.

I think that if one reads between the lines, one can see traces of the original timing amongst the corruption. Using Gregorian to Hijri converters, Muharam 1 of the first year of the new era converts to the first new moon crescent after the summer solstice. So originally the marker for the beginning of the year was the summer solstice. If the actual start of Muhrram was the scorching full-moon (shahr ramadhan) then indeed the Muslims would have fasted in the days leading up to and including the tenth of the first month (Muharram). At that time people would have still known the ramadhan/scorching full moon as the event marking the start of Muharram and not as the name of the month. Also, by its name ?Muharam? would make more sense as the first of the restricted period and not the third.

There was definitely no break between the Muslims and the Jews. The relationship soured during the Abbasid period and this is when those traditions about the Jews were invented. On the other hand, the Romans and the Jews themselves speak of a very strong alliance between the Jews and the Arabs well into the Umayyad period. For example, here is what the Jewish Rabbi Simon ben Yohai wrote around 680CE- describing the second king of the Arabs ('Umar I)

?The second king who arises from Ishmael will be a lover of Israel. He restores their breaches and the breaches of the Temple. He hews Mount Moriah, makes it level and builds a mosque (hishtahawaya) there on the Temple rock, as it is said "Your nest is set in the rock."? (Source Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw it).

Umar was clearly a champion of Zionism. The Romans equally talk in their writings about being invaded by an alliance between the Jews and the Arabs. They speak for example about the Jews and the Arabs upon defeating them and entering Jerusalem going to a place that the Romans used as a dump and cleaning it up and building two shrines side by side, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. For all we know, Umar himself might have been an Arab-Jew who converted but still harbored Zionist ideas.

I think that the corruption of the timing can be understood in light of this relationship between the Jews and the Arabs (who reverted to their pagan tendencies after the death of the prophet). I briefly provided some thoughts here

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9188.msg220236#msg220236

Peace,

Ayman

3510 Whosoever is seeking pride, then know that to God belongs all Pride. To Him ascend the good words, and they are exalted by the good deeds. And as for those who scheme evil, they will have a painful retribution, and their scheming will fail.