What if you kill a non-believer?
-
Without meaning anything, if that only applies to holy lands, then would you agree that the following can apply to every where else?
95
Then if they pass the forbidden limits then fight and kill the pagans wherever you find them.and take them, and surround them, and stand against them at every point. If they repent, and hold a meeting and abide by what is agreed, then you shall leave them alone. God is Forgiving, Merciful.? peace
or not?
God Bless All.Simple, your interpreation contradicts the context. Can you please look at 92. It says 'travel through the land for 4 ashhur'. How do you interpret this as 'limits'. Furthermore, the word 'limits' approximates to the word 'hudood' which actually is translated as limits. Hope you can explain this one.
-
Let's not take verses out of their context.
913 clearly shows they (mushriks) are the aggressors... This 'killing' is in self-defense.
This is strengthened by the phrase 'ahadtum min al-mushrikeen' in 91. ''ahadtum' is 'you contracted'. So there is a contract here and the mushirkeen reneged on it.
-
- That 91-12 is somehow connected with 835. There is no evidence for this.
This is because there are various kinds of people in the Quran...
Muslim - Believe in one God and the Last Day and practice Salat and Zakat=the only religion accepted by God.
Mushrik - Set up partners, reject the Last Day, practice crooked Salat and no Zakat.
Rejectors from the people of the Book - Rejected the Salat and Zakat and/or don't judge by scripture.
Mominoon - Believe in revelations of Mohammed in addition to being Muslims.So the Quran guides the Muslims to become Believers and so Islam is complemented with the Book.
- The word '3inda al-bait' in 835 means within the precincts of the kaaba. From this assumption, you have imported the entire traditional myth about how the kaaba in makkah used to have 360 idols and thus u assumed that 'salat' here is their ritual prayers.
The Quran says that their Salat was clapping and whistling. This most probably mean that Salat should be polite and in a moderate tone speech.
- That the Quran is geographically localised to 'holy lands'. Sorry but this has no evidence. The events in Quran are happening as we speak, albeit with different actors. The script is the same.
This doctrine is nowehre to be found in the Quran, all previous nations that were destroyed were near where Mohammed lived. The Quran asks the followers of the prophet to walk through the land and see the fate of the rejectors. The town of Lot was passed by the prophet and his companions day and night. Moses was in Midian and talked about Shuaib as being nearby then they moved to an area near Sodom. Moses also promised Jethro a couple of pilgrimages. And finally the Quran states that we are narrating the tales of the villages around you.
- You have interpreted 91-12 with a distinctly religious flavour. Do you think, given the spirit of Quran, God wants believers to kill off people to pray to statues?
If they defile God's house, they must be corrected. They can't be tolerated.
somethings to think about, if thats ok.
Love the hostility. bravo
-
Firstly, let me just say that where I come from saying ?something to think about, if that?s ok? does not constitute hostility. If that?s how you construed it, then I apologise and rephrase it to ?just my humble comments?.
This is because there are various kinds of people in the Quran...
Muslim - Believe in one God and the Last Day and practice Salat and Zakat=the only religion accepted by God.
Mushrik - Set up partners, reject the Last Day, practice crooked Salat and no Zakat.
Rejectors from the people of the Book - Rejected the Salat and Zakat and/or don't judge by scripture.
Mominoon - Believe in revelations of Mohammed in addition to being Muslims.
So the Quran guides the Muslims to become Believers and so Islam is complemented with the Book.How you define ?muslim? is incorrect. A muslim isn?t defined by belief but by actions, in this case compliance with God?s laws. See 4914, the a?raabu were told not not to call themselves mumin but muslim because iman had not entered their hearts.
Similarly, mumin isn?t about believing in the revelations of Muhammad either. If you see ayah like 4136 you will find that the Quran isn?t mentioned at all. Its about rather believing in God, angels, writings (not all his writings either), messengers and the last day. No Quran is mentioned either.
The Quran says that their Salat was clapping and whistling. This most probably mean that Salat should be polite and in a moderate tone speech.
?Whistling? and ?clapping? are traditional interpretations which presuppose that salat is a ritual. You will not find such backing from Quran itself. A better interpretation is ?slander? and ?opposition? respectively. ?Tasdiya? in the Quran is used in other places to mean this.
This doctrine is nowehre to be found in the Quran, all previous nations that were destroyed were near where Mohammed lived. The Quran asks the followers of the prophet to walk through the land and see the fate of the rejectors. The town of Lot was passed by the prophet and his companions day and night. Moses was in Midian and talked about Shuaib as being nearby then they moved to an area near Sodom. Moses also promised Jethro a couple of pilgrimages. And finally the Quran states that we are narrating the tales of the villages around you.
You say ?this doctrine is nowhere to be found? by which you refer to my following statement ?The events in Quran are happening as we speak, albeit with different actors. The script is the same.?
Perhaps you should take a look 83/17 When Our Signs are rehearsed to him, he says, "Tales of the ancients!"
The Quran isn?t expecting us to do an Indiana jones and going to find ancient cities to explain it (although it does want us to see what happened to them ? something completely different) nor does it want us to read ancient myths (essentially what hadiths are). When you say ?the town of lot was passed by the prophet?, you are effectively saying that ayah is dead because it simply doesn?t apply now.
If they defile God's house, they must be corrected. They can't be tolerated.
So if a person went the kaaba today, danced around a bit and clapped, we should draw our swords out and show him to behave? Do you have evidence for this law?
-
Firstly, let me just say that where I come from saying something to think about, if thats ok does not constitute hostility. If thats how you construed it, then I apologise and rephrase it to just my humble comments.
No problem.
How you define muslim is incorrect. A muslim isnt defined by belief but by actions, in this case compliance with Gods laws. See 4914, the araabu were told not not to call themselves mumin but muslim because iman had not entered their hearts.
First, what is God's law?
Can an atheist follow God's law and be called a Muslim??Similarly, mumin isnt about believing in the revelations of Muhammad either. If you see ayah like 4136 you will find that the Quran isnt mentioned at all. Its about rather believing in God, angels, writings (not all his writings either), messengers and the last day. No Quran is mentioned either.
Isn't the Books make up the Quran?? Isn't the Quran the Arabic rendition of the Book given to Moses held by the Israelites and witnesses over it??
Whistling and clapping are traditional interpretations which presuppose that salat is a ritual. You will not find such backing from Quran itself. A better interpretation is slander and opposition respectively. Tasdiya in the Quran is used in other places to mean this.
So what is Salaat, Zakat and Hajj from your perspective? Just quick definitions will do.
You say this doctrine is nowhere to be found by which you refer to my following statement The events in Quran are happening as we speak, albeit with different actors. The script is the same.
Perhaps you should take a look 83/17 When Our Signs are rehearsed to him, he says, "Tales of the ancients!"
The Quran isnt expecting us to do an Indiana jones and going to find ancient cities to explain it (although it does want us to see what happened to them something completely different) nor does it want us to read ancient myths (essentially what hadiths are). When you say the town of lot was passed by the prophet, you are effectively saying that ayah is dead because it simply doesnt apply now.
The Quran is narrating the stories of the past....and tales of the ancients almost always refers to the idea of life after death!
"Such things have been promised to us and to our fathers before! they are nothing but tales of the ancients!"
But (there is one) who says to his parents, "Fie on you! Do ye hold out the promise to me that I shall be raised up, even though generations have passed before me (without rising again)?" And they two seek Allah's aid, (and rebuke the son) "Woe to thee! Have faith! for the promise of Allah is true." But he says, "This is nothing but tales of the ancients!"
So if a person went the kaaba today, danced around a bit and clapped, we should draw our swords out and show him to behave? Do you have evidence for this law?
What will you do? At least you will tell him to leave.
Peace.
-
First, what is God's law?
Universal rules for mankind to follow
Can an atheist follow God's law and be called a Muslim??
Sure. We can?t know what?s inside people?s hearts. As long as they follow the law (which is essentially being a peaceful and productive person) we won?t know what they really believe. That?s essentially what a munafiq is, by the way.
Isn't the Books make up the Quran?? Isn't the Quran the Arabic rendition of the Book given to Moses held by the Israelites and witnesses over it??
I would say that the Quran is the detail of God?s plan for mankind and yes, the same ideology given to Moses (though different in wording and language, perhaps).
So what is Salaat, Zakat and Hajj from your perspective? Just quick definitions will do.
Salat ? Acts which bond , mostly to God.
Zakat ? a state of betterment
Hajj ? Establishment of God?s system.The Quran is narrating the stories of the past....and tales of the ancients almost always refers to the idea of life after death!
"Such things have been promised to us and to our fathers before! they are nothing but tales of the ancients!"
But (there is one) who says to his parents, "Fie on you! Do ye hold out the promise to me that I shall be raised up, even though generations have passed before me (without rising again)?" And they two seek Allah's aid, (and rebuke the son) "Woe to thee! Have faith! for the promise of Allah is true." But he says, "This is nothing but tales of the ancients!"These stories happened in the past, sure but they are happening now. See this
Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things? (4153)What will you do? At least you will tell him to leave.
Sure. Not that I believe in the concept of ?house of worship? but if a person intrudes on any private property, he should be asked to leave.
-
Simple, your interpreation contradicts the context. Can you please look at 92. It says 'travel through the land for 4 ashhur'. How do you interpret this as 'limits'. Furthermore, the word 'limits' approximates to the word 'hudood' which actually is translated as limits. Hope you can explain this one.
let us simplify it further
92
So wander freely with your heavy handed aproach but know that you can not escape (from the punishment of) Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.wow
-
Simple. I'm sorry but your translation above doesn't seem to cohere with 91. 91 is God giving immunity to those from the mushrikeen with whom the believers have a covenant. So why is 92 is telling them to keep doing what they're doing? Mind you, the traditional understanding (which is giving them 4 months) doesn't make much sense either.
Perhaps you can tell us your understanding of 91-12, if you don't mind?
-
The believers made a covenant with the Pagans in clear violation to God and the Messenger....so God is clearing his name from this covenant...the believers were to keep their covenant to the end of sacred months and the believers were to execute the Pagans effective immediately. For God, you either become a Muslim near the House or die.
God doesn't negotiate with Pagans. D
-
Universal rules for mankind to follow
Sure. We cant know whats inside peoples hearts. As long as they follow the law (which is essentially being a peaceful and productive person) we wont know what they really believe. Thats essentially what a munafiq is, by the way.
I would say that the Quran is the detail of Gods plan for mankind and yes, the same ideology given to Moses (though different in wording and language, perhaps).
Salat Acts which bond , mostly to God.
Zakat a state of betterment
Hajj Establishment of Gods system.
These stories happened in the past, sure but they are happening now. See this
Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things? (4153)
Sure. Not that I believe in the concept of house of worship but if a person intrudes on any private property, he should be asked to leave.You have this non-ritualistic metaphoric humanistic approach to Quranic exegesis. We won't agree in almost everything. ;D
Peace.
-
The believers made a covenant with the Pagans in clear violation to God and the Messenger....so God is clearing his name from this covenant...the believers were to keep their covenant to the end of sacred months and the believers were to execute the Pagans effective immediately. For God, you either become a Muslim near the House or die.
God doesn't negotiate with Pagans.
Sorry Rami, this isn't Islam, it's fascism.
but yes, you're right. We have different approaches. Peace to you.
-
Simple. I'm sorry but your translation above doesn't seem to cohere with 91. 91 is God giving immunity to those from the mushrikeen with whom the believers have a covenant. So why is 92 is telling them to keep doing what they're doing? Mind you, the traditional understanding (which is giving them 4 months) doesn't make much sense either.
Perhaps you can tell us your understanding of 91-12, if you don't mind?
Sorry it takes too long to translate word for word.
Just to give you vague picture of what I think.
9, 1-2.
Freedom from Allah to those you made a treaty of the murderous thugs.
So go do what you will but now that Allah will catch you out and disgrace you.
9, 3-5.
A declaration from Allah to mankind, that for a peaceful outcome Allah is free from obligations to the murderous thugs but if they repent it is better for them and if they don?t there awaits them severe consequences .Except for those murderous thugs who keep to their part of the treaty.
When and if they ever go on a rampage sought them out till they come to the counsel table and undertake their part of the treaty.911
But (even so), if they repent, establish counsel, and abide by the decisions, - they are your brethren in Faith (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand.God Bless.
-
Ok thank you Simple.
You mentioned that 92 reads 'so wander freely with your heavy-handed approach'. How did you translate 'arba'atun ashhuhur' here as 'heavy handed? Can you please explain ?
-
peace,
I think the contexts of both passages are very similar. Recently but briefly discussed here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9765.msg223199#msg223199Peace W,
I agree the contexts are similar but I doubt they refer to the same event as you said in the thread above. My reasons are as follows
-
To me, Anfal and Tauba are one single chapter since there?s no basmala between them. I refer to them as ?chapter 8/9? for convenience?s sake (otherwise I?ll have to refer to Yunus as chapter 9, hud as chapter 10 etc). Since it?s one chapter to me, I don?t think it refers to the same event since one chapter usually has one rendition of a single event.
-
Again using the ?chapter 8/9 theory?, the overall theme of chapter 8/9 is what I believe to be systemic warfare, the war between the system truth and falsehood. I believe that the thematic content of chapter 8/9 is progressive. 8/1-69 shows a balanced conflict but from 8/70-9/129, the upper hand is clearly with the believers.
-
8/29-44 shows , as I said above, as even handed conflict and it uses phrases like
a. Kafireen plot against believers to keep them in bonds, to kill them and to kidnap them (ayah 30)
b. They are still performing istighfar which are some acts which still afford them God?s protection (33)
c. They hinder people from masjid al-haram which is a place where the hurumaat of Allah are in place. So at this point, masjid al-haram does not yet exist (34)
d. God tells believers to fight them until there is no more fitnah , so there must still be fitnah at that point (39)-
9/1-22 on the other hand, is in a passage which starts from 8/70 onwards. You can see the following in 8/70-75 the following the elements
a. The nabiy has ?asraa? which I take to mean people in his bond (ayah 70)
b. It means emigration (72)
c. It mentions seeking the prophets aid in deen (72) -
9/1-22 contains elements which are distinctly absent from 8/1-69
a. Bara?ah or immunity can be given to mushriks (ayah 1)
b. It mentions ?yaum al-hajj al-akbar? which I interpret to mean a period where God?s system which is greater (akbar) than the system of falsehood is in place The mushrikeen are told to return to it, showing once again believers are in power (3)
c. Believers are told that once mushrikeen make tauba, establish salah and bring zakat, to open the way for them. Opening the way implies power (5)
d. The treaty between believers and mushrikeen can only be by masjidil-haraam which I take to mean that it can only happen once the believers have their own functional system with God?s hurumaat in place (7).
e. The implications the presence of masjd al-haraam is mentioned as the opposite of the state where mushrikeen are ?yazhiroo alaikum?/prominent over you.( 8 ) ?Zahiroo ala? is mentioned in ayaat like 9/33, 61/9 and 48/28 which not coincidentally, mushrikeen are mentioned too.
So Wakas, while I agree the context is similar (i.e. the conflict between believers and kafireen in a systemic sense), I don?t think they are the same scenario at all. Thanks for the discussion though, I saw a few things I hadn?t seen before when I wrote this post.
-
-
Ok thank you Simple.
You mentioned that 92 reads 'so wander freely with your heavy-handed approach'. How did you translate 'arba'atun ashhuhur' here as 'heavy handed? Can you please explain ?
In order to embody a calendar system based on the moon which Hindus used they have in-avertedly re-invented meanings of the quran, there are no four holy months or anything - i think.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume4/00000336.pdf
Shahr isn?t a month in the quran but the approach of people towards one another, how they interact.
Arba isn?t necessarily the number four but can mean heavy extreme weighty tangible apart from other things, there seem to be four pages in lanes as to what it can be at various time.
'arba'atun ashhuhur' confused
peace
-
In order to embody a calendar system based on the moon which Hindus used they have in-avertedly re-invented meanings of the quran, there are no four holy months or anything - i think.
I agree that in the traditional reading, i.e. giving mushrikeen 4 months, it doesn?t make sense to me. Why would you give them 4 months? Why not make it an indefinite peace treaty? I?ve never been comfortable with that interpretation. Another that doesn't make sense to me is why 9/36 which talks about 12 months has to be said at all. Perhaps there is something in your interpretation but we must go through the proper procedure to confirm your findings. I think to say they were trying to copy the hindus isn?t a valid argument. Hinduism has many things which Quran also has, like the concept of karma. The only way for us to prove this new understanding is by checking language resources (which you have done, I think) and seeing if it fits.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume4/00000336.pdf
Shahr isn?t a month in the quran but the approach of people towards one another, how they interact.
Approach of how people interact? Even this link you provided says ?something known, public? so I can?t see how you arrived at your conclusion.
Furthermore what about shahru ramadhan in which there?s an actually count of days to fulfil (2185)?
Arba isn?t necessarily the number four but can mean heavy extreme weighty tangible apart from other things, there seem to be four pages in lanes as to what it can be at various time.
What root did you look up for this ? Ra-ba-ain ?
How do you read 9/36-37 please?
-
In order to embody a calendar system based on the moon which Hindus used they have in-avertedly re-invented meanings of the quran, there are no four holy months or anything - i think.
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume4/00000336.pdf
Shahr isn?t a month in the quran but the approach of people towards one another, how they interact.
Arba isn?t necessarily the number four but can mean heavy extreme weighty tangible apart from other things, there seem to be four pages in lanes as to what it can be at various time.
'arba'atun ashhuhur' confused
peaceTwo of the description of the meaning say;
Signifying the appearance or the publicity of a thing or its appearance as bad evil abominable or unseemly?..
2.
An evil thing that exposes its author to disgrace, any disgraceful or shameful thing a vice or a fault or the like.And looking at the other meanings you can conclude that it is the people?s actions that are displaying such acts.
If you look at the Ramadan ayah then look to what the root means (Ramadz) rather then just shahr.
Here is one trans someone did;
2185
of your parading cast/throw the evilness /niggerdilness /stinginess that was revealed in it the quran a guidance for mankind and clear proofs of the guidance and the criterion ,who whosoever witnesses amongst you such parading he should abstain(remove/ expunge) it??for Ruba?a
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000181.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000182.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000183.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000184.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000185.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume3/00000186.pdfpeace
-
Two of the description of the meaning say;
Signifying the appearance or the publicity of a thing or its appearance as bad evil abominable or unseemly?..
2.
An evil thing that exposes its author to disgrace, any disgraceful or shameful thing a vice or a fault or the like.And looking at the other meanings you can conclude that it is the people?s actions that are displaying such acts.
If the meaning itself is ?publicity of an evil thing?, then its referring to the thing itself, not the cause of the thing. I?m afraid I can?t agree with how you conclude this.
If you look at the Ramadan ayah then look to what the root means (Ramadz) rather then just shahr.
Here is one trans someone did
2185
of your parading cast/throw the evilness /niggerdilness /stinginess that was revealed in it the quran a guidance for mankind and clear proofs of the guidance and the criterion ,who whosoever witnesses amongst you such parading he should abstain(remove/ expunge) it??I?m afraid I have a few issues here. Firstly, ?abstain it? doesn?t mean ?remove it?, there is a word for remove or expunge (ikhraj). Secondly he?s not taking into account the phrase in this ayah which reads He does not want to put to difficulties. (He wants you) to complete the count. What is this count, in your view?
What is your understanding of 9/36-37 please?
Thanks for the ruba?a reference. Will study it. But it?s also used in 9/36 as ?four? unless you translate it differently there. I?m very interested in your view.
I appreciate you find the usual translations illogical and so do I. However, we need to systematically find the right terms and make sure they fit the overall contexts.
