My problems with Free-Minds (very long post, please read)
-
Salaam Amid,
On the surface nothing wrong with adding (saw) or (pbuh) but you must ask yourself why you do it. It smacks of hero worship and fake lip service to me.
Muhammad is already a beautiful and respectful title I don't need to add anything else to it. In Quran which we are supposed to read as-is doesn't add anything to any of the prophets names. Those verses about "yusali" and "tasleem" have already been dealt with earlier here - so I won't go in to it.
Burhan.
That's your opinion and I respect it.
-
You are working an interpretation backwards my friend. You admit there are inconsistencies in hadiths on how it is performed which should ring some alarm bells anyway. But yet you so adamantly start your core interpretation of salat being a ritual based on those very hadiths that are inconsistent ??? If that isn't a fallacy right there then someone point out to me what is please.
Remember that the quran is the furqan (criterion) and not the hadiths.
PEACE
No fallacy at all. The hadeeth are not a criterion. On the contrary, we test authenticity of hadeeth by using the Qur'an. It would seem the most important things I wrote in my posts went right over your head. In the Bible there is much falsehood, but there's also truth to be found. The fact that you are not able to produce one single writing since the beginning of islamic history that shows the Salaat as something other than a ritual prayer simply doesn't bode well for you.
-
I see that you are not very familiar with The Reading and/or you have mixed stuff up in your head. Reading your 30000+ Hadiths must be a tiring thing.
Actually, the number is probably over 70000 if we were to add the "weak" and "fabricated" ones, none of which show the Salaat to be anything other than a worship ritual.
I was talking about 911 not 3356. You may want to add 95 as well. For this I gave you some links so you could in order to understand - I see you were too lazy to read them. I also see that you are persisting in your appeal to popularity.
Your post starts off interesting, then goes downhill as you throw in verses (and twisted translations I might add) which have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. No, it is not appeal to popularity, it is called using logic and reason. It would seem that you have difficulty in producing one writing since the beginning of Islamic history that shows the Salaat is not a ritual prayer. laugh
Am I asking for too much? One simple writing that supports your theory. Just one! rotfl
911 If they (those who have set up partners) repent, and uphold the salat, and bring forth the zakat, then they are your fellows/brethren in the obligation ("deen". We explain the signs for a people who know.
912 If they break their oaths after their covenant, and they assail in your obligation ("deen" then you may kill the chiefs of rejection. Their oaths are nothing to them, perhaps they will then cease.
You can see that "uphold the salat" is contrasted to "breaking their oaths after their convenant".
Also, "zakat", which is not charity, but "betterment/development", is contrasted to "assail in your obligation (deen)".
It is also important to note that the people who are being adressed THE WHOLE TIME are "al kafireena/al mushrikeena" (the rejecters/those who have set up partners).And what is your argument? I don't see it. Surely you've missed something?
Eating dog meat is prohibited according to Hadith. What I was getting at is that you pick and choose from the Hadith. You accept some and reject some. This is exactly what is being described in 6113.
I reject whatever violates God's commands. I must be writing in invisible font since I've repeated this statement at least 10 times by now.
Do you also believe in the intercession of Muhammad?
Of course not, since it violates the Qur'an. Are you drunk perhaps? It wouldn't surprise me to hear that some "Free Minders" have found a way to make Alcohol "halal." laugh
Bukhari is said to have collected 700,000 hadith and accepted only about 7000, rejecting 99 percent of them. With all this "science of Hadith" of verifying the chain of narrators, plus the travelling he would have done, the eating, the sleeping, etc. etc. it would be impossible to have done.
3945 When God alone is mentioned, the minds of those who do not acknowledge the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!
7218 The institutions of submission (masajid) are for God, so do not call on anyone alongside God.
7220 Say, "I only call on my Lord, and I do not associate anyone with Him."
4012 This is because when God alone was mentioned, you rejected, but when partners were associated with Him, you acknowledged. Therefore, the judgment is for God, the Most High, the Great.
Again, what is your argument? How can anyone with any brain tissue come to the conclusion after reading my posts that I am associating partners with God?? You are very funny.
Prayers for God to bless someone is associating partners? If I am asking God to bless my wife, I'm associating my wife as a partner with God? You can't be serious? I clearly said that the prayer for blessing certain people has no place in Salaat, but "dua" is NOT Salaat.
Dua is PRAYER/SUPPLICATION.
Regards,
Amid -
Actually, the number is probably over 70000 if we were to add the "weak" and "fabricated" ones, none of which show the Salaat to be anything other than a worship ritual.
Am I asking for too much? One simple writing that supports your theory. Just one! rotflYou are continuing with this nonsense. I already told you that this is 100% irrelevant. There could be 5 million Hadiths that indicate that salat is nothing but a ritual prayer as the Sunnis/Shias do it, and I still wouldn't care.
And what is your argument? I don't see it. Surely you've missed something?
You've missed something. The rejecters/idolaters are told to uphold the salat and bring forth the zakat. It is contrasted to "breaking their oaths after their covenant" and "assail in your obligation". You may want to read this.
Of course not, since it violates the Qur'an. Are you drunk perhaps? It wouldn't surprise me to hear that some "Free Minders" have found a way to make Alcohol "halal." laugh
More of your nonsense...
What does a simple question have to do with any drunkeness or what Free-Minders think about alcohol?Again, what is your argument? How can anyone with any brain tissue come to the conclusion after reading my posts that I am associating partners with God?? You are very funny.
Prayers for God to bless someone is associating partners? If I am asking God to bless my wife, I'm associating my wife as a partner with God?
If you ask God to bless your wife, then that is not a problem. However, if you ask God to bless some dead prophet, for example Muhammad, then there is, since you would be making a distinction among the prophets. We are to commemorate God alone and not the prophets. For you to want God to bless them and their families would be out of a religious reason, so you would be idolizing them. Those who idolize their idols only do so because they think that it makes them closer to God. We are never asked to ask God to bless them - they are already blessed by God. They are dead - why would you want to ask God to bless them? Also, why would you ask God to bless the dead prophets' dead families? What do they have anything to do with you serving God? We are never asked to ask God to bless the prophets by mere lip service. Furthermore, when a prophet dies, he no longer is a prophet. Even with your interpretation of 3356, it wouldnt make sense to bless the prophets by lip service since this would only supposed to be done when they are ALIVE.
Person F) Salaat means "bond", therefore it definitely can't be a ritual (aka progressive1993's argument).
I have already asked you before to quote me where I have alledgedly said "salat means bond therefore..."
Do you have proof or are you making up lies?Peace
-
The divinity of Jesus and him being the son of the god are two different issues as evidenced by the Nestorians who don't believe Jesus to be divine and yet take him as the very much human son of the god. You didn't really understand what I said in my previous post and it seems like it went over your head like my first two posts that you are still unable to answer.
It would seem that you have a problem reading words that are right in front of you. I used the Bible to show that it is exactly like Ahadith. Falsehood mixed with truth. We test what is truth by using the Qur'an.
This has been answered many times before. Do you think that you are the first guy who comes here and claims to have found some loophole in the great reading's timing of the restriction which justifies using Hadiths? Before asking to be spoonfed info that is readily obvious and available, please use the search function (you know the one next to Help on the top of your screen) and you will find the answer. In fact, the answer is in one of the busiest and most viewed threads on this forum
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9188.0
While your question has been answered many times over, it seems that you still don't have enough knowledge to answer even a single point from the following posts and are running away from them
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231810#msg231810
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231813#msg231813
What did I not answer?? LOL laugh Point it out please.
Regarding the prohibited months, every other person has a different opinion, just like Salaat. "Uncertainty" seems to be a very interesting pattern here.
If you continue to evade then you will be submitting to the fact that you have no argument to stand on.
If there is anyone who is intellectually bankrupt it is individuals like yourself who make Salaat into whatever they want it to be. They are also the ones who make halal haram, and haram halal, and funniest of all they claim to use the Qur'an alone yet they're using outside sources -- translations made by fallible human beings.
Perhaps you need to learn to read the great reading first before making such plunders. In the passage in question (3356) the believers are ordered to do "salat" in the same exact context at the god's "salat". So it is clearly the same concept. Also, the only reason you think that they mean different things is that your "ritual prayer" interpretation is an absuridity that produces huge inconsistencies. So now you are forced to invent THREE definitions of "salat"
- Ritual prayer.
- Mindlessly repeating "allahuma salli 3lih" every time a certain name is mentioned.
- Some other mysterious meaning that you ignore and are unable to tell us and that you apply only in the first "salat" by the god in 3356.
This just demonstrates your mental laziness. Unable to tell us what the "salat" of the god means, you revert back to your logical fallacy of appeal to popularity (the 30,000 nonsense).
It demonstrates your intellectual bankrupcy and nothing else. Because Salaat can be used in many different ways therefore it cannot be a ritual prayer. That is your "argument," and it's pathetic for crying out loud. Produce one document, one narration, one simple writing since the beginning of Islamic history that supports your theory.
Why can't you do so?
Face it you have no case.
No. Salat is whatever the god says it is. It is not what 30,000 Hadiths or even 30 Billion Hadiths say it is. You have nothing except making fallacious arguments based on appeal to popularity. This logical fallacy is your comfort zone and therefore when cornered you keep going back to that place of blissful ignorance.
They didn't hide the real "salat". Everyone can see the real "salat" in the great reading in 3356 and many other passages but they choose to ignore it. Salat is not some ritual that you learn. It is something that happens naturally like the birds knowing their "salat".
If everyone can see the real Salaat as you claim, then why does almost every other person in the "Qur'an alone" group completely disagree on this matter? LOL!!! rotfl Just by browsing this forum one can see how "certain" you guys are regarding Salaat
Person A) It is a ritual prayer.
Person B) No, it is simply remembering God.
Person C) What are you talking about? Salaat = doing good deeds.
Person D) I disagree, Salaat is charity. I've researched this for a long time.
Person E) You're all wrong, Salaat is simply studying the Qur'an.
Person F) Salaat means "bond", therefore it definitely can't be a ritual (aka progressive1993's argument).
Person G) I have no idea what it is. I've been trying to find out for many years.And I could go on.
What you call "salat" now is the "Islamicized" Zoroastrian Geh, which is a 5 times a day ritual adapted into sectarian practices along with some pagan customs such as obsession with repeating things three times for a pagan trinity. The best part about the sectaian "salat" is the reading of the great reading and unfortunately this was shortened to a minimum and even in group much of it is done in silence.
So because it bears similarity to something it automatically means it must be a rip-off? The Bible contains the teaching Eye for an Eye. The Code of Hammurabi contains that teaching too. So by your logic the Bible must have plagarised from the code of Hammurabi. Similarly many concepts in the Qur'an are similar to the Torah, so the author of the Qur'an copied the Torah? LOL
Furthermore, the Sunni Salaat it is not exactly like the Zoroastrian prayer. Now instead of changing subjects, you should come to terms with the following
You have no evidence to support what you are saying, and therefore you have no case. It's as clear as that. You cannot produce one document throughout history, not only a document but not even one narration, not even a single sentence, not even half a sentence, written anywhere, anytime, from any source, whether deemed authentic, weak, or fabricated, that supports your theory of salaat not being a ritual prayer.
Please come back when you can show me some evidence.
Best wishes,
Amid -
You are continuing with this nonsense. I already told you that this is 100% irrelevant. There could be 5 million Hadiths that indicate that salat is nothing but a ritual prayer as the Sunnis/Shias do it, and I still wouldn't care.
That's pure denial on your part, no more no less. Irrational and unreasonable. The evidence stares you in the face, but you simply don't want Salaat to be a ritual prayer, for whatever reason.
How can I respond to an irrational statement such as yours? I can't.
You've missed something. The rejecters/idolaters are told to uphold the salat and bring forth the zakat. It is contrasted to "breaking their oaths after their covenant" and "assail in your obligation". You may want to read this.
You may want to try and show me one document/writing/narration/half-a-narration/sentence/half-a-sentence since the beginning of Islamic history that implies Salaat is not worship/ritual prayer. If you can't do so, then I simply can't take you seriously. I want evidence, not twisted translations and misinterpretations of Qur'anic verses.
More of your nonsense...
What does a simple question have to do with any drunkeness or what Free-Minders think about alcohol?I was simply astonished as to how you could ask if I believe in intercession, seeing how I stated my beliefs clearly so many times.
If you ask God to bless your wife, then that is not a problem. However, if you ask God to bless some dead prophet, for example Muhammad, then there is, since you would be making a distinction among the prophets. We are to commemorate God alone and not the prophets. For you to want God to bless them and their families would be out of a religious reason, so you would be idolizing them. Those who idolize their idols only do so because they think that it makes them closer to God. We are never asked to ask God to bless them - they are already blessed by God. They are dead - why would you want to ask God to bless them? Also, why would you ask God to bless the dead prophets' dead families? What do they have anything to do with you serving God? We are never asked to ask God to bless the prophets by mere lip service. Furthermore, when a prophet dies, he no longer is a prophet. Even with your interpretation of 3356, it wouldnt make sense to bless the prophets by lip service since this would only supposed to be done when they are ALIVE.
Perhaps I gave a bad example. I don't do it myself anyway. However, if I say Allah, please let your peace be upon all your prophets and messengers from the first to the last, I am not violating anything. Show me how that would be a violation of the Qur'an. Of course, this is not during Salaat but during Dua (as I stated before).
If I'm singling out a Prophet, then yes I'm violating the Qur'an because I'm making a distinction between Prophets. Otherwise, no.
I have already asked you before to quote me where I have alledgedly said "salat means bond therefore..."
Do you have proof or are you making up lies?You don't type the exact phrase "salaat means bond, therefore", but you certainly do try with all your might to "show" how salaat is not a ritual prayer because the word itself means bond. You even devoted an entire post (http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231815#msg231815) to explain that salaat means bond, as if that proves anything.
-
Yes we can do it differently, I do it differently and I gave my reasons why. But we can't just do anything we want and slap the name "Salaat" on it. Some people have been saying that "doing good deeds" is Salaat, or simply "remembering God" without doing anything physically at all it "Salaat."
could you give examples of what IS NOT Salat?
I mean, a person may make a ritual prayer, another person might say a prayer verbally without going through the motions, others might keep God in mind and act accordingly. I don't see how these are mutually exclusive.
Don't you think you are being too concerned about terminology?
The threads on Salat had good examples to show that there is more than one way to worship God. What is wrong with that? And what does it matter what it is called?
-
If what you're saying is true, that Salaat is not a worship/ritual prayer, then surely in over 32265 narrations you would be able to find ONE SINGLE NARRATION that even remotely IMPLIES that the Salaat is something other than worship/ritual prayer.
do you mean that those articles state that Salaat is NOT a ritual prayer, or NOT JUST a ritual prayer?
(capital letters for emphasis)
-
Peace Amid,
That's pure denial on your part, no more no less. Irrational and unreasonable. The evidence stares you in the face, but you simply don't want Salaat to be a ritual prayer, for whatever reason.
How can I respond to an irrational statement such as yours? I can't.
You may want to try and show me one document/writing/narration/half-a-narration/sentence/half-a-sentence since the beginning of Islamic history that implies Salaat is not worship/ritual prayer. If you can't do so, then I simply can't take you seriously.
"Evidence"? "Irrational"? You are persisting in your appeal to popularity and authority.
I suggest reading up on the links on the logical fallacies, which I gave you.You may want to try and show me one document/writing/narration/half-a-narration/sentence/half-a-sentence since the beginning of Islamic history that implies Salaat is not worship/ritual prayer.
-
Define "Islamic history". "Islam" (peacefulness/surrender) is the obligation/system of all of God's prophets (i.e. it started before Muhammad). See 4213.
-
I also told you numerous times that it is IRRELEVANT what your beloved Hadith idol says.
If you can't do so, then I simply can't take you seriously. I want evidence, not twisted translations and misinterpretations of Qur'anic verses.
Ahh..I see. When The Reading contradicts your views/challenges them/brings about problems/inconsistencies with the traditional/mainstream understandings, it is a "twisted translation" and a "misinterpretation"...
You don't type the exact phrase "salaat means bond, therefore",
Thanks for acknowledging your lie.
but you certainly do try with all your might to "show" how salaat is not a ritual prayer because the word itself means bond. You even devoted an entire post (http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231815#msg231815) to explain that salaat means bond, as if that proves anything.
That post was not entirely dedicated to salat. Read carefully - I adressed more than just the salat issue. Anyways, even if it was just dedicated to salat being a bond/commitment, what would be the problem?
I only showed how the interpretation of "salat=prayer" is refuted by The Reading. I also gave you part of my view. Sad-lam-waw is used for a number of things in The Reading, that's why I said it's a general concept and that's why its nonsensical to translate it as "ritual prayer" (in all occurences). I strongly recommend you to re-read my last post where I explained 911-12 as well as the link I gave you which talks about the the things mentioned in the beginning of chapter 9 - especially the salat.
-
-
Peace Amid,
It would seem that you have a problem reading words that are right in front of you. I used the Bible to show that it is exactly like Ahadith. Falsehood mixed with truth. We test what is truth by using the Qur'an.
At least I made you realize that you were wrong and that Jesus divinity is not the same as him being the son of the god and therefore you stopped repeating this. Why don't you do like you say and test the issue of "salat" using the great reading. You can't even answer 3356 and tell us what "salat" means in this passage.
What did I not answer?? LOL laugh Point it out please.
You didn't answer anything of those posts.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231810#msg231810
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231813#msg231813
You also continue to evade answering this one and even completely deleted it from your quotes
Unable to tell us what the "salat" of the god means, you revert back to your logical fallacy of appeal to popularity (the 30,000 nonsense).
Now answer what the "salat" of the god in 3356 means or have the courage to admit that you don't know instead of evading like you have been doing.
Regarding the prohibited months, every other person has a different opinion, just like Salaat. "Uncertainty" seems to be a very interesting pattern here.
This is a surrender to the fact that your challenge about the restriction period not being known based on the great reading has failed. Your challenge was not about "different opinions", otherwise your false arbitrary timing for the restriction period is also "another opinion". Your challenge was about the question not being feasible to answer or give ANY opinion to begin with based on the great reading.
Also, it is an indisputable fact that each sectarian has a different opinion about "salat"
- It is ritual prayer.
- It is mindlessly parroting "sala allah 3alih" every time someone's name is mentioned.
- It is something else that you have no idea what it is and therefore are unable to answer what it means in 3356.
If there is anyone who is intellectually bankrupt it is individuals like yourself who make Salaat into whatever they want it to be. They are also the ones who make halal haram, and haram halal, and funniest of all they claim to use the Qur'an alone yet they're using outside sources -- translations made by fallible human beings.
This is again a surrender on your part that you have no idea what "salat" of the god means in 3356. When cornered you are beginning to sound like a bearded Mullah and exposing your dogmatic side.
It demonstrates your intellectual bankrupcy and nothing else. Because Salaat can be used in many different ways therefore it cannot be a ritual prayer. That is your "argument," and it's pathetic for crying out loud.
You are building a strawman. It is not about different ways. It is about contradicting meanings even in THE SAME EXACT context where it is clear that the meaning is the same as in 3356 where one time you interpret "salat" to mean "mindlessly parroting "sala allah 3alih"" and the other as some meaning that you ignore and evade telling everyone what it is.
Produce one document, one narration, one simple writing since the beginning of Islamic history that supports your theory.
Why can't you do so?
Face it you have no case.I already did. Whether you like it or not, the great reading is the earliest Islamic document and it supports my theory.
If everyone can see the real Salaat as you claim, then why does almost every other person in the "Qur'an alone" group completely disagree on this matter? LOL!!! rotfl Just by browsing this forum one can see how "certain" you guys are regarding Salaat
Person A) It is a ritual prayer.
Person B) No, it is simply remembering God.
Person C) What are you talking about? Salaat = doing good deeds.
Person D) I disagree, Salaat is charity. I've researched this for a long time.
Person E) You're all wrong, Salaat is simply studying the Qur'an.
Person F) Salaat means "bond", therefore it definitely can't be a ritual (aka progressive1993's argument).
Person G) I have no idea what it is. I've been trying to find out for many years.
And I could go on.The fact is that every creature, including birds know its "salat", unless you want to contest 2441. Even newborn babies know their "salat" as clear from 1931.
You also forgot Person H who is completely confused and thinks "salat" is ritual prayer or mindlessly repeating "sala allah 3alih" or has no idea what it is when it comes, for example, to 3356. )
Also, based on the above you admit that "salat" being "ritual prayer" is just another opinion.
So because it bears similarity to something it automatically means it must be a rip-off? The Bible contains the teaching Eye for an Eye. The Code of Hammurabi contains that teaching too. So by your logic the Bible must have plagarised from the code of Hammurabi. Similarly many concepts in the Qur'an are similar to the Torah, so the author of the Qur'an copied the Torah? LOL
Furthermore, the Sunni Salaat it is not exactly like the Zoroastrian prayer.I could reverse your question and say Are you saying that "rip-offs" bear no similarity?
You forget that your question to Progressive1993 was "why did they change it into a ritual prayer instead of what it really is?"
The most likely answer is that they simply renamed the Geh as "salat" and "Islamcized" it.
This answer is further confirmed by the fact that the earliest Islamic document (the great reading) has no evidence of the 5 daily ritual prayers and even Sunnis admit to this and thus always use it as an argument for why we need Hadiths.
Now instead of changing subjects, you should come to terms with the following
You started this subject and I was simply answering another one of your weak challenges. Of course, when your challenge is defeated you now say that this is not our subject.
You have no evidence to support what you are saying, and therefore you have no case. It's as clear as that. You cannot produce one document throughout history, not only a document but not even one narration, not even a single sentence, not even half a sentence, written anywhere, anytime, from any source, whether deemed authentic, weak, or fabricated, that supports your theory of salaat not being a ritual prayer.
Please come back when you can show me some evidence.I already showed everyone 3356, which is an earlier and more reliable document than any of your Abbasid era Hadiths and you still can't answer and never will. This is all I needed to do because your argument is a fallacious house of card.
Peace,
Ayman
-
No fallacy at all. The hadeeth are not a criterion. On the contrary, we test authenticity of hadeeth by using the Qur'an. It would seem the most important things I wrote in my posts went right over your head. In the Bible there is much falsehood, but there's also truth to be found. The fact that you are not able to produce one single writing since the beginning of islamic history that shows the Salaat as something other than a ritual prayer simply doesn't bode well for you.
No on the contrary it's my point that went over your head or maybe you intentionally evaded my point. Here's how you fail my friend
- You state the hadith are not a criterion.
- You state we test the authenticity of the hadeeth by using the Quran.
- Yet your sole premise to support salat being a ritual is based on providing a hadeeth showing salat is NOT a ritual.
Do you see where you fail?? You ask another member to use logic and reason yet you don't yourself.
The quran should be your starting point on what salat is and not vehemently parroting to bring a hadith showing salat is NOT a ritual prayer. Ridiculous!
PEACE
-
Peace
What did I not answer?? LOL laugh Point it out please.
What kind of question is this?
Have you even read the following two posts?http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231810#msg231810
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599473.msg231813#msg231813
Abdelilah
-
The extent to which the appeal to popularity fallacy is being used (in spite of how much a certain poster wants to deny it) is pretty astonishing.
The quran has addressed this, of course
When Moses went to them with our proofs, clear and profound, they said, "This is fabricated magic. We have never heard of this from our ancient ancestors."
-
Peace Amid
I have not been posting for a while as it has been a very busy time for me. However, I have to make a quick comment here.
Your position seems to be that salat must mean ritual prayer because every instance in the hadith describes it as ritual prayer & that nowhere in the hadith does it mean anything else.
However when it is shown to you that there are instances in the quran where the salat clearly means something else, you dismiss it by saying "SO WHAT".
I find this position of yours difficult to understand because while you are demanding that someone show you where in the hadith salat means something other than ritual prayer, the proof from the quran on this passes right over your head.
"WHICH HAS MORE AUTHORITY AND HOLDS MORE WEIGHT IN YOUR VIEW? THE QURAN OR THE HADITH?"
If it is the quran, than you must concede that it is obvious that salat can mean something other than ritual prayer.
If it is the hadith, then I see no reason to continue this discussion.
Imraan
-
Your position seems to be that salat must mean ritual prayer because every instance in the hadith describes it as ritual prayer & that nowhere in the hadith does it mean anything else.
However when it is shown to you that there are instances in the quran where the salat clearly means something else, you dismiss it by saying "SO WHAT".
I find this position of yours difficult to understand because while you are demanding that someone show you where in the hadith salat means something other than ritual prayer, the proof from the quran on this passes right over your head.
No, that is not my position at all. My position is that the tens of thousands of narrations (even the "weak" and "fabricated/inauthentic" ones) depicting Salaat as worshipping God at specific times is compatible with the Qur'an, no matter how you slice it or dice it. There is no evidence in the Qur'an that our Salaat cannot be a ritual prayer. These people keep showing me instances of how the word Salaat is also used in other ways, as if that shows that our Salaat cannot be a ritual. Even you yourself have written in your post there are instances in the quran where the salat clearly means something else. This is indeed very funny.
It seems whatever I say, and no matter how many times I say it, I simply get the same responses over and over again
- Salaat means "bond" and not "prayer."
- Salaat is used in many different ways.
And then they form their conclusion based on those 2 points above that our Salaat absolutely and positively can't be a bond between ourselves and our creator in which we worship him at specific times (a.k.a. "ritual prayer". How can I respond to that kind of faulty reasoning? I can't.
Fact check "progressive1993", and every other person who isn't fluent in Arabic and claims to follow the "Qur'an alone" is in fact USING OUTSIDE SOURCES
- Arabic dictionaries
- Qur'an translations made by fallible human beings
Therefore this will be my last contribution to this particular thread. In fact, I don't need to say anything at all to demonstrate that you are misguided on this matter. All you have to do is browse through the forum and look at all the different "conclusions" regarding Salaat. The level of uncertainty of those who say they don't need any outside source whatsoever to understand the Qur'an better is simply astonishing. The fact that almost every other person on this forum has a different opinion about Salaat is enough evidence (to me) that something is wrong with your position.
Just browse through the forum, mainly the Salaat section. I need not say more.
And may God guide us all.
Best wishes,
Amid -
Salaam,
No, that is not my position at all. My position is that the tens of thousands of narrations (even the "weak" and "fabricated/inauthentic" ones) depicting Salaat as worshipping God at specific times is compatible with the Qur'an, no matter how you slice it or dice it.
Actually it's quite easy to make specific times of something compatible with the Qur'aan -- not a single 'Sunna Hadith' is written before the revelation of Alqur'aan, correct? So no guesswork needed, all that is needed is the information already revealed in Alqur'aan to fit things into.
This is from someone who are still performing the standing-bowing-prostrating meditation (comply with "Fasabbih..." verses anyway, and good as an 'opening' to Quran study -- just make sure you're thinking of nothing else but ALLAH).
I'm on the thought that SalaAt can not be far away from what AlmuSalliyn do (7022-34), if not downright exactly as is. So be warned that SalaAt can not be only the standing-bowing-prostrating prayer in any way. See SalaAt as a system which we should perform continuously/constantly/permanently (7023). A muSalli keeps on racing until the finish line -- otherwise he can't be a muSalli, one who follows the Saabiq (champion, winner) closely.
You've warned others to not leave the ritual, let me warn you and myself and everyone who read this thread that we shall perform these daily
7022 Except AlmuSalliyn,
7023 Those who, they on their SalaAt, are continuing/lasting,
7024 And those who, in their possessions, a right/share known,
7025 For the asker/beggar and the deprived.
7026 And those who confirm with the day of Judgment.
7027 And those who, they, from retribution of their Lord, are afraid/cautious.
7028 Indeed, retribution of their Lord, not safe.
7029 And those who, they, to their private parts, protecting/guarding.
7030 Except on their spouse or maA malakat Aymanuhum, then indeed they are not blamed.
7031 Then whoever wished beyond that, then those, they are the transgressors.
7032 And those who, they, to their deposits/responsibilities and their promises/contracts, are observing.
7033 And those who, they, with their testimonies (shahada), are taking care.
7034 And those who, they on their SalaAt are protecting/guarding.
muSalli = the performer of SalaAt
A muSalli, as we are informed in Alqur'aan, do as above.
If one did all the daily ritual without maintaining all of the above, can he or she be called one of AlmuSalliyn, according to Alqur'aan?
Salaam
-
Peace Amid
No, that is not my position at all. My position is that the tens of thousands of narrations (even the "weak" and "fabricated/inauthentic" ones) depicting Salaat as worshipping God at specific times is compatible with the Qur'an, no matter how you slice it or dice it. There is no evidence in the Qur'an that our Salaat cannot be a ritual prayer. These people keep showing me instances of how the word Salaat is also used in other ways, as if that shows that our Salaat cannot be a ritual. Even you yourself have written in your post there are instances in the quran where the salat clearly means something else. This is indeed very funny.
Of course ritual prayer could be compatible with quran. I don't disgaree. However, there are many other concepts that could be compatible with quran.
I will put this question to you. Do you agree that salat could be ritual prayer and it could be many other things that would be compatible with quran too?
I don't understand what is funny about "there are instances in the quran where the salat clearly means something else." All I am saying there is that it is quite clear that salat can be viewed as having a much more comprehensive meaning within the quran. The challenge is to find a meaning for the concept that encompasses all instances of the term in the quran. What is funny to me is that you claim that salat is ritual prayer & say that you are going to present it to the forum, but you don't do it. So, either you are not sure of your conclusions (if this is the case, then why not just say it and we can try to understand them together as we normally do on this forum), or you are lying and don't have any real evidence from the quran that salat is exclusively ritual prayer. Either way, please stop wafting around in the wind and be man or woman enough to say, "I don't understand this concept. Let's work it out together." Follow this by presenting your findings without the fear of being wrong. We have all been wrong on many issues on this forum. The key is to work together toward a clearer understanding.
It seems whatever I say, and no matter how many times I say it, I simply get the same responses over and over again
- Salaat means "bond" and not "prayer."
- Salaat is used in many different ways.
And then they form their conclusion based on those 2 points above that our Salaat absolutely and positively can't be a bond between ourselves and our creator in which we worship him at specific times (a.k.a. "ritual prayer". How can I respond to that kind of faulty reasoning? I can't.
There are many things to discuss on this issue. However those who truly wish to discuss it must make the proper research before doing so. Also while you see the above as faulty reasoning, I could say your reasoning is faulty in the concept of worship. What is worship? Please provide the arabic equivalent of worship in your opinion. Therefore if your reasoning is proved to be faulty on the issue of worship and you use the strength of this to argue against someone else's reasoning, where does this us. Faulty reasoning accusing faulty reasoning of being faulty based on a false premise, etc, etc, etc. All this because no quranic evidence is presented for taking such a stand.
Fact check "progressive1993", and every other person who isn't fluent in Arabic and claims to follow the "Qur'an alone" is in fact USING OUTSIDE SOURCES
- Arabic dictionaries
- Qur'an translations made by fallible human beings
Of course sources outside the quran are used. There is nothing wrong with this. The issue, in my opinion is that we cannot look outside the quran for a source of law. Fluency in arabic has nothing to do with the subject at hand. There are resources available to ascertain the menaings of concepts presented in the quran. And yes these sources are fallible. That is why the quran is there. God employs a concept called tasreef in the quran through which He turns us away from a wrong course we are taking by showing us with untainted clarity the right course. This is why words are repeated within the quran in order to keep the meaning of terms pure and free from the faults of us humans who are fallible. It is only laziness that prevents any of us from understanding what is revealed in the quran. If we are not willing to do what it takes to acquire knowledge on a subject, we shouldn't present it as an inadequacy of God. That is what we do when we accept that God states in the quran that all the necessary details are contained within the quran, yet we feel that documents such as the hadith which have God sanctioned authority need to provide these details. This presents God as a contradictory being.
First answer the question If the hadith is 100% true, even then, can we draw sources of law from it?
Therefore this will be my last contribution to this particular thread. In fact, I don't need to say anything at all to demonstrate that you are misguided on this matter. All you have to do is browse through the forum and look at all the different "conclusions" regarding Salaat. The level of uncertainty of those who say they don't need any outside source whatsoever to understand the Qur'an better is simply astonishing. The fact that almost every other person on this forum has a different opinion about Salaat is enough evidence (to me) that something is wrong with your position.
Strange indeed that you choose this as your last contribution when you still haven't presented this ritual salat from the quran you promised. Anyway, I gues when in a corner, we do strange things.
Peace
Imraan
-
The fact that you claim that we are "misguided" and "uncertain" and that you keep on continuing in your appeal to popularity is pathetic. When someone provides you with evidence against your point of view, you don't answer or deem it a "misinterpretation". Just because there are disagreements in the points of view around the forum does not mean that anybody here is "uncertain" about the things in The Quran. It is also nonsense that you are portraying people that are using translations and dictionaries as using outside sources for the deen besides The Quran. How else are people going to understand?
4144 Had We made it a non-Arabic reading, they would have said, "If only its signs were made clear!" Non-Arabic and Arabic, say, "For those who trust, it is a guide and healing. As for those who reject, there is deafness in their ears, and they are blind to it. These will be called from a place far away."
26198 Had We sent it down upon some of the foreigners,
26199 And had he read it to them, they would not have trusted with it.551 The Almighty
552 Has made known and taught the The Quran.5679 None can grasp it except the pure (of mind/heart).