Dr Qamar's Haqeeqat Hadith, Haqeeqat Salat and Haqeeqat Saum??
-
salamun alykum, Everyone.
I have read this debate from page one to nineteen and am impressed with some of you people responses and insights. personally i feet Dr QZ has very valid argument and i agree with his results. i have read Adid Safar's article too and i think some of these scholars are on the right track in bringing truth into the light. Thank you all for your informative insights. god bless.
-
salaam dakiya,
Usually "scholars" do not make logical errors and fail to reference their sources. I know from my own experience when I have read Islamic books by Western "scholars" for example, it is rare for them to poorly reference their statements.
QZ certainly does not write like a scholar. Of course, it could just be an extremely bad translation from Urdu to English.
-
Salamun alykkum Wakas,
I have read part of the article provided by you and when i am done i will have better opinion about it. From start Mr Arif has started on the assumption that what ever he is reading is wrong and all he has to do is prove him wrong. his statement about yattatkoon as being guard is doubtful as that word was put there with the notion that its guard against evil. Thats why against evil is inserted in brackets. if the fast gives you the power to guard against evil then once you have guarded against evil the concept of fasting is done with and you don't need to do it throughout your life. I believe reading the quran everyday would do the same trick also. none of the reasons given for fasting could be seen in a society which goes through this fasting month. The debate that since some people do bad things does not make fasting a bad thing is very weak as Dr QZ has better argument then Mr Arif.MR Arif quoted " Thats a good question. The answer is very simple.If i get a speeding ticket, i will have to pay a ne, that will certainly not make be do it again. I will be very very careful..... and subsequently become a cautious and better driver.If a student in school gets a punishment to write a 1000 times that ?he wont make noise in the class?... he will denitely learn from the lesson and will never make noise in the class again...... and subsequently become a good guy. Simple" .
Again these example are also weak as both are punishment after a crime and not to be given to everyone who has not committed those crimes. Same is the case with fasting. It was use as a punishment and not as a deterrent.i will read the whole thing and see if i can pick up on other mistakes of his logic.
Mr QZ might not be very articulate in his writing or his knowledge but one thing he did do a good job of was make a person think on different level, it was not just his article but others well written articleS which made me learn more about islam and now its up to god to guide me in the right direction. peace. -
peace all,
Someone else has written a critique of Qamar Zaman's work on "sawm"
http//www.scribd.com/doc/63347625/az-vs-qz-on-saum
So many errors, as well as missing out Arabic words when it doesn't suit him.
This gay said -
?....SAY i have dedicated a SAUM for Most Gracious so not will i speak to any human today? Page 29This doest mean that Mary cannot go to the market to buy potatoes and tomatoes. Shecan speak as well but if she is asked about her pregnancy, she has to be silent and that is exactly what she did when she simply pointed towards the baby. (in 1929). PAGE 29
Ask him WHERE in the Quran it says she can go to the market and buy pottoes and tomatoes, AND that she CAN SPEAK in her soum? Where does he gets his information from ?
AT PAGE 19 he said
.......so keep away from NISA during their menses....
and his socalled brillian comment is- I guess males also have menses/maheez then."""Here the word is MUKHEZ not KHEZ. Does he know the difference? What is the difference?
Further he states-
s a reminder, look at this again, he takes the AL of AL-RAFASA and puts it in front ofNISA to make it AN-NISA........ whoooooa
Why didn't he explain the ""AL Rafasa" and AN NISA? Is anisa proper noun? Why is the word rafasa and mubashira mentioned ? What is the difference,,,?
;D, come on Wackass, or Dr whatever you call yourself, can you not come up with something better than that? What do you get out of telling lies and twisting words? If you are that much of a scholar, come on Aastana with your so called analysis?
Do you dare to do that or you want to hide here ?
-
B.ob,
I assume you are addressing me with your post.
Firstly, why are you asking me what Dr Zaman meant by XYZ? Go ask him. He has a website and blog for asking questions.
So you dont even understand what he is saying to begin with, but you have written an ,,what do you call it, analysis ?
How do we know you understood anything else? you don't even understand a simple line, but you have given a socalled throughout analysis of,,WHAT,,something you didn't understand?
Also ref to Dr Qamars statement that plural is NOT used after al ghaiti!
No I'm asking you , plz answer the questions, you are criticising Haqiqate Salaat WITHOUT understanding what the author is saying by a simple line to begin with, then you have to explain sand face one of you , toilet, the women etc. Come on don't be shy, all you have to do is to rub your face with sand and answer the questions. If your the one of them who went to toilet ofcrz - Explain it to us, otherwise this sandy thing will remain dusty. I'm also interested to know if you and all your friends who think like you, clean your face with sand, elevated land or high sand or whatever you guys call it.
Do you have the guts to answer my questions?
-
salamun alykum, Everyone.
I have read this debate from page one to nineteen and am impressed with some of you people responses and insights. personally i feet Dr QZ has very valid argument and i agree with his results. i have read Adid Safar's article too and i think some of these scholars are on the right track in bringing truth into the light. Thank you all for your informative insights. god bless.
Problem is that our "Analyser" doesn't even understand what Dr Qamar Wrote on the first page, but he have written a so-called stupid analysis, where he can't even explain the words he have pointed out. when I asked him, he told me to ask Dr Qamar what he meant,
HE is writing an analysis
HE didn't understand what Dr Qamar is saying
HE admit he don't get it ???
Can't get better
-
177 does not answer my questions, you have still not answered my questions. If you wan't credibility for your analysis, at least defend it
However, here I can share some "objections" from other so called scholar, who also banned me later
By*Dr. Shabbir
Date Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 913 am
In Response To Say NO to Fasting (Khaleeq)HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE DOESN'T KNOW.
Dear friends,
Thanks to brothers Adnan Khan and Rumi, I got the link to Dr. Qamar Zaman's HAQEEQAT SOUM & TRUTH ABOUT SOUM. Finally, I have been able to read both versions of the book, Urdu & English.
How can I trust a man who cannot even spell SAUM right? Let it go -)
SAUM is no punishment. The five places where he thinks of SAUM as punishment, are clearly referring to TAQWA (being watchful of Divine commands regarding our conduct). SAUM is prescribed in those instances for being careful of our utterances and actions. Soldiers run around a field every morning for fitness. They may be ordered to run around for attaining discipline as well.
People careless about their utterances and actions need to discipline themselves, and what could be a better way to discipline oneself than through SAUM (self-restraint)?
1015 When Our messages are conveyed to them in all clarity, those who do not expect that they are destined to meet with Us (want to strike a deal with the Messenger). They say, ?Bring us a Qur?an other than this or make some changes in it.? Say (O Prophet), "I cannot possibly change it on my own. I only follow what is revealed to me. If I disobey my Lord, I fear the retribution of an awesome Day."
Dr. Qamar Zaman DOES NOT EVEN KNOW the ultimate objective of SAUM! This fact alone effectively DEMOLISHES his THESIS.
THE ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE OF SAUM IS TO ESTABLISH THE SUPREMACY OF GOD
In the zest to create some furor among gullible Muslims, Dr. Zaman did not have patience enough to see the ultimate objective of the collective SAUM. He stops short at 2183 and closes his eyes to 2185. Finding the word TATTAQUN in the former he breathlessly jumps to MUTTAQI, dwells on it, and gets the reader confounded in and around that term at great length.
Getting empowered against evil (TAQWA) is only an essential attribute for people towards establishing the Supremacy of God on earth.
TAQWA & SAUM
2183 (Creating an ideal society requires discipline and self-restraint among the individuals.) O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Abstinence (from sex and free indulgence in food and drink during the daytime) is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you so that you get empowered against evil (TATTAQUN).GOD?S SUPREMACY & SAUM
2185 The month of Ramadhan has been chosen for this collective training since this is the month in which the Qur?an was revealed, a guidance for mankind, clearly explaining the ?why? of every Rule. And it is the Criterion of right and wrong. Whoever witnesses this month should participate in the program of Abstinence. But if any of you is sick or on a journey, let him practice Abstinence for the same number of days later. God desires for you ease, and He does not desire hardship for you. The postponement is to enable you to complete the period. The objective of this training is to establish the SUPREMACY OF GOD (on earth) for, He has shown you a well-lighted road, and for you to show gratitude.MUSLIMS? FAILURE IS NOT THE FAILURE OF SAUM It is quite true that inspite of all the ritualistic devotions, Muslims are failing miserably in the world. We cannot pull out SAUM for chastisement. Very briefly, the reason is their lack of intellectual inquiry and neglect of education, science and technology. Add to this the N2I poisoning keeping Muslims preoccupied with accumulating THAWAB for the Akhirah by incessant praying and counting names on rosaries. Mullahs keep propagating Ahadith like, ?This world is a carcass and its seeker is a dog.?
THOSE FIVE KINDS OF SAUM AS ?QAMARI PUNISHMENTS?
ONE Self-discipline for failing to help the Hajj congregation (2196).
TWO Self-discipline for unintended murder (492).
THREE Self-discipline for vain utterances of oaths (589)
FOUR Self-discipline for hunting during Hajj (595)
FIVE Self-discipline for vain utterances about wives (582-4)My friends may convey this post to Dr. Qamar Zaman. I do not mean to be trifle-harsh, but here we are dealing with the Book of Allah, the noblest text ever. The man plays with the words and terms of the Qur'an with utmost callousness. Adopting his attitude, one can cancel the entire Book. He would rather rewrite the entire Revelation again and again. I used the words ?plays with the words and terms?. That is a lot more than erring, overstretching and imagining. I advise Dr. Zaman to ask forgiveness of Allah for desecrating His Word.
He assails certain statements and verses, but fails to present the correct meanings. Even where he thinks he is correct, he is awfully wrong. The man?s command over the Arabic language is dismal. I dismiss his so-called book as a pathetic, condemnable distortion of the Qur'an.
dictated not read
http//www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119155966
My reply
By bob
Date Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 659 pmIn Response To SAY "YES" TO SAUM! (*Dr. Shabbir)
Dear Dr Shabbir and friends
You have stated that ?SAUM is prescribed in those instances for being careful of our utterances and actions?. However, in each instance, it is clear that if violations occur, the result will lead to expiations. If one is to exercise caution or be mindful in order to prevent such situations from occurring, why are penalty measures put in place?
According to oxforddictionaries.com, the definition of ?punishment? is given as followsThe infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence ?crime demands just punishment?
In other words, if one commits offenses / wrongful acts, he will receive a penalty accordingly.then observe Abstinence (from food, drink, and sex) for three days, as in Ramadhan. This is the expiation of your (breaking of) intentional oaths. (589)
If one is to break an oath, then the direct consequence for this is to ?observe abstinence? (no sex no food).
Or for expiation, feed some poor at a cost equal to the cost of the animal. If someone has no means to do that, then Abstinence (for three days as in Ramadhan. (Three days of Abstinence from food, drink, and sex, would equal feeding ten poor persons. 589). God has pardoned past violations. An appropriate court shall punish those who persist in violating this law. God is Almighty, Able to requite. (595)It is further classified in this verse, that an individual will be punished for the offense, however repeat offenses be dealt by the judiciary of the state.
If a person is present at the Convention but cannot afford to contribute, he should exercise Abstinence for a total number of ten days, three days there and seven days after coming home. (2196)
Penalty terms have been provisioned ? if one is unable to contribute, he should exercise abstinence (no sex no food)!
It is not conceivable that a believer will slay another believer unless it be by mistake. If one kills a believer by mistake, there is the duty of freeing a believing person from bondage; may it be slavery, extreme poverty, crushing debt or oppression (please refer to the Ayat itself for more criterion) For those who find this settlement beyond their means, two consecutive months of Abstinence, as in the month of Ramadhan, are ordained by way of repentance from God. (492)
This is a mind-blowing assertion; one who commits manslaughter is given an extreme light sentence of ?Abstinence? (no sex no food) for two months. Nevertheless, a sentence would indicate an act of punishment due to an offense committed.The above verse is not stating, one must avoid killing / manslaughter, but providing details of capital punishment of ?Saum? for two months.
For arguments sake, let?s take ?Saum? to be abstinence from sex and food. It is not common for prisoners / inmates to have intimate encounters, would this create self-discipline or enrage the inmate, causing psychological pressure upon the individual?
The fact remains; the manner in which the above ayat is translated suggests that ?Saum? is a punishment.
those of you who have made senseless declarations about their wives (583) let him observe daytime Abstinence (from food, drink and sex as in the month of Ramadhan) for two consecutive months before the couple may intimately touch each other. (584)Again, it is noted, that if you do wrongful acts, you will receive a penalty.
Just to provoke thought amongst the readers ? and going by just the translation, many men make terrible assertions about their wives, and vice versa, why is this commandment only for men?
Does this mean those who do not have self discipline have the potential to commit murder, break oaths, and bad-mouth their spouses?The state determines disciplinary actions and ensures the offender is charged in a just manner receiving a deserved punishment. The state takes responsibility for the rehabilitation for the offender, not only imposing restrictions but providing a program of support to ensure repeat offences are not committed. An individual who commits such a crime, does so by choice, self-discipline (no sex no food) will not change that!
Abstinence is better for you, if you only knew. (2184?)
If ?Saum? is such a blessing, why in the above Ayats is it portrayed as a punishment?
Dr Qamar Zaman has not stated that ?Saum? is a punishment. He has pointed out that the traditional interpretation of ?Saum? is conveyed as a punishment!He has given a definition of what he thinks ?Saum? is that?s why he referred to ?Maryams Saum? in his book. She did not ?abstain? from sex and food, her ?Saum? is the real ?Saum? the same ?Saum? which is prescribed for everyone.
Saum is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you (2183)Let?s take a look at the following mentioned by Dr Shabbir
**ONE Self-discipline for failing to help the Hajj congregation (2196).
If one is unable to afford to contribute to hajj, is self discipline required? How much abstinence (no sex no food) should the victims of the flood in Pakistan / poor people in the world, how much abstinence (no sex no food) should they practice in order to develop self-discipline ? obviously they are unable to contribute, so are they pardoned?
**TWO Self-discipline for unintended murder (492).
Having lack of self-discipline, how likely is it to lead to murder? As stated above, being unable to contribute to hajj and murder require the same level of self-discipline?
Why is a poor person who is unable to contribute to hajj required to have self- discipline, this is also adopted for the murderer, instead of punishment or rehabilitation? The psychological state of a murderer cannot be the same as a poor person. Here the Quran is definitely conveying a deeper message.
**THREE Self-discipline for vain utterances of oaths (589)
Again, the same self-discipline is required for vain utterance of oaths? Can vain utterance of oath be placed in the same category as murder?
**FOUR Self-discipline for hunting during Hajj (595)
A very different type of act, but the same notion of ?Saum? (no sex no food) which should lead to self-discipline? How can refraining from having sex or food change the psychological state of the offenders / law violators?
If the inmates of prisons in the UK and the US were to perform ?Saum? (no sex no food) for 30 days, would they gain self-discipline?**FIVE Self-discipline for vain utterances about wives (582-4)
I don?t think any wife would have sex with her husband if he bad-mouthed her anyway, neither would she cook for him, either way, he would be in a constant state of abstinence (no sex no food).
One must be in a certain psychological state of mind to commit such acts, which are on different levels; you claim all this can be treated by refraining from sex and food?The west who have the highest standard of rehabilitation programs missed out the greatest method given by the Quran, no sex no food? And this of course would result in no murders, no vain utterance about wives, no vain utterance of oaths, and everyone would be able to afford to contribute to hajj?.?
All of the above offenses were committed because of lack of self-discipline?
In these cases ?Saum? is not self-discipline (no sex no food), but a rehabilitation program which is required to treat the psychological state of mind of the law breakers, their intention which initiates the action must stop immediately.
For example, if an individual wanted to loose weight, one would hire a personal trainer. The personal trainer would advise you to stop certain types of foods immediately. Whether dietary or physical exercise, one would then start the program given by him / her. However, the personal trainer would not give the same training program to a body builder, nor would it be the same for a gymnast.*Those who are sick (such as those who suffer from diabetes) how would they attain self-discipline (no sex no food), if they commit such crimes and cannot conform to abstinence (no sex no food) ?
I don?t understand how no sex and no food can lead to taqwa?
Yes we are talking about the noblest book, so illogical conclusions adopted about ?Saum? which are clearly inferior to much better programs created by the west, such conclusions need to be eliminated!http//www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119156033
-
and here you can read some "educated" objections, unlike yours who didn't even understand what Dr Qamar Zaman wrote.
http//www.aastana.com/urdu/viewer.asp?id=45
so, hope to see you and your analysis/objections on "what you didn't understand", on Aastana,you may also call Dr Qamar Zaman. phone no the web side.
-
Bob,
I didn't realise you also breached forum rule 3 by calling me names. Interesting approach you have, pity it is not Quranic.
In any case, let's go through your so-called questions/objections one by one. Please note, if you dodge a question I am not interested in continuing further.
Your first claim was I seemingly do not understand what QZ wrote. If so, please bring your clearest/strongest example which proves I did not understand what QZ wrote. You can read my critique here
http//www.islam-and-muslims.com/Critique-Dr-Zaman-Ablution.pdf
-
Bob,
I didn't realise you also breached forum rule 3 by calling me names. Interesting approach you have, pity it is not Quranic.
In any case, let's go through your so-called questions/objections one by one. Please note, if you dodge a question I am not interested in continuing further.
Your first claim was I seemingly do not understand what QZ wrote. If so, please bring your clearest/strongest example which proves I did not understand what QZ wrote. You can read my critique here
http//www.islam-and-muslims.com/Critique-Dr-Zaman-Ablution.pdf
You writing a so called critique and you're afraid of questions? I know you don't have the answers, that's what I'm pointing out. If you had them, you would answer in 177.
I have read through your "analysis", and you admit you don't understand what Dr Qamar Zaman meant at page 65. but you have given a "critique" without understanding what he meant to begin with, how do we know you understood anything else?
I have asked you questions to see if you understood anything, but you are not answering them.
I don't have to give you any names, your work will define you. You are also invited to Aastana with your "critique" but can't see you there, any special reason for that?
However, I'm still waiting for you to answer the questions. The words you are pointing out,should be explained by you. Read reply 176
-
Bob,
As I suspected would happen, you brought no specific example of where I apparently misunderstood what QZ said.
And the icing on the cake, you make one up
and you admit you don't understand what Dr Qamar Zaman meant at page 65.
I dont even cover page 65 of his work. Allow me to re-quote myself
Secondly, I recommend re-reading what I wrote.
Good luck in your search for the truth, you will need it.
Peace out.
-
Bob,
As I suspected would happen, you brought no specific example of where I apparently misunderstood what QZ said.
And the icing on the cake, you make one up
I dont even cover page 65 of his work. Allow me to re-quote myself
Good luck in your search for the truth, you will need it.
Peace out.
Oh sorry I meant page 69
I asked you-
Please explain what Dr Qamar Mean by "?Kindly note that routine talk is not allowed during Namaaz.?" at page 69
To that you answered-
Firstly, why are you asking me what Dr Zaman meant by XYZ? Go ask him. He has a website and blog for asking questions.
What did you write on page 69?
"- since he calls salat ?namaaz? here, it is hard to differentiate whether his statements are only
applicable to what is commonly known as ?namaaz? or ?salat? also. I assume it only refers to
?namaaz?. For example IF only applicable to ?namaaz? here then yes, there is no routine talk in
?namaaz? as far as I know (afaik). However, if he is implying routine talk is not allowed during salat,
as per AQ, then he should provide Quran references etc"Dear readers, kindly note that this is a book called HAQIQATE SALAAT, not haqiqate NAMAAZ. If our analyser had read through the book, he would understand what this line at page 69 mean and he wouldn't be guessing and assuming too much.
Further, I asked you questions relevant to your claims and pointed out discoveries in Haqiqate Salaaat, as quoted and overlooked by you
YOU SAID
you said- -" but conveniently neglects to mention that immediately after the singular ?al ghaiti? reference it
becomes plural, e.g. ?or you (plural) have touched the women? or ?and you (plural) could not find
water?."To that I asked-Did dr Qamar say plural is NOT used AFTER al ghaiti? where did he say that?Please explain what this verse means when it say" or one of you cometh from offices of nature, or ye have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand or earth"
Do you rub your face with sand when you along with others have touched THE WOMEN AL NISA, or if ONE of you cometh from offices of nature? Or do you mean to say rubbing the face with sand is only a reference to those who touch THE women and not those who ,,no no ,I mean NOT "THE ONE OF YOU" who came from office of nature? So it means rubbing the face with sand is only mandatory for those who touch the women and not "If ye are ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from offices of nature" ?
What is the command to "THE ONE OF YOU who come back from offices of nature"?
why are all these things mentioned at all, if sand is ordered to use only if you (plural) have touched the women? THE WOMEN? who are they? And heyy, what about the private parts? you mean to say The Quran, Allah Paak Almighty,order people to walk around or participate Salaat with stinkydirty private parts, as long as they have a ...errrm ,,a sandy face?
who use sand to clean his face anyway? you?
THE YOU SAID- "P71 ? claims ?would certainly smear the already clean faces? ? I never knew travellers, or those
who had sex or are sick etc have clean faces by default! Erroneous.Claims ?sa?eedan? can mean ?height? ? NQE, NCADR. Although I do know it can mean ?elevated land?, but that is not the same as it meaning ?height? only"AND I ASKED YOU-Please explain this, do you mean one have to clean the face with elevated land? Which is? If we use both the definitions, does it make sense? Rub your face with elevated land, or rub your face with high sand,,aeehhh, sand which is high ? drunk sand ? Please explain
last part of the Aya- For Allah doth blot out sins and forgive again and again.
so what's the "sin" here? Not to clean oneself after toilet ? Or to enter Salaat without cleaning oneself after the toilet? Sorry, it is not about al ghaiti, it is about touching THE women. so what's the sin, not to rub ones face and hands with elevate land/ high sand, or to enter Salaat without a sandy face? Allah's mercy and forgiveness is mentioned after issuing orders to rub ones face with sand (and you now why)...does it make sense at all?
These questions are relevant to your points in your analysis, but you are not answering them.
Asking me to re read your critique over and over again won't help, I have read through it and believe me, I fell asleep. Your second analysis is even worse. At least read through everything Dr Qamar Zaman wrote to understand what he mean by all the terminologies, such as AlRajjal, Khez Mukhez, abnaa etc. And how he use the Ratil tasreef method.
Anyway, next time make sure you have done your homework so you can answer questions and explain your views. Or maybe it is not you who have written it? Because here you seem to be well educated...
Peace in peace out-
-
Peace
There is a difference between "punishment" and "saum (abstinence/self restraint)". A punishment is a penalty or pain imposed or enforced by another person while "saum" in the Quran is self inflicted.
In each case of saum in the Quran, the matter is between the person who abstains and God.
-
Peace,
The attempt by Dr QZ to negate Saum, on the basis of the ?punishment argument?, which is developed without considering all aspects of the issue, is weak.
The verses 492, 589, 595, 584 are cited by Dr QZ to support his theory of Saum being a form of punishment. In the same verses feeding the poor/needy and freeing prisoners are also made available as alternatives to Saum. Therefore going by the definition of the Dr QZ feeding the poor under normal circumstances should be taken as a punishment since in both cases you have to part with something of value. Can the rich consider the command to feed the poor in the Quran as a punishment imposed on them for having money?
Every suffering and sacrifice of a believer arising from the command of God is not a punishment. The Quran commands believers to fight in the path of God and give their wealth in this cause; difficult sacrifices than abstaining from food. Can these sacrifices and suffering be considered as punishment as well? The true believers willingly sacrificed their lives and their wealth and the persons who did not have faith made excuses and refrained from fighting and treated this command as it were a punishment from God.
In Dr QZ?s take on Maryam?s Saum in 1926, he commits the mistake of assuming Qwl/fakooli and kalam/ ukallima, both, as ?speak?. When analyzing a verse it?s important to study the use of important words and roots in that verse and to test the use of same in other verses in the Quran and in which context. Without this kind of in depth analysis one should not try to build major thesis on issues of the Quran.
The Quran has a word for ?speak?, a word for ?converse/communicate? and also a word for ?say?. I have explained the differences of these words in previous posts in other discussions.
