I renounced my faith in the divinity of the Qur'an today

good_logic

Peace nimnimak.

I will let you provide me with verses that say Otherwise.

Peace.

nimnimak_11

Failthful-Jinn

If the Qur'an is direct from God how can it be inconsistent?!

It cannot. This would lead us to either a) reject the whole book or b) think that it's been tampered with and there is some truth in there as well as falsehood

Surely if it is the direct word of God you must accept and follow every single letter as perfect and unchangeable wisdom for humanity.

Yes. But We have reason. Whether we accept/reject a scripture should be based on reason. Interpretation of scripture is not as consistent as reason could be IMO. Thus when a verse is read that does not make sense (and never does), then either the scripture is outright wrong thus not diving in inspiration at the particular point OR the interpretation/translation is wrong.

How do you decide which part is consistent and which part is inconsistent?

You use reason and logic.

Zulf

We should allow for this possibility, while not favoring either for or against. This is hard.

You say this but I assume your a Muslim? Which means your belief is making the claim that God is real and then an even bigger leap that the Qur'an is the direct and infallible word of your God.

Don't assume I'm a Muslim. What is a Muslim according to you anyway? This should be clear first.

What is God? Personally, my idea about what God is, is not like the typical fatherly figure in the sky. It is more towards an aware, intelligent, life-force which is always at work, and the we are "tiny extensions" of. I really do not subscribe to the common religions of today, and would not like to identify myself with any one of them. Allah (which to me is a more neutral word, since I was not raised in a Muslim country) is way beyond what people can imagine. Allah is not some God figure full of wrath.

But, if the quran turnes out to be false (not from the creating intelligent force of everything/Allah), then that is good... because it is true. And if the quran turns out to be true, then that is also good, coz it is true.
We must let go of the FEAR of the possibility that the quran is false, and of the possibility that the quran is true. Fear resists truth, in any direction. Fear is created by the mind, our dear mind.

cheers

The whole thing about fear you're writing is just your personal opinion. Fear is created by the mind and so is belief.

It is my personal opinion, but that doesn't mean it is not the reality of our minds' make up and characteristic. This opinion comes from observation and study, and I'm certainly not the only one who has this opinion. Have you ever looked into your mind and investigated how it works? I have.
In case you or anyone think they don't have fears in the mind, or that fears don't play a huge part in their minds, then those people are simply not aware enough about the workings of their mind to realize this.

You are right. Fears and beliefs are indeed created by the mind, and also nurtured and kept alive there. They arise from personal experiences, up-bringing, interpretation of events etc etc. The key is to see the mind and its thoughts, beliefs, fears etc for what they are.... i.e. just a bunch of programs (often limiting) running in the mind. Our mind is a tool, we are not our minds, although loads of people think so, and are subsequently prisoners to the minds whims.

Peace FJ

Zulf

Yes. But We have reason. Whether we accept/reject a scripture should be based on reason. Interpretation of scripture is not as consistent as reason could be IMO. Thus when a verse is read that does not make sense (and never does), then either the scripture is outright wrong thus not diving in inspiration at the particular point OR the interpretation/translation is wrong.

Whether one believes the scripture is correct or not, the common interpretations and translations of it is unfortunately many times uninspired, biased and simply without sense. That's for sure.

nimnimak_11

Peace Good logic

I will let you provide me with verses that say Otherwise.

Would it not be logical of me to say that the burden of proof is upon you? You are suggesting that something is prohibited in the Quran. I am saying that there is no such prohibition. I don't need to prove anything. You need to prove that there is this prohibition since nothing is prohibited unless specified/implied sufficiently via the Quran.

Please respond with the following in mind

"Ungarding the furooj (private parts) does not mean to have sex."
"Having sex is amongst the things that one does by ungarding their private parts."
"The restriction of who we can unguard our private parts have been narrowed to the MMA (Ma Malekat Aymunkum) and the zawj."
If it is your claim that we cannot engage in sexual activity with the MMA, then the burden of proof is upon you. You must show that there are restrictions conveying how much, in what way and when one can ungaurd their private parts to the MMA

With regards to the MMA

Please bear in mind that at 424 we cannot marry the muhsinat women untill they are of MMA
Also bear in mind that since we can only unguard our private parts to the zawj or the MMA, this means that we cannot allow doctors/surgeons to operate on our private parts or caretakers to look after us with regards to our private parts UNLESS the doctors/surgeons etc. are of either zawj or MMA. Thus if you understand MMA to exclusively mean wife, this causes problems.

My understanding is that the MMA are those whom your oaths possess. This is a literal translation of MMA and it encompass anything from doctors to girlfriends.

This makes sense with regards to the prohibition of the muhsinat at 424 and whether doctors can operate on our private parts.

The following links may be of interest to you

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604063.0

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599777.750

Peace

nimnimak_11

Whether one believes the scripture is correct or not, the common interpretations and translations of it is unfortunately many times uninspired, biased and simply without sense. That's for sure.

Yes that is true.

Edited (I did not read the previous (zulf's) post properly. Really, really sorry zulf)

nimnimak_11

I see you chose to ignore the rest of my points. Why is that?

Sahih International Translation

O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to marry her, only for you, excluding the believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. (3350)

Clearly we can see here that female war captives are lawful for sex.

I don't have a Qur'an verse to affirm the prophet's marriage to Aisha and her consummation but hadith can be recognized as historical documents if not as divine documents. Of course I'm sure as a Qur'an alone Muslim you will flat out deny anything to besmirch the character of your prophet so I won't even get into that and instead I'll focus on the sex with with female war captives.

In addition I also find it amusing that the Prophet receives special privileges in marriage rights excluding the other believers.

Not exactly, check my post to good logic

good_logic

Peace nimnimak.

Is not the burden of proof also on the one that suggest differently also?

What you provided is your understanding of MMA, not mine. Your understanding of"sex" and your understanding of the points you mentioned.

I have read the links, they do not convince me otherwise either.

I suggest for everyone to study Qoran and make up their own mind on what MMA is and is not. It seems to mean different " what you are responsible for" in different verses with different contexts.

If you choose to have sex outside " marriage/oath...However it is taken" it is up to you.I am not your guardian.

Peace.

nimnimak_11

Peace good logic

Is not the burden of proof also on the one that suggest differently also?

Say you were to suggest....beef is prohibited and I say no it is not. What do I have to prove? Should you not be the one pointing to verses?

Hence I have no burden of proof. But if I am given proof, I either acknowledge it, or the burden of proving it's falseness will fall on me.

I have read the links, they do not convince me otherwise either.

I suggest for everyone to study Qoran and make up their own mind on what MMA is and is not. It seems to mean different " what you are responsible for" in different verses with different contexts.

If you choose to have sex outside " marriage/oath...However it is taken" it is up to you.I am not your guardian.

Fair enough, and I will not further debate with you regarding this as this is not the purpose of this thread.
But should you make assertions such as sex is exclusive to marriage, you should provide evidence or reason for this. Without this, beliefs become dogmas and truths may become buried.

Peace

good_logic

Peace nimnimak.

Nevertheless, I shall provide the verses that back up my understanding

You shall encourage those of you who are single to get married. They may marry the righteous among your male and female servants, if they are poor. God will enrich them from His grace. God is Bounteous, Knower.

Those who cannot afford to get married shall maintain morality/chastity until God provides for them from His grace. Those among your servants who wish to be freed in order to marry, you shall grant them their wish, once you realize that they are honest. And give them from God's money that He has bestowed upon you. You shall not force your girls to commit prostitution, seeking the materials of this world, if they wish to be chaste. If anyone forces them, then God, seeing that they are forced, is Forgiver, Merciful.

Like you said in another thread, it is a question of " morality" Quote
As far as I know, so long as he has a good character (is morally strong and beneficient and also rational) , he is a submitter. The Quran in my opinion aids in our understanding/speed of progress with regards to morality.

Peace.

nimnimak_11

Peace Good Logic

Like you said in another thread, it is a question of " morality" Quote
As far as I know, so long as he has a good character (is morally strong and beneficient and also rational) , he is a submitter. The Quran in my opinion aids in our understanding/speed of progress with regards to morality.

Indeed it is. competence/self-sufficiency/strength and providence for others/beneficence
encompassed by zikr (which augments those traits and in turn those traits augments the zikr IMO)

If I understand you correctly, your suggestion is that 2433 tells us not to have sex until we get married. IMO that is a bad translation as it strays from the literal translation with preconceived notions.

The root of the word translated as chaste is Ayn-Fa-Fa = to abstain from what is unlawful, be abstinent, restrain.

None of the above means chaste. That is just an insertion from interpretors.
So here is a more literal translation of 2433

And let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain until God enriches them of His Bounty...

Abstain from what? Sex, touching in anyway, living together, becoming pregnant (this can be done without sex i.e sperm donor)
So how do we come to understand what we are supposed to abstain from? The clue is in the verse.

Let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain untill God enriches them of His Bounty

IMO we are told, let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain from marriage untill God enriches them of His Bounty

This makes the most sense when you consider the other options

let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain from sex untill God enriches them of His Bounty
let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain from getting pregnant untill God enriches them of His Bounty
let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain from marriage untill God enriches them of His Bounty.

What fits best? In particular when you consider the part that follows abstain "untill God enriches them of His Bounty" and 2432? Can it be other than

let those who are not able to marry continue to abstain from marriage untill God enriches them of His Bounty?

good_logic

Peace nimnimak.

How can you abstain from marriage if you cannot marry? You have no choice! you cannot marry. You are already abstaining.

So obviously you abstain from something else that you are able to do, even though you cannot get married!

How can you abstain from getting pregnant if you are male? Remember GOD is addressing both sexes.

To me that leaves only one possibility.

Peace.

nimnimak_11

Peace nimnimak.

How can you abstain from marriage if you cannot marry? You have no choice! you cannot marry. You are already abstaining.

So obviously you abstain from something else that you are able to do, even though you cannot get married!

How can you abstain from getting pregnant if you are male? Remember GOD is addressing both sexes.

To me that leaves only one possibility.

Peace.

I think your right with regards to abstain not being able to refer to marriage (Someone will be very angry with me) I originally understood the verse to mean those who don't have the means for marriage rather than those who cannot find marriage. This makes a lot of difference in my understanding. The clue in the verse 2433 with regards to what abstain/refrain must be referring to was that it must relate to God enriching us with his bounty. I didn't think sex would make sense. I mean how could God enrich us of his bounty such that sexual abstinence could be ended.

I thought marriage did because wealth is needed for marriage but not for sex and since it's addressing those who can't afford marriage but can still theoretically and legally do it, it is making clear....abstain from marriage until you can afford to marry.

Here is what I originally said

Savage_carrot suggested that only those who have the means to marry, can marry thus the abstaining here refers to something other than marriage since the individual who lacks the means for marriage cannot marry and it is thus impossible.
The verse is referring to those who don't have the means for marriage. Is the word means in this verse referring to necessary requirements for marriage such as witnesses and a relevant authority to enforce the marriage or is it referring to something like wealth? I think that it refers to something like wealth since witness and other conditions are almost always available and so marriage is possible as opposed to impossible. This is further implied by the following 2433 "...until God enriches them of His Bounty" I don't think one's increase in bounties corresponds to witness, documentation and so on.

Abstain remains open though to what it could be referring to. We should look at it in the context and use our aql for it to make sense. Any ideas how sex might be related to God enriching us of his Bounties? I have an idea but I need to cross-reference and think about it more to see if it's reasonable then I will post it here. I'l also have to make changes to the summary thread.

But I can't deny the good logic involved here. Your right. It does not refer to marriage. Thanks.

farida

I thought marriage did because wealth is needed for marriage but not for sex and since it's addressing those who can't afford marriage but can still theoretically and legally do it, it is making clear....abstain from marriage until you can afford to marry.

Salaam

I must admit that I have only read parts of this thread and one question comes to my mind could marriage/nikkah mean
an intention to start a family(setting up a house hold) where you take someone into nikkah?

Peace

nimnimak_11

Salaam

I must admit that I have only read parts of this thread and one question comes to my mind could marriage/nikkah mean
an intention to start a family(setting up a house hold) where you take someone into nikkah?

Peace

Salam Farida

Originally I thought that the primary purpose for marriage was to establish and document a life-long commitment to one. But the more I read verses about marriage, the more I get the impression that nikah, is primarily for establishing rights and legalities with regards to inheritance and starting a family who would come to receive inheritance. So technically it's more about the establishment of family which necessarily or ideally needs a life-long partner then it is to establish a life-long partner since a family would benefit more from a marriage than a couple with no children.

Faithful-Jinn

Peace Faithful-Jinn.

I will clarify again what I said. Sex is lawful so long as you are married to each other

There are numerous definitions of " marriage" depending of what tradition/people/part of the world.... you belong.

The verse you provided does not allow sex outside marriage.

Peace.

ignore

That is what you're doing. No evidence to support your claim and you totally ignored my own evidence by dismissing the long accepted meanings of the words.

This is one problem I have with many people on this forum. People think they can create new meanings for words and dismiss the age old usage as if they have the true meaning that God intended and that everyone else is wrong.

You can make the Qur'an say anything you want if you reinterpret all the words but there is no denying that since it was revealed and up until today there has been accepted meanings of certain words and verses and that many of these meanings are likely how Muhammad and the Sahaba applied them originally.

I mean I can speak to you and say that a verse says "He Allah is One" and then you can tell me that Allah really means not a god and that one really means three and then we just have nonsense and conjecture. This is ridiculous.

nimnimak_11

ignore

That is what you're doing. No evidence to support your claim and you totally ignored my own evidence by dismissing the long accepted meanings of the words.

This is one problem I have with many people on this forum. People think they can create new meanings for words and dismiss the age old usage as if they have the true meaning that God intended and that everyone else is wrong.

You can make the Qur'an say anything you want if you reinterpret all the words but there is no denying that since it was revealed and up until today there has been accepted meanings of certain words and verses and that many of these meanings are likely how Muhammad and the Sahaba applied them originally.

I mean I can speak to you and say that a verse says "He Allah is One" and then you can tell me that Allah really means not a god and that one really means three and then we just have nonsense and conjecture. This is ridiculous.

and that's when it becomes established that someone is likely just making things up. This may be sometimes be the case here but not all the time.

farida

Salam Farida

Originally I thought that the primary purpose for marriage was to establish and document a life-long commitment to one. But the more I read verses about marriage, the more I get the impression that nikah, is primarily for establishing rights and legalities with regards to inheritance and starting a family who would come to receive inheritance. So technically it's more about the establishment of family which necessarily or ideally needs a life-long partner then it is to establish a life-long partner since a family would benefit more from a marriage than a couple with no children.

Salaam nimnimak

I too deduce similar understandings.
At the moment there are at least three threads running on this subject so its will condfuse things if I start discussing MMK but I agree with your view based on the Qur'an on this subject, even though I am a woman o .

Bigmo

Salam Farida

Originally I thought that the primary purpose for marriage was to establish and document a life-long commitment to one. But the more I read verses about marriage, the more I get the impression that nikah, is primarily for establishing rights and legalities with regards to inheritance and starting a family who would come to receive inheritance. So technically it's more about the establishment of family which necessarily or ideally needs a life-long partner then it is to establish a life-long partner since a family would benefit more from a marriage than a couple with no children.

Among His proofs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquility and contentment with each other, and He placed in your hearts love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are sufficient proofs for people who think.

nimnimak_11

Salaam nimnimak

I too deduce similar understandings.
At the moment there are at least three threads running on this subject so its will condfuse things if I start discussing MMK but I agree with your view based on the Qur'an on this subject, even though I am a woman o .

Salam Farida

Thanks. I'm still waiting on the discussion with others to end in the other thread (I still need to hear back from Wakas to see if he has anything to add. Plus I need to respond to noon and mazhar) and then I'm planning on doing an update on the summary. Plus I need to respond to good logic but I'l do it in the other thread and post the link to him in this thread so as not to lead this conversation purely in that direction. I have an answer to him, but I want to triple check it first.

Salam Bigmo

Among His proofs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquility and contentment with each other, and He placed in your hearts love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are sufficient proofs for people who think.

I'm not suggesting that marriage is exclusively for children and the start of families. I think it is of more benefit and relevance to a couple who plan on children (whether this be natural pregnancy or adoption) than a couple who do not have this same goal in mind.

Love and affection, tranquility and contentment can occur outside of marriage and a proposal/agreement to marriage can enhance this and add to the security of this.

But I don't think that it can be said that a couple who don't have wealth and resources should try for a child outside of marriage. Here I think it becomes more important, relevant and necessary that a couple marry. Inheritance and rights plus identity of the child ought to be established so that ideally, the child will not become an orphan.

I think there is a clear seperation and distinction between sexual activity and trying for a child and in my opinion the waiting periods and the refrain/abstain at 2433 must be referring to those that seek to start a family or try for a child. I say this because I have the following in mind

There are sperm donors and there are egg donors. Someone who seeks to have children, can do so without any sexual activity. For example men who want children could go after an egg donor and women who want children could go after a sperm donor. A couple can even be each other's donors and get pregnant without any sexual activity and without marrying and without having the resources to bring up their respective children.

Thus it needs to be made clear what the Quran's intention is with regards to the waiting periods, the purpose of nikah and what one should refrain/abstain from before marriage. In my opinion since the two are distinguishable (trying for children and sexual activity) it needs to be determined which the Quran is referring to and in my opinion, it is with regards to children andd pregnancies rather than sexual activity.