Is Zina related to sex ?

[Mazhar]

salaam Mazhar

243 The ZANI will only marry a ZANIA or she who is a polytheist. And the ZANIA, she will only be married to an ZANI or he who is a polytheist. And such has been made forbidden for the believers.

following your reasoning
if a married women commit illegal intercourse with another man than his husband we have to

1- accuse the husband to be a polytheist and forbid him for example to make Hajj
2- accuse the husband to be a zani and gives him 100 leashes

what is the good response ?

Peace

Salamun alaika,

The Man held guilty of consented illicit sexual intercourse shall not henceforth enter into the contract of Nikah matrimonial bondage except with a woman-convict of illicit sexual intercourse or a polytheist woman.
And no one except a convict-man of illicit sexual intercourse or a polytheist shall marry certain woman held guilty of consented illicit sexual intercourse.
And this marriage entering into Nikah with the man or the woman convicted of illicit sexual intercourse is prohibited for the Believers.

Implication of the injunction is that in case of a married man convicted guilty of Zina-illicit intercourse the bondage of Nikah with the believing woman who is his wife ceases to exist. They stand seperated. The convict is at liberty to enter into marriage with any convict woman on charge of Zina or a polytheist woman. Both such women are prohibited for marriage for the believing men.

The Ayah negates those conjectural gossips which propose stoning to death. Obviously a dead person cannot marry while Qur'aan allows him to marry.

[noshirk]

Salamun alaika,

The Man held guilty of consented illicit sexual intercourse shall not henceforth enter into the contract of Nikah matrimonial bondage except with a woman-convict of illicit sexual intercourse or a polytheist woman.
And no one except a convict-man of illicit sexual intercourse or a polytheist shall marry certain woman held guilty of consented illicit sexual intercourse.
And this marriage entering into Nikah with the man or the woman convicted of illicit sexual intercourse is prohibited for the Believers.

Implication of the injunction is that in case of a married man convicted guilty of Zina-illicit intercourse the bondage of Nikah with the believing woman who is his wife ceases to exist. They stand seperated. The convict is at liberty to enter into marriage with any convict woman on charge of Zina or a polytheist woman. Both such women are prohibited for marriage for the believing men.

The Ayah negates those conjectural gossips which propose stoning to death. Obviously a dead person cannot marry while Qur'aan allows him to marry.

Salaam Mazhar

let suppose that my wife make an aduletery and that i decided to forgive her because of what we already lived together, for our children ...

Now, as you see, i can have a different understanding of word zina than you.

now, if i understand well
you mazhar, with your understanding
you decide to leash my wife 100 leashes while i am not agree
you ask me to divorce her while i am not agree

all that because you think that your understanding is better than mine.

Zina is not adultery.
both my heart and my brain tell me that.
it is my global understanding of Quran that tell me that zina=adultery would be a big anomaly in quran

if zina is adultery then i will probably go to hell simply because it would imply that i have understood nothing in quran.

241 A chapter which We have sent down and imposed, and We have sent down in it clear revelations that you may remember.
when a sourate begin like that, it cannot speak about laws quite impossible to apply.

moreover, you cannot, only with quran, decide exactly from wich point of "flirting", flirting should be considered as adultery.

the problem is much more difficult than you think.
if you accept that hypothesis, then you have also another big debate indisputable proof versus 4 testimonies.

of course, you have also the very big problem of what to apply to the general crime of defaming when it is prooven.
as i already told, defaming a mohasanet of adultery worth 80 leashes. What for defaming of crime....

So, dear mazhar, i am not agree. You haven't the right the leash my wife for what you consider your beliefs.
i am the victim. You have nothing to do between me, my wife, his friend and my god if i decide to forgive her.

Peace

[Mazhar]

Salaam Mazhar

let suppose that my wife make an aduletery and that i decided to forgive her because of what we already lived together, for our children ...

Law does not work on suppositions. And law does not come into play without there being a complainant about the commission of an offence. And the complainant is required to produce evidence to the satisfaction of the court of competence to prove the alleged charge.

And please avoid making false suppositions about your wife. Wives are more courageous in forgiving sexual shortcomings of their husbands than the husbands. No charge of ilicit sex lies against one's own wife unless he produces four eye witnesses to testify the allegation in the court of law or undertakes the procedure prescribed in the Qur'aan in support of his allegation. And if the wife also rebuts that personal evidence of her husband, nothing stands against her.

[god1quran1]

NoShirk,

Can you provide your Quranic understanding of Zina in a clear manner?

thanks.

[noshirk]

NoShirk,

Can you provide your Quranic understanding of Zina in a clear manner?

thanks.

Salaam god1quran1

my actual understanding is this
making zina=defaming someone, accusing him to have commited a crime he didn't committed.

244 And those who accuse the independent female (MOHASANAT)s, then they do not bring forth four witnesses, you shall lash them with eighty lashes, and do not accept their testimony ever; and those are the wicked.

MOHASANAT is women who have sufficient money to be independant. They don't need to work.
So mohsanat can surmont more easely the prejudice of false accusations. In other hand, it is more difficult to make credible accusation against mohasanat.
Giving 80 lashes to defamer of a mohsanat is, i think, a way to calibrate the punition and to show that defaming is a great sin.

415 And those of your women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from among you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or God makes for them a way out.

Here, we have another attitude to have towards women comminting "lewdness". Explaining the meaning of 415 is another debate. We have only to notice that there is no leashes there.

4240 The recompense for a crime shall be its equivalence, but whoever forgives and makes right, then his reward is upon God. He does not like the wrongdoers.
4241 And for any who demand action after being wronged, those are not committing any error.
4242 The error is upon those who oppress the people, and they aggress in the land without cause. For these will be a painful retribution.

in quran, we have a sample of adultery accusation in history of Yusuf. There was no leashes on the story.
1227 ?And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful.?
1228 So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said ?This is from your female planning, your female planning is indeed great!?

there was not also 4 testimonies. There was a proof that Yusuf was not guilty.

By definition, a defamer has no proofs. So at least 4 testimonies are needed in case of lack of proofs.

1276 So he began with their bags before the bag of his brother. Then he brought it out of the bag of his brother. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the system of the king, except that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.

Here again we have a sample that with a proof, we don't need 4 testimonies.

Peace

[pixelrow]

"Zina is not adultery.
both my heart and my brain tell me that. "

Your heart and mind have got nothing to do with it. You are unqualified to know what the word means. . . it simply being misled - not "heart or mind". . . what kind of nonsense is that?

So you have been impressed with Westernism that you come back and change your religion - rather than yourself.

[huruf]

Salaam god1quran1

my actual understanding is this
making zina=defaming someone, accusing him to have commited a crime he didn't committed.

244 And those who accuse the independent female (MOHASANAT)s, then they do not bring forth four witnesses, you shall lash them with eighty lashes, and do not accept their testimony ever; and those are the wicked.

MOHASANAT is women who have sufficient money to be independant. They don't need to work.
So mohsanat can surmont more easely the prejudice of false accusations. In other hand, it is more difficult to make credible accusation against mohasanat.
Giving 80 lashes to defamer of a mohsanat is, i think, a way to calibrate the punition and to show that defaming is a great sin.

415 And those of your women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from among you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or God makes for them a way out.

Here, we have another attitude to have towards women comminting "lewdness". Explaining the meaning of 415 is another debate. We have only to notice that there is no leashes there.

4240 The recompense for a crime shall be its equivalence, but whoever forgives and makes right, then his reward is upon God. He does not like the wrongdoers.
4241 And for any who demand action after being wronged, those are not committing any error.
4242 The error is upon those who oppress the people, and they aggress in the land without cause. For these will be a painful retribution.

in quran, we have a sample of adultery accusation in history of Yusuf. There was no leashes on the story.
1227 ?And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful.?
1228 So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said ?This is from your female planning, your female planning is indeed great!?

there was not also 4 testimonies. There was a proof that Yusuf was not guilty.

By definition, a defamer has no proofs. So at least 4 testimonies are needed in case of lack of proofs.

1276 So he began with their bags before the bag of his brother. Then he brought it out of the bag of his brother. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the system of the king, except that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.

Here again we have a sample that with a proof, we don't need 4 testimonies.

Peace

I think your proposition that zina is not illegal fornication but slander has some merit, seen from the point of view of the 100 lashes versus eighty lashes.

However I disagree with the idea that in 4.15 we are dealing with the same as in the first ayas of sura 24. Fahisha may stretch more than just indecency or sexual morals, but I think that its main content is that, and in 4.15 we are not dealing with any punishment, nor does it speak of keeping women jailed be it in their home or anywhere else, it does not speak about any punishment at all. So we are not dealing with a crime, but if it were a crime, that aspect is not contemplated, but rather the social measures to be taken to protect those women from the dangers of a life of fahisha, and to keep private what should be private.

I think I did a search for the word zina in the Qur'an and could not find an occurrence that could uphold that it is fornication or otherwise, if we take it that in the first ayas of 24. it is not about illegal fornication. And I say there is merit to your understanding from the point of view that in the ayas subsequent to the imposition of 100 lashes it does not expound about the evils of illegal fornication, but surprisingly, quite the opposite does deal with the evils of slander, quite a few ayas pounding on that and promising punishment in this world and the next. But not expounding on the evils of illegal fornication, as should be understood.

In a historical sense, we might come to understand, that it became taken to mean zina, since there was on the other hand the trend to stone adulterers. The jurists of the time might have thought that it was much better to keep to the lashes and to make the proof of adultery as hard as possible in order to keep within bounds the hounds of women on those grounds. So it might have been with a good purpose that the Qur'an was understood that way. The stoning with flimsy evidence is quite something, and in itself actually monumental slander.

May be other people can bring their own observation, reasonings, comments...

Salaam

[unknownuser]

Oke maybe we reject hadith, but for this circumstances, we can use it.

Though hadith contradict in orginal Quranic law, but not so for historical example we can know all Sahabah,hawariyyon, and their culture, like they drink with jar etc.

For word "zina", maybe it translated too "accused" in dictionary, but from hadith we can now, if word "zina" was used by Arabs at that time for "adultery" and still be used until now.

Arabic word has multiple meaning, different sentences, different meaning.
Like the word "hot", if it used in "The weather is hot" and "This chili is hot" the word hot will have different meaning.

Maybe it will be some mistake, if someone get 100 lashes, just because he wrongly accused someone.

[noshirk]

Salaam

"Zina is not adultery.
both my heart and my brain tell me that. "

Your heart and mind have got nothing to do with it. You are unqualified to know what the word means. . . it simply being misled - not "heart or mind". . . what kind of nonsense is that?

So you have been impressed with Westernism that you come back and change your religion - rather than yourself.

Please, take note that my deen is not your deen. I am free to rebuild my deen as i want with my own understanding.
From my understanding, your last remark is Zina.
However, your remark reveals a great confusion in your mind of what is a deen. It is like if you were speaking of my deen while thinking about your own set beliefs and rituals.

Oke maybe we reject hadith, but for this circumstances, we can use it.

Though hadith contradict in orginal Quranic law, but not so for historical example we can know all Sahabah,hawariyyon, and their culture, like they drink with jar etc.

For word "zina", maybe it translated too "accused" in dictionary, but from hadith we can now, if word "zina" was used by Arabs at that time for "adultery" and still be used until now.

Arabic word has multiple meaning, different sentences, different meaning.
Like the word "hot", if it used in "The weather is hot" and "This chili is hot" the word hot will have different meaning.

Maybe it will be some mistake, if someone get 100 lashes, just because he wrongly accused someone.

We have to take account of the hypothesis that Hadiths are not even hadiths. I mean that Bukhari and muslim and other persian storytelles gathered by the abbasid may have built hadiths together from scratch.

In a historical sense, we might come to understand, that it became taken to mean zina, since there was on the other hand the trend to stone adulterers. The jurists of the time might have thought that it was much better to keep to the lashes and to make the proof of adultery as hard as possible in order to keep within bounds the hounds of women on those grounds. So it might have been with a good purpose that the Qur'an was understood that way. The stoning with flimsy evidence is quite something, and in itself actually monumental slander.

May be other people can bring their own observation, reasonings, comments...

Salaam

Salaam Huruf
i thought quite all my life that Quran wanted to make the proof of adultery as hard as possible.
but this explanation always annoyed me. This way of making laws is inconsistent for me with the biggest lesgislator. It is somewhat hypocryte.

243 The ZANI will only marry a ZANIA or she who is a polytheist. And the ZANIA, she will only be married to a ZANI or he who is a polytheist. And such has been made forbidden for the M'ominin ("who are faithfull/take care of Allah Words&quot.

this is a very important verse. Why zani don't marry with a rejector or unbeliever ?

1539 He said ?My Lord, for that by which You have caused me to be misled, I will beautify (OUZAYNANNA) for them what is on the earth, and I will mislead them all.?

Making false zina is the promise of Ibliss. Polytheist are making false Zina on Allah and his words and they are defaming him.
Defaming Humans and defaming Allah are similar "productions" for ill spirits who cannot take care of what they have of truth.
24-3 simply means that liers on Akhira and in Donia are of same matter and marry themselves.

Both has no proofs on what the say. Liers in donia are easy to discover no proofs and no testimonies.

Peace

[pixelrow]

"Please, take note that my deen is not your deen. I am free to rebuild my deen as i want with my own understanding.
From my understanding, your last remark is Zina.
However, your remark reveals a great confusion in your mind of what is a deen. It is like if you were speaking of my deen while thinking about your own set beliefs and rituals."

Obviously - you do not believe in Islam . . . Quran is NOT your book . . . Prophet Muhammad is NOT you Messenger - and Allah in NOT your deity.

Read this . . . people.

Hence why I said - There is no one that does NOT belong to a sect.

---

This is why . . . . you cannot get rid of Hadith - else it is IMPOSSIBLE to understand Quran.

If you forsake Hadith . . . then Quran all of it is rendered meaningless. And you cannot understand even 1 letter. . . . Look you are inventing meanings for Quran - which suit you.

---

[noshirk]

This is why . . . . you cannot get rid of Hadith - else it is IMPOSSIBLE to understand Quran.

If you forsake Hadith . . . then Quran all of it is rendered meaningless. And you cannot understand even 1 letter. . . . Look you are inventing meanings for Quran - which suit you.

---

i take note that
you have other books than book of Allah in your deen.
you cannot understand words of Allah without words of other than Allah.
you take other teachers than allah in your deen.

definitively, your deen is not my deen

Salaam

[pixelrow]

"you have other books than book of Allah in your deen."

Obviously . . . many many many books - yet not one is equal to in status of Quran. Something which you failed to note - but understand. I consider - Lisan al-Arab, Taj al-Uroos fundamental books . . . in towards understanding Arabic and Quran . . . .

---

"you cannot understand words of Allah without words of other than Allah."

True - neither can you . . .

---

"you take other teachers than allah in your deen."

Yes - the Prophet Muhammad. And others.

---

"definitively, your deen is not my deen"

No disagreements there!

[noshirk]

salaam pixelrow

let me understand how you understand this
456 These are the revelations of God, We recite them to you with the truth. So, in which HADITH after God and His revelations do they believe?

and let me understand how, with your others books explaing quran, how you can contest this claim
"Bukhari and Muslim are liars".

and how you can explian me that this hadith sahih is true

here is the link if you want to verify http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&TOCID=372
How your teachers explain you that Muhammad said that end of world will occur 100 years after him ?

please pixelrow, teach me science of your teachers

how can 96-1 be first verse revealed as it is said in this Sahih http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=3&BookID=24&PID=3
and how can 74-1 be first verse revealed as it is said in this sahih http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=2690&BookID=24&PID=4702

how can 4-93 be last verse revealed like it is said in this sahih http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&TOCID=2374
and how can 4-176 be last verse revealed like it is said in this sahih http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&TOCID=2385
and how can 5-3 be last verse revealed like it is said in this sahih http//hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=5&BookID=24&PID=43

it is just that i am interested in other religions and other ways of thinking.

Peace

[Man_of_Faith]

Peace pixelrow,

Simple logic tells me that Arabic as language must have existed before the Quran and the people who the Quran was revealed to must have understood the Arabic of the Quran. Arabic is a language like any other language and it has remained a language also after over 1400 years. It did logically survive even without hadith, why hadith is of importance for the preservation of Arabic at all is beyond me.

So my question is; why is hadith required to understand the passages of the Quran?

Is the Arabic language magically bound to hadith of Muhammad? It sounds pretty absurd to me.

Is not the Quran a pretty easy book to understand as it is? Why add other fallible books (because they were written by men) to understand one perfect book with God's exact wordings? It does not make any sense to me, can you explain? Do you not believe what God dictated to Muhammad via Gibrail?

God bless you

[god1quran1]

Salaam god1quran1

my actual understanding is this
making zina=defaming someone, accusing him to have commited a crime he didn't committed.

OK lets see if this understanding fits with other verses of the Qur'an

244 And those who accuse the independent female (MOHASANAT)s, then they do not bring forth four witnesses, you shall lash them with eighty lashes, and do not accept their testimony ever; and those are the wicked.

MOHASANAT is women who have sufficient money to be independant. They don't need to work.
So mohsanat can surmont more easely the prejudice of false accusations. In other hand, it is more difficult to make credible accusation against mohasanat.
Giving 80 lashes to defamer of a mohsanat is, i think, a way to calibrate the punition and to show that defaming is a great sin.

I am not sure how this verse is relevant to the topic we are discussing. Can we focus on the the Quranic understanding of Zina. Verse 244 does not contain the word zina or its derivative. The issue here is slander.

Please talk about 242 and 243 and explain your understanding on the basis of these verses.

415 And those of your women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from among you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or God makes for them a way out.

Here, we have another attitude to have towards women comminting "lewdness". Explaining the meaning of 415 is another debate. We have only to notice that there is no leashes there.

This is not about adultery but more about prostitution imo. Again there the word zina or its derivative is not used in this verse.

4240 The recompense for a crime shall be its equivalence, but whoever forgives and makes right, then his reward is upon God. He does not like the wrongdoers.
4241 And for any who demand action after being wronged, those are not committing any error.
4242 The error is upon those who oppress the people, and they aggress in the land without cause. For these will be a painful retribution.

I do not under stand the relevance unfortunately. The topic is adultery that we are discussing.

in quran, we have a sample of adultery accusation in history of Yusuf. There was no leashes on the story.
1227 ?And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful.?
1228 So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said ?This is from your female planning, your female planning is indeed great!?

there was not also 4 testimonies. There was a proof that Yusuf was not guilty.

By definition, a defamer has no proofs. So at least 4 testimonies are needed in case of lack of proofs.

OK you have to understand the issue here and it is not Zina. Yusuf is being wrongly accused of sexual assault (meaning there is no consent between the partners) The wording of 1227 and 1228 proves that He is being accused of sexual assault. Adultery is not equal to Sexual assault so again I would argue that the verses you have quoted have no relevance to the issue of Adultery.

1276 So he began with their bags before the bag of his brother. Then he brought it out of the bag of his brother. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the system of the king, except that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.

Here again we have a sample that with a proof, we don't need 4 testimonies.

Again relevance?? Where does it state in 242 and 243 that you need 4 witnesses to punish the adulterers?

Unfortunately you have not quoted a single verse that contains a word derived from the root word "zy nn y" to support your understanding of the issue.

[noshirk]

Unfortunately you have not quoted a single verse that contains a word derived from the root word "zy nn y" to support your understanding of the issue.

Salaam
you asked me to give my understanding not to discuss it.
i did that already and i gave you an abstract

i have not to convince you.
i have not to repeat all what i already said for you.
Peace

[pixelrow]

"Simple logic tells me that Arabic as language must have existed before the Quran and the people who the Quran was revealed to must have understood the Arabic of the Quran. Arabic is a language like any other language and it has remained a language also after over 1400 years. It did logically survive even without hadith, why hadith is of importance for the preservation of Arabic at all is beyond me."

So how did Arabic survive?

---

"So my question is; why is hadith required to understand the passages of the Quran?

Is the Arabic language magically bound to hadith of Muhammad? It sounds pretty absurd to me."

How else do you think Arabic itself is preserved. . . how else is any language preserved? There are no unwritten/written languages that have survived the same way as Arabic has . . . why do you think that is.

---

"Is not the Quran a pretty easy book to understand as it is? Why add other fallible books (because they were written by men) to understand one perfect book with God's exact wordings? It does not make any sense to me, can you explain? Do you not believe what God dictated to Muhammad via Gibrail?"

One needs to know Arabic to understand the Quran. And knowledge of Arabic is preserved by Hadith.

---

It is as simple as that.

[pixelrow]

"456 These are the revelations of God, We recite them to you with the truth. So, in which HADITH after God and His revelations do they believe?"

I have answered the same question twice. . . here the Hadith does NOT refer to Hadith Corpus . . . but anything taken as equivalent to the Quran . . . such Guru Granth Sahib . . . a book that gives knowledge of God - and is considered equal in rank to the Quran . . . Hadith are not that.

---

""Bukhari and Muslim are liars"."

How are they liars? What lie are they charged with? How can one dismiss the charge . . . without know what someone is accused of.

---

"How your teachers explain you that Muhammad said that end of world will occur 100 years after him ?"

I fail to see your objections to this Hadith . . .

Let me present the translation. . .

The Prophet prayed one of the 'lsha' prayer in his last days and after finishing it with Taslim, he stood up and said, "Do you realize (the importance of) this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight would be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night."

Now if could state your objections . . .

---

"please pixelrow, teach me science of your teachers"

What does this mean?

---

After this - you seem to have left something implied . . . if you state it . . .then I will answer.

[noshirk]

"please pixelrow, teach me science of your teachers"

What does this mean?

---

After this - you seem to have left something implied . . . if you state it . . .then I will answer.

Salaam pixelrow

213 And if they are told ?Believe, as the people have believed,? they say ?Shall we believe like the foolish have believed?? No, they are the foolish but they do not know.
214 And if they come across those who have believed, they say ?We believe,? and when they are alone with their devils they say ?We are with you, we were only mocking.?

don't take it bad pixelrow.
From my point of view, you have been astrayed by false arbabs.
931 They have taken their Priests and Monks to be patrons (ARBABS) besides God, and the Messiah, son of Mary, while they were only commanded to serve One god, there is no god except He, be He glorified against what they set up.

Read this about hadiths
26221 Shall I inform you on whom the devils come down?
26222 They come down on every sinful liar.
26223 They claim to listen, but most of them are liars.
316 And from the people, there are those who will purchase a baseless narrative with which to mislead from the path of God without knowledge, and to make it a mockery. These will have a humiliating retribution.

Always from my point of view, you are now in the state of moshrik but i think however that you are a sincere guy.

read this about shirk

1746 And we place shields over their hearts, that they should not understand it, and a deafness in their ears. And if you mention your Lord in the Qur?an alone, they run away turning their backs in aversion.
393 Absolutely, to God is the true system. And those who set up allies besides Him ?We only serve them so that they may bring us closer to God.? God will judge between them in what they dispute. For God does not guide him who is a liar, a rejecter.
3945 And when God alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned besides Him, they rejoice!
4012 This is because when God alone was mentioned, you rejected, but when partners were set up with Him, you believed. Therefore, the judgment is for God, the Most High, the Great.

2165 And from among the people are some who take other than God as equals to Him, they love them as they love God; but those who believe love God more strongly; and when those who were wicked see the retribution, they will see that all power belongs to God, and that God is severe in retribution.
380 Nor does He order you that you take the angels and the prophets as patrons. Would He order you to rejection after you have submitted?
623 Then, their only excuse was to say ?By God, our Lord, we were not polytheists!?
624 See how they lied to themselves; and that which they invented abandoned them.
112 ?That you shall serve none other than God. I am to you from Him a warner and a bearer of good news.?
18110 Say ?I am but a human being like you, being inspired that your god is One god. So whoever looks forward to meeting his Lord, then let him do good works, and not serve anyone besides his Lord.?
3125 And if you ask them ?Who has created the heavens and the earth?? They will say ?God.? Say ?Praise be to God.? Yet, most of them do not know.
416 Say ?I am no more than a human being like you. It is inspired to me that your god is One god, therefore you shall be upright towards Him and seek His forgiveness. And woe to the polytheists.?
4387 And if you asked them who has created them, they would say, ?God.? Why then do they deviate?

Peace

496 O you who believe, if a wicked person comes to you with any news, then you shall investigate it. Lest you harm a people out of ignorance, then you will become regretful over what you have done.

[Man_of_Faith]

Peace,

My point was; do you not think Arabic from this time could have been preserved in any discourse written during that time until today? Why is it restricted only to hadith? It rings a bell that it is illogical reasoning.

Do you think God wrote Quran in a special Arabic that people could not understand without external references, and still call it easy to learn and understand?

Despite "your hadith", obviously traditional understanding is seriously flawed and there are many errors in the interpretation. Ask noshirk about it because he is more well-versed in the Arabic language than me and he is doing research in the area. They used logical deduction to most part and assist it with Arabic dictionaries. Why do they need hadith in their work, can you tell me?

We are obviously not overly interested in Muhammad but God. We serve God and we do try to imitate the life of Muhammad over 1400 years ago based on questionable hearsay. His life can teach us something, but for that the Quran is sufficient, is it not?

In this thread brother noshirk is trying to investigate if there is any flaw in the traditional understanding as we believe God does not give us irrational and illogical rules to live by. If there is no flaw, well then we must rethink our own viewpoint of the issue and see where we are wrong ourselves.

Despite this, I am sure the traditional understanding is wrong almost all the time.

See 434 for example, does it sound rational that God gave a husband right to beat his wife?

God bless you