Do you take the Qur'an literally?
-
Peace all, Peace Samira1234,
Upon what evidence do you base your assertion?
'Azab' clearly means 'torture'. How else would you translate it? A word like '3iqaab' can mean punishment. 'Azab' can mean something like torment, agony, or torture. Unless you have another translation.
-
'Azab' clearly means 'torture'. How else would you translate it? A word like '3iqaab' can mean punishment. 'Azab' can mean something like torment, agony, or torture. Unless you have another translation.
Peace Samira1234
Let me make it clear that I am not a scholar but just a student who is trying to understand Quran without using other's glasses. The purpose of discussion is to gain better understanding of Quran and not to defeat anyone.To understand AZAB lets reflect on following verses in Quran
25 Word "Muflihoon" is used for those who attain certain attributes given at 22 to 24
Falahun is a farmer and muflihoon are those who are rewarded for their hard work with good
crops and yields27 Word "AZAB" is used for those who are in opposition to "believers"
Please reflect on Muflihoon and Azab in these verses. Both words have been used in comparison to eachother.
Does AZAB means torture or deprivation of the pleasant things?
-
I have issues regarding this verse. What is your opinion regarding the below verse?
242 The woman or man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their torture.
The translators usually chooses the word 'punishment' as a translation for the Arabic word ?Azabahuma? which is a big error. The exact meaning of the word azabahuma is ?the torture of both of them?. Well, that doesn't sound much of a merciful God. Apparently both the public humiliation and real physical pain especially, to the person, is collectively being torture for that person. And Allah does not only sanction torture and that too for public view, but He is also concerned that the human feeling of the people who implement His orders might succumb to their feelings, hence they are warned against it, by mentioning the Last Day (do not be taken by pity for them in the system of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day).
Please give your input regarding the above verse.
Peace.
Peace Samira1234
What is your opinion about word ZANI as discussed in following thread
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605270.msg325693#msg325693 -
It's supposed to be two, and three, and four. Instead of 'and' you translated 'wa' as 'or'. That's an error you made.
And now the sentence looks funny. Marry two, and three, and four? How all the three numericals at once?Peace.
Peace Samira1234
Thank you, I agree that your translation makes no sense, could it be that "or" is grammatically correct?
God bless you
peace
-
One of the biggest problems I still have is why an atheist who dedicates his whole life to help other people would be thrown in Hell for eternity. That simply doesn't make sense to me whatsoever. But I believe that God is just and that this will not be the case. I know if instead of being born to Turkish parents, I was born in Mexico , I wouldn't have been a Muslim today. There is no question. So just because you were born in Saudi Arabia, Turkey or Pakistan does not and cannot guarantee you a free ticket to Paradise.
In life, we will be that to which we are destined. My parents arrived to the US from Mexico just a couple of months before my birth, and I was meant to be nothing more than a person who submits to the will of God, a Muslim. That was and is God's destiny. Praise be to God.
-
Samir a,
To answer the question about the atheist, ask the question "Does quran state anywhere that being Muslim is dependent on believing in God?"
Imraan
-
Quran is not speaking of belief but it is speaking of (spiritual) affinity. And the ones who are harshly threatened with Hell are fabricators and such people who are false and hypocritical. This is because the word 'kafar' is hijacked and to connote something which is does not. That is just the same as amen/iman which means to acknowledge/accept/have affinity with something rather than believe. You can try to research on its usage in the past in Hebrew or trust me on the "innate letter knowledge".
It is just deceived people who argue something else. People who know amen's historical usage ought to know it does not reflect belief. It is said after prayer because you are supposed to accept what you just said and live accordingly. It can also be repeated after a cleric reads up guiding information to mark that you acknowledge something.
Faith and harmony with you
-
Peace hawk99
Peace Samira1234
Thank you, I agree that your translation makes no sense, could it be that "or" is grammatically correct?
I didn't know 'wa' had any alternate meaning. Looks like people are ready to change words to keep their grammatical ideas in a sentence intact. I am just saying. Perhaps you can explain how you came to your point that 'wa' meaning as 'or' is more grammatically correct?
Peace.
-
Peace hawk99
I didn't know 'wa' had any alternate meaning. Looks like people are ready to change words to keep their grammatical ideas in a sentence intact. I am just saying. Perhaps you can explain how you came to your point that 'wa' meaning as 'or' is more grammatically correct?
Peace.
Peace Samira1234
My understanding is as follows
The Arabic word for 'OR' is pronounced 'Ow'.
And the Arabic word for 'AND' is pronounced 'Wa'.Or =
And =Arabic speaking folks may give a better understanding, I'm just learning.
God bless you
peace
-
Hello hawk99,
My understanding is as follows
The Arabic word for 'OR' is pronounced 'Ow'.
And the Arabic word for 'AND' is pronounced 'Wa'.Or =
And =Yes, so we shouldn't confuse the two, or add an extra 'alif' where it was not there. We shouldn't try to force our grammatical ideas where it is not possible. Unless someone has a better interpretation.
Peace.
-
Hello hawk99,
Yes, so we shouldn't confuse the two, or add an extra 'alif' where it was not there. We shouldn't try to force our grammatical ideas where it is not possible. Unless someone has a better interpretation.
Peace.
Peace Samira1234
I do not understand the above, please give your translation of 4/3.
God bless
peace
-
Hello hawk99,
I didn't change much in the interpretation of 43, just used the word 'and' for 'wa' in place of the commonly used translation of it, which is 'or'.
43 And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphans, then marry those that please you of women, two and three and four...
The sentence is incredibly confusing. How can a person marry two AND three AND four? That's a clear error. Unless someone can explain to me why it is not.
Besides, why is fear of injustice towards orphans followed by marrying women that pleases him, in multiple numbers? That's a strange concept, which has led to various interpretations for it and created more injustice in the society due to confusion, and which has led to reformer Muslims like Edip saying the women are widows whom to marry, which is most likely an invention, since he also did an interpretation change for verse 4127, where he translated 'Yataman Nisaa' as 'orphans' mothers'. Some others see 'Yataman Nisaa' as 'orphan women' or 'orphans' women'. I am not sure personally.
Peace.
-
Peace Samira1234
Let me make it clear that I am not a scholar but just a student who is trying to understand Quran without using other's glasses. The purpose of discussion is to gain better understanding of Quran and not to defeat anyone.To understand AZAB lets reflect on following verses in Quran
25 Word "Muflihoon" is used for those who attain certain attributes given at 22 to 24
Falahun is a farmer and muflihoon are those who are rewarded for their hard work with good
crops and yields27 Word "AZAB" is used for those who are in opposition to "believers"
Please reflect on Muflihoon and Azab in these verses. Both words have been used in comparison to eachother.
Does AZAB means torture or deprivation of the pleasant things?
I am kind of confused. Arabic is a difficult language to follow up on. The same word in a different context can apparently means a more different meaning.
I want you to look up on the word 'Azabahuma', whose meaning seems to be ?the torture of both of them?, in the context of 242. This exact word in a context. And if a different interpretation is used, then I want to see how this word can be translated that way.
Peace.
-
Hello Novice,
Peace Samira1234
What is your opinion about word ZANI as discussed in following thread
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605270.msg325693#msg325693This seems to require more study. Some conflicting ideas have been proposed in the thread, as follows
Salaam
arabic is a very strange language.zina have meaning of decoration. defaming is a false decoration of reality.
Quran forbid showing forouj to other than spouses and malakat aymanoukom (70-29 and 70-30) but ask to show zina to many (24-31) and to take our zina to masjid
731 O Children of Adam, dress nicely at every temple (TAKE YOUR ZINA), and eat and drink and do not indulge; He does not like the indulgers.Peace
Root
Words from this Root in the Grand Qur'aan
a) Total occurrences 24
b) No of constructions 8
(ش . .The basic perception infolded in the Root is that of indulging in excessive, immoderate, or beyond measure with reference to generally or universally accepted norms, limits and measures of behaviour. The perception and meanings of the Root have built in subjective and relational element. Moreover, since the excessive, immoderate and extremist tendencies are universally looked upon with dislike, abomination, repulsiveness, and unacceptability, therefore, it has inherent negative element. For reason of built in subjective and relational element, it is the context and related field which will determine and expose its meanings with reference to that context and in definite state generally about the irrational, unnatural, obscene, pervert and excessively emotional sexual conduct.
There is no active participle and passive participle in it. On the contrary Zina (ا is for illegal intercourse; premarital or extramarital.
is a Verbal Noun signifying an act only. It denotes the act of intercourse and a state where the male genitalia intercourses with female genitalia. It does not refer to the doer of act as to who are they who are performing intercourse.
The woman performing in the act of intercourse is Active Participle
and the man performing in the act of intercourse is also Active Participle .This act of intercourse is certainly but any thing regarded as is not Zina. All ilicit sexual activities minus Zina are . Similarly rape is not Zina, whether done by a man or by a woman or women with a man, since Zina is only with mutual consent.
A couple days back one commentator changed the phrase interpretation of 'Ya AAibadiya' from 'O my servants' to 'O my allegiants'. This gets confusing to me, especially since I do not have that strong hold of knowledge in Arabic. So I am not sure regarding them.
Peace.
-
Only with one condition can this be a truly fulfilling and satisfying alternate lifestyle
=> This simply isn't true. I agree for most of us what you say would be the only valid terms for it, but you are ignoring there are people out there who are an exception to your rule and perfectly happy with it.
Yeah there are exceptions. I have been also watching documentaries on polyandry, practiced such as in South India and Tibet, where the men in several families seem to be perfectly alright sharing their wife among two or three or more men in a polyandrous setting. The reasons for them there are
-
By not allowing land to be split between brothers, the families retained farms sufficiently large to continue supporting their family. A compelling socio-biological justification for polyandry is that it makes good genetic sense for brothers to raise one another's children since a brother possesses the next closest gene pool to their own.
-
The mountainous terrain makes some of the farm land difficult to farm, requiring more physical strength. Women take multiple husbands because they are strong and able to help tend the land.
So mainly in the rural areas polyandry is literally important for their survival. So that is why I had mentioned earlier, either no polygamy at all or polygamy for both the genders being equally legalized. Both genders have just as much substantial evidence for why their side of case should be approved for. It makes no sense, from a real world perspective, to legalize polygamy for only one gender for religious-based reasons, that too giving one-sided real-world reasoning to justify it, since that would only create distress and suffering in a society, since the collective possible reasoning and real-world cases is not looked at and compared with, and the reasons for the other gender to choose polygamy is thwarted aside, simply on basis of 'because God said so'.
Peace.
-
-
Harmony be with you Samira,
The ambiguity is due to errors in what the passages really say. Arabic is not strange, only the fools who have tried to interpret it and derived lots of strange practices and guesswork from it. Despite being a foreigner to the language I am fascinated by its simplicity due to that roots have only three letters and they are all based on a morpheme level meaning. It is a quite primitive but also very logical due to its precision and meanings derived straight out of the very letters.
Have faith
-
Peace,
Words don't have different meanings in different contexts. A clear, consistent text requires clear, consistent language. Context does not change meanings, it simply shows what a consistent meaning should be applied to.
Imraan
-
Oh we have found that meaning, don't worry, cut I doubt that it does interest you. You seem to catch up to any straw to just disqualify anythign that is answered to you and instead speak at interpretation acrobatics, but reject that what you have been fed, or you say so, about the Qur'an may have been indeed interpretation acrobatics. A problem you will not have with the West which they have rally been saints all along.
I know I may have been coming across as biased against the Quran. Which I am, actually. My biasness is mainly against how the vast majority of Muslims seem to be interpreting the Quran. There are simply too many ways apparently in which one can choose to interpret the Quran, or even a letter within a word to change the course of the entire meaning. I have a feeling the majority of the people's way of interpreting is wrong on several levels, but many of them are stuck since they simply haven't seen something better, and simpler, which is verifiable. I am going with the notion currently that the Quran have indeed been divinely inspired, at least to an extent, at some point in history. If I find out later it wasn't, well, that's another story, for the later time being.
I am curious how you would see this verse for example, which appear misogynous. This is one of the examples regarding, frankly, my anger towards the traditional interpretations the Quran
314 Beautified for people is the love of that which they desire - of women and sons, heaped-up sums of gold and silver, fine branded horses, and cattle and tilled land. That is the enjoyment of worldly life, but Allah has with Him the best return.
The word 'Nas' is translated normally as 'mankind' or 'people'. And that in PEOPLE itself they have been given the desire of WOMEN. I thought women were supposed to be part of people? Hence we are being regarded as not even people in this case, but like cattle, or as property, for men who are the real people. That's objectification in yo' face gurl. You said earlier that it is the people's fault for misinterpreting the Quran and creating problems in the world. Looks like the Quran in several places actually approves of their actions as well to an extent. It even looks like many people's messed-up attitude is a direct result from reading the scriptures.
Some embarrassed translators translated 'Nas' as 'men', which is wrong.
Peace.
-
Speaking about polyandry and men being happy with it, of course they are. The use rostitutes all the time without the slightest dislike. What they do not want is responsibility or acknowledgement, but sharing women, oh yes, they are quite happy with it, those who do, of course. Obvioysly not all men are that type, Thank God.
Salaam
-
Speaking about polyandry and men being happy with it, of course they are. The use rostitutes all the time without the slightest dislike. What they do not want is responsibility or acknowledgement, but sharing women, oh yes, they are quite happy with it, those who do, of course. Obvioysly not all men are that type, Thank God.
Salaam
I already gave the reasons why the people in those areas in general would approve of polyandry. They struggle with their livelihood. And no, their societies are not run on patriarchy, hence they don't have the same level of thinking as you provided here. I suggest you watch on YouTube polyandrous families in South India and Tibet. One woman having two husbands even said that they were so content as a family that their happiness and contentment would be there simply by sitting together with their children in the same room, even if they were living without food for days at a time. Their husbands also supported their decision of having a polyandrous household. And this is just one example.
Peace.