Have we given this script too much credit-made an idol of it
-
Peace brother Zlatan,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us on this important issue.
Here is what I see the problems that most people (including me) sometimes have
- We sometimes ask the wrong question and expect a right answer.
- Our expectations from the book are different than what the book tells us to expect.
The question was never about "calendar". All calendars are man-made. Therefore, you are looking for the right answer to the wrong question. The issue is about cosmic phenomena that everybody can use to time the restriction irrespective of what man-made calendar system they use. Hence, people from different cultures and having different level of technological sophistication can know the timing of the restriction.
As for the authority of the book, maybe you are expecting too much of the book. We are told from the beginning of the book what to expect
This is the book no doubt in it, a guidance for the forethoughtful/mindful.
Therefore, this book is simply a guide to the right answer but the forethoughtful/mindful still have to work to find the answer and it doesn't have the authority to easily feed anyone the answer no more than to move mountains or to speak to the dead.
There is a difference between contradictions and inconsistencies. The great reading doesn't contain inconsistencies. Contradictions can be consistent too. Contradictions are created by our faulty understanding. Hence, when one has the wrong understanding of a certain issue, the scripture is consistently contradicting on this issue.
The great reading is not a book of answers nor does it ever claim to be. It is a book of guidance. We have to find the answers ourselves. If we ask the book anything, it will not answer back, exactly like the biggest idol of the people of Ibrahim didn't answer back. Again, the book is only guidance and we have to find the way and the answers ourselves. The God guides whom He WILLS, always in the present tense. Thus, it is not predestined who will be guided. It is up to each individual and what choices he/she makes.
As for the scripture being complete, it depends on what you mean by "complete". Complete for what? For example, if our purpose is to know the future, then this scripture is far from complete because we can't even know from it what will happen tomorrow, let alone in a few years.
Our purpose is to serve The God. This scripture contains the complete guidance on how to serve The God. Guidance is like a map that will point us in the right direction but we have to travel the road and learn from the signs on the road and on the map along the way.
Being fascinated with the great reading is natural. It is the same reaction that looking at a tree, at the sky, and at any of The God's signs evokes. The great reading contains signs exactly like the universe around us and in us contains signs. However, no one looks at a tree and asks himself "if the tree is intact or complete". A tree is a sign just like the signs in the great reading. We are fascinated by it, however it doesn't spoon feed us its fruits. It is up to us to study it and use it. We should not expect to perfectly understand the book no more than we expect to perfectly understand a tree.
The God has clearly told us that He preserved the reminder and not the reading or even what is written (the book). We remember by learning. Hence, it is not surprising that we find differences in some letters in the book that are not material to our learning of the meaning. We also see that the reading is not preserved as we see people with different accents reading it differently and we see corrupted vocalization marks that, unlike the dots, were added hundred of years after the revelation of the great reading (we know this for sure based on physical archeological evidence). But all those things are immaterial because the reminder that we can only get by learning is preserved. Thus when someone studies and learns the book properly they will get the preserved reminder. Knowing Arabic is immaterial. There is nothing in the book that says "knowing Arabic" is a requirement to be guided.
I think that you put it very well when you said that patience is part of the answer. You see we arrive at the answer with patience and "salat"/learning and we should not expect to ask the book and it to reply to us with an answer.
In 548 and 2148 we are told that the differences between us should be managed by racing to the best. Thus, we should follow the best understanding and then The God will bring us together.
If there is a better understanding of "shahr 7aram" tomorrow then I am all for it and I have no special attachment to anything I write. However, for now, the understanding provided in the article is the best understanding currently available.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace Ayman!
another interesing phenomenon on the topic that i have noticed is that there is a plenty of the repeatings in the book....for example, the story of Moses is narrated and repeated so many times and i doubt that anybody would noticed if one of the repetitions is omited and instead of it revealed a verse like" o you who believe the times of restrictions are 1....2......3....4.... ?"
now why thats not the case?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us on this important issue.
thanks to you for trying to answer some of them....
Here is what I see the problems that most people (including me) sometimes have
- We sometimes ask the wrong question and expect a right answer.
agreed, however i doubt that asking when are times of restrictions is wrong question of course except in the case that ashurul hurum doesnt mean/denote times of restriction....could that be the case? i remember i have tried another solutions from the dic as well as from my imaginations and nothing worked well as "times of restriction"(except of course that i was nt able to find when are those times)
- Our expectations from the book are different than what the book tells us to expect.
I agree...that mislead me a lot of times before
The question was never about "calendar". All calendars are man-made. Therefore, you are looking for the right answer to the wrong question. The issue is about cosmic phenomena that everybody can use to time the restriction irrespective of what man-made calendar system they use. Hence, people from different cultures and having different level of technological sophistication can know the timing of the restriction.
The calendar from my question was the simplest way or one word way to define the problem.... i have used it as a methaphor and was not looking for the right calendar but for the answer when are the times when we are supposed to do hajj and are forbiden from fighting and hunting baheematul an`aam
All calendars are man-made. Therefore, you are looking for the right answer to the wrong question. The issue is about cosmic phenomena that everybody can use to time the restriction irrespective of what man-made calendar system they use. Hence, people from different cultures and having different level of technological sophistication can know the timing of the restriction.
As for the authority of the book, maybe you are expecting too much of the book. We are told from the beginning of the book what to expect
This is the book no doubt in it, a guidance for the forethoughtful/mindful.
Therefore, this book is simply a guide to the right answer but the forethoughtful/mindful still have to work to find the answer and it doesn't have the authority to easily feed anyone the answer no more than to move mountains or to speak to the dead.
i am not sure i can agree to that...this comment is very unlike your comments when you discuss with the traditionalists...for a moment it looked like i am gonna hear that i should "obey the messenger" and find the answer in the book of Bukhari or consensus of the ummah...
There is a difference between contradictions and inconsistencies. The great reading doesn't contain inconsistencies. Contradictions can be consistent too. Contradictions are created by our faulty understanding. Hence, when one has the wrong understanding of a certain issue, the scripture is consistently contradicting on this issue.
nice observation...
The great reading is not a book of answers nor does it ever claim to be.
I am afraid I can not agree....at least not completely
It is a book of guidance. We have to find the answers ourselves. If we ask the book anything, it will not answer back, exactly like the biggest idol of the people of Ibrahim didn't answer back.
Sometimes it will answer sometimes not....depending of what is asked....and this is not simply a book... we believe it a representant of The God HIS WORDS....when one is reading it he is supposed to have in mind that The God is speaking to the messenger and humanity through him answering their problems....
Again, the book is only guidance and we have to find the way and the answers ourselves. The God guides whom He WILLS, always in the present tense. Thus, it is not predestined who will be guided. It is up to each individual and what choices he/she makes.
again i cant agree that WE are to find answers, but that we are to hear and obey, and not to search for the answers, we are given answers ....remember people have asked the messeger this and that.. and The God have gave them the answers through him...now when the messenger is dead who will give us answers? isnt this book his heritage and the source of all of his answers? can it be that the messenger was sent only to a particular nation as i have stated before? nobody of them asked the question i have asked, i.e., when are the times of restriction?
Does it mean that my question is wrong and ashurul hurumu doesnt mean that or that they knew it by default(if this is the case that would open a whole can of worms in regards of salat zakat hajj and many other issues, actually this might be excactly what had hapened and caused creation and proliferation of Hadith and sunna concepts).
As for the scripture being complete, it depends on what you mean by "complete". Complete for what?
Complete for the orders it has given us....if we are ordered not to fight at certain times i expect it to define us these times or i could conclude that the book isnt complete or isnt send/intended to/for me, at least not all of its orders...thats exactly why i have been argued that maybe the book is intended only for a specific cultural milieu.
For example, if our purpose is to know the future, then this scripture is far from complete because we can't even know from it what will happen tomorrow, let alone in a few years.
thank The God i am not searching for that kind of answers, only for those that would make the book consistent or complete to me....i am also looking to a proper understanding of the concepts we think we have already understood because in the light of the truth we found out in regards this topic they might greatly change as well....
Our purpose is to serve The God. This scripture contains the complete guidance on how to serve The God. Guidance is like a map that will point us in the right direction but we have to travel the road and learn from the signs on the road and on the map along the way.
Being fascinated with the great reading is natural. It is the same reaction that looking at a tree, at the sky, and at any of The God's signs evokes. The great reading contains signs exactly like the universe around us and in us contains signs. However, no one looks at a tree and asks himself "if the tree is intact or complete". A tree is a sign just like the signs in the great reading. We are fascinated by it, however it doesn't spoon feed us its fruits. It is up to us to study it and use it. We should not expect to perfectly understand the book no more than we expect to perfectly understand a tree.
I am not sure the perfect, less than perfect etc are proper terms for judging the translation or understanding the book however toward my current knowledge(and sure i might be wrong), any traslation less then perfect might easily lead somebody to join others with the God and obey orders and hold the views of translator and not of the God....thats why i am wondering isnt this book, in/with all its details, intended only to arabs?
The God has clearly told us that He preserved the reminder and not the reading or even what is written (the book).
I am not sure that there`s such a message in the book? i mean The God never directly claimed He will preserve the script or reminder sent to this arabic messenger...( of course we maybe might conclude from the book that the essential message will be delievered to the people of all the times...but that being far from all the details we posses in this script)....
you probably think of 159...imho "inna lahu la hafizoon" is reffering to the messenger not to the the dhikr/reminder...see the context.. and if you are thinking of 4141-42 i think it is obvious that it reffers to the originaly revealed reading and what the messenger is reciting and not what might later become of it...many falsehood has entered it many times....in my opinion....
We remember by learning. Hence, it is not surprising that we find differences in some letters in the book that are not material to our learning of the meaning. We also see that the reading is not preserved as we see people with different accents reading it differently and we see corrupted vocalization marks that, unlike the dots, were added hundred of years after the revelation of the great reading (we know this for sure based on physical archeological evidence). But all those things are immaterial because the reminder that we can only get by learning is preserved. Thus when someone studies and learns the book properly they will get the preserved reminder. Knowing Arabic is immaterial. There is nothing in the book that says "knowing Arabic" is a requirement to be guided.
of course it is not requirement for being guided one can hear or read the translation but if somebody is trying to be guided by understanding the arabic script without knowing arabic he might be easily misguided....and imo the very proof of it might be this forum of ours..
I think that you put it very well when you said that patience is part of the answer. You see we arrive at the answer with patience and "salat"/learning and we should not expect to ask the book and it to reply to us with an answer.
how did you come to conclusion that salat mean learning? from the dictionaries or from the contexts of the book or by combining them?
In 548 and 2148 we are told that the differences between us should be managed by racing to the best. Thus, we should follow the best understanding and then The God will bring us together.
If there is a better understanding of "shahr 7aram" tomorrow then I am all for it and I have no special attachment to anything I write. However, for now, the understanding provided in the article is the best understanding currently available.
As i have already clearly demonstrated the understanding in the article is incorrect and pottentially misleading(if someone take this solution as the correct or The God given/prescribed timing for the times of restriction )though some of its findings and conclusions might be correct
Peace and all best wishes,
Zlatan
-
God bless all,
Listen this is my take on all of this. All this confusion comes from wrong ideas and pre-conceptions. These wrong ideas and pre-conceptions cause people to argue in a certain way and really cause the confusion some of them that I've seen are the following
- Islamic scholars understandings are always corrupt.
- Anything that was written down or organized after the Koran, that has bearing on our understanding of the Koran, is a corruption and a fabrication. And anybody who authored these things are liars.
3.The Koran only speaks to the spirit of things, not literal things.
-
All of the hadeeth is a lie.
-
Because the hadeeth is a lie, it can have no bearing on our understanding of the Koran, not even in the language that it uses.
-
The Cl. Arabic of Muhammad's day had evolved significantly by the time the Hadeeths were written and the foundations for the dictionaries undergone. So the dictionaries cannot contain the meanings that the Koran meant.
-
The Classical Arabic language was corrupted by scholars.
-
There is only one Arabic
-
Modern Arabic is the same as Classical Arabic.
-
How many times the Koran mentions a word has significance on ideas about that word. For instance, 'The word month is mentioned twelve times in the Koran . . . so a year must have twelve months.' That is called jumping to conclusions without evidence.
-
Any word that the Koran uses can only have one meaning everywhere that it is used in the Koran.
-
If the Koran uses a word in a certain way any other meaning of that word in Classical Arabic sources is a lie.
-
The Koran can only use a Classical Arabic word in one way, all the time that it uses it.
-
There are no such things as synonyms.
-
Anything word that the Koran uses repeatedly, giving it importance in our lives must conform to the things that we find important or grand. For example, if prayer is not grand or important to a person who thinks like this, then the Koran can't mean Prayer when it uses the word Salat, because the concept is just not grand, important or ground-breaking enough.
-
One doesn't have to know Classical Arabic to understand the Koran.
These are some of the erroneous ideas that people on this forum have. It is these ideas that have guided their arguments, and that leads to all the confusion that has ensued on this website. Sometimes they don't know they think in that way, sometimes they do not see the fallacies in their thinking and logical process.
As for the issues that have caused so much confusion these are my conclusions in short
Pre-Islamic Arabic Calendar There were Jewish, Roman, Zodiacal and persian versions. What all of them did was to map solar time accurately. Periods around 30 days have always been considered months. So the Pre-Islamic calendar and its months mapped solar time.
The Islamic Calendar The Islamic calendar was a miscalculation. The Jewish calendar seems to have been the most prevalent, or respected, in pre-Islamic Arabia. The Muhammad's religious community at some time probably adopted the Jewish method of calculating the year over other calendars. The Jewish calendar happens to use the moon cylces to determine the beginning of a month (a natural marker) but allow for an unnatural 13th month into the equation every couple of years so that they could continue to use the moon as a natural marker for time. The Jewish calendar never implied that the completion of 12 lunar cycles made a year. That was an Islamic invention that can be dated whenever the muslims made the mistake of calling it a year. The Jewish calendar approximated and had as its goal what all of the other calendars did, the calculation of an accurate solar year. The injunction in the Koran that says that there are only to be 12 months in a year most likely prompted the Muslims to drop the practice of adding in an extra year. Thereby making the Islamic calendar out of wack with the real year, as they continued to use the moon as a natural marker as the Jews in that area did.
The Proper Calendar There are only 12 months in a year. The Koran implies that 2 months is 60 days and by deduction that 1 month is 30 days. A month is period of 30 days. The Koran also implies that the month of Ramadan is a 30 day period that is when the Sirius star has both faded and risen, which is the Heliacal rising of Sirius, where it fades from the night sky and rises with the Sun. So the Heliacal rising of the Sirius serves as a marker for when the year begins and for the time that Ramadan was in pre-islamic times(Its name also alludes to this as this is the period called The Dog days in the mediterranean area.) There is no evidence that says that the order of the months has ever been changed and so we have the proper calendar by starting Ramadan at the Heliacal Rising of Sirius and counting twelve 30 day periods. That leaves us with 360 days or 12 months even though it takes 365 days for the Sirius Star to rise again, and generally any accurate solar calendar will have 365 days. But that does not violate the Koran statement. There are 12 months in a year. Even if th 12 months only add up to 360 days with 5 days left there are still only 12 months in/within the year. Just as we generally learn in our gregorian calendar that there are 4 weeks in a month, this statement holds true. We consider a week to be 7 days and 4 weeks is 28 days. Some months are 28, some 29, some 30 and some 31 in our gregorian calendar, but there is still always 4 weeks in a month. That statement is never broken no despite where if the month ends on the 28th or the 31st. Equally, when counting each month as 30 days, there will always be 12 months in a year. The truth of that statement is never broken, despite the fact that 5 more days are needed to complete the year. It is incorrect for us to assume that the Koran means that 12 months completes a year when all it says is that there are to be 12 months in a year.
Al-Ashurul-Hurum In the pre-Islamic calendar there were a number of months considered to be Haraam. Haraam means that some sort of restriction is to go on, and holiness is implied by the restriction. It's funny that we don't consider pig's meat to be holy even though they are haraam
as a food. Basically Haraam implies restriction and when it comes to things that are restricted it is best we take our advise on that from God. Therefore, there are 4 months in the Koran that are considered months in which we are to practice some sort of restriction. There are the 3 months of pre-islamic months of pilgrimage that are known was dul-qi'dah, dhul-hijja and shawwal. They are the three consecutive months after Ramadan. There is no counter-evidence that shows that these months are not the months that the pre-Islamic Arabs made pilgrimage in. (There however is plenty of evidence to be found in the Koran and elsewhere about other statements that the Hadeeths make). In the above three months we are to practice the restrictions made on us during pilrimage. The last month in which we have restrictions is Ramadan when we are suppose to fast. So the three sacred montsh are dhul-qi'dah, dhul-hijja, shawwal and Ramadan.Fasting Fasting is abstention of anykind. The Koran however, advises us on how we are to fast in Chpt. 2. Unless specificied otherwise the Koran makes it clear on how we are to undergo fasting.
Salat This word can mean the practice/act of praying, petitioning, blessing (in whatever way), commending, adherence(which I see as meaning discpline in its non-physical way), oratory (which is speaking in a dignified/upstanding manner). There is no one meaning for this word. Its meanings should not be mixed and all meanings that the reader finds relevant and contextually sound (for ONE particular context) should be taken into consideration.
Zakat This word means betterment, doing what is best, vindication, making this right, putting thing back in order. There is no one meaning for this word. Its meanings should not be mixed and all meanings that the reader finds relevant and contextually sound (for ONE particular context) should be taken into consideration.
Deen This word does not only mean system. It means 'system/order, dues, judgement, obligation, sort/kind, customs, culture, rule and religion.
There is no one meaning for this word. Its meanings should not be mixed and all meanings that the reader finds relevant and contextually sound (for ONE particular context) should be taken into consideration.Last but not leastly on the issue of shah-r and ahillat (2189). Shah-r can mean, 'full, fame, famous, outstanding/salient, moon and month (in all of its forms).' The pre-Islamic arabs naturally would have considered the months of the persians, romans, zodiac and jewish calendars months also. There is no one meaning for this word, shah-r. Its meanings should not be mixed and all meanings that the reader finds relevant and contextually sound (for ONE particular context) should be taken into consideration. Shah-r in the form of time could be 'moon' or 'month.' As in 'He walked for 3 moons (moon cylces starting with any phase of the moon as a beginning and end marker) or he walked for 3 months (28, 29, 30 or 31 days.)
Ahillat interestingly enough according to my recent studies can be the plural of hilaal, halaal, hulaal, hill, hull, hall,, hulal, halal, hilaalat or haleel.
In particular 'hilaal' can come from haalla(the III form of the verb H-L-L) in addition it meaning moon phase (full or crescent). Halaal can also come from the hallala (the II form of the verb H-L-L).
Just a few verses earlier than 2189 the Koran talks about forbidden foods. One of the forbidden foods is maa uhilla bihi ghayirallaahi. Or what has been consecrated in a name other than God's. Uhilla means 'has been consecrated.' It is the passive tense of ahalla (to consecrate, which is only one meanings if I remember correctly). Ahalla is the IV form of the verb H-L-L, and the IV form can be synonymous with the II form.
This gives me the hunch that 'ahillat' can mean 'consecrations.' ANd that 2189 can mean 'And they ask you about (the) consecrations. Say, 'There are to be timed* for the people on pilgrimage. Moreover, it is not righteous to visit the houses because of their fame (dhuhoor can mean fame). Rather visit them because of the kinds of houses they are (min abwaabihaa).'
- mawaaqeetu can be the plural of maqoot (timed) as well as means of time (meeqaatu).
'Baab' from what I know can mean 'kind/sort' its plural is abwaab.
'linaasi wal-hajji' can mean 'For the people and for pilgrimage.' However it can also mean 'For the people with pilgimage' which can be stylistically improved to mean 'People on pilgrimage.' The basis being that pilgrimage is a duty and therefore is something that a person can be 'with.' 'Wa' being able to be synonymous with 'bi' or 'ma&a' in Classical Arabic, among its many other uses other than 'and' 'or' or 'but.'
If anyone can do simultaneously research in Lane's lexicon and can the IV, III and II forms of H-L-L I'd greatly appreciate it.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace be upon you all
Anwar - I applaud you. An excellent post.
I think you have articulated many of my own ideas very well.
Personally I think that a major component of islam is that of finding out for ourselves. It might sound like I am promoting a selfish attitude but I feel it is the right one. Comparing ideas is vital for understanding - we are not created equal afterall but accepting the ideas or summations of someone else as your own idea without analysis is dangerous. I hope that healthy posts like yours continue.
Thank you and thank God for allowing us to be.
darcus
-
Peace Darcus,
I think you have articulated many of my own ideas very well.
I am afraid that most of those ideas have been dealt with before, for example
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2560&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=6761a7df8b6dcff893dc36fb776190d0
It has been demonstrated that they are based on wishful thinking not on reality. For example
The truth of that statement is never broken, despite the fact that 5 more days are needed to complete the year. It is incorrect for us to assume that the Koran means that 12 months completes a year when all it says is that there are to be 12 months in a year.
The above underlined contradictory statement illustrates the kind of wishful thinking that I am talking about, especially in light of 936.
- Indeed, the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve "shahr" in the book of The God...
The verse clearly talks about the count of the "shuhur" (which are wrongly interpreted as months). The above comment from brother Anwar assumes that The God doesn't know how to count fractions such as 5/30 = 1/6 = "one sixth" = "sudus" in Arabic. Surely, The God knows how to count fractions and so did the Arabs as evident from the many fractions (including "sudus") given in verses such as 412. The God doesn't make the clearly false statement that brother Anwar's interpretation implies. Hence, it must be his understanding that is false. So unless he can explain why The God didn't say 12 and a sixth ("sudus") in 936, his entire understanding of the word "shahr" is based on wishful thinking and not on reality. Even the dictionaries don't say that "shahr" means "30 day period". In fact, the dictionaries clearly say that the Arabs used to call the moon "shahr".
Similarly, his assessment that the Arabic language hasn't evolved in the 200-300 year period between the revelation of the great reading and the canonization of Hadiths is na?ve wishful thinking not supported by empirical observation of evolution in Arabic and all languages for that matter. The word "shahr" is an example of such evolution where the meaning of "shahr" as "moon" died out and the new meaning of "month" took over in more modern Arabic.
As for his assessment of Hadith, a Hadith is not merely "content". It is both "content"/"matan" and a "chain of transmission"/"sanad". By making the "chain of transmission"/"sanad" part of the Hadith, it has become impossible for any Hadith to be true. For example, a Hadith that says "be kind to your neighbor" is a true good advice (i.e. not a lie). However, by making the chain of transmission part of the Hadith, it is transformed to hearsay that is at best unverifiable and at worst an outright lie. So NO HADITH IS TRUTH and that is a fact.
Personally I think that a major component of islam is that of finding out for ourselves. It might sound like I am promoting a selfish attitude but I feel it is the right one. Comparing ideas is vital for understanding - we are not created equal afterall but accepting the ideas or summations of someone else as your own idea without analysis is dangerous. I hope that healthy posts like yours continue.
I agree.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace all,
Ayman you said
I am afraid that most of those ideas have been dealt with before, for example
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2560&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=6761a7df8b6dcff893dc36fb776190d0
It has been demonstrated that they are based on wishful thinking not on reality. For example
progod wrote
The truth of that statement is never broken, despite the fact that 5 more days are needed to complete the year. It is incorrect for us to assume that the Koran means that 12 months completes a year when all it says is that there are to be 12 months in a year.The above underlined contradictory statement illustrates the kind of wishful thinking that I am talking about, especially in light of 936.
- Indeed, the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve "shahr" in the book of The God...
The verse clearly talks about the count of the "shuhur" (which are wrongly interpreted as months). The above comment from brother Anwar assumes that The God doesn't know how to count fractions such as 5/30 = 1/6 = "one sixth" = "sudus" in Arabic.
Inna iddatushuhoori ithnaa ashara shahran . . .
The count of months undubiously is to be twelve . . .
If you tally up the months within 365 days you have twelve months and not a month more. Exaxtly it is 12 months and 1/6th of a month. However, a sixth of a month is not a month and believing that a year only has a count of twelve months when it literally is 12 1/6 months is not a contradiction because that last 1/6 of a month is not a month.
And you statement that NO HADITH IS TRUTH is just not verifiable. IF you think about hearsay, even hearsay CAN be true, but is up to you to study each aspect of the hearsay to judge whether or not that hearsay can be judged as most likely to be true or the least likely. That is how we have most of our histories so hearsay does have validity if studied right, when it is not analyzed right it has none.
No one here is familiar with the Science of History and unfortunatley neither are Muslim scholars. Modern Science of History defintely built off of Muslim efforts and methods but it has advanced way beyond where Muslim scholarship left off. Even in this case there isn't always one version of a history. But to say right out that all hadeeths are a lie, is just plain out wrong.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Inna iddatushuhoori ithnaa ashara shahran . . .
The count of months undubiously is to be twelve . . .
"Undubiously" hardly describes what you are proposing.
If you tally up the months within 365 days you have twelve months and not a month more. Exactly it is 12 months and 1/6th of a month.
Yes. If you Anwar can describe it so "exactly", then why do you think that The Almighty cannot be as exact as you?
However, a sixth of a month is not a month
A sixth of a month is ... a sixth of a month. It is good that you know about fractions. Why do you think that The Almighty doesn't know about fractions like you?
and believing that a year only has a count of twelve months when it literally is 12 1/6 months is not a contradiction because that last 1/6 of a month is not a month.
No, 1/6 of a month is not a month, it is simply 1/6 of a month. It is not just a contradiction to say that the year has 12 "30 day periods" it is undubiously and utterly false. If you Anwar can undubiously/literally say that the year has 12 1/6 months (30 days periods) then why do you think that The God can't undubiously say so?
Why do you think that unlike you The God can't say "Inna iddatushuhoori ithnaa ashara shahran wa sudus..."?
And you statement that NO HADITH IS TRUTH is just not verifiable.
It is Hadiths that are at best unverifiable (like any hearsay) or false. If you disagree then give me a single Hadith that is the TRUTH and why you think it is the truth and how you verified it.
IF you think about hearsay, even hearsay CAN be true,
Hearsay by definition is unverifiable. If it is verified as true then it is not hearsay.
but is up to you to study each aspect of the hearsay to judge whether or not that hearsay can be judged as most likely to be true or the least likely. That is how we have most of our histories so hearsay does have validity if studied right, when it is not analyzed right it has none.
Hearsay is unverifiable no matter how long or how hard you study it. Hadith collectors wasted their lives working much harder than you trying to do what you are suggesting. At the end, they only proved that working hard is useless if you don't work smart.
If they were smart then they should have gathered the proverbs or rumors going on at their time without regards to the chain of transmission. This at least would have given us insight into Abbassid era popular and religious culture, instead of the useless Hadith heap we have now.
No one here is familiar with the Science of History and unfortunatley neither are Muslim scholars. Modern Science of History defintely built off of Muslim efforts and methods but it has advanced way beyond where Muslim scholarship left off. Even in this case there isn't always one version of a history. But to say right out that all hadeeths are a lie, is just plain out wrong.
I didn't say that all are lies. I said they are at best unverifiable and in many cases are verifiable as lies. They can never be verifiable as true unless you can wake the dead and ask them.
Recounting old wives tales is much sounder scientifically than a process that "builds off of Muslim efforts and methods but has advanced way beyond where Muslim scholarship left off" as you say. This is for the simple reason that old wives are old but at least they are not dead so one can at least go back to them and verify the tales. Your proposition doesn't even measure up to old wives tales.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
God bless,
Ayman you said
Why do you think that unlike you The God can't say "Inna iddatushuhoori ithnaa ashara shahran wa sudus..."?
Because the count of months is not 12 and 1/6th. In our modern concept of math we say 1 1/2 days and 6 1/2 oranges. What I mean to say by that is that 6 days is in no way month, a month is 30 days. So why would the count of months be 12 and a sixth if we are counting whole months not parts of months? The count of months (30 day periods) is to be twelve. And even when taking into account 365 days the count of 30 day periods(months) is 12.
I can't make God coform to your sense of exactness. And why He didn't have stated ' A year is to be a count of 12 months and a sixth of a month', well I can't answer that for you. I can only read and analyze what is there. The words that I see in that passage are saying how many months(30 day periods) we are to count, supposedly in a year. If there are 5 days left over I don't see anything contradictory in that statement because 5 days is not a month. Nor do I see anything lacking in clarity because what was stated was how many months (30 day periods) are supposed to be calculated (in a year); and being that 5 days does not add up to a month it cannot be included a count geared towards counting months, not days. 6 days qualifies in a count of days but not in a count of months, if we want to be exact. It is a sixth of a month, true, but it is not a month and if we are counting months (&iddatushuhoor) it doesn't make the cut, nor does it need to make the cut.
I didn't say that all are lies. I said they are at best unverifiable and in many cases are verifiable as lies. They can never be verifiable as true unless you can wake the dead and ask them.
Recounting old wives tales is much sounder scientifically than a process that "builds off of Muslim efforts and methods but has advanced way beyond where Muslim scholarship left off" as you say. This is for the simple reason that old wives are old but at least they are not dead so one can at least go back to them and verify the tales. Your proposition doesn't even measure up to old wives tales.
I don't think you understood me well. The Historical Process that I was talking about that "builds off of Muslim efforts and methods but has advanced way beyond where Muslim scholarship left off" is the Modern Science of History, not Hadeethic History, the former is a whole lot sounder scientifically than recounting old wives tales. The Modern Science of History also deals with the History of the Ancients and in that case they are also dealing with hearsay and old anonymous texts. The most logical story that comes about from these hearsays and anonymous texts we have to consider as truth as these are the only evidences we have, despite all the possible doubt that can be brought up against them.
In the case of the Hadeeth Muslim scholarship did a half-ass job. Because of the culture and time frame that they were in they considered the reputation of narrators more important than content. It is simple thinking, "Good honest, respectable men speak and act in good, honest and respectable ways." They only took it that far. Whereas the next step would have been to compare it to every possible interpretation of the Koran to eliminate contradictory stories. For instance the gospels of the Bible are anonymous hearsays. Good scholarship judges the narrators if possible and then judges the content. From that they form a more credible story. In our case we know about Jesus' life God bless him from a provable divine source. Knowing that we can easily form a more credible and more realistic interpretation of the story of Jesus, using the original scripts and what we know of him from the Koran. I would love to be apart of a project like that. I see words like 'Lord' and 'seeing that the was dead' and I know that they can with just reason be translated as 'Noble or Sir' and 'Thinking that he was dead.' and more.
It is the same with the Hadeeth. If a Hadeeth says that God gave a man named Muhammad a scripture that declared him as a prophet and so he began to preach among the people what the scipture taught him, and that hadeeth has a sound chain there is no reason to reject that hadeeth as historically incorrect.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Ayman you said
Why do you think that unlike you The God can't say "Inna iddatushuhoori ithnaa ashara shahran wa sudus..."?
Because the count of months is not 12 and 1/6th. In our modern concept of math we say 1 1/2 days and 6 1/2 oranges.
So now you are blaming us for fractions and saying that they are OURS!
Instead of blaming "our modern concept" of fractions, please blame your faulty understanding of the word "shahr". Fractions is not a "modern concept of math" as you claim. In fact fractions are used in many instances of the great reading so the Arabs undubiously knew about fractions.
What I mean to say by that is that 6 days is in no way month, a month is 30 days. So why would the count of months be 12 and a sixth if we are counting whole months not parts of months?
Because 12 1/6 is the real count of your months in a year. I say your months because no calendar system in the world since the beginning of history has ever had constant 30 day periods.
The count of months (30 day periods) is to be twelve. And even when taking into account 365 days the count of 30 day periods(months) is 12.
No, if you take 365 then the count is 12 1/6 Anwar months/30 day periods. We wouldn't be having this conversation if the year had 360 days.
I can't make God coform to your sense of exactness.
You are giving me too much credit. I didn't invent fractions. In fact, I got the word "sudus" (1/6) from the great reading. This comment is based on the faulty assumption that The God doesn't know about fractions.
And why He didn't have stated ' A year is to be a count of 12 months and a sixth of a month', well I can't answer that for you.
You can't answer it because you don't have a logical answer.
I can only read and analyze what is there. The words that I see in that passage are saying how many months(30 day periods) we are to count, supposedly in a year. If there are 5 days left over I don't see anything contradictory in that statement because 5 days is not a month. Nor do I see anything lacking in clarity because what was stated was how many months (30 day periods) are supposed to be calculated (in a year); and being that 5 days does not add up to a month it cannot be included a count geared towards counting months, not days. 6 days qualifies in a count of days but not in a count of months, if we want to be exact. It is a sixth of a month, true, but it is not a month and if we are counting months (&iddatushuhoor) it doesn't make the cut, nor does it need to make the cut.
Your entire hypothesis is based on a number of extraordinary claims for which you have no proof
- A month is 30 days. There is no calendar system nor has ever been one that has constant 30 day months.
- Fractions are not to be counted.
The Modern Science of History also deals with the History of the Ancients and in that case they are also dealing with hearsay and old anonymous texts. The most logical story that comes about from these hearsays and anonymous texts we have to consider as truth as these are the only evidences we have, despite all the possible doubt that can be brought up against them.
Anonymous texts are evidence that can be carbon dated and analyzed. Hearsay is not evidence. It is unverifiable.
In the case of the Hadeeth Muslim scholarship did a half-ass job. Because of the culture and time frame that they were in they considered the reputation of narrators more important than content. It is simple thinking, "Good honest, respectable men speak and act in good, honest and respectable ways." They only took it that far. Whereas the next step would have been to compare it to every possible interpretation of the Koran to eliminate contradictory stories. For instance the gospels of the Bible are anonymous hearsays. Good scholarship judges the narrators if possible and then judges the content. From that they form a more credible story. In our case we know about Jesus' life God bless him from a provable divine source. Knowing that we can easily form a more credible and more realistic interpretation of the story of Jesus, using the original scripts and what we know of him from the Koran. I would love to be apart of a project like that. I see words like 'Lord' and 'seeing that the was dead' and I know that they can with just reason be translated as 'Noble or Sir' and 'Thinking that he was dead.' and more.
It is the same with the Hadeeth. If a Hadeeth says that God gave a man named Muhammad a scripture that declared him as a prophet and so he began to preach among the people what the scipture taught him, and that hadeeth has a sound chain there is no reason to reject that hadeeth as historically incorrect.
It is historically incorrect no matter what it says. It doesn't reflect the thinking of people at the time it was gathered nor does it reflect the thinking of people at the time it claims it was said. It is simply unverifiable hearsay. If it didn't have the chain of narration then it would have at least reflected the thinking of people at the time it was gathered.
The fact is that no single hearsay account can be accepted as historically correct or true because all hearsay by definition is unverifiable. Even if the content of the hearsay is confirmed by the great reading, it is still unverifiable. The content could have well been copied much later from the great reading and then a chain of transmission was attached to make it appear as if it is contemporaneous to it. Thus, it is useless as far as analyzing history.
Peace,
Ayman
-
i am studying this scripture 10 years now and i know arabic better than maybe 90% participants of this forum and it still doesnt help... still theres no answers to many questions...are we sure this scripture is complete....of course maybe we or me are blind....maybe my heart is zealed cause of some misbehaviour??!!
Hello Zlatan,
Just a quick question are you a native Arabic speaker? (pardon my ignorance)
Regards,
-
Godbless,
So now you are blaming us for fractions and saying that they are OURS!
Instead of blaming "our modern concept" of fractions, please blame your faulty understanding of the word "shahr". Fractions is not a "modern concept of math" as you claim. In fact fractions are used in many instances of the great reading so the Arabs undubiously knew about fractions.
Wow Ayman, your extreme thinking definitely clouds your ability to understand what I am saying, as well as us coming to any common understanding.
I never said that fractions are ours. All that I said is that a half of a month or a sixth of a month doesn't count as a month. It never has and it never will. I know that you are caught up in the way that we express the quantities that include fractions instead of what these quantities really are.
We say 6 and a half months but there is really no such thing if you think hard about it. There are six months and a half of a month. A fraction of a month is not a month. We express it in the way that we do because it makes it simpler for us to reckon exactly. However if we are literally counting days we cannot count hours, which can be expressed as a half of a day or a sixth of a day. And if we are counting months we cannot count days, which can be expressed using terms like a half of a month or a sixth of a month. If the Koran didn't say 'and 5 days' after it said that the count of months is 12 there is nothing wrong with that because 5 days isn't a month, whether you say 'sixth of a month' or '5 days.' If God wanted to add 'and a sixth' or 'and five days' that would have been fine also, but it is an addition onto the count of months, which is twelve. But we can figure that our on our own and see that the count of months is and always will be twelve, twelve 30 day periods, and that deducing through the Koran that Ramadan begins when Sirius rises with the sun which coincides with the summer sostice, there are 5 days left that do not belong to any particular month, and nor do they have to.When we say 12 1/6 months that is just a form of expressing the real reality of 12 months and 5 days. The fraction is real but the expression is ours and the reality is that there are only 12 months and that a sixth of a month is not really a month no matter how we phrase it.
As for your bias about the hadeeth it seems to be a sickness to me, or maybe more a long the lines of an unjust hatred and bias. From my classes at the University of Penn I learned that there are alot of histories based on hearsay or oral stories. As well, anonymous texts whether they can be carbon dated or not are still anonymous and could have been written by anyone making them more unreliable that oral stories that at least profess their origins step by step.
I know the faults of the Hadeeth but they are not as drastic as you would like to make them. The Koran says don't let your hatred of others, in this case the hadeeth compilers and narrators, keep you from being just (5. I think you should heed these words.
Your are letting your hatred carry you away from being just.Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Wow Ayman, your extreme thinking definitely clouds your ability to understand what I am saying, as well as us coming to any common understanding.
I am not interested in a common understanding that is based on falsehood. I am only interested in the truth. The truth of the matter is that there are 12 1/6 Anwar months in a year NEVER 12. It is not my problem that you can't grasp this simple fact.
I never said that fractions are ours.
Yes you did my friend. Here is what you said "In our modern concept of math we say 1 1/2 days and 6 1/2 oranges."
All that I said is that a half of a month or a sixth of a month doesn't count as a month.
You are stating the obvious fact that all elementary school students know. Yet you are unable to apply this simple fact to the count of Anwar months in a year. The count will be 12 1/6 Anwar months NEVER will it be 12 Anwar months.
It never has and it never will. I know that you are caught up in the way that we express the quantities that include fractions instead of what these quantities really are.
According to you we should all forget about fractions because they are not 'real'. Anwar, you are arguing about obvious facts for no reason other than to advance your Anwar months.
We say 6 and a half months but there is really no such thing if you think hard about it.
Wow there are really no fractions. This is news to me.
There are six months and a half of a month.
So let me get this straight you are saying "there is really no six and half months but there are six months and half a month". Next time someone asks me to meet him after a month and a half, I will tell him no I will meet him after a month and one half month because there is no such thing as a month and a half. )
I am sorry to dissapoint you Anwar but a month and a half and a month and a half of a month are EXACTLY the same thing. I can't believe that you are arguing this obvious fact that even a six year old elementary school student knows.
If your theory was correct then The God would have said
"Inna 3iddat al-shuhur 3inda Allah ithna 3ashr wa sudus shahr..."
"Indeed the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve and a sixth "shahr"..."Or if it makes you feel better
"Inna 3iddat al-shuhur 3inda Allah ithna 3ashr shahr wa sudus shahr..."
"Indeed the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve "shahr" and a sixth "shahr"..."A fraction of a month is not a month. We express it in the way that we do because it makes it simpler for us to reckon exactly. However if we are literally counting days we cannot count hours, which can be expressed as a half of a day or a sixth of a day. And if we are counting months we cannot count days, which can be expressed using terms like a half of a month or a sixth of a month.
So why are you saying "half a month' if such term is not "reality" as you said earlier? )
If the Koran didn't say 'and 5 days' after it said that the count of months is 12 there is nothing wrong with that because 5 days isn't a month, whether you say 'sixth of a month' or '5 days.' If God wanted to add 'and a sixth' or 'and five days' that would have been fine also, but it is an addition onto the count of months, which is twelve.
Yes it would have been fine because fractions are real. It is good that you finally acknowledge that.
But we can figure that our on our own and see that the count of months is and always will be twelve, twelve 30 day periods,
Obviously you can't figure it on your own. Since the year doesn't have 12 Anwar months/30 day periods. It has 12 1/6.
and that deducing through the Koran that Ramadan begins when Sirius rises with the sun which coincides with the summer sostice, there are 5 days left that do not belong to any particular month, and nor do they have to.
There is nothing that says that the year begins when Sirius rises. There is absolutely no relationship in the great reading between Sirius and Ramadan so this is baseless conjecture.
When we say 12 1/6 months that is just a form of expressing the real reality of 12 months and 5 days.
Wow 12 1/6 months is a way of expressing the "real reality". What happened to you not liking "the way that we express the quantities that include fractions instead of what these quantities really are?"
I am sorry but your arguments are not making much sense (even to you as evident from your inconsistencies).
The fraction is real but the expression is ours and the reality is that there are only 12 months and that a sixth of a month is not really a month no matter how we phrase it.
I am gald that you acknowledge again that the fraction is real after you earlier nonsense of it not being real.
Everybody knows that one month is not 6 months in the same exact way that a sixth of a month is not a month. This is no reason not to count it.
If you want to talk seriously about phrasing and communication then if you tell anyone in the world to meet you in 12 Anwar months and you use your logic, you would miss each other by a sixth of an Anwar month. This is the reality of phrasing and communication.
As for your bias about the hadeeth it seems to be a sickness to me, or maybe more a long the lines of an unjust hatred and bias. From my classes at the University of Penn I learned that there are alot of histories based on hearsay or oral stories. As well, anonymous texts whether they can be carbon dated or not are still anonymous and could have been written by anyone making them more unreliable that oral stories that at least profess their origins step by step.
Not everything that they teach at the University of Penn is true. If they didn't teach you about the difference between evidence and hearsay then perhaps you should consider bringing it up to your instructor.
I know the faults of the Hadeeth but they are not as drastic as you would like to make them. The Koran says don't let your hatred of others, in this case the hadeeth compilers and narrators, keep you from being just (5. I think you should heed these words.
Your are letting your hatred carry you away from being just.Don't get all fuzzy feely on me. This is not about love and hate. It is about the truth. Here is the truth
- There are 12 1/6 Anwar months/30 day periods in a year
- Even according to the hearsay reports "shahr" doesn't mean 30 day period
- No calendar system ever existed or will ever exist that has constant 30 day periods
You can research this at Penn or ask your instructor if you don't believe me that the above is true.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Wow, Ayman. I read your posts and I see how you try to make what i say inconsistent, how you refuse to understand what I am saying and how your tone is hostile and overly rejective.
It seems that it doesn't matter how I say it you will refuse to acknowledge what I am saying.
progod wrote
I never said that fractions are ours.Yes you did my friend. Here is what you said "In our modern concept of math we say 1 1/2 days and 6 1/2 oranges."
Is that me saying that fractions are our inventions? Or is that me saying that our modern concept of math says 1 1/2 days when really there is only one day and a half of a day. The fact that we express the half a day as a day is our way of expressing 1 day and a half a day. I never said the fractions were our inventions. If you can't see that then you should seriously question the way you are reading and understanding my posts. Maybe you should read them twice, carefully and without bias before you respond.
progod wrote
All that I said is that a half of a month or a sixth of a month doesn't count as a month.You are stating the obvious fact that all elementary school students know. Yet you are unable to apply this simple fact to the count of Anwar months in a year. The count will be 12 1/6 Anwar months NEVER will it be 12 Anwar months.
If that is elemetary than why can't you acknowledge that there is really no such thing as 12 1/6 months, but really 12 months and a sixth of a month. The fraction is real, it is 1/6 and it is not a month and in a count of months it should not be included. You stated that this is a fact that elementary school students know make you look stupid because you don't understand the concept when it is applied.
progod wrote
There are six months and a half of a month.So let me get this straight you are saying "there is really no six and half months but there are six months and half a month". Next time someone asks me to meet him after a month and a half, I will tell him no I will meet him after a month and one half month because there is no such thing as a month and a half.
Again you are demonstrating how you don't understand what I am saying. I specifically said that saying 6 1/2 months is an EXPRESSION, like an IDIOM. It communicates a reality but that way that it is said does not reflect reality. If you don't get this I will understand, even though I will be dissapointed. It's like when you say when the 'stuff hits the fan' you don't literally mean that, it is an expression, that means 'when there is trouble.' Equally saying 6 1/2 months doesn't mean that there is actually a count of 6 1/2 months, it communicating a count of 6 months and a half a month. It is an EXPRESSION an IDIOM. Do you understand that? So you don't have to say it in a more literal way necessarily, just understand that it is an expression that is not literal.
I am sorry to dissapoint you Anwar but a month and a half and a month and a half of a month are EXACTLY the same thing. I can't believe that you are arguing this obvious fact that even a six year old elementary school student knows.
I am sorry that you understand the concept but not the application. OF course they are the same. I never said they are not. I hope you understood what I am saying in the above.
If your theory was correct then The God would have said
"Inna 3iddat al-shuhur 3inda Allah ithna 3ashr wa sudus shahr..."
"Indeed the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve and a sixth "shahr"..."Or if it makes you feel better
"Inna 3iddat al-shuhur 3inda Allah ithna 3ashr shahr wa sudus shahr..."
"Indeed the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve "shahr" and a sixth "shahr"..."Not true. Because like I said what is said is 'the count of months . . ' And the count of months is 12 whether a half of a month comes after that or or it is 12 months exactly. The statement is still true. I know you have an idea that the Koran has to map out every single thing and has to go beyond exactness, but the statement is still true. The count of months is 12 even in 360 days. Count the months, count the 30 day periods in a period of 365 days and tell me how many there are.
There are 12 30 day periods, 12 months. And 5 days left, which is a sixth of a month but can't be counted in 'the count of months' 'iddatusha-hr' because it is not a month. Saying that the count of months is 12 1/6 is an algorithm, an expression for expressing everying in months even if 1/6 of a month is not a month. That is a human form of expression, the fractions are not our invention, and I never said that they were.
So why are you saying "half a month' if such term is not "reality" as you said earlier?
I never said that fractions are not reality. I said that our expressions such as '2 and a half MONTHS' are idioms not reflective of reality, although they communicate a reality.
Obviously you can't figure it on your own. Since the year doesn't have 12 Anwar months/30 day periods. It has 12 1/6.
I have figured it out. The year does have a count 12 Anwar month. If you can count more than 12 30 day periods in a period of 365 days please inform me of your count. The 1/6 of a month is not a month so you can't count that in A COUNT OF MONTHS. Do you get it yet?
Look at Chpt 53. It begins by mentioning 'the star.' The only star that is mentioned in the chapter is Sirius. That is the star that is meant in the beginning if one considers that the Koran doesn't follow all of the modern rules of literature but includes rules of literature that are NOW classified and used only in poetry. Whereas rules that separate poetry from other literature is a recent, modern phenomenon.
What happened to you not liking "the way that we express the quantities that include fractions instead of what these quantities really are?"
When did I say that I didn't like it. I never talked about liking it or not liking it. I'm just stating what it is. There are no value judgements being made here. So please don't put them in my mouth or assume that I"m making them.
Not everything that they teach at the University of Penn is true. If they didn't teach you about the difference between evidence and hearsay then perhaps you should consider bringing it up to your instructor.
Thank you for reminding me of that. I've experienced that personally. Have you had the same experience there? Maybe we can relate on some issues about the content of the lectures given by professors that we have both had there. You know, classes that we have shared. roll
Don't get all fuzzy feely on me. This is not about love and hate. It is about the truth. Here is the truth
- There are 12 1/6 Anwar months/30 day periods in a year
- Even according to the hearsay reports "shahr" doesn't mean 30 day period
- No calendar system ever existed or will ever exist that has constant 30 day periods
You can research this at Penn or ask your instructor if you don't believe me that the above is true.
Peace,
Ayman
Hmmmm. Fuzzy feely?
Well, I think I demonstrated to you that implication of the Koran that a month is 30 days. And I'm sure that you can find this in Lane's lexicon as well. But the implication of the Koran is enough. The Koran is full of passages that can contradict if that is what the reader WANTS to read. But the consistency is there. You have two options and you choose to look at the possible inconsistency despite the fact that the consistency is offered to you.As for your last comment. . . Please!!!
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Wow, Ayman. I read your posts and I see how you try to make what i say inconsistent, how you refuse to understand what I am saying and how your tone is hostile and overly rejective.
I simply quoted what you said. If it comes across as inconsistent then don't blame me.
It seems that it doesn't matter how I say it you will refuse to acknowledge what I am saying.
Yes, I refuse to acknowledge that fractions are not to be counted.
I also refuse to acknowledge that a year has, has ever had, or will ever have 12 Anwar months/30 day periods. If you disagree then please do your homework and show me a single calendar in history that had constant 30 day periods.
Also, you are conveniently silent on what you are doing with the extra 5 days. Do you take a vacation ang go to Florida and pretend that they don't exist? )
Is that me saying that fractions are our inventions? Or is that me saying that our modern concept of math says 1 1/2 days when really there is only one day and a half of a day.
OK. If expressing it this way makes you feel better then there is 12 Anwar months and a sixth Anwar month in a year. There is NEVER just 12 Anwar months.
The fact that we express the half a day as a day is our way of expressing 1 day and a half a day. I never said the fractions were our inventions. If you can't see that then you should seriously question the way you are reading and understanding my posts. Maybe you should read them twice, carefully and without bias before you respond.
So why do you act as if pre-quranic Arabs didn't know about fractions and hence The God didn't count them?
If that is elemetary than why can't you acknowledge that there is really no such thing as 12 1/6 months, but really 12 months and a sixth of a month.
OK. As I said, if expressing it this way makes you feel better then there is 12 Anwar months and a sixth Anwar month in a year. There is NEVER just 12 Anwar months. So Anwar months cannot be what 936 is talking about. This is obvious.
The fraction is real, it is 1/6 and it is not a month and in a count of months it should not be included.
No it should be included as 1/6 of a month. If we apply your logic then fractions will never be included in any count of anything. roll
Again you are demonstrating how you don't understand what I am saying. I specifically said that saying 6 1/2 months is an EXPRESSION, like an IDIOM. It communicates a reality but that way that it is said does not reflect reality. If you don't get this I will understand, even though I will be dissapointed. It's like when you say when the 'stuff hits the fan' you don't literally mean that, it is an expression, that means 'when there is trouble.' Equally saying 6 1/2 months doesn't mean that there is actually a count of 6 1/2 months, it communicating a count of 6 months and a half a month. It is an EXPRESSION an IDIOM. Do you understand that? So you don't have to say it in a more literal way necessarily, just understand that it is an expression that is not literal.
By your standard all of mathematics is idioms. We don't really pile "months" on top of each other and add them up like we do with physical apples and oranges. If we use your same logic then adding months is an idiom exactly like adding a sixth of a month.
Not true. Because like I said what is said is 'the count of months . . ' And the count of months is 12 whether a half of a month comes after that or or it is 12 months exactly.
What is logically or gramatically not true with saying
"Indeed the count of "al-shuhur" at The God is twelve "shahr" and a sixth "shahr"..."
If like you we wrongly assume that "shahr" means "30 day period" then at least this is more true then your musings.
The statement is still true. I know you have an idea that the Koran has to map out every single thing and has to go beyond exactness, but the statement is still true.
So now stating the simple facts is "going beyond exactness". I must say that your standards for exactness are pretty dismal.
I am sure that The God has higher standards than what you believe.
The count of months is 12 even in 360 days. Count the months, count the 30 day periods in a period of 365 days and tell me how many there are.
There are 12 1/6 months. Or if you prefer 12 months and 1/6 month and that is a fact.
There are 12 30 day periods, 12 months. And 5 days left, which is a sixth of a month but can't be counted in 'the count of months' 'iddatusha-hr' because it is not a month.
Again, you are making the nonsensical argument that fractions are not supposed to be counted. This is of course ridiculous to say the least.
What are you doing with those 5 days? Of course you never say.
I have figured it out. The year does have a count 12 Anwar month. If you can count more than 12 30 day periods in a period of 365 days please inform me of your count. The 1/6 of a month is not a month so you can't count that in A COUNT OF MONTHS. Do you get it yet?
The count is 12 Anwar months and a sixth Anwar months because I know about fractions. If I know about fractions then The God certainly knows about them. It seems that you are the only one in the world who thinks that fractions are not to be counted.
Look at Chpt 53. It begins by mentioning 'the star.' The only star that is mentioned in the chapter is Sirius.
Firstly, some sources say that al-shaara is a mountain. Other sources say that it is Venus and not Sirius. Yet other evidence shows that it is the sun. So saying that it is Sirius is not sure to begin with.
Secondly, even assuming that shaara is Sirius this doesn't answer my question. You are evading it because you know that you don't have an answer.
Where does it say in the great reading that Ramadan starts with Sirius?
Where does it say that the year starts with Sirius?
That is the star that is meant in the beginning if one considers that the Koran doesn't follow all of the modern rules of literature but includes rules of literature that are NOW classified and used only in poetry. Whereas rules that separate poetry from other literature is a recent, modern phenomenon.
What rule did you use to read Chapter 53 and conclude that shaara is the start of the year? The words year or month don't even occur in Chapter 53.
I don't think that you can answer because I think that you made that up and you really have no rule that leads you to conclude that shaara denotes the start of the year or the start of ramadan.
Thank you for reminding me of that. I've experienced that personally. Have you had the same experience there? Maybe we can relate on some issues about the content of the lectures given by professors that we have both had there. You know, classes that we have shared. roll
My experience is on both sides of the fence, as a student long time ago and as a teacher more recently. As for Penn, I am sure it is a fine university and I personally have a close colleage who teaches there. I can say that what any good university teaches is critical thinking and focusing more on the "how" (the process) rather than the "what" (the story). If they teach you in any course that hearsay stories is evidence then I am afraid that you are not getting your money's worth for that course.
Hmmmm. Fuzzy feely?
Well, I think I demonstrated to you that implication of the Koran that a month is 30 days.No you never did. You only demosntrated that you will ignore the obvious facts such as that fasting for three days is equivalent to feeding 10 poor (3.33 per day) in 589. Don't you wish that 589 said to feed 3 poor ). You are also ignoring the obvious fact that the year has 12 Anwar monhs and a sixth Anwar month.
And I'm sure that you can find this in Lane's lexicon as well.
I didn't see it in Lane. Nor did I see any Classical Arabic dicitionary claim that "month" means 30 day period. This is just more of your wishful thinking.
But the implication of the Koran is enough. The Koran is full of passages that can contradict if that is what the reader WANTS to read.
There is no contradiction. The contradictions are created by your faulty understanding.
But the consistency is there. You have two options and you choose to look at the possible inconsistency despite the fact that the consistency is offered to you.
I know that the consistency is there. No one was ever able to find any inconsistency in "shahr" meaning "full moon". Even you despite all your rambling never found any inconsistencies. The same cannot be said about "shahr" meaning your imaginary "30 days" month.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salam,
Just a remainder from the previous discussions on the meaning of the word shahr
As explained by brother Ayman in Hot/"ramadan" Answer the equivalence between arbaAAati ashhurin/four shahr traditionally translated by four "month" (2226) and three menstruation periods (222 is clear.
If four shahr means four periods, then we should read four menstruation periods in 228.
Three menstruation periods correponds exactly to four shahrshahr1------------shahr2------------shahr3-----------shahr4
----------period 1--------period 2-----------period 3It is logic and without ambiguity
Shahr ramadan in which the Reading was sent down ...(2185) and particularlly during the night of alqadr.
Shahr ramadan = the night of alqadr; a blessed night (443)
It is not a coincidence when the God compares the night of alqadr with one thousand shahr (973).
Thousand shahr are nothing but one thousand night.-
The Night of Destiny is better than one thousand sahr.
Laylatu alqadri khayrun min alfi shahrin -
O you who believe, let not a people ridicule other people, for they may be better than they. Nor shall any women ridicule other women, for they may be better than they. Nor shall you mock one another, or call each other names. Evil indeed is the reversion to wickedness after attaining faith. And anyone who does not repent, then these are the transgressors.
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoola yaskhar qawmun min qawmin AAasa an yakoonoo khayran minhum wala nisaon min nisa-in AAasaan yakunna khayran minhunna wala talmizoo anfusakum walatanabazoo bial-alqabi bi/sa al-ismualfusooqu baAAda al-eemani waman lam yatub faola-ikahumu alththalimoona
The Reading explains itself
-
-
Peace sister Marie,
Thank you for your valuable insight.
Just a remainder from the previous discussions on the meaning of the word shahr
As explained by brother Ayman in Hot/"ramadan" Answer the equivalence between arbaAAati ashhurin/four shahr traditionally translated by four "month" (2226) and three menstruation periods (222 is clear.
If four shahr means four periods, then we should read four menstruation periods in 228.
Three menstruation periods correponds exactly to four shahrshahr1------------shahr2------------shahr3-----------shahr4
----------period 1--------period 2-----------period 3It is logic and without ambiguity )
I agree that it is logic and without ambiguity. However, it is in the way of counting not in the equivalence. 2226 prescribes a waiting period before divorce. 2228 prescribes a waiting period after the divorce. So they don't overlap and correspond to each other as the diagram shows. However, 2226 coveys to us logically and without ambiguity that the way we count "shahr" is like the way we count "mensturation". They are both cyclical events (not a continuous time period).
Shahr ramadan in which the Reading was sent down ...(2185) and particularlly during the night of alqadr.
Shahr ramadan = the night of alqadr; a blessed night (443)
It is not a coincidence when the God compares the night of alqadr with one thousand shahr (973).
Thousand shahr are nothing but one thousand night.-
The Night of Destiny is better than one thousand sahr.
Laylatu alqadri khayrun min alfi shahrin -
O you who believe, let not a people ridicule other people, for they may be better than they. Nor shall any women ridicule other women, for they may be better than they. Nor shall you mock one another, or call each other names. Evil indeed is the reversion to wickedness after attaining faith. And anyone who does not repent, then these are the transgressors.
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoola yaskhar qawmun min qawmin AAasa an yakoonoo khayran minhum wala nisaon min nisa-in AAasaan yakunna khayran minhunna wala talmizoo anfusakum walatanabazoo bial-alqabi bi/sa al-ismualfusooqu baAAda al-eemani waman lam yatub faola-ikahumu alththalimoona
The Reading explains itself )
This is brilliant sister. Thank you for sharing this additional evidence and logical explanation. I look forward for us to witness the scorching full-moon/night of measure, which is only a few weeks away from now. )
Paix and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
-
Peace brother Ayman
2226 prescribes a waiting period before divorce. 2228 prescribes a waiting period after the divorce.
You are right.
Is it a coincidence that we are command to wait four full moon and three menstruation periods before and after the divorce respectively?Ideed two full moons don't overlap one menstruation period, in my last postI spoke about the equivalence only because during three menstruation periods, one can observe four full moon.
I look forward for us to witness the scorching full-moon/night of measure, which is only a few weeks away from now. )
I'm waiting too to observe it Inchallah )
PS
This is a confidence Since my childhood until 3 years ago I always speak about the shahr when the moon is full in the sky. When I discover the genuine islam, I changed my mind ? about this after a discussion with a freind of mine.
Now, praise to the God, my first understanding seems logic )Paix