A GREAT CONTRADICTION
-
PEACE, SHUAIB,
I see that you did not reply to my last post above . I didn't think after it, that you would still be having difficulty, but, seeing that you are, let me see if I can make it any simpler for you
Do you want to go to Hell or Paradise? I will assume you desire the latter. So, in order for you to know how avoid Hell and get to Paradise, are all of the details necessary toward that end... fully detailed in Al-Quran...yes or no?
Please respond.
Peace.
-
salam pb,
no offense to you, but i just dont want to go in circles. when you say something that shows that you actually thought about my position, i will respond.
i asked you a question in my last post which you have been ignoring. in your last 2 you've again totally ignored it again. why should i answer your question, which you've asked and i've answered several times already?just superficially changing the words and asking the same question over and over, what do you expect??
why should i answer when you display intellectual dishonesty in your posts by forcing word meanings which you know are against the Arabic lexicon evidence?
post something that shows you've read digested and thought about my post (doesn't mean you have to agree), then i will definitely respond. dont just repeat your points like a parrot and expect me to keep replying.
-
PEACE, SHUAIB,
no offense to you, but i just dont want to go in circles. when you say something that shows that you actually thought about my position, i will respond. i asked you a question in my last post which you have been ignoring. in your last 2 you've again totally ignored it again. why should i answer your question, which you've asked and i've answered several times already?just superficially changing the words and asking the same question over and over, what do you expect?? why should i answer when you display intellectual dishonesty in your posts by forcing word meanings which you know are against the Arabic lexicon evidence? post something that shows you've read digested and thought about my post (doesn't mean you have to agree), then i will definitely respond. dont just repeat your points like a parrot and expect me to keep replying.
On the contrary Shuaib, it is you who is being intellectually dishonest. I've not posted one dishonest thing and well you know it . If I've posted something dishonest, then, call Allah as your witness and post it, otherwise, please retract your comments and apologize for slandering me. Remember, Allah, is our witness to who is lying and who is not. You don't want to respond, because you realize that your argument has collapsed, utterly.
From day one, my argument was/is, Allah's Quran, relative to guidance, is fully detailed
GUIDANCE/Al-Quran the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .
Brother Wakas, all praises due to Allah, agreed
My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide. That does not mean every single thing must be detailed within it. For example, if it says one should do righteous deeds, that does not mean it must list every single righteous deed possible for one to do...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
That was my only issue, and rather than just admit that your position was wrong, you'd prefer to slander me and make excuses as to why you won't respond.....and you call me dishonest?, please, bro. We've been discussing this issue over two forums and umpteen posts, yet, Wakas, only after 2-3 exchanges, arrived at the same conclusion I did...why is that? Because he is intellectually honest and not afraid to support what is the truth. Please don't refer to me as being intellectually dishonest anymore, because you are not an example of intellectual honesty...at all, thanks.
Understanding that Al-Quran is the only thing necessary for guidance, is a tremendous prophylactic against shirk...think about that, would you?
Anyway, good discussion nonetheless. See you on the next issue.
Peace to you, bro.
-
salam pb,
i didn't mean to insult or slander you at all, and if you felt that, i apologize.
however, what i am saying is dishonest is this... you do not speak Arabic.. you are reading an arabic dictionary that has been called into question NUMEROUS times... fine, you still use it because you have no choice. no complaints there... but you are confronted, not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4 times with people giving you evidence to the contrary.. PRIMARY source evidence (CLASSIC lexicons).
any intellectually HONEST person would at LEAST have second thoughts.. the fact that you press on unabashedly, is, as i said, dishonest.. for the obvious reason that you no longer are interested in truth, rather your views have become an agenda (probably subconsciously).
yet, Wakas, only after 2-3 exchanges, arrived at the same conclusion I did
ask him if fassala means detailed.. let me save you the trouble, look back a few posts and open your eyes. i cant speak for what he exactly agrees with you about, but he did openly disagree about your interpretation of fasala which is what i am disagreeing with you about.
because you are not an example of intellectual honesty...at all, thanks.
On the contrary Shuaib, it is you who is being intellectually dishonest.
if i have been dishonest in some way, feel free to tell me why. dont just say i was dishonest because i called you that, like we're children on the playground. are you going to stoop to that? i wasn't just randomly calling you names, i hope you can see.. i have a legitimate complaint against your tactics.. just as i did against apple pie!
you are exactly following the logic of apple pie.. keep pressing on about your views, regardless of how little knowledge of Arabic you have or how much contrary linguistic evidence is supplied... and stick to your omar's dictionary with your eyes closed! is this how an sincere truth-seeking person behaves? if knowingly turning a blind eye to evidence is not dishonesty, then what is?
ps--
i'm still waiting for you to tell me how Muslims should punish alcohol drinking... i wonder if you'll EVER answer that. since you've ignored this in every post, that's another reason why i decided it's best just to end the discussion. -
PEACE, SHUAIB,
I'm really curious as to what circles I'm going in, perhaps you will clarify that for us. I prefer to use syllogism as opposed to "circles". You see, A=B=C, therefore, A=C, is a circle. Now, I choose to use Allah's syllogisms or, as you call them, circles.
i didn't mean to insult or slander you at all, and if you felt that, i apologize.
Accepted, good deal.
however, what i am saying is dishonest is this... you do not speak Arabic.. you are reading an arabic dictionary that has been called into question NUMEROUS times... fine, you still use it because you have no choice. no complaints there... but you are confronted, not once, not twice, not thrice, but 4 times with people giving you evidence to the contrary.. PRIMARY source evidence (CLASSIC lexicons).
As i said, I don't know the Spanish language either, however, when i used to say to the Spanish ladies "como esta, baja?" I and that lady knew exactly what I was talking about on many levels. lol It is a canard and specious argument to say that, because someone doesn't know a particular language that they cannot know what particular words mean in that language. Another example is Latin. Many Latin phrases are used in law, writing, mottos etc. ,yet, the person using that phrase or word, while not knowing the Latin language, nonetheless, knows what that particular phrase or term means. It is know different in my case relative to fasala.
any intellectually HONEST person would at LEAST have second thoughts.. the fact that you press on unabashedly, is, as i said, dishonest.. for the obvious reason that you no longer are interested in truth, rather your views have become an agenda (probably subconsciously).
This is more canard, specious argument, and now...mind/heart/ghayb reading, Shuaib.
ask him if fassala means detailed.. let me save you the trouble, look back a few posts and open your eyes. i cant speak for what he exactly agrees with you about, but he did openly disagree about your interpretation of fasala which is what i am disagreeing with you about.
If he disagrees with me, then why in his finally post to me, did he say the following about fassalnahu relative to Al-Quran and guidance
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
He had to admit that, fasala, to be 'explained distinctly/clearly' or 'explained in a distinguishing/clarifying manner' or 'distinctly/clearly explained', could not be that/could not achieve that end, if it weren't, at the same time...fully detailed in that explanation.
WAKAS It means to make distinct, distinguish, clarify. I would translate the following 'fassalnahu tafseela' as 'explained distinctly/clearly' or 'explained in a distinguishing/clarifying manner' or 'distinctly/clearly explained'.
The Dictionary of the Holy Quran, by Omar, regarding fasala, writes
Main Entry FASALA to set apart separate distinguish set a limit depart decide divide into parts expatiate into detail make clear distinct narrate a thing with all its particulars. page 428
You will notice that both Wakas and Omar, use distinct and clear in their definitions, hence, it isn't the case that Omar doesn't know what he is talking about, rather, his definition is more comprehensive and exact, meaning, as I said to Wakas...how is something explained in a distinguishing and clarifying manner, and not at the same time, be fully detailed in that explanation, especially, something coming from Allah!? That simply would not make any sense at all. I believe this is what Wakas also understood, hence, his reply
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide. That does not mean every single thing must be detailed within it. For example, if it says one should do righteous deeds, that does not mean it must list every single righteous deed possible for one to do...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
if i have been dishonest in some way, feel free to tell me why. dont just say i was dishonest because i called you that, like we're children on the playground. are you going to stoop to that? i wasn't just randomly calling you names, i hope you can see.. i have a legitimate complaint against your tactics.. just as i did against apple pie! you are exactly following the logic of apple pie.. keep pressing on about your views, regardless of how little knowledge of Arabic you have or how much contrary linguistic evidence is supplied... and stick to your omar's dictionary with your eyes closed! is this how an sincere truth-seeking person behaves? if knowingly turning a blind eye to evidence is not dishonesty, then what is?
O.k. given that you are an honest and sincere individual, and my evidence is all wrong, then
-
please explain why both mine and Wakas's conclusion that, relative to guidance, Al-Quran is fasala...fully detailed.
-
please respond, at last, by way of Al-Quran, to the following
2185 The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed, a guidance to men and clear proofs of the guidance...that you should exalt the greatness of Allah for His having guided you and that you may give thanks
53...This day have I perfected for you your Deen and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Al-Islam as your Deen..
Main Entry PERFECT/ED being entirely without fault or defect flawless satisfying all requirements pure, total lacking in no essential detail complete meaning not lacking or faulty in any particular to bring to final form.
Main Entry COMPLETE having all necessary parts, elements, or steps.
Main Entry NECESSARY an indispensable item logically unavoidable that cannot be denied without contradiction
Main EntryGUIDANCE/Al-Quran the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .
Now, here is the question and it will only require a yes or no response. Given the above ayats and defintions
Are ALL of the NECESSARY details, RELATIVE/SPECIFIC, to MANKIND'S GUIDANCE , found in Allah's Quran. Yes or no?
(Remember now, Allah, is not threatening mankind with death, because we were created to die. Allah, therefore, is threatening mankind with...HELL, thus, what possible detail, could Allah not have included in Al-Quran, relative/specific to, man avoiding that fate/destiny?)
Please don't cop-out this time and call me circular, dishonest, insincere, ignorant, or blind, as a pretext for ignoring this post. If you are honest, sincere, can see, knowledgeable, and logical, then please demonstrate this, eshew any personal comments, and focus on the above issues, thanks.
As always, looking forward to your reply.
-
-
salams pb,
A=B=C is logic. But saying A=B and then repeating it over and over and over regardless of what the other person is saying, is dogma, not discussion.
If i ask you a question, in a discussion, you should answer it... not just repeat what you said in the last post in new words. What you have been doing in every post is taking what you said in the last post, tweaking it or changing the words slightly, and then reposting!
As i said, I don't know the Spanish language either, however, when i used to say to the Spanish ladies "como esta, baja?" I and that lady knew exactly what I was talking about on many levels.
The question is not the ability to say a phrase or two... the question is the ability to do a deep linguistic investigation in a particular word to find the nuances related to a word...
If he disagrees with me, then why in his finally post to me, did he say the following about fassalnahu relative to Al-Quran and guidance
i dont like to put words in others' mouths... but regardless of his end conclusion, he still disagreed with your definition of fasala..
Let's just take a step back for a second.
I dont think you realize how close we are on our positions... we both agree that all we need is the Quran and the Quran is complete and perfect. we both agree that we dont require outside divine sources and all necessary divine guidance is in the Quran.
To illustrate my point, I asked a question which for some reason you ignored yet again... how to punish drinking in Islam. try to answer/think about it and you might see where we differ or why i say the quran is perfect without being detailed.
-
PEACE, SHUAIB,
A=B=C is logic. But saying A=B and then repeating it over and over and over regardless of what the other person is saying, is dogma, not discussion.
If people would simply accept 1+1=2, then, there would be no need to repaeat things.
If i ask you a question, in a discussion, you should answer it... not just repeat what you said in the last post in new words. What you have been doing in every post is taking what you said in the last post, tweaking it or changing the words slightly, and then reposting!
"Tweaking", is refining (zakaa?), and not for my benefit, but yours.
The question is not the ability to say a phrase or two... the question is the ability to do a deep linguistic investigation in a particular word to find the nuances related to a word...
And that is why dictionaries/lexicons exist. Simply because your dictionary doesn't include fasala as meaning fully detailed and Omar's does, doesn't mean that your dictionary is correct, have you considered that possibility? Omar's definition incorporates both your dictionaries definition and other dictionaries definition of the term, hence, he offers a more comprehensive linguistic rendering of the term.
i dont like to put words in others' mouths... but regardless of his end conclusion, he still disagreed with your definition of fasala..
Seeing how you disagree, then, ask him. I think he does agree that fassalnhu incorporates fully detailed, as Omar wrote, because he specifically stated
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
Now, what Quranic term is he using for fully detailed, in his conclusion?
I dont think you realize how close we are on our positions... we both agree that all we need is the Quran and the Quran is complete and perfect. we both agree that we dont require outside divine sources and all necessary divine guidance is in the Quran.
Well, if that is your position and given the definitions of complete and perfect, then you know that Al-Quran, relative to/specific to GUIDANCE, is fully detailed. What is the problem? Why can't you simply admit to this? Nothing more than your ego prevents you from doing so, come on.
To illustrate my point, I asked a question which for some reason you ignored yet again... how to punish drinking in Islam. try to answer/think about it and you might see where we differ or why i say the quran is perfect without being detailed.
If Allah wanted a specific punishment for drinking, He would have, as He did with the specific fahusha/indency of zina , detailed it in Al-Quran. The guidance, then, on drinking is...Allah has left it up to each community/society to determine how to deal with it...that is the guidance on it. Now, what is your difficulty?
Looking forward to your reply.
-
peace PB, shuaib,
Do not embellish upon my comments. I feel my position was explained in a 'fassala' manner, thus there is no need to tell the reader what my position was.
As far as I can see, all of us agree that 'al quran' is all the guidance we need. It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
However, that does not change the fact that 'fassala' does not mean 'fully detailed'. The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
One could infer from the attribute 'fassala', that the text would be clear in what the text means thus it is sufficiently detailed with respect to gaining a meaning, but not 'fully detailed' as a blanket term.
When someone says a text is 'fully detailed' one must give an object of reference (i.e. fully detailed with respect to what). For example, a 'how to assemble product X' guide/booklet can be described as fully detailed BUT this description must go hand in hand with an appreciation of its purpose, i.e. it is fully detailed with respect to assembling product X.I am not using the term 'fassala' to conclude that 'al quran' is fully detailed. If the DofQ said it can mean 'fully detailed' then this means that somewhere someone used it in such a way, but as far as I can see 'al quran' does not use it in this way. I came to this conclusion through cross-referencing its usage.
Is that explanation 'fassala' enough for you?
Wakas
-
PEACE, WAKAS,
As far as I can see, all of us agree that 'al quran' is all the guidance we need. It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide. However, that does not change the fact that 'fassala' does not mean 'fully detailed'.
What is the Quranic term you are using for fully detailed, relative, to guidance? Please post it with the ayat.
The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
This makes no sense and you are contradicting yourself, let me show you.
Main Entry STYLE a distinctive manner of expression as in writing or speech.
The question now is, what is the style of Allah's Quran? Well, Allah says, Al-Quran is
Main Entry CLEAR free from obscurity or ambiguity easily understood unmistakeable capable of sharp discernment free from doubt.
Main Entry BANA/BAYYINAH/MUBIN 2282; clear evidence; clear proof; precise testimony explaining clearlybeyond doubt. page 70-71
Main Entry FASALA to set apart separate distinguish set a limit depart decide divide into parts expatiate into detail make clear distinct narrate a thing with all its particulars. Dictionary of the Holy Quran, page 428
Main Entry FASALA to divide into particular sectionsclassify categorize to present in logical order set forth in detail particularize. A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, by Hans Wehr. page 715-716
Main Entry TAFSEEL detailed statement elaborate or minute exposition detailing completeness of detail particular. A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, by Hans Wehr. page 716
Main Entry DETAIL fassal yufassil tafsil. The English-Arabic Translator Dictionary, by F. Steingass, revised by Said Salah.
1712 We have made the Night and the Day as two (of Our) Signs the Sign of the Night have We obscured, while the Sign of the Day We have made to enlighten you; that ye may seek bounty from your Lord, and that ye may know the number and count of the years all things have We explained in detail.
1712 WajaAAalna allayla wannahara ayatayni famahawna ayata allayli wajaAAalna ayata annahari mubsiratan litabtaghoo fadlan min rabbikum walitaAAlamoo AAadada assineena walhisaba wakulla shayin fassalnahu tafseela.
The above ayat then, is saying that, Allah, has minutely and completely...detailed the details. Hence, the purpose of Al-Quran is to Guide mankind , and the style of Al-Quran is to be clear . Now, especially, that Al-Quran comes from Allah, how is it possible then for it to be clear, and not at the same time, fully detailed?
One could infer from the attribute 'fassala', that the text would be clear in what the text means thus it is sufficiently detailed with respect to gaining a meaning...
Well, isn't it all about the meaning of Al-Quran? We are supposed to derive its meaning so that we can take advantage of its guidance and be guided. If we could not derive the meaning of Al-Quran, then, it could not fulfill its purpose/raison d etre--to guide , but, there is no deriving its meaning if it isn't fully detailed toward that end.
but not 'fully detailed' as a blanket term. When someone says a text is 'fully detailed' one must give an object of reference (i.e. fully detailed with respect to what). For example, a 'how to assemble product X' guide/booklet can be described as fully detailed BUT this description must go hand in hand with an appreciation of its purpose, i.e. it is fully detailed with respect to assembling product X.
Who's talking about as a "blanket term"?, this is what Shuaib, and now you, obviously, are talking about, not me. Al-Quran does not give details on how to build and X-Box, a deisel locomotive, a conputer chip, or how to lay carpeting. I'm talking about, as you also admitted to btw, that Al-Quran in its purpose to guide mankind , is fassalnahu/fully detailed. This is not a blanket use of fassalnahu, but a very specific use of it...specific to/relative to...guidance .
I am not using the term 'fassala' to conclude that 'al quran' is fully detailed.
You aren't saying it's fully detailed specific to what? You, as with Shuaib, are now free-floating/disconecting this term from its meaning and purpose---that Al-Quran is fully detailed relative to/specfic to---Guidance...it's only usage.
If the DofQ said it can mean 'fully detailed' then this means that somewhere someone used it in such a way, but as far as I can see 'al quran' does not use it in this way. I came to this conclusion through cross-referencing its usage.
Look again, because you've already defined this term, specific to, guidance the same way Al-Quran uses it and myself.
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
As you see, you made no mention of style, which, contradicts your above position. But, as you can see, your style argument is a canard and does not hold up.
Is that explanation 'fassala' enough for you?
No, it's not and I'm looking forward with anticipation to your reply.
-
peace PB,
What is the Quranic term you are using for fully detailed, relative, to guidance? Please post it with the ayat.
I am not using any specific term. I am using the message/information contained within several signs (that article needs updating with my new understanding of FSL). I am also using logic to determine 'al quran' is fully detailed with respect to its purpose.
Its clear to me, you are seeing what you want to see in my writing (this is easily demonstrated by your cuting & pasting of my words then underneath you give an interpretation/embellishment of what I'm saying). If you are so sure I am contradicting myself, why dont you ask for other forum members of their opinion, see if they come to the same conclusion.
Since you are a fan of dictionary meanings, allow me to present one you never did
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contradiction
Wakas
-
PEACE, WAKAS,
Thanks for your reply.
I am not using any specific term. I am using the message/information contained within several signs (that article needs updating with my new understanding of FSL). I am also using logic to determine 'al quran' is fully detailed with respect to its purpose.
Well, if you are not using a specific term for fully detailed, then you are conjecturing about Al-Quran being fully detailed in any regard, because with no term for fully detailed, you cannot prove that it is, in fact, fully detailed, certainly you must see this? Your position then, is in contradiction to ayats 733, 1736, and 2124
733 Say the things that my Lord has indeed made haram are shameful deeds, whether open or secret; sins and trespasses against truth or reason; assigning of partners to Allah, for which He has given no authority; and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.
1736 And pursue not that of which you have no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning)
- Or have they taken for worship (other) gods besides him? Say, "Bring your convincing proof this is the Message of those with me and the Message of those before me." But most of them know not the Truth, and so turn away.
Its clear to me, you are seeing what you want to see in my writing (this is easily demonstrated by your cuting & pasting of my words then underneath you give an interpretation/embellishment of what I'm saying). If you are so sure I am contradicting myself, why dont you ask for other forum members of their opinion, see if they come to the same conclusion.
I only posted what you what stated, Wakas. On one hand, you agreed with me that Al-Quran, in its purpose/reason for existence, was to guide mankind, and in that it is fully detailed, hence, the contents of Al-Quran--the ayats, those things that do the guiding, must be fully detailed regarding guidance. Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style??? This, by any definition of the term, is contradictory---"to be inconsistent". The only thing I've been asserting is that Al-Quran, relative to guidance, is fully detailed and that fasala expresses the meaning of fully detailed.
Btw, do you stand by your assertion that, Al-Quran is not fully detailed in content, but only in style, is this your final position?
why dont you ask for other forum members of their opinion, see if they come to the same conclusion.
Tell me how to do this and I will, no problem.
Looking forward to your responses.
-
peace PB,
Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style???
This is yet another example of you seeing what you want to see. I stated no such thing.
The only thing I've been asserting is that Al-Quran, relative to guidance, is fully detailed and that fasala expresses the meaning of fully detailed.
I know this is what you've been asserting, and I disagree with the latter. And in a resulting issue, I disagree with me making any contradictory statement.
Tell me how to do this and I will, no problem.
The invitation has been made, if people wish to come forth, they can, if they dont, they dont have to. Simple.
In the meantime, I suggest you re-read my posts.
Wakas
-
PEACE, WAKAS,
Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style???
This is yet another example of you seeing what you want to see. I stated no such thing.
Well, that is quite possible, so, please, tell me what I misread. Here is your quote
However, that does not change the fact that 'fassala' does not mean 'fully detailed'. The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
I am quoted as saying
"Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style??? This, by any definition of the term, is contradictory---"to be inconsistent".
What did I get wrong as to what you stated?? Either you are contradicting yourself, or, you are agreeing with me that, Al-Quran's style is to be--clear/ban and fully detailed/fasala. Which is it?
I know this is what you've been asserting, and I disagree with the latter. And in a resulting issue, I disagree with me making any contradictory statement.
What, then, is the word you are using for fully detailed, relative, to guidance? Please answer this. As I said, we cannot make claims and then not provide the ayat/proof.
Tell me how to do this and I will, no problem.
The invitation has been made, if people wish to come forth, they can, if they dont, they dont have to. Simple.
O.k. I will start a thread--IS AL-QURAN, RELATIVE TO/SPECIFIC TO, GUIDANCE, FULLY DETAILED IN STYLE OR CONTENT...OR BOTH?
I'll use your quote
The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
What do you think?
-
peace,
I believe this is sufficient evidence against your extrapolation/embellishment/misrepresentation upon my comments
My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide. That does not mean every single thing must be detailed within it. For example, if it says one should do righteous deeds, that does not mean it must list every single righteous deed possible for one to do.
Please note his ommission of not highlighting the part in blue. This distorted my view.
He then goes onto state
- please explain why both mine and Wakas's conclusion that, relative to guidance, Al-Quran is fasala...fully detailed.
One again, distorting my view. Not once did I state that fassala=fully detailed.
I believe this is what Wakas also understood, hence, his reply
If he disagrees with me, then why in his finally post to me, did he say the following about fassalnahu relative to Al-Quran and guidance
He had to admit that, fasala, to be 'explained distinctly/clearly' or 'explained in a distinguishing/clarifying manner' or 'distinctly/clearly explained', could not be that/could not achieve that end, if it weren't, at the same time...fully detailed in that explanation.
Where did I admit that? Your embellishment/extrapolation/misrepresentation is in direct contradiction with my answer
My view of 'fassala=distinguish' can co-exist with such a view. Something can be explained in a distinguishing/clarifying/distinct manner by the presentation/style/content. For example, the distinguishing/clarifying way 'al quran' uses internal tafsir/explanation of its concepts/terms. The way it uses contrast, the way it uses examples/parables to explain its points etc.
The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
it isn't the case that Omar doesn't know what he is talking about, rather, his definition is more comprehensive and exact
Perhaps this is where you are going wrong. One must know what a dictionary is, before one uses it. Just because the dictionary states 5 meanings for example, doesn't mean these can be rolled together into one super-exact-definition and this is the meaning applicable in all occurrences in 'al quran'.
As a result, I'd like to give you some more dictionary definitions
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dictionary
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=embellish
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=extrapolate
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=interpret
http//dictionary.reference.com/search?q=misrepresent
O.k. I will start a thread--IS AL-QURAN, RELATIVE TO/SPECIFIC TO, GUIDANCE, FULLY DETAILED IN STYLE OR CONTENT...OR BOTH?
Do you hear yourself? Do you honestly think someone you described as "intellectually honest" would make an absurd claim that 'al quran' is fully detailed in style? I have a radical idea, could it be that you misinterpreted what I said and ran away with it, then when I clarified my position, you then thought I was contradicting myself.
I have no more to say on this matter.
Wakas
-
PEACE, WAKAS,
Do you hear yourself? Do you honestly think someone you described as "intellectually honest" would make an absurd claim that 'al quran' is fully detailed in style? I have a radical idea, could it be that you misinterpreted what I said and ran away with it, then when I clarified my position, you then thought I was contradicting myself.
Wakas, relative to Al-Quran being fully detailed, the only thing we are discussing is, it being fully detailed relative to/specific to---guidance, that is it. Whatever details regarding the concept of righteous deeds are all in Al-Quran. I'm not talking about listing all the possible righteous deeds which can be performed, hence, the following part of your post is not relevent to our discussion.
...That does not mean every single thing must be detailed within it. For example, if it says one should do righteous deeds, that does not mean it must list every single righteous deed possible for one to do.
A). Wakas, I can only go on what you said, to wit
My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
However, that does not change the fact that 'fassala' does not mean 'fully detailed'. The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.
I am quoted as saying
"On one hand, you agreed with me that Al-Quran, in its purpose/reason for existence, is to guide mankind, and, in that, it is fully detailed, hence, the contents of Al-Quran--the ayats, those things that do the guiding, must be fully detailed regarding guidance. Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style??? This, by any definition of the term, is contradictory---"to be inconsistent".
I ask you again...what did I get wrong as to what you stated?? Either you are contradicting yourself, or, you are agreeing with me that, Al-Quran's style is to be--clear/bana and fully detailed/fasala. Which is it? You, thus far, have not explained...your detail in style vs not being detailed in content, assertion, please do so, come on.
B). Again, what is the word you are using for fully detailed, relative, to guidance? Please answer this. As I said, we cannot make claims and then not provide the ayat/proof.
I have no more to say on this matter.
Come on, don't do this brother. I do see you as being an intellectually honest individual, but honestly, right now, I do think you are copping-out. If it were the other way around, I would not end the conversation with you until I either conceded a point to you or proved my own. Copping out, in my opinion, is not being intellectually honest, agreed? If so, then please address A and B.
Peace and looking forward to your reply
-
salam pb,
The likely reason people do not like to discuss with you after a while, is because it becomes more and more obvious that you are agenda driven.
This means that you've already decided what you believe in, and you are looking for any possible means to justify it, regardless of the truth of those methods.
A prime example is your "linguistic analysis," which is IDENTICAL to apple pie's methods. You repeatedly turn a blind eye to the multitude of evidence presented to you, and you blindly clutch Omar's faulty QD claiming ridiculous things like maybe he's right and everyone else is wrong.
You make a big deal about wakas agreeing with you, (which ironically enough turned out not to be true), while it is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT how many people agree or disagree with you... truth is truth, regardless of popularity.
If people would simply accept 1+1=2, then, there would be no need to repaeat things.
Spoken like a true dogmatist.
If Allah wanted a specific punishment for drinking, He would have, as He did with the specific fahusha/indency of zina , detailed it in Al-Quran. The guidance, then, on drinking is...Allah has left it up to each community/society to determine how to deal with it...that is the guidance on it.
Thanks for finally answering the question... actually, you answered it in pretty much the same way i did in my very first post on this thread.
Now, if you look back in my previous posts about my definition of principles and laws (or principles and details/applications)... the fact that zina and drinking are fahisha (bad) are principles. The fact the zina gets punished with 80 lashes is the application/detail/law.
You agree with me that drinking needs to be dealt with and this is not given in the Quran, hence its "up to each community/society to determine to how deal with it" (in your own words). However, this application/detail/law is NOT found in the Quran now is it?
Do you NOW understand what I mean by the Quran is not fully detailed?
This is not an opinion, it's an obvious fact... all the applications of principles/laws/details are just not there... yet some are. And I explained the wisdom/reason behind this in my very first post. -
PEACE, SHUAIB,
salam pb,
You repeatedly turn a blind eye to the multitude of evidence presented to you, and you blindly clutch Omar's faulty QD claiming ridiculous things like maybe he's right and everyone else is wrong.
Not only did I give Omar's definition, but Hans Wehr's and Steingass, as well. Both Omar and Wehr, agree with the definition that Wakas and you so cling to, but also defined the term as detailed as well. Now, let me ask you a question, seeing how you are so grounded in the Arabic langauge, are you going to say that absolutely that, fasala, cannot mean detailed, is this your position, yes or no?
You make a big deal about wakas agreeing with you, (which ironically enough turned out not to be true), while it is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT how many people agree or disagree with you... truth is truth, regardless of popularity.
Wakas did agree with me. My only point has been that, relative to/specific to GUIDANCE, that Al-Quran is fully detailed, THAT IS ALL, to wit
Main EntryGUIDANCE/Al-Quran the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .
Wakas, contrary to your above claim, did agree with me on Al-Quran being fully detailed as a...guide, to wit
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
Now, are you going to say that I'm not reading his quoted clearly, please? He said exactly the same thing I said, my God.
Thanks for finally answering the question... actually, you answered it in pretty much the same way i did in my very first post on this thread.
I've answered this question at least twice now, but you have elected to ignore the answer.
Now, if you look back in my previous posts about my definition of principles and laws (or principles and details/applications)... the fact that zina and drinking are fahisha (bad) are principles. The fact the zina gets punished with 80 lashes is the application/detail/law.
And?
You agree with me that drinking needs to be dealt with and this is not given in the Quran, hence its "up to each community/society to determine to how deal with it" (in your own words). However, this application/detail/law is NOT found in the Quran now is it?
Just because Allah allows man to come up with the exact punishment for the misuse of intoxicants, does not mean He has not given the GUIDANCE on it. My understanding is that He told mankind to AVOID doing it, because while there is some benefit it, there is greater harm in it...AND THAT IS THE GUIDANCE ON IT. Allah, has not left mankind bereft of guidance concerning drinking. How is Allah going to prescibe a punishment for something that He says has some benefit in it? Each society must, on its own, designate what it considers the abuse of intoxicants and then design a means to deal with it. Now what more do you want?
Do you NOW understand what I mean by the Quran is not fully detailed? This is not an opinion, it's an obvious fact... all the applications of principles/laws/details are just not there... yet some are. And I explained the wisdom/reason behind this in my very first post.
I've ALWAYS understood what your erroneous position. I continue to say that Al-Quran, relative/specific to guidance, is fully detailed. You, rather than understanding that, choose to use detailed regarding everything under the sun. Allah, has not made any claim that Al-Quran is fully detailed on everything i.e. how to do the flamingo. What are you talking about.
Let me ask you a question
IS IT YOUR POSITION ,THEN THAT, RELATIVE TO/SPECIFIC TO--GUIDANCE THAT, AL-QURAN, IS NOT FULLY DETAILED? I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT AL-QURAN BEING FULLY DETAILED IN ANY OTHER MATTER, JUST IN GUIDANCE . Please answer yes or no, thanks. I hope, as with Wakas, you will not bail when the chips are down.
The following, was my last post to Wakas. As you can see, he could extricate himself from his contradictions and bailed. Perhaps you can ask him, as I did unsuccessfully, what Quranic term is he using to define fully detailed.
WAKAS
Do you hear yourself? Do you honestly think someone you described as "intellectually honest" would make an absurd claim that 'al quran' is fully detailed in style? I have a radical idea, could it be that you misinterpreted what I said and ran away with it, then when I clarified my position, you then thought I was contradicting myself.Wakas, relative to Al-Quran being fully detailed, the only thing we are discussing is, it being fully detailed relative to/specific to---guidance, that is it. Whatever details regarding the concept of righteous deeds are all in Al-Quran. I'm not talking about listing all the possible righteous deeds which can be performed, hence, the following part of your post is not relevent to our discussion.
WAKAS
...That does not mean every single thing must be detailed within it. For example, if it says one should do righteous deeds, that does not mean it must list every single righteous deed possible for one to do.WAKAS
My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose...It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.WAKAS
However, that does not change the fact that 'fassala' does not mean 'fully detailed'. The argument put forth that if the text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this equates to the text being fully detailed is INCORRECT. If a text is explained in a 'fassala' manner, this is making a reference to its style, NOT its content.I am quoted as saying
"On one hand, you agreed with me that Al-Quran, in its purpose/reason for existence, is to guide mankind, and, in that, it is fully detailed, hence, the contents of Al-Quran--the ayats, those things that do the guiding, must be fully detailed regarding guidance. Then, you turn around and say that it is not fully detailed in content but style??? This, by any definition of the term, is contradictory---"to be inconsistent".
I ask you again...what did I get wrong as to what you stated?? Either you are contradicting yourself, or, you are agreeing with me that, Al-Quran's style is to be--clear/bana and fully detailed/fasala. Which is it? You, thus far, have not explained...your detail in style vs not being detailed in content, assertion, please do so, come on.
B). Again, what is the word you are using for fully detailed, relative, to guidance? Please answer this. As I said, we cannot make claims and then not provide the ayat/proof.
Looking forward, with great anticipation, to your reply.
Peace.
-
salam pb,
you're becoming quite the lost cause unfortunately, because of the way you are discussing. you have total disregard for evidence, and repeatedly so.
Not only did I give Omar's definition, but Hans Wehr's and Steingass, as well.
the more you talk the more you incriminate yourself. you are using MODERN ARABIC dictionaries... it is well known that meanings creep into Arabic words in modern Arabic, which are totally different from the true classic meanings.
Keep it up mr. makeshift professor of arabic without actually knowing arabic.
Wakas did agree with me.
you love putting words in people's mouths don't you? come on, have some scruples! he just went back and forth with you in several posts before finally getting sick of you. i'm not going to put words in his mouth, but i think it's obvious that he decided that fassala DOES NOT MEAN fully detailed... and wasn't that the whole issue here? Wasn't that how this thread got started?
Besides, it's irrelevant whether he agreed or not. The fact you CONTINUE to talk about this shows your immaturity. Whether he agreed or not is irrelevant, and you continue to show the forum the low level of your arguing techniques.
Just because Allah allows man to come up with the exact punishment for the misuse of intoxicants, does not mean He has not given the GUIDANCE on it.
It's amazing how short your attention span is. Let's go back to what i JUST said...
I SAID
Now, if you look back in my previous posts about my definition of principles and laws (or principles and details/applications)... the fact that zina and drinking are fahisha (bad) are principles.
In other words, we have gotten FULL "guidance" or "principles" on both drinking and zina.
However, we ALSO get DETAILS/LAWS/APPLICATIONS about zina... 80 lashes.
We DONT get this for drinking. You AGREE with me that it needs to be dealt with, and the community has to come up with the technique (your own words). IN OTHER WORDS, the DETAIL/LAW/APPLICATION for drinking is NOT THERE (compare this to zina, which IS THERE).
Please don't mix up the term DETAILED and COMPLETE. That is what you are doing here... when I say the Quran is not detailed (which is obvious) you immediately say "Well you're just saying the Quran is incomplete." As I said before, the Quran CAN be complete WITHOUT giving us ALL the applications/details.
Also note, according to my definitions the claim "the guidance is fully detailed in the Quran" MEANS that the principles PLUS the application is given. You are using fully detailed to mean the guidance is complete. This is NOT what I am talking about.. when I say fully detailed it means the guidance is complete AND the applications/details/laws are given for ALL the principles in the Quran.
Most of the confusion stems from your blind adherence to your modern arabic dictionaries.
-
Peace be upon you,
The God guides us towards ending debates when arguing cannot be avoided...."there is no arguing(jidala) in the debate"(Hajj)"
When arguing is taking place, we have left the realm of "Oneness" and we now see an "enemy" (so to speak). We should refrain and use that energy to transcend the emotional state and get back to PEACE. Peace is more important, debates must be halted for the sake of PEACE, we do not trade PEACE for a miserable price. We start our posts of with the greeting to invoke peace, so how can we then turn around and invoke tension with our statements, wether initiated or in response.
Just a reminder for myself and everyone else involved in this and all threads.
-
PEACE, SHUAIB,
you're becoming quite the lost cause unfortunately, because of the way you are discussing. you have total disregard for evidence, and repeatedly so...come on, have some scruples!...Keep it up mr. makeshift professor of arabic without actually knowing arabic...The fact you CONTINUE to talk about this shows your immaturity. Whether he agreed or not is irrelevant, and you continue to show the forum the low level of your arguing techniques...Most of the confusion stems from your blind adherence to your modern arabic dictionaries.
No personal attacks please; keep to the issues, thanks.
the more you talk the more you incriminate yourself. you are using MODERN ARABIC dictionaries... it is well known that meanings creep into Arabic words in modern Arabic, which are totally different from the true classic meanings.
This is simply your opinion, nothing more.
Wakas did agree with me.
you love putting words in people's mouths don't you? come on, have some scruples! he just went back and forth with you in several posts before finally getting sick of you. i'm not going to put words in his mouth, but i think it's obvious that he decided that fassala DOES NOT MEAN fully detailed... and wasn't that the whole issue here? Wasn't that how this thread got started?
LOL! You are evading, once again, what he and I agreed on, why do you continue to do this? Let me post, for the fourth time at least, where Wakas and I agree
PRIEST BOKMEI Relative to/specific to--Guidance, Al-Quran is fully detailed.
WAKAS My view is that al quran contains all the guidance we need with respect to its purpose....It is fully detailed with respect to its purpose as a guide.
Now, there you have it. What are you going to deny, that he didn't agree with my proposition?
Then I asked him
What Quranic word/term, are using for--fully detailed?
He made a claim about Al-Quran, to wit that, as a guide, it is fully detailed, hence, he is now required to prove that, hence, he is required to produce the Quranic term to justify his calling Allah's Quran---fully detailed? After being confronted with this question, he bailed out of the discussion...why? And please don't give me the "he's sick of me", baloney, because that is blaming.
In other words, we have gotten FULL "guidance" or "principles" on both drinking and zina.
Thank you, and that is all I've been arguing!
However, we ALSO get DETAILS/LAWS/APPLICATIONS about zina... 80 lashes.
Because that is Allah's guidance on zina. His guidance on drinking is..."people, you deal with it". What's the problem?
Please don't mix up the term DETAILED and COMPLETE. That is what you are doing here... when I say the Quran is not detailed (which is obvious) you immediately say "Well you're just saying the Quran is incomplete." As I said before, the Quran CAN be complete WITHOUT giving us ALL the applications/details.
2185 The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed, a guidance to men and clear proofs of the guidance...that you should exalt the greatness of Allah for His having guided you and that you may give thanks.
53...This day have I perfected for you your Deen and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Al-Islam as your Deen..
Main Entry PERFECT/ED being entirely without fault or defect flawless satisfying all requirements pure, total lacking in no essential detail complete meaning not lacking or faulty in any particular to bring to final form.
Main Entry COMPLETE having all necessary parts, elements, or steps.
Main Entry NECESSARY an indispensable item logically unavoidable that cannot be denied without contradiction
Main Entry DETAIL to report minutely and distinctly specify marked by abundant thoroughness in treating small items or parts.
( Now, would you look at that. Detail, means to report minutely and distinctly. So, let me get this straight, if something, as M-W asserts, is reported in a minute and distinct manner...it is detailed.
Check out what Allah says
1712...all things have We explained in detail.
1712...shayin fassalnahu tafseela.
WAKAS, said I would translate the following 'fassalnahu tafseela' as 'explained distinctly/clearly' or 'explained in a distinguishing/clarifying manner' or 'distinctly/clearly explained'.
Wow, would you look at that, Wakas, defined detail the same way as M-W. Instead of using "report", he uses "explain", and the both he and M-W, use "distinct". Without a doubt, fasala, means detailed. So, Allah, Wakas, M-W...all define detail the same way, hence, when Allah says "fassalnahu tafseela", He can only mean..detail miunutely and distinctly...the details)
GUIDANCE/Al-Quran the instructions on how to live a righteous life in this world (especially, not to do shirk) , so that, one may successfuly pass the test of conduct , so that, one may avoid the destiny of Hell and gain the destiny of Paradise .
Now, here is the question and it will only require a yes or no response . Given the above ayats and defintions
Are ALL of the NECESSARY/COMPLETE DETAILS, RELATIVE TO MANKIND'S GUIDANCE , found in Allah's Quran. Yes or no?
Also note, according to my definitions the claim "the guidance is fully detailed in the Quran" MEANS that the principles PLUS the application is given.
Where did you get this from?? Tell you what, please pull out your ayats and prove your assertion.
2185 The month of Ramazan is that in which the Quran was revealed, a guidance to men and clear proofs of the guidance and the criterion...that you should exalt the greatness of Allah for His having guided you and that you may give thanks.
If guidance, according to you, means principles plus applications , then Allah, in 2185, Has made a mistake, because, according to you, in that, Allah didn't give the "application", as you define it, for dealing with drinking, His Quran then, cannot, in fact, relative to/specific to guidance, be fully detailed. Sorry, but you cannot have it both ways.
You are using fully detailed to mean the guidance is complete.
Exactly right! That is all I've been arguing.
This is NOT what I am talking about.. when I say fully detailed it means the guidance is complete AND the applications/details/laws are given for ALL the principles in the Quran.
LOL! Well, then you've made this up and now ascribe it to Allah's Quran. Either Allah's Quran, relative to/specific to GUIDANCE, is complete, fully detailed, and perfect...or it is not. Does Allah, anywhere, say that His Quran is not fully detailed in IT'S guidance/that somewhere it is lacking in guidance?, because for you to claim it is, relative to the "guidance of applications", then you must provide the proof/ayat where Allah says what you are ascribing to Him.
Looking forward to your reply.
