Angels?who eat up roasted calf...........

unknownuser

Salaams Idmkhizar,

You said

?I get the impression from you that you are one of those who likes to take everything symbloical or allegorical in the Quran rather than literal?

No sorry to disappoint you Br. I always take everything literal.

Just look at this

once i was convincing a close relation about the errors in the translation of the quran,He gave me an answer to make me believe in the Kaaba.He reminded me of the story of the owners of the elephents who once are thought to have come to destroy the kaaba ,but allah sent the flock of birds with stones and thus saved his kaaba from destruction?

Sura 105

Ashaab = companions ,7439,9018,9019 and all over the quran.and in
lanes.

Feil = incorrect in judgment and opinions/low ignoble and MEAN.
=but also elephants. (lanes)

wakas pointeded out the dictionery of the quran and i looked through and saw that ababeel are not birds as i allways thought they were
and funny found couple of other things

Tarmee = He shot or cast.
Tair(an) = moved in the air or flew.
ababeel = a company in a state of dispersion.

105

Have not you seen how dealt your lord with the companions of the mean did not he make their plot go astray and he sent against them flying company ,in atate of dispersion shot at them of stones of baked clay.And made them like stubble,stalks devoured.

God Bless.

Idris

peace be upon you mehdi,

this is for both of yous...

isn't taking everything literal kinda of scary? .. i mean... the highest spritual truths come in forms of stories and parables... taking everything literal sounds like what i hear many of the christians who try and describe events of the bible tend to do.. which in my eyes is a bit out of touch..

maybe i took it wrong and you guys can explain a bit more

I believe the direct commands to us, such as laws, orders, and such are given to us in this reading literally and the stories are given to us allegorically/symbolically, these are examples that we must strive to attain

Symbolism and Allegory in the Qu'ran

by Muhammad Asad

When studying the Quran, one frequently encounters what may be described as "key?- phrases" - that is to say, statements which provide a clear, concise indication of the idea underlying a particular passage or passages for instance, the many references to the creation of man "out of dust" and "out of a drop of sperm", pointing to the lowly biological origin of the human species; or the statement in the ninety-ninth surah (Az-Zalzalah) that on Resurrection Day "he who shall have done an atom's weight of good, shall behold it; and he who shall have done an atom's weight of evil, shall behold it" - indicating the inelucctible afterlife consequences of, and the responsibility for, all that man consciously does in this world; or the divine declaration (in 3827), "We have not created heaven and earth and all that is between them without meaning and purpose (baatilan), as is the surmise of those who are bent on denying the truth."

Instances of such Quranic key-phrases can be quoted almost ad infinitum, and in many varying formulations. But there is one fundamental statement in the Quran which occurs only once, and which may be qualified as "the key-phrase of all its key-phrases" the statement in verse 37 to the effect that the Quran "contains messages that are clear in and by themselves (ayat-e-muhkamaat) as well as others that are allegorical (mutashabihaat)". It is this verse which represents, in an absolute sense, a key to the understanding of the Qur'anic message and makes the whole of it accessible to "people who think" (li-qawmin yatafakkarUn).

In my notes on the above-mentioned verse I have tried to elucidate the meaning of the expression ayaat muhkimaat as well as the general purport of what is termed mutashabih ("allegorical" or "symbolic"). Without a proper grasp of what is implied by this latter term, much of the Qur~an is liable to be - and, in fact, has often been - grossly misunderstood both by believers and by such as refuse to believe in its divinely-inspired origin. However, an appreciation of what is meant by "allegory" or "symbolism" in the context of the Quran is, by itself, not enough to make one fully understand its world-view in order to achieve this we must relate the Quranic use of these terms to a concept touched upon almost at the very beginning of the divine writ - namely, the existence of "a realm which is beyond the reach of human perception" (aI-ghayb). It is this concept that constitutes the basic premise for an understanding of the call of the Quran, and, indeed, of the principle of religion - every religion - as such for all truly religious cognition arises from and is based on the fact that only a small segment of reality is open to man's perception and imagination, and that by far the larger part of it escapes his comprehension altogether.

However, side by side with this clear-cut metaphysical concept we have a not less clear-cut finding of a psychological nature namely, the finding that the human mind (in which term we comprise conscious thinking, imagination, dream-life, intuition, memory, etc.) can operate only on the basis of perceptions previously experienced by that very mind either in their entirety or in some of their constituent elements that is to say, it cannot visualize, or form an idea of, something that lies entirely outside the realm of previously realized experiences. Hence, whenever we arrive at a seemingly "new" mental image or idea, we find, on closer examination, that even if it is new as a composite entity, it is not really new as regards its component elements, for these are invariably derived from previous - and sometimes quite disparate - mental experiences which are now but brought together in a new combination or series of new combinations.

Now as soon as we realize that the human mind cannot operate otherwise than on the basis of previous experiences - that is to say, on the basis of apperceptions and cognitions already recorded in that mind - we are faced by a weighty question Since the metaphysical ideas of religion relate, by virtue of their nature, to a realm beyond the reach of human perception or experience - how can they be successfully conveyed too us? How can we he expected to grasp ideas which have no counterpart, not even a fractional one, in any of the apperceptions which we have arrived at empirically?

The answer is self-evident By means of loan-images derived from our actual - physical or mental - experiences; or, as Zamakhshari phrases it in his commentary on 1335, "through a parabolic illustration, by means of something which we know from our experience, of something that is beyond the reach of our perception" (tamtheelan li-ma ghaaba anna bi-ma nushaahid). And this is the innermost purport of the term and concept of al-mutashaabihaat as used in the Quran.

Thus, the Qur~an tells us clearly that many of its passages and expressions must be understood in an allegorical sense for the simple reason that, being intended for human understanding, they could not have been conveyed to us in any other way.. It follows, therefore, that if we were to take every Quranic passage, statement or expression in its outward, literal sense and disregard the possibility of its being an allegory, a metaphor or a parable, we would be offending against the very spirit of the divine writ.

Consider, for instance, some of the Quranic references to God's Being - Being indefinable, infinite in time and space, and utterly beyond any creature's comprehension. Far from being able to imagine Him, we can only realize what He is not namely, not limited in either time or space, not definable in terms of comparison, and not to be comprised within any category of human thought. Hence, only very generalized metaphors can convey to us, though most inadequately, the idea of His existence and activity.

And so, when the Quran speaks of Him as being "in the heavens" or "established on His throne (al-arsh)", we cannot possibly take these phrases in their literal senses, since then they would imply, however vaguely, that God is limited in space and since such a limitation would contradict the concept of an Infinite Being, we know immediately, without the least doubt that the "heavens" and the "throne" and God's being "established" on it are but linguistic vehicles meant to convey an idea which is outside all human experience, namely, the idea of God's almightiness and absolute sway over all that exists. Similarly, whenever He is described as "all-seeing", "all-hearing" or "all-aware", we know that these descriptions have nothing to do with the phenomena of physical seeing or hearing hut simply circumscribe, in terms understandable to man, the fact of God's eternal Presence in all that is or happens. And since "no human vision can encompass Him" (Quran 6103), man is not expected to realize His existence otherwise than through observing the effects of His unceasing activity within and upon the universe created by Him.

But whereas our belief in God's existence does not - and, indeed, could not - depend on our grasping the unfathomable "how" of His Being, the same is not the case with problems connected with man's own existence, and, in particular, with the idea of a life in the hereafter for, man's psyche is so constituted that it cannot accept any proposition relating to himself without being given a clear exposition of its purport.

The Quran tells us that man's life in this world is but the first stage - a very short stage - of a life that continues beyond the hiatus called "death" ; and the same Quran stresses again and again the principle of man's moral responsibility for all his conscious actions and his behaviour, and of the continuation of this responsibility, in the shape of inescapable consequences, good or bad, in a person's life in the hereafter. But how could man be made to understand the nature of these consequences and, thus, of the quality of the life that awaits him'? - for, obviously, inasmuch as man's resurrection will be the result of what the Quran describes as "a new act of creation", the life that will follow upon it must be entirely different from anything that man can and does experience in this world.

This being so, it is not enough for man to be told, "If you behave righteously in this world, you will attain to happiness in the life to come" , or, alternatively, "If you do wrong in this world, you will suffer for it in the hereafter". Such statements would be far too general and abstract to appeal to man's imagination and, thus, to influence his behaviour. What is needed is a more direct appeal to the intellect, resulting in a kind of "visualization" of the consequences of one's conscious acts and omissions and such an appeal can be effectively produced by means of metaphors, allegories and parables, each of them stressing, on the one hand, the absolute dissimilarity of all that man will experience after resurrection from whatever he did or could experience in this world; and, on the other hand, establishing means of comparison between these two categories of experience.

Thus, explaining the reference to the bliss of paradise in 3217, the Prophet indicated the essential difference between man's life in this world and in the hereafter in these words "God says, 'I have readied for My righteous servants what no eye has ever seen, and no ear has ever heard, and no heart of man has ever conceived"' (Bukh?ri, Muslim, Tirmidhi). On the other hand, in 225 the Quran speaks thus of the blessed in paradise "Whenever they are granted fruits therefrom as their appointed sustenance, they will say, 'It is this that in days of yore was granted to us as our sustenance' - for they shall be given something which will recall that

" and so we have the image of gardens through which running waters flow, blissful shade, spouses of indescribable beauty, and many other delights infinitely varied and unending, and yet somehow comparable to what may be conceived of as most delightful in this world.

However, this possibility of an intellectual comparison between the two stages of human existence is to a large extent limited by the fact that all our thinking and imagining is indissolubly connected with the concepts of finite time and finite space in other words, we cannot imagine infinity in either time or space - and therefore cannot imagine a state of existence independent of time and space - or, as the Qur'~n phrases it with reference to a state of happiness in afterlife, "a paradise as vast as the heavens and the earth" (3133) which expression is the Qur'anic synonym for the entire created universe. On the other hand, we know that every Qur'anic statement is directed to man's reason and must, therefore, be comprehensible either in its literal sense (as in the case of the dy?t muhkamdt) or allegorically (as in the ayat-e-mutashaabihaat); and since, owing to the constitution of the human mind, neither infinity nor eternity are comprehensible to us, it follows that the reference to the infinite "vastness" of paradise cannot relate to anything but the intensity of sensation which it will offer to the blest.

By obvious analogy, the principle of a "comparison through allegory" applied in the Qur~?n to all references to paradise - i.e., a state of unimaginable happiness in afterlife - must be extended to all descriptions of otherworldly suffering - i.e., hell - in respect of its utter dissimilarity from all earthly experiences as well as its unmeasurable intensity. In both cases the descriptive method of the Qur'?n is the same. We are told, as it

were "Imagine the most joyous sensations, bodily as well as emotional, accessible to man indescribable beauty, love physical and spiritual, conscious?ness of fulfilment, perfect peace and harmony; and imagine these sensations intensified beyond anything imaginable in this world - and at the same time entirely different from anything imaginable and you have an inkling, however vague, of what is meant by 'paradise'." And, on the other

hand "Imagine the greatest suffering, bodily as well as spiritual, which man may experience burning by fire, utter loneliness and bitter desolation, the torment of unceasing frustration, a condition of neither living nor dying; and imagine this pain, this darkness and this despair intensified beyond anything imaginable in this world - and at the same time entirely different from anything imaginable and you will know, however vaguely, what is meant by 'hell'."

Side by side with these allegories relating to man's life after death we find in the Qur'?n many symbolical expressions referring to the evidence of God's activity. Owing to the limitations of human language - which, in their turn, arise from the inborn limitations of the human mind - this activity can only be circumscribed and never really described. Just as it is impossible for us to imagine or define God's Being, so the true nature of His creativeness - and, therefore, of His plan of creation - must remain beyond our grasp. But since the Quran aims at conveying to us an ethical teaching based, precisely, on the concept of God's purposeful creativeness, the latter must be, as it were, "translated" into categories of thought accessible to man. Hence the use of expressions which at first sight have an almost anthropomorphic hue, for instance, God's "wrath" (ghadab) or "condemnation"; His "pleasure" at good deeds or "love" for His creatures; or His being "oblivious" of a sinner who was oblivious of Him; or "asking" a wrongdoer on Resurrection Day about his wrongdoing; and so forth. All such verbal "translations" of God's activity into human terminology are unavoidable as long as we are expected to conform to ethical principles revealed to us by means of a human language; but there can be no greater mistake than to think that these "translations" could ever enable us to define the Undefinable.

And, as the Quran makes it clear in the seventh verse 37, only "those whose hearts are given to swerving from the truth go after that part of the divine writ which has been expressed in allegory, seeking out confusion, and seeking its final meaning but none save God knows its final meaning."

unknownuser

Salaams Br.Idmkhizar,All,

The word Banaati can mean his dwelling as well, according to the dictionary.

So as the the enemies came to visit Lut so of course the people went to sought them out possibly free lut but Lut said this is my dwelling/building and it is pure from you having a right in it ,he was constrained by the visitors to a degree. The visitors have come to save him on account of Abrahams pleading with them ? as they had orders to destroy that community and because of the danger from the community they escaped at night.
The community was then destroyed by the enemy/slaves of Allah.

There is no specific mention of abomination-homosexuality as such the word used simply means evil people and that can mean a lot of things.

Most of the Trans as I said are being imposed in the Trans from a biblical/hadithan point of view ? if you think it?s not love to see proof from anybody.

And adding words about marriages and the rest isn?t Right as the context isn?t implying anything of that sought, is it?

Where on Gods earth do we find such hungry people for homosexuality, unless you are implying the people of that area had that tendency as there aren?t anywhere else?

And our messengers came to Abraham with good news, they said ?Peace? He said ?Peace,? and it was not long before he came back with a roasted calf.
But when he saw that their hands did not go towards it, he mistrusted them, and he began to have fear of them. They said ?Have no fear, we have been sent to the people of Lot.?
And his wife was standing, so she laughed when We gave her good news of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob.
She said ?O my!, how can I give birth while I am an old woman, and here is my husband an old man? This is indeed a strange thing!?
They said ?Do you wonder at the decree of God? God?s Mercy and Blessings are upon you O people of the sanctuary. He is Praiseworthy, Glorious.?
So when the shock left Abraham, and the good news was delivered to him, he began to argue with Us for the people of Lot.
Abraham was compassionate, kind.
O Abraham, turn away from this. Your Lord?s command has come, and a retribution that will not be turned back is coming for them.
And when Our messengers came to Lot, he was grieved on their account and he felt discomfort for them and said ?This is a distressful day.?
And his people came rushing towards him, and before it they were committing sin, he said ?My people, these are my daughters, they are purer for you, so be aware of God and do not disgrace me regarding my guests. Is there no sane man among you??
They said ?You know we have no interest in your daughters, and you are aware of what we want!?
He said ?If only I had strength against you, or I could find for myself some powerful support.?
They said ?O Lot, we are your Lord?s messengers; they will not be able to harm you, so travel with your family during the cover of the night and let not any of you look back except for your wife, she will be afflicted with what they will be afflicted. Their appointed time will be the morning. Is the morning not near??
So when Our command came, We turned it upside down, and We rained on it with hardened fiery projectiles.

Salaams.

jonny_k

Salam mz357,
It is absolutely clear that Lot's people committed homosexaulity from the following verses
"You practice sex with the men, you commit highway robbery, and you allow all kinds of vice in your society." The only response from his people was to say, "Bring to us GOD's retribution, if you are truthful."
"You practice sex with the men, lustfully, instead of the women. Indeed, you are ignorant people."
GOD Bless!

jonny_k

You said

?I get the impression from you that you are one of those who likes to take everything symbloical or allegorical in the Quran rather than literal?

No sorry to disappoint you Br. I always take everything literal.

isn't taking everything literal kinda of scary? ... i mean.. look at what you guys are arguing about ?!

again..maybe i took it wrong and you guys and explain more in detail what you mean about taking everything literal...

thanks in advance if you decide to ignore my question again.. but it sure would be nice if you took the time to explain why you both seem to "take everything literal"

Khi- Salam. i think ur confused brother. I was addressing mz357 NOT you. Please see above. GOD Bless!

unknownuser

Salaams Br.Idmkhizar, All,

"You practice sex with the men, you commit highway robbery, and you allow all kinds of vice in your society." The only response from his people was to say, "Bring to us God?s retribution, if you are truthful."

So as this verse states they were evil , even now a days people do such things , I hope you are aware - I think its always been around , but the way people are explaining the trans of the story nothing is further from the truth. That they saw two beautiful men/angels and wanted to have a go at them and went as far as -------------, and lut offered his daughters, this is not Gods way if it is, where?

Salaams.

unknownuser

Salaams Mehdi,

Yes i believe the quran is a total literal message to the masses - so that they may understand the message sent by the almighty and follow it instead of being of the lost.

See4458,5417,22,32,40.
6114,433,1689,413, e.t.c

But due to mistranslation its all fuzzy, so we take it as its a fantasy , or something in parables and only people like the Alims,Molvis and such have the brain power to understand it , thats all.

Gods Blessings.

unknownuser

Salaam Mehdi ,
of course we are not here to argue but discuss/debate to find the real meanings of the quran - they may not even matter much but i am sure they will help some.

But of course if one wants to accept the quranic translation as it stands then that is up to each individual.

Regarding your points we Are net present - and didn't witness, if we go by this then we wouldn't have much to believe in accept our own experiences.
And that is not what God wants - if we believe he exists -because we have not seen him neither!

Gods Blessings.

jonny_k

Salaams Br.Idmkhizar, All,

"You practice sex with the men, you commit highway robbery, and you allow all kinds of vice in your society." The only response from his people was to say, "Bring to us God?s retribution, if you are truthful."

So as this verse states they were evil , even now a days people do such things , I hope you are aware - I think its always been around , but the way people are explaining the trans of the story nothing is further from the truth. That they saw two beautiful men/angels and wanted to have a go at them and went as far as -------------, and lut offered his daughters, this is not Gods way if it is, where?

Salaams.

Khi- Salam. Ofcourse this evil is still there today but here GOD is giving an example of how bad it is and how badly He punished such a community who commits hs. Btw the whole community was hs which ive not seen anywhere in the world today. There are always good and bad people mixed. Now ofcourse its not GOD's way. GOD didnt tell Lot to say what he did. Messengers are sometimes very kind hearted and they care for their community. Lot knew they were doing bad so he though that at a last resort he may offer his daughters to them in marriage that those evil men might become righteous and attracted to women again. GOD on the other hand doomed them and gave them what they deserved while saving Lot. Lot's wife was probably tolerant of the hs or supported it like many people are today which is as much as bad so she was left behind. So theres nothing wrong with the translation of that verse. GOD Bless!

unknownuser

Salaams All,
not everybody will agree with me and neither everybody agree with you- i think, I wouldn't accept anybody giving their daughters away to anybody even under such a situation but someone else might .

Good for them.

Salaams.