New reading of V 6:145
-
PEACE, DANISH,
An outstanding post, as is your custom to produce, all praises due to Allah.
Tanveer, SC, Jaxal, JM, print out Danish's post and study it carefully, so that, at the very least, you might learn to discern the difference between giving opinion and presenting fact.
-
Salaams All,
PB SAID"An outstanding post"
indeed it was - Good and sound Arguments.
Peace to All.
-
-
Salam Danish
- The pig does not weigh in or carry the notion that its meat is rijsun by its very nature/creation/origin for the simple, natural, scientific and logical reasons
As I already stated in my previous posts, according my understanding, 6145 doesn't tell us that the meat of pig is rijs but to eat it is rijsun/not completely pure/healthy for the eater in the same way for deed meat and blood.
For me the meat of pig is rijs and to eat is rijs for the eater are not the same thing. This why I have created a new thread to expose the "new reading of V6145
Your statement that the verse 6145 doesnt tell you that the meat of pig is rijsun but to eat it is rijsun, and then for YOU, both of them are rijsun yet they are not the same in similarity to dead meat and blood, is not only self-contradictory but plain gibberish/confusion.
Maybe my english is not clear at all, in the future please ask for more explanation before making subjective judgements.
As I already explained it to PBM, rijsun doesn't refers to deed meat, blood and teh meat of pig but refers to the eater of this prohibited food.I hope I was clear when I have said
It is quite obvious that the meat of pig or the blood are edible in the world but to eat them are not completely pure/healthy/good for one eater. The God wishes to purify us completelyWhat do you mean by completely pure, Marie? If you wouldnt have known about the mad cow disease, would the beef be considered as completely pure? How do you know that the each time you visit a grocer, the chicken, beef, turkey, lamb and all that you eat is completely pure? LOL!! You sound really funny when you bring about such notions as completely pure.
Because yopu don't get what I meant
You can replace "completely pure" by "healthy/pure". Neither the consumption of blood nor the meat of the pig are fatal for us, that doesn't make them pure/healthy for us.If you don't minf, can you answer this question, sincethe consumption of the blood and the meat pf pig are not fatal for us, how do you admit that the blood is not good/healthy for the eater but not the meat of pig?
It is quite evident that meat of pig (just like chicken, beef, lamb, turkey, etc.), is edible because millions (perhaps billions) eat it without any consequences (FDA tested and approved) and is readily available along with other produce and byproducts.
If you trust FDA, I trust only the God. FDA doesn't hold the absolute truth.
If you failed to understand that blood in the same way than the dead meat and the meat of pig are not pure/healthy for us that doesn't prove the opposite.Blood is NOT an entr?e and one cannot go about asking for a glass of blood for a drink or two. It is not a food or a drink by nature on its own and has never been.
Just a bracket, Now you mix french and english "entr?e" lol
Blood is not drink in Europe but people eat it in black pudding...
Blood is also a drink in Africa.Blood also carries moral and ethical values, besides medical reasons. Transfusion of blood among humans is a survival issue and is performed under strict guidelines and controlled environment.
Agree, but the blood of some animals like cow is drunk (Africa) and eaten like food (blackl pudding).
The pigs meat being rijsun by its very nature goes against Quranic Law and System simply because theres no evidence nor certainty that every and all pigs meat in our entire world is rijsun and poeple getting seriously ill or dying because of it,
Your first sentence "The pigs meat being rijsun by its very nature" is a wrong reading of the verse 6145
I wrote (see my previous post for more details)
As I already explained it to PBM, rijsun doesn't refers to deed meat, blood and the meat of pig but refers to the eater of this prohibited food.
I repeat to you my first question, since the consumption of blood and the meat of pig are not fatal for human, how do you admit that the consumption of the blood in the same way than carrion is not pure/healthy for one eater and not the meat of pig?
Is this your logic?You are right when you wrote
carrion nor blood nor meat is specific to anything.
But that doesn't imply that "lahma alkhinzeer" is specific to anything. Now you invent a rule how to understand according your way
For example when the God uses this allegory and says that some people "behaves like apes and pigs (560)", you cannot reason in the same way , let us suppose that alkhanazeer/the pigs is not a noun, can you say that alqiradat/the apes is also specific to anythingHumans and apes have a common ancestry/link/kin, not pigs. The verse talks about qirada (clumsy) and khinzeer (ill-seeming) as behavior patterns, not food.
Nor clumsy neither ill-seeming doesn't make sense according the context.
If you don't mind , please elaborate.The God uses allegorically some animals like apes and pigs in 560 to describe the behaviour of human. You cannot deny that they are also used by people in the same aim. Another similar example from the Reading
-
1And be humble in how you walk and lower your voice. For the harshest of all voices is the donkey's voice.
Waiqsid fee mashyika waoghdudmin sawtika inna ankara al-aswati lasawtu alhameeri -
And the horses, and mules, and donkeys, that you may ride them and as an adornment. And He creates what you do not know.
Waalkhayla waalbighalawa alhameera litarkabooha wazeenatanwayakhluqu ma la taAAlamoona
And what about this verse 7133, Will you interpret the locust, and the lice, and the frogs them like apes and pigs in 560 and the meat of pig in 6144 because they are quoted whith the blood which is specific to anything?
7133.So We sent them the flood, and the locust, and the lice, and the frogs, and the blood; all detailed signs; but they turned arrogant, they were a criminal people.
If your Arabic dictionary that you use for reference dont provide enough guidance, then clearly your arguments are weak and doubtful.
I don't seek any guidance in any human dictionnary. The reading is sufficient for me and it is my best dictionary. Praise to the God I find all arguments from the Reading which support my understanding of 6145. If you need human explanation, then good lack.
PS Just for your information, This message takes for me more than three hours to write it evil . Believe it or not It is more difficult and not obvious to trasnslate one page or more from my arabic-arabic dictionary into english. Don't be offended if I cannot do it for you. Indeed I'm mod but not 24H/24H.
Salam
-
Salam PB,
I agree again. Lahm/flesh, then, does not include for examples the pig's liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brains, and lard/fat, hence, they are halal to eat. Now, the rational mind must ask, what is it about the lahm/flesh of pig, exactly, that makes it rijsun and haram for the eater to eat, whereas, the other parts, especially the intestines for example, is not? How can the flesh be more of a problem, then say, the intestines? I think we can all agree that the intestines as opposed to the flesh, is much more filthy. To reply with...Allah knows best, is to blindly follow and Allah condems this.
The body and the digestive system (intestines, stomach....) are closely linked
Ponder more before making lawfull intestines, liver, the heart......I ask you the same question than Danish, since the blood and the meat of pig are edible and not fatal for human, how do you admit that the blood in the same way than carrion are not healthy and pure for us and not the meat of pig?
I'd like to understand your logic.Thanks in advance.
-
Salam PB,
I agree again. Lahm/flesh, then, does not include for examples the pig's liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brains, and lard/fat, hence, they are halal to eat. Now, the rational mind must ask, what is it about the lahm/flesh of pig, exactly, that makes it rijsun and haram for the eater to eat, whereas, the other parts, especially the intestines for example, is not? How can the flesh be more of a problem, then say, the intestines? I think we can all agree that the intestines as opposed to the flesh, is much more filthy. To reply with...Allah knows best, is to blindly follow and Allah condems this.
The body and the digestive system (intestines, stomach....) are closely linked Ponder more before making lawfull intestines, liver, the heart......
- "Closely linked" does not mean..."the same as", you are fudging again. As lahm is distinct from shahm, hence, are entirely different terms, likewise, hawaya (small intestines), is also a distinct term and distinct from lahm and shahm. Given these distinctions then, the intestines of the pig, as with the intestines of the ox and sheep, likewise, must be halal, in that, the intestines are not lahm.
I was not clear in my last statement, I will try to clarify it through a question to you
Can you eat liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brain or fat of a sick cow with the disease of "Croswell-Jacob" ?
Let us suppose that lahm alkhinzeer means ill-seeming meat, Does the God only forbid the meat of a sick cow with the disease of Croswell-Jacob?
It is more logic that all the body of this cow was forbiden for the consumption and not only its meat."I think" is not truth. Either you know what you are talking about or you don't. Ayats 733 makes it haram to speak of Allah without knowledge, meaning, having facts not opinion/"I think". In ayat 1736, Allah tells us not to follow anything of which we have no knowledge
Do you claim you hold the absolute truth about all thing? if this is not the case, according to your extreme reasoning, this forum should be closed because nor you neither any member here do not hold the absolute truth. We are here to share our understanding and we pray the God to improve our knowledge.
What you consider as a truth is only your own truth and not the absolute truth. All what you can do is to share it and confront it with other understandings/view/opinion.Well, intestines and fat do not cover bones. Fat, as with the intestines, are full of pollutants. Why, then, isn't the fat of pig rijsun for the eater to eat?
You should refer to the study about the fat of pig and compare wit the study about the meat of pig.
Danish and I are stating that the pig is not unhealthy to eat and, given the fact that billions have been eating since time immemorial without health problems, how is it then unhealthy/unpure for human consumption?
You can say the same thing for the blood (black pudding ), that doesn't prove they are pure (100%) for one eater. You admit that the blood is not pure and you apply your reasoning only for the meat of the pig roll
Is this you infaillible logic?On what do you base your conclusion the pig is unhealthy/unpure for the eater to eat
For the same reason than the blood
Indeed they are edible and not fatal but their consumption is not pure (100%) for the eater. How simple but difficult to understand.Salam
-
Salam all,
In the Reading, the words used to mean ill is marad, marda, mareed, saqeemun
- O you who believe, do not come near the contact-method while you are drunk, until you know what you are saying. Nor dirty, except if travelling, until you wash. And if you are ill or traveling, or one of you has excreted feces, or you had sexual contact with the women, and could not find water then you shall make ablution with clean soil by wiping your faces and hands. God is Pardoning, Forgiving.
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoola taqraboo alssalata waantum sukarahatta taAAlamoo ma taqooloona walajunuban illa AAabiree sabeelin hattataghtasiloo wa-in kuntum marda aw AAala safarin awjaa ahadun minkum mina algha-iti aw lamastumualnnisaa falam tajidoo maan fatayammamoo saAAeedantayyiban faimsahoo biwujoohikum waaydeekuminna Allaha kana AAafuwwan ghafooran
4102, 56, 991, 3332, 4817, 7320,
-
- As for those who have a disease in their hearts, it only increased foulness to their foulness, and they died as rejecters.
Waamma allatheena feequloobihim maradun fazadat-hum rijsan ilarijsihim wamatoo wahum kafiroona
- There is no blame upon the blind, nor is there any blame upon the crippled, nor is there any blame upon the ill, nor is there any blame upon yourselves, if you eat at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your uncles, or the homes of your aunts, or the homes of your mothers brothers, or the homes of your mothers sisters, or that which you possess their keys, or that of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from God that is blessed and good. God thus explains the revelations for you that you may understand.
Laysa AAala al-aAAma harajunwala AAala al-aAAraji harajun walaAAala almareedi harajun wala AAalaanfusikum an ta/kuloo min buyootikum aw buyooti aba-ikumaw buyooti ommahatikum aw buyooti ikhwanikum awbuyooti akhawatikum aw buyooti aAAmamikum awbuyooti AAammatikum aw buyooti akhwalikum awbuyooti khalatikum aw ma malaktum mafatihahuaw sadeeqikum laysa AAalaykum junahun an ta/kuloojameeAAan aw ashtatan fa-itha dakhaltum buyootanfasallimoo AAala anfusikum tahiyyatan min AAindiAllahi mubarakatan tayyibatan kathalikayubayyinu Allahu lakumu al-ayati laAAallakumtaAAqiloona
-
And if I am sick, He is the One who cures me.
Wa-itha maridtu fahuwayashfeeni -
And he said I am ill!
Faqala innee saqeemun
-
PEACE, MARIE,
PBM I agree again. Lahm/flesh, then, does not include for examples the pig's liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brains, and lard/fat, hence, they are halal to eat. Now, the rational mind must ask, what is it about the lahm/flesh of pig, exactly, that makes it rijsun and haram for the eater to eat, whereas, the other parts, especially the intestines for example, is not? How can the flesh be more of a problem, then say, the intestines? I think we can all agree that the intestines as opposed to the flesh, is much more filthy. To reply with...Allah knows best, is to blindly follow and Allah condems this.
The body and the digestive system (intestines, stomach....) are closely linked Ponder more before making lawfull intestines, liver, the heart......
PBM 1. "Closely linked" does not mean..."the same as", you are fudging again. As lahm is distinct from shahm, hence, are entirely different terms, likewise, hawaya (small intestines), is also a distinct term and distinct from lahm and shahm. Given these distinctions then, the intestines of the pig, as with the intestines of the ox and sheep, likewise, must be halal, in that, the intestines are not lahm.
I was not clear in my last statement, I will try to clarify it through a question to you Can you eat liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brain or fat of a sick cow with the disease of "Croswell-Jacob" ? Let us suppose that lahm alkhinzeer means ill-seeming meat, Does the God only forbid the meat of a sick cow with the disease of Croswell-Jacob?
It is more logic that all the body of this cow was forbiden for the consumption and not only its meat.Excellent question and it proves my point that lahma khinzerin is not meat of pig. If a cow has "mad cow" disease of course no part of it is halal as food, because due to the disease it becomes...lahma khinzerin--ill-seeming/that which "I see as bad", hence, must be avoided.
PBM I think" is not truth. Either you know what you are talking about or you don't. Ayats 733 makes it haram to speak of Allah without knowledge, meaning, having facts not opinion/"I think". In ayat 1736, Allah tells us not to follow anything of which we have no knowledge
Do you claim you hold the absolute truth about all thing? if this is not the case, according to your extreme reasoning, this forum should be closed because nor you neither any member here do not hold the absolute truth. We are here to share our understanding and we pray the God to improve our knowledge. What you consider as a truth is only your own truth and not the absolute truth. All what you can do is to share it and confront it with other understandings/view/opinion.
I agree with you that opinions, conjectures, p.o.v.'s are important in developing the proper understanding of Al-Deen Allah and Al-Quran, we are in agreement here. The problem, however, comes in when people take their opinion/conjectures and assign them to Allah and His Deen, thus, elevating them to truth/knowledge and Islamic/Quranic Law. It is the height of absurdity to think/believe that, Allah, revealed a Perfect Book of Guidance which cannot be definitively understood and applied. This Book was sent to all of mankind, hence, it's guidance must be objective, definitive, unifying and readily applicable by all who wish to do so. If one cannot be certain of what one claims, (Allah, per ayats 733 tells us to be certain in out claims about Him, and 1736 tells us not follow anything until we are certain, hence, the guidance is objective and readiliy available to one and all.) then that individual cannot claim to have knowledge or understanding. Given your logic, one can only be in a perpetual state of guessing and hoping that he/she has it right. Perpetual guessing and hoping results from a philosophy based on relativism, that is, opinion and conjecturing, but lays no claim to certainty. You claim that lahma khinzerin means meat of pig, yet, you have not overcome ayats 55 and 6146 when taken together, totally preclude the pig either in whole or part, as being haram for the eater to eat, yet, you have elevated your opinion to Quranic truth and follow it as such. This is in violation of 733 and 1736.
PBM Well, intestines and fat do not cover bones. Fat, as with the intestines, are full of pollutants. Why, then, isn't the fat of pig rijsun for the eater to eat?
You should refer to the study about the fat of pig and compare wit the study about the meat of pig.
If the fat of pig or the intestines of the pig are haram for the eater, why , then, did Allah not specifically state that? We both have agreed that Allah knows how to say shahm, lahma, hawaya, correct? However, Allah, only says lahma khinzerin is haram, does Allah not say what He means? Clearly, as you pointed out to JM, Allah, per ayat 6146, refers to shahm and hawaya distinctly from lahma, correct? You are fudging again, Marie.
PBM Danish and I are stating that the pig is not unhealthy to eat and, given the fact that billions have been eating since time immemorial without health problems, how is it then unhealthy/unpure for human consumption?
You can say the same thing for the blood (black pudding ), that doesn't prove they are pure (100%) for one eater. You admit that the blood is not pure and you apply your reasoning only for the meat of the pig roll Is this you infaillible logic?
A very important reality which you and the others continue to lose sight of is this, blood, unlike the meat of pig, is not a species of animal. Ayats 55 and 6146, absolutely precludes the animal pig or any part of it, as being haram in any time period. To date, neither you, Tanveer, SC, JM, Jaxal, Sweden etc., have been able to overcome these two ayats and, until you either of you can do so, you cannot make the case that lahma khinzerin is referring to a part of a species of animal.
PBM On what do you base your conclusion the pig is unhealthy/unpure for the eater to eat
For the same reason than the blood Indeed they are edible and not fatal but their consumption is not pure (100%) for the eater. How simple but difficult to understand.
LOL! Well, shellfish, for millions upon millions, is edible, yet, it is not 100% pure and healthy for the eater to eat (in fact, for many, to eat it will be fatal due to allergic reactions), so why isn't shellfish haram to the eater to eat? The fact is this, blood is a tremendous source of infectious and potentially fatal pathogens i.e. HIV/Aids and Hepatitis, hence, it needs to be avoided as a source of food.
Btw, you still have not clarified if by lahma khinzerin, you mean the flesh, that is, that which covers the bones or do you mean any meat part of the pig. Please define your term.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
Peace PB,
I will comment only the following point
I was not clear in my last statement, I will try to clarify it through a question to you Can you eat liver, intestines, kidneys, hooves, heart, brain or fat of a sick cow with the disease of "Croswell-Jacob" ? Let us suppose that lahm alkhinzeer means ill-seeming meat, Does the God only forbid the meat of a sick cow with the disease of Croswell-Jacob?
It is more logic that all the body of this cow was forbiden for the consumption and not only its meat
.Excellent question and it proves my point that lahma khinzerin is not meat of pig. If a cow has "mad cow" disease of course no part of it is halal as food, because due to the disease it becomes...lahma khinzerin--ill-seeming/that which "I see as bad", hence, must be avoided.
Your interperation of lahm alkhinzeer collapse once again because the the God's commands are complete not partial. Does He forbid only the ill meat instead of all the body of each sick animals like deed meat?
Ponder more and more on this argument.
If you miss my post about what is used in the Reading to mean sick ill
In the Reading, the words used to mean ill is marad, marda, mareed, saqeemun
- O you who believe, do not come near the contact-method while you are drunk, until you know what you are saying. Nor dirty, except if travelling, until you wash. And if you are ill or traveling, or one of you has excreted feces, or you had sexual contact with the women, and could not find water then you shall make ablution with clean soil by wiping your faces and hands. God is Pardoning, Forgiving.
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoola taqraboo alssalata waantum sukarahatta taAAlamoo ma taqooloona walajunuban illa AAabiree sabeelin hattataghtasiloo wa-in kuntum marda aw AAala safarin awjaa ahadun minkum mina algha-iti aw lamastumualnnisaa falam tajidoo maan fatayammamoo saAAeedantayyiban faimsahoo biwujoohikum waaydeekuminna Allaha kana AAafuwwan ghafooran
4102, 56, 991, 3332, 4817, 7320,
-
- As for those who have a disease in their hearts, it only increased foulness to their foulness, and they died as rejecters.
Waamma allatheena feequloobihim maradun fazadat-hum rijsan ilarijsihim wamatoo wahum kafiroona
- There is no blame upon the blind, nor is there any blame upon the crippled, nor is there any blame upon the ill, nor is there any blame upon yourselves, if you eat at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your uncles, or the homes of your aunts, or the homes of your mothers brothers, or the homes of your mothers sisters, or that which you possess their keys, or that of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from God that is blessed and good. God thus explains the revelations for you that you may understand.
Laysa AAala al-aAAma harajunwala AAala al-aAAraji harajun walaAAala almareedi harajun wala AAalaanfusikum an ta/kuloo min buyootikum aw buyooti aba-ikumaw buyooti ommahatikum aw buyooti ikhwanikum awbuyooti akhawatikum aw buyooti aAAmamikum awbuyooti AAammatikum aw buyooti akhwalikum awbuyooti khalatikum aw ma malaktum mafatihahuaw sadeeqikum laysa AAalaykum junahun an ta/kuloojameeAAan aw ashtatan fa-itha dakhaltum buyootanfasallimoo AAala anfusikum tahiyyatan min AAindiAllahi mubarakatan tayyibatan kathalikayubayyinu Allahu lakumu al-ayati laAAallakumtaAAqiloona
-
And if I am sick, He is the One who cures me.
Wa-itha maridtu fahuwayashfeeni -
And he said I am ill!
Faqala innee saqeemun
Praise to the God, the Reading is the best dictionary and criterion.
Human interpretation/conjecture not based on the best criterion which is the Reading is no substitute for the truth.
-
If the fat of pig or the intestines of the pig are haram for the eater, why , then, did Allah not specifically state that? We both have agreed that Allah knows how to say shahm, lahma, hawaya, correct? However, Allah, only says lahma khinzerin is haram, does Allah not say what He means? Clearly, as you pointed out to JM, Allah, per ayat 6146, refers to shahm and hawaya distinctly from lahma, correct?
The God forbad for the Jews the fat of cattle and sheep as a punishment for their rebellion. He didn't forbad the meat. Since the meat is not prohibited then the digestive system cannot be prohibited. the muscles are developed by the digestion of food. If there is a risk of disease after the consumption of the meat, this is also valid for the intestines, liver....
The Reading is a guide and a criterion for those who use their reason.
-
blood is a tremendous source of infectious and potentially fatal pathogens i.e. HIV/Aids and Hepatitis, hence, it needs to be avoided as a source of food.
Carrion, blood and the meat of pig represent several degree of infectious and they are not at the same level. One cannot disregard one of them because one is less potentially infectious than others. The God is the best knower not human conjecture.
About the word rijsun which I understand as unhealthty, unpure for the eater that doesn't mean when the eater eat Carrion or blood or the meat of pig , he should have the serious problem immediately because they are 3 sources of infectious with several degrees. The God whishes to purify us completely.
-
PEACE, MARIE,
PBM If the fat of the pig or the intestines of the pig are haram for the eater, why , then, did Allah not specifically state that? We both have agreed that Allah knows how to say shahm, lahma, hawaya, correct? However, Allah, only says lahma khinzerin is haram, does Allah not say what He means? Clearly, as you pointed out to JM, Allah, per ayat 6146, refers to shahm and hawaya distinctly from lahma, correct?
The God forbad for the Jews the fat of cattle and sheep as a punishment for their rebellion. He didn't forbad the meat. Since the meat is not prohibited then the digestive system cannot be prohibited. the muscles are developed by the digestion of food. If there is a risk of disease after the consumption of the meat, this is also valid for the intestines, liver....
You're not making any sense, Marie. The shahm was not made haram due to any health/digestive concerns, it was made haram ONLY as a punishment. Aren't we allowed to eat shahm? Your above response is not only pure conjecture and self-contradictory, but totally misunderstands why the shahm was made haram in the first place...as punishment.
The Reading is a guide and a criterion for those who use their reason.
I totally agree, however, your above comment contradicts your understanding that..."The Reading is a guide and a criterion for those who use their reason".
-
PEACE, MARIE,
PBM blood is a tremendous source of infectious and potentially fatal pathogens i.e. HIV/Aids and Hepatitis, hence, it needs to be avoided as a source of food.
Carrion, blood and the meat of pig represent several degree of infectious and they are not at the same level. One cannot disregard one of them because one is less potentially infectious than others. The God is the best knower not human conjecture. About the word rijsun which I understand as unhealthty, unpure for the eater that doesn't mean when the eater eat Carrion or blood or the meat of pig , he should have the serious problem immediately because they are 3 sources of infectious with several degrees. The God whishes to purify us completely.
Well, then you are stating that the lahm of pig, unlike other animals, is a carrier of infectious and potentially fatal diseases. Is this your position now? If it is, then, the lahm of pig, intrinsically, is rijsun, however, time and again you've rejected this notion. So, which is it? Is there something intrinsically wrong with/bad with the lahm of pig or not?
I'm still waiting for a definitive definition for lahm, that is, how you are defining it.
-
Salam PB,
- As I said previously, if any part of an animal becomes infected then the whole animal, to me anyway, is infected, hence, it becomes lahm khinzerin--ill-seeming/that which I see as bad.
We agree that the consumption of any part of the animal whatever he is dead or sick/ill is unhealthy for the eater.
However, the God specifies that it is forbiden for us "lahm alkhinzeer" and "almayta/dead animal" instead of lahm almayta/the meat of the dead animal.
If the God means the whole ill-animal, then we should read only "alkhinzeer" without lahm in the same way than almayta wich is without any precision.
Consequently, lahm alkhinzeer cannot mean nor the whole animal, neither ill seeming meat because the consumption of the whole animal whatever he is dead or sick is unhealthy for the eater.You insist that lhma alkhinzeer is ill-seeming which is not supported by the Reading and based only on conjecture. If the Reading is your criterion then you can see clearly that the God uses a specific word to mean ill/sick.
This is just common sense/intellect. One of the major problems with your position is this, if the meat of pig is not intrinsically bad by its created nature, then why is it rijsun for the eater to eat it?
In the light of the Reading, permitted for us all the animals of the livestock, except what is specifically forbidden in the Book (51)
We are given for examples of these quadrupeds (6143-144)
- the sheeps
- the goats
- the camels
- the cows
They are herbivores and ruminants contrary to the pig which is omnivorous and non ruminant.
We have to consider these four examples as a criterion for us. The desease of Croswell-Jacob is a good example.The God created the pig as omnivorous non ruminant contrary to the the sheeps, goats, camels and cows. The God prohibited the meat of pig for us because its consuption can be a potential source of desease for human which is proved scientifically in the same way for the blood.
Now feel free to accept it or not.
To make it clear one of all
Alkhinzeer = the whole animal
lahm alkhinzeer is not the whole animal
Why the God doesn't forbad the fat of pig, do refer to the scientific study about the fat of pig.
No comment avout your understanding of 55 because you use only a part of some verse to fit your point and you neglect the whole Reading. To you is your approch and to me is mine.
the muscles are developed by the digestion of food. If there is a risk of disease after the consumption of the meat, this is also valid for the intestines, liver....
Sorry for the confusion, the quote above concerns only the prohibition of the pig's meat. You asked me about intestines, liver..of the pig et it was my response for you. If there is some infectious germs in the meat, it forwarded through the digective system. I hope it's clear for you.
The source of desease is due to the infectious germ contained in the meat of pig, the runing blood and dead animal.
The diet of some animals make their meat unhealthy for us because it may contain some infectious germ. What is your problem with this?I'm still waiting for a definitive definition for lahm, that is, how you are defining it.
Lahm = meat.
Salam
-
You need to Quranically refute the above Marie, otherwise, your argument is gone. Looking forward to your reply.
I have no time to repeat to you all quranic arguments which destroy your understanding.
Take much time to read carefully what is already said about it.
I leave you with peace
-
Fine, so meat excludes fat, bone, and hoof material, thus, these are halal as food...is this your position? If so, then how do these things escape the "infectious germ" contamination, which you claim is inherent to the meat of pigs?
PB u are getting stupid by the minute. How do u know that the shit and piss you hold in u doesnt infect your whole body? Comon man use some common sense. And if you are like this, i cant even imagine what those two people you mention that "guided' you to this understand must be like.
-
- JM, wrote We have no direct knowledge of whether or not God forbade the Jews to eat pig. The torah may have been altered, so, it cannot be regarded as a reliable source of knowledge.
You are distorting what I have said, by quoting only a part of my post.
Yes, we have no direct knowledge, but (as I have explained it) we have indirect knowledge, by combining and , and reminding the grammatical rule.
See http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&start=625#55493
And http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&start=625#55205Your statements have been refuted again and again.
I will waste no more time with you.