Alkhineer is a noun in the light of the Reading
-
Peace,
For Omar Ali
According to the Dictionary of the Holy Qur'an Page 166, the word Khinzir is a combination of two words, a compound word, Khinz meaning ?bad? and ara meaning ?I see?- ; proud and evil; piggy (it means dirty, greedy and stubborn); Pig-headed; obstinate; stupidly perverse.
Referring to the Hans Wehr definition of khinzir including the word scrofulous, ?having a diseased appearance? is in agreement with the Quranic use of the compound term Khinzir (Dic. Of the Holy Qur?an), I see it bad/having a diseased appearance.
Scrofulous etymology scrofula+ous
WordNet Hyperdictionary
having a DISEASED APPEARANCE resembling scrofula;
morally contaminated;
afflicted with scrofula;having a diseased run-down appearance
When referring to Lanes Lexicon under the entry Khazira, note that the meaning makes reference to seeing or eyes. It also makes the same reference to the diseased appearance caused by scrofula as Hans Wehr above.
The meaning pig, swine, hog, as a contemporary definition apparently reflects the evolution of the term.
Chazir (noun) swine, boar
This noun is well attested throughout northwest and south Semitic. It also appears in Akkadian as a loanword, although one derived noun means ?mouse? in addition to another noun which means ?pig?. The noun may denote the genus Sus scrofa, common throughout the ancient near east. The pig was regarded with little esteem throughout the ancient near east, along with the dog. Both were urban scavengers, omnivorous which would consume any refuge, including (especially true for pigs) excrement.
In Egypt both pigs and swine herds were considered to be repulsive. Attempts to explain the Israelite prohibition on pork consumption have all failed, as the ultimate rational for these laws escapes detection. In both Lev. 117 and Deut. 148, chazir represents unclean food, forbidden to the Israelites, based on the fact that, although it is a cloven footed animal, it does not chew the chud. Isaiah speaks of it?s flesh and blood as an offering in pagan rituals and false worship condemned by God (Isa. 654 ; 6617).
Chazir also occurs in Proverbs 1122 as a simile for a woman of disreputable character, ?like a gold ring in a pigs? snout is a woman without discretion.? There, in it?s ironic setting, it connotes the idea of beauty tainted by repulsiveness and presents a very close parallel to the Homeric use of kuon (HED # 293, ?Dog? which also occurs frequently in a similarly derogatory context (cf. Iliad 3180; 6344, where Helen of Troy applies the insult to herself.)
The Book Of Leviticus Page 2480 Article 2478
The Complete Biblical Library The Old Testament Hebrew English Dictionary
World Library Press Inc. Springfield Missouri Inc. USAYou may also reference Hastings Dictionary Of The Bible Edited by James Hastings 1963, Page 943
?Swine Domesticated swine were probably kept in the east in the earliest historic times when they appear to have been regarded as sacred. In a cave associated with the earliest place of sacrifice at ancient Gezer, in use certainly before 2000 BC, large quantites of pig bones where found. It was the sacrocent character of swine that lay at the root of the prohibition in Lev 11. & Deut. 14 and the eating of swine?s flesh and offering of swine?s blood are clearly regarded as a lapse into paganism. The heathen frequently tried to compel the Jews to eat the swines flesh and thus renouce their religion. The contempt for the swine is shown in Pr. 1122, Mt. 76, 2P222] In the talumdic writings the pig appears as the emblem of uncleanliness and those who keep swine are regarded with aversion. The same idea colors the parable of the prodical son Lk1515. where he is depicted as reaching the lowest depth of infamy being sent to fee the swine, and actually being reduced to covert their food and also in the narrative of the demoniacs where the Gentile inhabitants of Gerasa lose their great herds of swine?.?
An analysis of the ten occurrences of the ra-ja-sa indicates that it is a condition caused by actions or dirt. It is a condition that can be cleaned, removed or a condition that can be increased, hence changed. In 6145 the fisqan, that follows aw/or has also been caused and is conditional. Each item on the sanctioned list is conditional and can be changed to become lawful including the ?rijsin?.
For example in 6145, an animal that is alive is lawful. Blood that is not flowing is lawful. Flesh that is not khinzir is lawful. Accordingly, the action fa-sa-qa can also be changed making the food lawful. I don?t find any inherent permanence related to ra-ja-sa such as a species created ?rijsin? as a concept anywhere in the reading.
What has been sanctioned permanently for mankind are universal conditions that cross all lines of species. All the good is lawful and there is no blame on ?allathina aamanu for what he eats .
593 There is no blame upon those who believe and do good works for what they EAT when they are aware/cautious and believe and do good work, then they are aware/cautious and believe, then they are aware/cautious and do good; God loves the good doers.
The verb akala is a word that can include eating but does not mean ?to eat? food exclusively and therefore should be rendered as such and not shaded by the translator?s understanding. See 2188 for an example.
-
Dear Grourself,
How can I thank you enough?
This is the kind of clarification I am asking for. bravoIf nobody is contending your findings with, at least, the same value of proofs, then it is beyond doubt that the word can mean not only the animal pig, but also other things.
Then the question remains Anyone who understands ?khinzeer? as meaning pig, in verse 6.145, should try to find an explanation as to why pork is bad for us, because that is exactly what the verse says ?........lahma khinzeerin fa-innahu rijsun........?.
If this can not be found, then, to continue stating that it refers to the animal pig, is, should we say, ?pig headed?? lol
It is at best guesswork, or conjecture, something we should avoid. ?I came into this discussion with doubts in my mind, and hoped to find certitude one way or another. I didn?t, and I don?t, care which way it goes, pig or no pig, as it is not part of my diet anyway, and neither is blood.
Right now I am leaning very heavily to the opinion that blood and pork is forbidden out of ignorance, not out of knowledge.
This will remain my opinion until such time someone brings evidence to the contrary.I believe most people would shun raw, blood dripping, or bad smelling/seeming meat on most occasions, although throughout history there have been people consuming raw and/or not properly handled meat as well, hence Gods warning. )
And I will go on enjoying my, mainly, vegetarian diet.
On the other hand, pigs, be afraid be veeeery afraid! mrgreenBest regards, and again, thanks
Ali Omar
-
The Jews and Christians are also forbidden from eating pork. Here is a quote from the Old Testament to that effect
?And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase.?
Many Christians believe that this verse was directed only at the Jews. But Jesus himself says during the Sermon on the Mount
?Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.?
Some Christians say that, after a vision by St. Peter, God cleansed all animals and made them fit and lawful for human consumption. If ALL animals are cleansed by Peter?s vision, this includes dogs, cats, vultures, and rats but you just don?t see people getting excited about a cat-meat sandwich like they do over barbecued pork or bacon.
Others say that it was Paul who rescinded the law forbidding pork to humans, in order to appease the Romans, who enjoyed the taste of pig-meat. Many excuses have been given, but none are very sound.Many Far Eastern traditions also discourage the eating of pork. The 3,000 year old Confucian Book of Rites says, ?A gentleman does not eat the flesh of pigs and dogs.? Although many Chinese are avid eaters of pork today, physicians of ancient China recognized pork-eating as the root of many human ailments. Buddhists, Jains and Hindus usually avoid eating any kind of meat.
Bad effects of pork consumption
Pig?s bodies contain many toxins, worms and latent diseases. Although some of these infestations are harbored in other animals, modern veterinarians say that pigs are far more predisposed to these illnesses than other animals. This could be because pigs like to scavenge and will eat any kind of food, including dead insects, worms, rotting carcasses, excreta (including their own), garbage, and other pigs.
Influenza (flu) is one of the most famous illnesses which pigs share with humans. This illness is harbored in the lungs of pigs during the summer months and tends to affect pigs and humans in the cooler months. Sausage contains bits of pigs? lungs, so those who eat pork sausage tend to suffer more during epidemics of influenza.
Pig meat also contains excessive quantities of histamine and imidazole compounds, which can lead to itching and inflammation; growth hormone, which promotes inflammation and growth; sulphur-containing mesenchymal mucus, which leads to swelling and deposits of mucus in tendons and cartilage, resulting in arthritis, rheumatism, etc. Sulphur helps cause firm human tendons and ligaments to be replaced by the pig?s soft mesenchymal tissues, and degeneration of human cartilage.Eating pork can also lead to gallstones and obesity, probably due to its high cholesterol and saturated fat content. The pig is the main carrier of the taenia solium worm, which is found it its flesh. These tapeworms are found in human intestines with greater frequency in nations where pigs are eaten. This type of tapeworm can pass through the intestines and affect many other organs, and is incurable once it reaches beyond a certain stage.
One in six people in the US and Canada has trichinosis from eating trichina worms which are found in pork. Many people have no symptoms to warn them of this, and when they do, they resemble symptoms of many other illnesses. These worms are not noticed during meat inspections, nor are they killed by salting or smoking. Few people cook the meat long enough to kill the trichinae. The rat (another scavenger) also harbors this disease.
There are dozens of other worms, germs, diseases and bacteria which are commonly found in pigs, many of which are specific to the pig, or found in greater frequency in pigs.
Eating pork is harmful to health in a great many regards. This harm still persists today, despite all the precautions that are taken. First and foremost, no matter how clean the farms and environments on which it is raised may be, the pig is not by nature a clean-living animal. It often plays in, and even eats, its own excrement. Due to this and its biological structure, the pig produces much higher levels of antibodies in its body than other animals. In addition, far higher levels of growth hormone are produced in the pig compared to those in other animals and human beings. Naturally, these high levels of antibodies and growth hormone pass across to and collect in the pig's muscle tissue. Pork meat also contains high levels of cholesterol and lipids. It has been scientifically proven that these significant amounts of antibodies, hormones, cholesterol and lipids in pork represent a serious threat to human health.
Pigs are biologically similar to humans, and their meat is said to taste similar to human flesh. Pigs have been used for dissection in biology labs due to the similarity between their organs and human organs. People with insulin-dependent diabetes usually inject themselves with pig insulin. If you pour Coke (yes, the soda) on a slab of pork, and wait a little while, you will see worms crawl out of it.
All these reasons are just a part of the wisdom in our Lord's prohibition on the consumption of pork. Moreover, this commandment of our Lord's provides complete protection from the harmful effects of pork under any conditions.
It used to be that European people believed pork would taste better if the pigs were kept in a state of filth, but this is not the natural inclination of the pig. When left to their own devices, it is said that pigs do not like to soil their sleeping quarters. As for their tendency to wallow in mud, that is done mainly to keep cool.
-
Dear Ahmed,
Thank you for interesting info.
I would be very interested in the origin of the reported bad effects of pork consumption.Could you please give me some details?
Regds
Ali Omar
Cheers Ali
mate, all this stuff are saved on documents on my laptop, I'm actually an active member on many boards and what I have is the history of what I discussed or researched in the past 18 months, the above came from many locations I can only remember one to be honest, part of the info above is on Harun Yehya web site, but what you can do is this bro, there is many medical terms and diseases mentioned why not searching the net and see if it relates to the meat of the pork or even search for info about workers who work in pig farms and how they get infected with horrible diseases
but the bottom line brother ali is this "for me", even if pork was the best meat ever, it was forbidden by Allah explicitly and more than once in His Quran, to be honest when I was 15 to 16 years old I used to go and buy mortadella in Egypt and bloody loved it but later realized that it has to stop, not because I discovered it is harmful, quite the contrary I only discovered this in the last 5 years or so, rather I took it as an order from Allah, I classify this issue as another small test within the numerous tests all of us go through equally, Allah wants to see who will believe and listen then obey, now I don't obey humans really, but because it was so literally straightforward in the Quran, I have to submit
a clear example is alcohol, now, alcohol is fun, it makes us forget the pain, right?, well Allah has told us that alcohol is a bit of good for us but its harm is far more dangerous and we should not come near it, so I stopped drinking about 16 years ago, the important note is this, I could not even read in the Quran that the meat of pig is a bit of good for us like alcohol, so both has to be eliminated and pork before alcohol even
Cheers
-
Salam Ali Omar,
And this is the next obstacle. It seems like nobody consider what is stated in this verse, just bluntly accept blood is rijsun. The verse doesnt say that at all, it says flowing, or running blood. It does not say that blood, as such, is forbidden!
-
He only made forbidden for you what is already dead, and blood, and the meat of pig, and what was sacrificed to any other than God. But whoever is forced to, without disobedience or transgression, then God is Forgiving, Merciful.
-
He has only forbidden for you what is already dead, and the blood, and the meat of pig, and what was dedicated to other than God. Whoever finds himself forced out of need and without disobedience or animosity, then there is no sin upon him. God is Forgiving, Merciful.
The quran specifically mention blood that is pouring out, or running, i.e. not treated in any way, but raw, straight from the source.
Black pudding is fabricated with the running blood.
My question is if this running blood is cooked (black pudding), does that make it lawfull for us?
Idem for the dead meat?It is double standard to say that blood in large amounts is rijsun but in small amounts it is not, and God does not keep double standards.
I said blood (16115, 2173) but I meant running blood (6145), this is why I gave you the example of black pudding.
I have put out one single question that everyone seems to be overlooking, so I post it again for the third time
Can the Arabic word, or root of khinzeer, mean something besides pig, or can it not?
According my understanding, there is any doubt that alkhinzeer is a noon like apes in the light of the Reading.
Independently of scientific arguments about the blood and the meat of pig, the Reading provides the criterion to follow about the animals of the livestock. Based on this, the pig don't fulfill this criterion. The examples given in the Reading is not a free information (6142-6144, 51).
Does pig is like the animals quoted in 6142-144?
The response is NO.You accept scientific argument about the blood and you reject the same argument about the meat of pig, is this your logic?
Actually, if blood is treated properly, there is nothing wrong with it
If you mean running blood, please bring your proof from the Reading which support the statement above.
You should not eat A or B or C or D.............
You should avoid eating A and B and C and D.......Different connecting words, same meaning. ?
I think you don't understand my explanation about why aw/or is used instead of wa/and in 6145. A right reading is necessary for a right understanding. "or" and "and" in 6145, 16115, 2173 is linked to the structure of the sentence but the meaning remains the same one. These 3 verses speaks about the same law; the prohibition of the dead, blood, meat of pig..etc. The common points between these prohibited food remains the same both in 6145 than in 16115, 2173 whatever the letter used "or" or "and".
Dear Grourself,
How can I thank you enough?
This is the kind of clarification I am asking for.If nobody is contending your findings with, at least, the same value of proofs, then it is beyond doubt that the word can mean not only the animal pig, but also other things.
If your question is answered based on what is said in the dictionnaries instead of the Reading, then I tell you good luck for your further study. Personnally I don't trust what is said in the dictionnaries. As I said it to Danish, I seek any guidance in them. The Reading is my only criterion and I find the answers to my questions only in the light of the Reading because it explains itself based.
Salam
-
-
Dear Ahmed,
Thank you for further info.
I will look into it and see what I find.There are many mentions of a source called ?Health Corporation of Singapore? on the Internet concerning this issue, containing a very similar text as what you referred.
However, the only organization of that name in Singapore is a staff union for employees at health institutions, hospitals and so on, and has nothing whatsoever to do with health questions one way or another.
Therefore this may be someone faking a research authority, and has no bases in reality whatsoever. I just hope your information does not stem from that fake source, it has fooled many.As to what God says in the quran, I can not find any mention of ?meat of pig? mentioned anywhere as forbidden, as explained in an earlier post.
Now I will search a bit further into the matter and see what comes up. As I said I am very laid-back with regards to pork being allowed or not as it is not part of my diet.Regards
Ali Omar
-
Salam Grourself,
According to the Dictionary of the Holy Qur'an Page 166, the word Khinzir is a combination of two words, a compound word, Khinz meaning bad and ara meaning I see-
the last syllabe of khinzeer "ir" interpreted as ara = appearance = conjecture.
Khinz meaning bad is a forced meaning, the basic meaning is stink, reek, smell foul.
"see" and "smell foul" together doesn't make any sence, then Khinzeer as a combination of two words doesn't hold water.Will you proceed in the same way for the following words which are ended with the same syllabe than khinzeer?
naseer/Helper (445)
qadeer/able/capable (4133)
basheer/bearer of good news (519)
hameer/donkey (168 )And so on..
Can you bring other examples from the Reading where this kind of combination is used ?
Or khinzeer is an unique exception in the Reading.
having a DISEASED APPEARANCE resembling scrofula;
morally contaminated;
afflicted with scrofula;having a diseased run-down appearance
having a diseased run-down appearance is a forced meaning.
According my arabic-arabic dictionnary, lisan alAAarab, alkhinzeer is also a known/specific desease which is a solid/hardened, abscess, canker, wound, hardened, ulcer of the nape of the neck
Neither khinzeer as a combination of 2 words or a solid/hardened, abscess, canker, wound, hardened, ulcer of the nape of the neck makes sense in the light of the Reading.
The Reading is the best dictionary and the words used to mean ill/sick/desease in a general way are 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 brother Ali
regarding verse 6145, I see that you consider the word (Masfoha) as a very important key word that make the meaning some sort of running blood or poured blood
really mate and very simply, "I'm not the type of person who makes things hard or complicated", Allah has told us in at least two other locations that Blood is forbidden, the word "masfoha" was not mentioned at all in these other locations, however looking at 6145 again, I see it means the exact meaning as blood, with an additional piece of info, which is the way the blood was obtained, the common arabic meaning for the word safaha is actually (to kill) or (to try to kill) or to inflict harm on others like (to rape) , (not sure about other meanings if any, I'm just looking at the common meaning that I know in arabic), in fact we call a serial killer or a serial rapist a "Saf'fah", this is a common arabic word indeed, so when I read the the word "Masfoha" which gramatically is called "Maf'oola" i.e. an action was performed on it, for example "Ma'koola" means been eaten, and the root is "akala" (eat), so I see "Masofha" clearly means that the blood was obtained by an action (an action was perfomed on it) "Maf'oola", and the action is to hurt or to kill any creature to obtain its blood to drink it
regardless the blood becomes stationery in a cup or been sucked directly from the injury inflicted on that creature is the exact same for me which is drinking the forbidden blood
Allah knows best
Peace brother
-
Ok brother Ali, sorry to ineterfer, I just like this discussion
I see your point and sure you have a point
but let's consider the following logic
I agree with you that yes blood is blood and if we squeez the meat, drops of blood will come out and sure we eat that blood
But because the blood is runnig in every single part of the body (whatever the part is tiny, small or big), how can we bloody extract the blood from the whole body? lol
impossible man, so whatever left that we can't exctract out with ease will be allowed to eat "No sin committed", in fact if you read all those verses that forbid blood, they end up with "and who was forced to do it without delibertly violating the law, will be forgiven," and I see the very lil amount of blood left in the meat that we end eating will fall under this category of been forced to eat it without delibertly violating the law
Allah knows best
peace
-
Peace,
Does not k-n-z imply a change from the right state? For example, the definition given by Marie is
a known/specific desease which is a solid/hardened, abscess, canker, wound, hardened, ulcer of the nape of the neck
which is clearly describing a change from the right state, as that which is foul/maggotty is a change from the right state. Ali, you look like you're making sense here. I will have to read over the posts when I get back.
Joe
-
Dear Ahmed,
Your comments are enlightening, and I fully agree concerning ?masfooha?, but there is no denying that it mentions that blood is flowing.
The problem I have is mostly to get the whole of the text of the verse to fit with the picture of something being forbidden due to ?rijsun?.
Now if it is regarded as ?not healthy for us?, the amount is not a deciding factor. Contamination in blood is found wherever the blood is.
God does not waste any words; therefore the mention as in 6.145 must have some significance. I therefore see that verse as a guideline.However, it is correct that blood is mentioned on other occasions without saying that it necessarily has to be flowing.
I still have not found anything convincing me that ?flowing blood? is the same as blood wherever and however it is found.
Regards
Ali Omar
-
Ok bro
I can still see your point, how about the following logic
why you considering it as it is forbidden because it is bad?, I know that blood is bad and can be contaminated easily and is not right to drink or cook and eat, but let's assume it is great to drink or cook an eat, why not considering it as a test from Allah to test us and see who will obey?, everything is a test in this life, in fact anything that is forbidden is one of the the real tests
why you need Allah to explain Himself in every single detail?, He actually did briefly and said blood is bad if we drink it, He created the blood and He knows best if it is bad for us or not, but our assupmtion for now that it is good, then the other divine law will apply that it is yet another test from our God in this life which is about nothing but tests and some will pass and the others will fail
now for the tiny blood we eat after been cooked, why not considering that cooking will remove all the shit things from it?, most likely it will when you boil the meat, so even if it was harmful, its lil harm from this tiny quantity should be gone after boiling
but let's assume the lil harm will not go by boiling, then why not considering that Allah will stop that lil harm because He knows well that we can't exctarct all the blood out, He only needs one word to stop the harm "Be"
will this allow us then to drain the blood then cook it to make the balck jelly and eat it?
of course not, because the action is deliberate here to eat blood and this will be violating the clear law from Allah "Not to drink or eat blood"
Allah knows best
peace bro
-
Salam to you all,
I'd like to know your opinion about a detail in 6145, 2173, 16115
Why the God use the word lahm/meat before alkhinzeer and not before the dead animal?
Does the meat of the dead animal( lahm almayta) and the dead animal (almayta) have the same meaning?
Idem for the meat of khinzeer/lahm alkhinzeer and alkhinzeer.
Thanks in advance.
-
Salam to you all,
I'd like to know your opinion about a detail in 6145, 2173, 16115
Why the God use the word lahm/meat before alkhinzeer and not before the dead animal?
Does the meat of the dead animal( lahm almayta) and the dead animal (almayta) have the same meaning?
Idem for the meat of khinzeer/lahm alkhinzeer and alkhinzeer.
Thanks in advance.
Peace sister
just a quick answer as I just read your comment and I have to run to work but will be back and would like to continue this discussion
your question is really good in why Allah did not use the word Lahm before the word Dead as He did with the Lahm Al Khanzir
when I read it I had a quick answer but I would like to elaborate on it later as I think my answer is not complete, but here is what i thought of on the fly
The Quran "Yofasir Badoho Ba'da" i.e. The Quran explains itself, I'm sure you know that, so in another verses Allah has used Lahm with the dead, consequently they both the same (adding the word lahm or not), let's look at the verse where the Word lahm was used with the dead
"O ye who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible) for suspicion in some cases is a sin And spy not on each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay, ye would abhor it...But fear Allah For Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful."
(12)
Peace to all
-
PEACE, AHMED BAHGAT,
4160 Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them and for their hindering many (people) from Allah's way.
The verse never mentioned the khanzir, neither it is telling us any new laws, rather is telling us a fact, that For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (things) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from Allah's Way;-
O.K.
can you see mate that I replaced the word (food) with (Things), I could not see anything in the arbic verse that imply it was food that was the subject of the Tahreem matter, rather anything, read it again bro if you read Arabic, what was good for the jews then became forbidden as a result of their iniquity, may also include actions, like not sleeping with their wives during the whole period of fasting, it can be anything really, but it can not be food explicitly, more over you want to extend it further and make it like it is the meat of the pig that was good for them then became forbidden due to their iniquity.
"MAY include"? well, do you know for a fact that it does include those things you mentioned? Yes or no?
What we do KNOW FOR A FACT IS...per ayat 6146, Allah made haram the following "things" to the Jews prior to the advent of Al-Quran
-
"things" called animals with claws.
-
"a thing" called fat of sheep and oxen.
Now, do you see how the pig can be included in any of the above "things" which Allah made haram to the Jew? Yes or no?
Main Entry THING an entity, an idea, or a quality perceived, known, or thought to have its own existence the real or concrete substance of an entity an inanimate object something referred to by a word, a symbol, a sign, or an idea creature.
Given the above definiton of "thing", food definitely qualifies as such and, food, also comes under the rubric of halal and tayyib "things", hence, ayat 4160 CAN MEAN FOOD, in that, ayat 6146, names the "things" which Allah expressly made haram for the Jews for their transgressions...and those "things" were food. Can you produce another ayat where Allah, expressly, made something haram for the Jews?
Does Allah, anywhere in Al-Quran, state the pig was haram prior to the advent of Al-Quran, meaning, was it haram for Abraham? Yes or no? If yes, then provide the ayat as your proof. You have not yet proved your point via ayat 4160. Let's continue
The second verse you posted 55, again I see nothing explicit about Lahm Al Khanzir, it is also a two way between the Muslims and Ahal Al Kitab, i.e. This day, all good things are made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them...But you see how the verse started with ?ALL GOOD THINGS ARE MADE LAWFUL TO US?,,
Look, I don't care if it started with--"Jeremiah was a bullfrog", the point is this...the ayat says the food of the people of the book is halal to those who follow Al-Quran and vice versa, period. So, I ask you again, where, in Al-Quran, can I find the ayat where Allah made the pig haram for the Jews ( a people of the book)? Allah, expressly, made...ALL animals with CLAWS, IN THEIR ENTIRETY ( not in part as lahma means), haram for the Jews. Now, as I hope you know, pigs do not have claws, period.
now those good things is a general statement and whatever will be lawful should not violates this general rule, so if the verse continued saying, their food is made lawful to us, then why you take it ?all their food??, and even if we will take it as such, then all their good food that should not violate the general rule ?ONLY GOOD THINGS ARE MADE LAWFUL TO US?, you see those good things, ARE MADE, at the same time we ARE WARNED not to eat Lahm Al Khanzir in about 4 different locations, the argument that Khanzir does not mean the pig, is absolutely baseless, because it is the common Arabic word for the pig and this what will prevail, the word should not cause any confusion from the first place, I agree that there are many words that can cause a lot of confusion like ?SOLB and TRA?IB?, but that was not a statement for a new law that we should be aware and are warned to commit it,
The above is just double talk.
But my question again mate, what is in the above verse that talks about Lahm Al Khanzir?, I could not find anything in the Arabic language that can imply talking about it.
Do me a favor, would you? please stay focused, o.k.? This discussion is around that which is considered food. Khinzeer, falls under that category. 55 is, in part, discussing what is halal food
Now science has proved that lahm al khanzir can be really harmful to humans, it is the nature of the animal itself, I?m not going to get into this, I know it has to be exhausted already, but I know for certain that when Allah is forbidding anything or allowing anything, He will be doing it with great wisdom and the absolute knowledge in why this should be the case, and science proved Allah 100% right regarding the environment of the pigs world and its effect on humans
Science hass proved no such thing. Billions of people, past and present, have eaten the pig with absolutely no health problems. As Idol asked...why isn't th rat haram? It was the vector of Bubonic plague. It is much more filthy than any pig, yet it isn't haram. Read the posts by Member Danish, regarding the pig and the supposed health problems.
Moving on to the third verse 6146, after I read it many times and many explanations as well my own understanding based on what I read, I could understand what you want to say by this verse !! do you mean that Lahm Al Khanzir is not listed in the verse as an item of food that was forbidden on the jews?
Of course that is what I mean.
Come on bro, the Lahm Al Kanzir is listed for sure, you see the verse is clearly saying the followings were forbidden
- Every (animal) with claws (Meat and Fat)
- The fat of the ox and the sheep (Fat Only)
So do you agree that the pig is an animal with a claw?
LOL!! You cannot tell the difference between a hoof and a claw??? yet, you are going to debate this issue?? LOL! you've got to be kidding me, right? Psssst...check this out, you will undoubtedly find what I'm going tell fantastic, beyond belief but...pigs don't have claws... Tell you what, look at the foot of pheasant and compare with the foot of a pig...can you see any difference?
Now, given that the pig, per ayat 6146, was not made haram to the Jews, ayat 55 then, makes it clear that, in that the pig was not haram to Jews, hence, it had to be haram--their food, the Jews, is lawful to us. Remember now, per ayat 16116...you cannot make haram what Allah didn't and, nowhere in Al-Quran, did Allah make the pig haram for the Jews. If I'm wrong then produce the ayat where He did make the pig haram, specifically, to the Jews.
I reckon it is, moving to the last verse 16116
16116 And, for what your tongues describe, do not utter the lie, (saying) This is lawful and this is unlawful, in order to forge a lie against Allah; surely those who forge the lie against Allah shall not prosper.
-> mate, I have to say, this verse may be talking about you, you are possibly trying to say that Marie and Me are trying to forbid something that is lawful to us, but we did not forbid anything, it was Allah who said DO NOT EAT LAHM AL KHANZIR, and I see KHANZIR with one meaning only, it means for me that filthy animal called "a pig", nothing in the Arabic that I know for 40 years suggest to me that it means anything else, this is a total joke really, but what I can finally say is thisplease consider that verse 16116 may also be talking about you, because it also talks about the people who try to allow things that are forbidden, I'm sure the verse is talking about things that vague like smoking for example but in this case Lahm Al Khnazir was clearly ?Horrim? by Allah, Allah does not play games with us man
On the contrary, the ayat IS talking about YOU and Marie and some others, mate. You people claim that...the pig is haram for mankind to eat. Ayat 55 says that, the food of the people of the book is halal for us, thus, you and Marie, MUST PROVE, via Al-Quran, that the pig was haram to the Jews before the advent of Al-Quran, PERIOD. If you cannot do this, then you cannot prove your assertion that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. Ayat, 6146, as far as I know, tells us exactly what Allah, specifically, made haram to the Jews regarding food...now...do you have any ayat where He made haram the pig to them? Yes or no?
Neither you nor Marie, have yet to overcome ayats 4160, 55, 6146, and 16116, which, beyond any doubt, preclude the pig as being haram to those before the advent of Al-Quran or after it. You've got to do better than you have. Marie knows that, when those ayats are taken together/on their own, it destroys her notion that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. This is why she will has not address them when I posed them to her.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
-
PEACE, MARIE,
ALI OMAR I have put out one single question that everyone seems to be overlooking, so I post it again for the third time Can the Arabic word, or root of khinzeer, mean something besides ?pig?, or can it not?
MARIE According my understanding, there is any doubt that alkhinzeer is a noon like apes in the light of the Reading. If your question is answered based on what is said in the dictionnaries instead of the Reading, then I tell you good luck for your further study. Personnally I don't trust what is said in the dictionnaries. As I said it to Danish, I seek any guidance in them. The Reading is my only criterion and I find the answers to my questions only in the light of the Reading because it explains itself based.
Oh, come on, Marie, you know as well as I that the issue is not the dictionaries, the problem is determining which dictionary definitionAllah is using in His Quran. This is the situation with lahma khinzeer. Khinzeer, according to at least a couple of dictionaries, as you know by this time, has two meanings. Ahmed Bahgat, attempted to explain away ayats 4160, 55, 6146, and 16116, but could not...when are explain them away, because until you do, your notion that lahm khinzeer means the pig, will not fly . Hope at some point you will stop ducking my question.
-
Salam brother Ahmed Bahgat,
Thanks for your reply, I don't think that lahma almayta = almayta and lahma alkhinzeer = alkhinzeer.
4912 specifies the flesh of his dead brother, not his bones.
In 2314, we read "then We covered the bone/alAAithama with flesh/lahman". In the Reading, the God uses distinctly lahm/meat, shahm/fat and alAAitham (bones).6146 is a good example, the God prohibited for the "jews" all that have claws/hoof and the fat of the cattle and the sheep.. that implies the whole body of all that have claws/hoof and only the fat not the meat of the cattle and the sheep except what is attached to the back, or entrails, or mixed with bone.
As the language in the Reading is concise, lahm/meat or shahm/fat of some thing (alkhinzeer (6145, 16115, 2173), the cattle and sheep (6146) are specific and doesn't mean the whole body.
alkhinzeer without lahm means the whole body but lahm alkhinzeer specifies what is forbiden the meat.My question if alkhinzeer is not healthy to eat it, why the God specifies lahm alkhinzeer instead of "alkhinzeer" like "almaytat" or "all that have claws/hoof".
It is clear that almayta implies the whole body, can we say the same thing for lahm alkhinzeer?Thanks
-
PEACE, AHMED BAHGAT,
Peace
4160 Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them and for their hindering many (people) from Allah's way.
The verse never mentioned the khanzir, neither it is telling us any new laws, rather is telling us a fact, that For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (things) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from Allah's Way;-
O.K.
cheers
can you see mate that I replaced the word (food) with (Things), I could not see anything in the arbic verse that imply it was food that was the subject of the Tahreem matter, rather anything, read it again bro if you read Arabic, what was good for the jews then became forbidden as a result of their iniquity, may also include actions, like not sleeping with their wives during the whole period of fasting, it can be anything really, but it can not be food explicitly, more over you want to extend it further and make it like it is the meat of the pig that was good for them then became forbidden due to their iniquity.
"MAY include"? well, do you know for a fact that it does include those things you mentioned? Yes or no?
yes
don?t hold the word ?May? that I used against me, I?m not fluent in English, in fact I brought an example that was mentioned in the Quran
I tend to be logical in what I say as a third person who is not me, that?s all LOL,
What we do KNOW FOR A FACT IS...per ayat 6146, Allah made haram the following "things" to the Jews prior to the advent of Al-Quran
-
"things" called animals with claws.
-
"a thing" called fat of sheep and oxen.
Now, do you see how the pig can be included in any of the above "things" which Allah made haram to the Jew? Yes or no?
Main Entry THING an entity, an idea, or a quality perceived, known, or thought to have its own existence the real or concrete substance of an entity an inanimate object something referred to by a word, a symbol, a sign, or an idea creature.
Oh, please, what the hell of that?, I do not need your dictionary, thanks
Given the above definiton of "thing", food definitely qualifies as such and, food, also comes under the rubric of halal and tayyib "things", hence, ayat 4160 CAN MEAN FOOD, in that, ayat 6146, names the "things" which Allah expressly made haram for the Jews for their transgressions...and those "things" were food. Can you produce another ayat where Allah, expressly, made something haram for the Jews?
why you want me to produce a verse as such?
Is it a test or somethin?
Possibly a Quran trivia?
Well, I?m not playing, thanks lol
Does Allah, anywhere in Al-Quran, state the pig was haram prior to the advent of Al-Quran, meaning, was it haram for Abraham? Yes or no?
of course it is stated in the OT, I posted it already, now a true Muslim should believe in the OT parts that was not corrupt, how we know it is not corrupt?, simply by comparing it with the uncorrupted Quran and sorry we have a perfect match regarding the meat of the pig in here
If yes, then provide the ayat as your proof. You have not yet proved your point via ayat 4160. Let's continue
The second verse you posted 55, again I see nothing explicit about Lahm Al Khanzir, it is also a two way between the Muslims and Ahal Al Kitab, i.e. This day, all good things are made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them...But you see how the verse started with ?ALL GOOD THINGS ARE MADE LAWFUL TO US?,,
Look, I don't care if it started with--"Jeremiah was a bullfrog", the point is this...the ayat says the food of the people of the book is halal to those who follow Al-Quran and vice versa, period. So, I ask you again, where, in Al-Quran, can I find the ayat where Allah made the pig haram for the Jews ( a people of the book)?
hey bro, I don?t like this arrogant way of talking, sorry, my right I guess, now I can really compete with very tough arrogant words and I do it on other boards but I decided not to do it in here, so please read the OT passage I posted and in there you will see God forbidding the pig, and this was confirmed by the Quran
very simple equation for me
if your equation totally ignores the uncorrupted parts of the OT then sorry we have to agree to disagree, as I believe in those OT passages exactly as I believe in the all the Quran verses
Allah, expressly, made...ALL animals with CLAWS, IN THEIR ENTIRETY ( not in part as lahma means), haram for the Jews. Now, as I hope you know, pigs do not have claws, period.
really?, it seems we need Darwin to give us some insight, I don?t give a shit really if it was forbidden on the jews or not, I?m not a bloody Jews, I?m a Muslim, and I?m following what the celar words of ?Lahm Al Kanzir? means
How about you try the Christians instead of the Jews, possibly I will give a shit?
now those good things is a general statement and whatever will be lawful should not violates this general rule, so if the verse continued saying, their food is made lawful to us, then why you take it ?all their food??, and even if we will take it as such, then all their good food that should not violate the general rule ?ONLY GOOD THINGS ARE MADE LAWFUL TO US?, you see those good things, ARE MADE, at the same time we ARE WARNED not to eat Lahm Al Khanzir in about 4 different locations, the argument that Khanzir does not mean the pig, is absolutely baseless, because it is the common Arabic word for the pig and this what will prevail, the word should not cause any confusion from the first place, I agree that there are many words that can cause a lot of confusion like ?SOLB and TRA?IB?, but that was not a statement for a new law that we should be aware and are warned to commit it,
The above is just double talk.
ok
But my question again mate, what is in the above verse that talks about Lahm Al Khanzir?, I could not find anything in the Arabic language that can imply talking about it.
Do me a favor, would you? please stay focused, o.k.?
ok
This discussion is around that which is considered food. Khinzeer, falls under that category. 55 is, in part, discussing what is halal food
ok
Now science has proved that lahm al khanzir can be really harmful to humans, it is the nature of the animal itself, I?m not going to get into this, I know it has to be exhausted already, but I know for certain that when Allah is forbidding anything or allowing anything, He will be doing it with great wisdom and the absolute knowledge in why this should be the case, and science proved Allah 100% right regarding the environment of the pigs world and its effect on humans
Science hass proved no such thing. Billions of people, past and present, have eaten the pig with absolutely no health problems. As Idol asked...why isn't th rat haram? It was the vector of Bubonic plague. It is much more filthy than any pig, yet it isn't haram. Read the posts by Member Danish, regarding the pig and the supposed health problems.
well you may try to ask the Rat question to someone else not me?, I won?t eat rats but if I?m staved to death I will eat all the rats/pigs around me and possibly eat you too, ?just kiddin?
I will try to read the post by Danish but I can?t promise, I run three companies and I participate on other boards, I have no time to piss but I mange to squeeze a lot of things togther
Moving on to the third verse 6146, after I read it many times and many explanations as well my own understanding based on what I read, I could understand what you want to say by this verse !! do you mean that Lahm Al Khanzir is not listed in the verse as an item of food that was forbidden on the jews?
Of course that is what I mean.
cool, rarely we agreed on something
Come on bro, the Lahm Al Kanzir is listed for sure, you see the verse is clearly saying the followings were forbidden
- Every (animal) with claws (Meat and Fat)
- The fat of the ox and the sheep (Fat Only)
So do you agree that the pig is an animal with a claw?
LOL!! You cannot tell the difference between a hoof and a claw??? yet, you are going to debate this issue?? LOL! you've got to be kidding me, right? Psssst...check this out, you will undoubtedly find what I'm going tell fantastic, beyond belief but...pigs don't have claws... Tell you what, look at the foot of pheasant and compare with the foot of a pig...can you see any difference?
do you think I?m an idiot to do and look on the pig foot?, LOL, come on man it is relative, something which look hoof to you may look like a claw to me, and will look like nothing to a blind man, who give a shit?
What is your argument trying to prove that the pig meat was not prohibited on the Jews?, is it relevant to the STRAIGHTFORWARD VERSES to not to eat the meat of the pig?
Oh yeh, you trying to use a general statement in another verse that says their food it allowed to us, come on this is a perfect case of deception by you, the verse did not say all the food and it started by sating only the good things are allowed, now the quran told us the meat of the pig is not a good food and ?DO NOT EAT IT?, how clearer can it get?, I reckon a blind will see it
What exactly you are trying to manipulate?
Now, given that the pig, per ayat 6146, was not made haram to the Jews
far out bro, I do not agree with that, cheers
ayat 55 then, makes it clear that, in that the pig was not haram to Jews,
sorry again I don?t agree with that, your logic is way too far beyond recognition
hence, it had to be haram--their food, the Jews, is lawful to us.
hence I don?t agree
Remember now, per ayat 16116...you cannot make haram what Allah didn't and, nowhere in Al-Quran, did Allah make the pig haram for the Jews.
you accuse of double talk, now it is my turn to accuse you with triple talk, come on bro I?m sick of this question already, ok, let me answer it for the third time
it is written in the uncorrupted passages in the OT, and we can know it is uncorrupted by comparing it with the 100% uncorrupted Quran,
now any true Muslim must believe in these uncorrupted passages exactly as the believe in the Quran, this is not what I said, it is what Allah said in His Quran
If I'm wrong then produce the ayat where He did make the pig haram, specifically, to the Jews.
help me God, thank you
it was very specific and explicit to the Muslims in the Quran
and it was very specific and explicit to the Jews and Christians in the Bible
I reckon it is, moving to the last verse 16116
16116 And, for what your tongues describe, do not utter the lie, (saying) This is lawful and this is unlawful, in order to forge a lie against Allah; surely those who forge the lie against Allah shall not prosper.
perfect verse that describe you, cheers
-> mate, I have to say, this verse may be talking about you, you are possibly trying to say that Marie and Me are trying to forbid something that is lawful to us, but we did not forbid anything, it was Allah who said DO NOT EAT LAHM AL KHANZIR, and I see KHANZIR with one meaning only, it means for me that filthy animal called "a pig", nothing in the Arabic that I know for 40 years suggest to me that it means anything else, this is a total joke really, but what I can finally say is thisplease consider that verse 16116 may also be talking about you, because it also talks about the people who try to allow things that are forbidden, I'm sure the verse is talking about things that vague like smoking for example but in this case Lahm Al Khnazir was clearly ?Horrim? by Allah, Allah does not play games with us man
On the contrary, the ayat IS talking about YOU and Marie and some others, mate. You people claim that...the pig is haram for mankind to eat. Ayat 55 says that, the food of the people of the book is halal for us, thus, you and Marie, MUST PROVE, via Al-Quran, that the pig was haram to the Jews before the advent of Al-Quran, PERIOD. If you cannot do this, then you cannot prove your assertion that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. Ayat, 6146, as far as I know, tells us exactly what Allah, specifically, made haram to the Jews regarding food...now...do you have any ayat where He made haram the pig to them? Yes or no?
hehe, yep I posted the passage from the Bible, do you want to see it again, or you don?t believe in it?
Now let me give you a lesson in the Arabic Language
We can say the following
? ?, which has one meaning only ?The meat of the chicken?
we can also say the following and it also has the same exact meaning
? ?, again it also has one meaning ? the meat of a chicken?
can you spot the difference?
Well let?s now apply another Arabic word that describe the meat instead of associating it with a noun of a creature, for example, the following is valid
? ?, it simply means ?barbequed meat?
the following is also valid
? ?, it means ?rotten meat
now the following is also valid
? ?, it means ?the barbequed meat?
as well the following is valid
? ?, which means ?the rotten meat?
now what I have never heard of in Arabic is this the second word ?Al Fasid? which means ?The Rotten? is an adjective to the first word ?Lahm? without ?Al? in ?Lahm? as follow
? ?
Al Fasid can not describe Lahm without Lahm having the ?Al?, do you understand my very important point?
Unless Al Fasid is a noun NOT an adjective, and in this case Lahm can be accepted without the ?Al in front it
Applying this simple common knowledge about Arabic, on the verses where the meat of the pig appeared we see the Quarn used Lahm without ?Al? and Khanzir was used with ?Al? and without ?Al?
Like this
? ?
? ?
The above two Arabic sentences as appeared in the Quran can not be valid unless ?Khanzir? is a noun, like the chicken example I started with.
if ?Khanzir? is an adjective then ? ? is not valid Arabic sentence
Neither you nor Marie, have yet to overcome ayats 4160, 55, 6146, and 16116, which, beyond any doubt, preclude the pig as being haram to those before the advent of Al-Quran or after it. You've got to do better than you have. Marie knows that, when those ayats are taken together/on their own, it destroys her notion that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. This is why she will has not address them when I posed them to her.
Looking forward to your reply.
Ok
peace
-