did Muhammad really have 11 wives?
-
Peace be upon you Elena,
At the same time, this option of putting aside the "usual" Muhammad makes me think of the other extreme, the traditional extreme of putting him in the center of the message till the extend of giving him more importance than to the message.
I can't help It seems to me denying the "usual" Muhammad being the person who received the inspiration to not have to deal with the controversial part of his reported actions.
Controversial part of whose actions? There is no history of this man except that controversy. This reading uses the word "muhammadan" as a description only. It is this made up character that has all the controversy
A question, there is no source appart from Bukhari & Co hadiths that gives information about this individual? None?
I dont know, but how can it ever be proven? I dont deal with people in histry, because you just cant prove it, its impossible. All I like to dewal with is philosophies, because we can implement the philosophies to see if they are true, we can verify them. The God does not ask us to believe in that which we cannot verify.
-
Peace Idolfree,
A question, there is no source appart from Bukhari & Co hadiths that gives information about this individual? None?
I dont know, but how can it ever be proven? I dont deal with people in histry, because you just cant prove it, its impossible..
Then, as you don't know you decide to put the suppossed Muhammad aside. Something is incomplete here. Something is left. It is not enough. It is not a proof that the suppossed Muhamamd was not the person who received the inspiration.
Let me wite again what I wrote above
Peace Idolfree,
the books that have been written about Muhammad give bibliography, but I have to research if the original sources are based just on the Arab tradition or something else. My readings say the study, not by Arabs, of his life started around 1600 by Thomas Erpenius (1584-1624) in Leiden and Edward Pocok (1604-16919 in Oxford and from this there a lot to check.
-
Peace be upon you Sister Elena,
Then, as you don't know you decide to put the suppossed Muhammad aside.
No, it is because the message does not speak of a person named "muhammadun" that I put it aside. One would have to have a pre concieved idea that there is a real person to "put it aside". If we just read the message, there is no mention of a historical person. It is the historical muhammad that reqires the proof, which can never be given since his person would be dead physically. Now it is like trying to prove santa claus was a real human.
Something is incomplete here. Something is left. It is not enough. It is not a proof that the suppossed Muhamamd was not the person who received the inspiration.
I am not understanding, what is incomplete? The person who did get the inspiration and write the book could indeed be DESCRIBED with the word "muhammadun", but that does not mean his name was "Muhammad".
Sister, do not let the rejectors run yuo around trying to prove that which can never, a this point, be proven. Trying to prove that will in no way improve your behavior, and thats what the message is about, which is why none of these characters are real, just stories about US ALL D
-
Peace Sis Elena,
Peace Whichever way one chooses to look at it, the number of wives a person(s) may have or had (or what their names are) has no significance or benefit to any of us.
no benefit but it would give us some information. Don't you think taht information would be very important if we really had the true information?
IMHO, no. I don't think this information has any importance or significance whatsoever. Again, this is my opinion. )Peace
-
Peace Idolfree,
sorry for having said that agressive comment ("as you don't know, you decide...")
I have the book 'Mohammed', by Hartmun Bobzin, 2004, Ed. ABC, SL , first Edition 2000, C.H. Beck Verlag.
It tracks the studies about the person, lots of Bibilography and titles and after reading it, I could conclude that the original sources are the quran and the tradition and that a lot of addings were inserted because the quran had very few about his life, it had just about his rol as messenger.
The authors of those studies trusted on those sources, but yes, lots of fabrications have to be there, and I can't can't verify further, ok.
Peace Zenje,
you think it is not important but if we had the true info about the life of the person who received the inspiration, it could help to know what the quran says. For instance, there is no agreement in the poligamy issue. If we knew if that person had married many women, if he lived the message, then it would support the interpretation that poligamy is allowed.
-
Peace Elena,
you think it is not important but if we had the true info about the life of the person who received the inspiration, it could help to know what the quran says. For instance, there is no agreement in the poligamy issue. If we knew if that person had married many women, if he lived the message, then it would support the interpretation that poligamy is allowed.
I disagree because al-quraan has an internal methodology and it doesnt include looking at other texts. If pro-polygamy supporters bring historical evidence without bringing in textual evidence, then their evidence wont be acceptable.
The salaat issue best demonstrates this. If we use hadith/seerah/maghazi texts to determine what salaat is, we come up with a picture which is not in alignment with al-quraan. The textual evidence which people have attempted to bring out renders a far more quranic picture.
-
Sister, do not let the rejectors run yuo around trying to prove that which can never, a this point, be proven.
This is rather unfair comment Idolfree. I have found Elena to be too astute to be run around by "rejectors" as you say it.
Regards,
-
LoteTree This is rather unfair comment Idolfree. I have found Elena to be too astute to be run around by "rejectors" as you say it.
This isnt a question of astuteness but of zeal. What Kyle's trying to say it, don't be overawed by the 'academic' methodology preached. Al-quraan should be judged and interpreted on its own, not with an artificial method.
-
LoteTree This is rather unfair comment Idolfree. I have found Elena to be too astute to be run around by "rejectors" as you say it.
This isnt a question of astuteness but of zeal. What Kyle's trying to say it, don't be overawed by the 'academic' methodology preached. Al-quraan should be judged and interpreted on its own, not with an artificial method.
Astute - shrewd, smart, of good judgement, perceptive, judicious, incisive, wise, intelligent...
I think these qualities will allow someone to see beyond the "zeal" of any people...
This isnt a question of astuteness but of zeal. What Kyle's trying to say it, don't be overawed by the 'academic' methodology preached. Al-quraan should be judged and interpreted on its own, not with an artificial method.
But this approach is not even scientific? A scientific approach would be to apply same instrument of analysis to all scriptures and not change the method of analysis depending on the holy text...this is the objective way, this is the scientific way...
One of the definition of
methodology - A documented approach for performing activities in a coherent, consistent, accountable, and repeatable manner
So lets have it mquran?
So we can go away and apply this yes?
Regards,
-
Astute - shrewd, smart, of good judgement, perceptive, judicious, incisive, wise, intelligent...
I think these qualities will allow someone to see beyond the "zeal" of any people
You're telling me the factors of LEVELS of astuteness and zeal AND the nature of the subject matter has nothing to do with it? Simply 'astute' overrules 'zeal' ? I disagree.
In this case, seeking a historical recourse has no basis in al-quraan.
But this approach is not even scientific? A scientific approach would be to apply same instrument of analysis to all scriptures and not change the method of analysis depending on the holy text...this is the objective way, this is the scientific way...
All scriptures ? Can you please tell me where al-quraan approves of 'all scriptures' ? Can you also please tell me where I might find these 'objective (key phrase , please dont ignore this) instruments of analysis' ? Lastly, can you please tell me, what makes these instruments 'objective' ?
So lets have it mquran?
So we can go away and apply this yes?
I've already described to you in another thread and in chat. I'm not going to repeat myself. If you wish, you may deconstruct what's already been said.
-
In this case, seeking a historical recourse has no basis in al-quraan.
This is your own opinion.
But this approach is not even scientific? A scientific approach would be to apply same instrument of analysis to all scriptures and not change the method of analysis depending on the holy text...this is the objective way, this is the scientific way...
All scriptures ? Can you please tell me where al-quraan approves of 'all scriptures' ?
Regardless if Quran approves other scriptures are not. Thats not the point is it? In order to be objective same method of analysis should be carried out on all scriptures.
Can you also please tell me where I might find these 'objective (key phrase , please dont ignore this) instruments of analysis' ?
This is irrellevant to you anway from your previous statement.
Lastly, can you please tell me, what makes these instruments 'objective' ?
Objective 2+2=4
So lets have it mquran?
So we can go away and apply this yes?I've already described to you in another thread and in chat. I'm not going to repeat myself. If you wish, you may deconstruct what's already been said.
methodology - A documented approach for performing activities in a coherent, consistent, accountable, and repeatable manner
You have done no such thing. As for our chat you only proved to yourself why Quran is the absolute truth for you...
Here is a test for you
Show using your methodology that Quranic Stance on Polygamy?
Please give full details so that we can apply this methodology to other things - since this methodology should not change should it?Regards,
-
LT This is your own opinion.
It's my view, yes. Why don't you actually provide yours instead of helping me identify my own view.
Regardless if Quran approves other scriptures are not. Thats not the point is it? In order to be objective same method of analysis should be carried out on all scriptures.
It IS the point if one is a believer which I am. But assuming I'm not, can you please tell me what qualifies as a 'scripture' ?
This is irrellevant to you anway from your previous statement
Oh but if YOU used the phrase, YOU must know what it means. So tell me 'where I might find these 'objective (key phrase , please dont ignore this) instruments of analysis'
you told me that I should use it so presumably you must know where it or they is/are.
Objective 2+2=4
Great. Back to our issue. What makes A HERMENEUTICAL/EXEGETICAL INSTRUMENT objective?
You have done no such thing. As for our chat you only proved to yourself why Quran is the absolute truth for you...
I disagree and assert you're lying. I further assert that you have no idea what 'objective instruments of analysis' are and will never be able to furnish this discussion with the details of one.
Show using your methodology that Quranic Stance on Polygamy?
Please give full details so that we can apply this methodology to other things - since this methodology should not change should it?I have not engaged in this subject and therefore cannot give answers which Im comfortable with.
-
You have done no such thing. As for our chat you only proved to yourself why Quran is the absolute truth for you...
I disagree and assert you're lying. I further assert that you have no idea what 'objective instruments of analysis' are and will never be able to furnish this discussion with the details of one.
I have the transcript of our entire conversations mquran...all you kept saying is that quran has its own internal methodology. You gave no such description of this methodology. So gives us the procedures for this methodology. But if you haven't worked out the methodolgoy yet then I fully understand and we can leave it at that...
Regards,
-
I have the transcript of our entire conversations mquran...all you kept saying is that quran has its own internal methodology. You gave no such description of this methodology. So gives us the procedures for this methodology. But if you haven't worked out the methodolgoy yet then I fully understand and we can leave it at that...
Excellent. Please quote it.
And Im still waiting for your 'objective instruments of analysis'. Please tell me what these are and who provides them. Also, please define for me what qualifies as a scripture.
-
I have the transcript of our entire conversations mquran...all you kept saying is that quran has its own internal methodology. You gave no such description of this methodology. So gives us the procedures for this methodology. But if you haven't worked out the methodolgoy yet then I fully understand and we can leave it at that...
Excellent. Please quote it.
Here it is - thats the only thing you have said regarding this matter...I can email you the whole transcript if you like...
19/09/2005 113554 mq - its like humans have 2 dynamic poles
19/09/2005 113559 mq - the heaven and the earth
19/09/2005 113603 mq -heavenS, sorry
19/09/2005 113623 mq -part of us soar in this heavenly realm, which the poet captures
19/09/2005 113644 mq -but our earthly realm brings us back
19/09/2005 113700 mq -this is where my love of mystical poetry ends
19/09/2005 113705 Lote-Tree -poet captures both chap..
19/09/2005 113715 Lote-Tree -the hell as well as the heaven
19/09/2005 113734 mq -agreed.., but where we depart is that actual program
19/09/2005 113754 mq -i think heaven can be found in the earthly side of things
19/09/2005 113759 mq -if we follow the path
19/09/2005 113803 Lote-Tree -heaven is within us
19/09/2005 113809 Lote-Tree -hell is within us
19/09/2005 113833 Lote-Tree -we would not know the differnece without them
19/09/2005 113901 mq -potentially, yes
19/09/2005 113917 mq -but they must be given birth to
19/09/2005 113930 mq -thats the whole point
19/09/2005 114027 Lote-Tree - elaborate
19/09/2005 114052 mq - well, the concept of heaven is within us, its actualisability is also within our grasp
19/09/2005 114103 mq -but in order to bring it forth, that requires a prograk
19/09/2005 114107 mq -progam*
19/09/2005 114115 mq -all human beings seek that
19/09/2005 114138 mq -the quran calls this 'al-kitaab'...the writ
19/09/2005 114157 mq -as a programmer, what are u trying to do ? ur WRITING something which the system understands
19/09/2005 114206 mq -why ? in order to exploit the usage of the system
19/09/2005 114235 mq -if we discover LIFE'S program, we could do the same
19/09/2005 114352 Lote-Tree -your analogy fails in the respect that are millions of different programs available... and that is my point - Quran for you is your program - and thats great... but to others it is Bhagavad Gita, Buddhas Fire Sermon...etc...
19/09/2005 114417 mq -no, the quran acknowledges the many different programs
19/09/2005 114429 Lote-Tree -so why bother with quran?
19/09/2005 114513 mq -its the best programming language
19/09/2005 114524 mq -i have not seen concepts so illustrated
19/09/2005 114533 Lote-Tree -for you it is mquran... for you it is
19/09/2005 114538 mq -oh agreedSee the highlighted and now see what you have written now
Can you please tell me where al-quraan approves of 'all scriptures' ?
Look mquran, I am not attacking your understanding. I really want to understand, and I have said before, your method. Don't take it personally...
Regards,
-
Peace be upon you Lote Tree,
idolfree1 wrote
Sister, do not let the rejectors run yuo around trying to prove that which can never, a this point, be proven.This is rather unfair comment Idolfree. I have found Elena to be too astute to be run around by "rejectors" as you say it.
Unfair? How is a warning unfair? I dont want Elena to waste her time searching for something that is meaningless. I hope that she will be just as "unfair" to me. MQ gave an accurate statement of my intentions for what I said. I meant no disrespect whatsoever and I am sure Elena knows this.
Regarding the objective science of this all, I used the VERY SAME LAW that is applied to other words that have the prefix "MU" added to them, it does not change the word to a persons name in none of the other occurences, so scientifically, we should not change this word to a proper name. Is this not correct science?
-
Peace Zenje,
you think it is not important but if we had the true info about the life of the person who received the inspiration, it could help to know what the quran says. For instance, there is no agreement in the poligamy issue. If we knew if that person had married many women, if he lived the message, then it would support the interpretation that poligamy is allowed.
If I understand you correctly Elena, the issue isn't the exact number of wives, this prophet had, but whether he had more than one? If that's the case then, the answer is in the message...-
O prophet, say to your wives ?If you are seeking this worldly life and its vanities, then come, I will make a provision for you and release you in an amicable manner.?
-
O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they should lengthen upon themselves their outer garments. That is better so that they would be recognized and not harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
-
O you prophet, why do you prohibit what God has made lawful for you, seeking to please your wives? God is Forgiver, Merciful.
Peace
-
-
LoteTree Here it is - thats the only thing you have said regarding this matter...I can email you the whole transcript if you like...
Ok, check out this thread
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4097&highlight=meaning+attach+alquraan
Please comment on it if you haven't already seen it.
Look mquran, I am not attacking your understanding. I really want to understand, and I have said before, your method. Don't take it personally...
LT, intellectual cowardice does not befit you. You have made assertions such as But this approach is not even scientific? A scientific approach would be to apply same instrument of analysis to all scriptures and not change the method of analysis depending on the holy text...this is the objective way, this is the scientific way
So if you use such terminologies, I would expect you to know what you're talking those terms means. Here they are again for your convenience
-
objective instruments of analysis
-
scripture
I can only attempt to answer your underlined statement above if you can define these terms for me. How can you expect a discussion to progress when you yourself don't know what you mean ?!
And no, I'm not taking anything personally. I want the discussion to progress and so I am justifiably asking for clarification.
-
-
LoteTree Here it is - thats the only thing you have said regarding this matter...I can email you the whole transcript if you like...
I disagree and assert you're lying.
I have been accused of many things mquran but above did hurt.
I don't wish to proceed with anything with you.
I withdraw from this and other threads in which I have engaged with you...
Thanks.
Shanti
Regards,