Quran - The Word of God or Man.
-
Peace danish and all. I personally think the quran is a mans(or possibly mens) opinions,interpretations,theories of the world,metaphysics,experience,knowledge, predictions and hopes.I dont doubt that there is a lot of wisdom,truth and correct predictions/scientific facts in it. The writer was very learned. What the writers intention was i am not 100% sure,but i will say he wanted society to be cleansed and pure. However if one takes the quran literally in todays society i believe a lot of harm can be caused.(look around at societies that follow literal translations) And if one takes a metaphorical understanding then you can interpret the quran to whatever you want it to say. I try to take ideas from the quran,but realise the knowledge is(in some parts)subjective,relative,incomplete, a different time/context,not applicable any more and sometimes wrong, or misunderstood knowledge from the author.. I thought in islam only god is perfect? If the quran is perfect isnt that two gods? However i do believe benefit can be gained from it, if it is taken as ideas and filtered through a persons conscience, brain and other present knowledge(including science and other texts) in order to benefit all life.
Peace all. -
Hello Danish
with my respect bro, the Quran does not say that it is written by wise men and women
it sayd something else bro, so if you are going to claim this big one you need to bring compelling proofs from the Quran
but what puzzles me, if it is is written by wise men and women, why they didn't tell us who the hell they are?
thanks bro
-
Peace Danish,
You raise an extremely pertinent question in some respects. When reading the koran it is inevitable that one is going to wonder about some passages and their purpose. There is clearly a filter throughout the verses of the koran in which you know that if the perfect knowledge was available it would be stated clearly, but there's a degree of simplification of some concepts; dare I say it, in an evasive way.
There's no doubt at all in my mind that there is a high degree of inspiration in the koran and that it is inspired by the God, but to say that it is the verbatim word of the God is in all respects incorrect in my opinion. The barrier, the veil, the filter of the human is present and to even suggest that one could encompass or witness the unadulterated pure truth of the God is a sort of blasphemy. Like wanting to witness the God with your eyes or other senses for example I think.
So I must say that I do witness the filtration present, the human mind being inspired and relaying the message as clear as humanly possible - and that's the key - afterall the message is being relayed by a human in a language limited to his and his societies consciousness and intellect.
The ideas and concepts are pure and I think any text that is inspired cannot but necessarily have the concepts within like the essential concepts of monotheism, etc.
I've sometimes wondered whether a new text could be written, try it in your mind if you wish; and it's truly a formidable challenge. I mean that in the every sense of the word - formidable.
Ultimately you must ask yourself, why do I want something other than the reading? What would a new text bring?
I happen to believe that chapter 98 is a prophetic one; that the proof is something that is yet to come. It is something we may have had a hint of with the mathematical codes discovered so far (19, neusemantics), but I think there is something more; something that unifies everything and is incontestable to every believer in the God.
Some people I've spoken to privately believe that there may be a hiddenmessage within the message - that some underlying code will one day bring out something more. You are communicating a similar desire for something more I think.
But why look for a hidden message? I think that it is quite clear what righteousness is when you look within your own self. There is a moral sense that is hard to deny. It's also in the reading, what more is there to it?
Regards.
-
Peace ,
i used to believe that quran is the direct word of god, to be taken litterally. This idea of mine was also based on code 19. Have changed my mind somewhat Still believe that quran is one divinely inspired scripture and also the most recent and purest existing. But when god says "i will surely preserve it" - does he mean the quran or the teachings of the "kitab-universe"? I nowadays tend to the "kitab" and the essence of the message. Why ? Because applicable laws should be adapted with society evolving and also because we do know that quran is written by human beings even if inspired by god. the book didn't just fall down from the skies, there are different versions, signs and verse numbers have been added aso...
lk
-
Peace ,
i used to believe that quran is the direct word of god, to be taken litterally. This idea of mine was also based on code 19. Have changed my mind somewhat Still believe that quran is one divinely inspired scripture and also the most recent and purest existing. But when god says "i will surely preserve it" - does he mean the quran or the teachings of the "kitab-universe"? I nowadays tend to the "kitab" and the essence of the message. Why ? Because applicable laws should be adapted with society evolving and also because we do know that quran is written by human beings even if inspired by god. the book didn't just fall down from the skies, there are different versions, signs and verse numbers have been added aso...
lk
I agree... one of the things that would bring one to this conclusion is the quite repetitive use of the word "we" - that is the first person PLURAL. Why would a God that has gone to great lengths to decribe his singularity then go about "we" when speaking in the first person, and then in the third person singular (either the name Allah followed by a singular third person verb, or the pronoun "he" "??") when wanting to emphasize God wants something to be done? I would say this means that the Koran is not word for word from God - I am one to think that God is above language - and that rather his servants, the angels (or perhaps just one, Gabriel "?????", but then why would be speakingin the plural), put it together for Muhammed in Arabic, a tongue he could understand. Note it is "we" who sent down the scripture in Arabic, and not "Allah" or "he" (122, 1337, 16103, 20113, 3928, 4144, 427, 433 all use "we" instead of "he" - not one ayat connects God with the Arabic tongue).
Let us also not forget that the Koran states that it is the Mother of the Book "?? ?????" that is with Allah (1339) and 37 clearly states that the Koran we have is part Mother of the book, part something else (allegorical, ambiguous, similar depending on the translation). 1338 also states that every age has its own book - doesn't this kind of defeat the assertion that the Koran is the only and the last book?
I don't this kind of thinking detracts anything from the greatness of the Koran and its message. It is this kind of information which will enable us to better understand and interpret the Koran. It of course flies in the face of orthodoxy, the sort of core deep down sunni beliefs most of us on this board have still not been able to shake off, even if we were never part of the sunni. Comments?
-
Peace elke and claurianta. I think there is a lot of wisdom in your two posts. We need to update our understandings with the passage of time and science(ie what is the the essence of the message) for different situations and societies;like elkes and idol-frees idea of kitab as the knowledge of universe or experience. And clauriantas astute observation that deep down we still have some shackles in our thinking(pre-conceived ideas and fear) from our primary experiences of organised or fixed religion.
Peace all. -
Hello
We for a singular in arabic and hebro languaes is used for honor and respect, this is very common
in datc it is even very common in other language
please explain the me why the Queen of England call herself "We"?
thanks
-
Hello
We for a singular in arabic and hebro languaes is used for honor and respect, this is very common
in datc it is even very common in other language
please explain the me why the Queen of England call herself "We"?
thanks
I will have to study this a bit further. Is it also common practice in arabic to refer to oneself by the singular third person pronoun "he" "??" as the Koran often does for God... why swap between "he" and "we" all the time if he wanted it to be clear... it seems to me that some sort of distinction is made, though my analysis of it may have been incorrect.
-
Salam,
The information in the Quran cannot be from man. Its impossible.
PeaceCan you elaborate on how its impossible?
Regards,
-
Hello
We for a singular in arabic and hebro languaes is used for honor and respect, this is very common
in datc it is even very common in other language
please explain the me why the Queen of England call herself "We"?
thanks
I will have to study this a bit further. Is it also common practice in arabic to refer to oneself by the singular third person pronoun "he" "??" as the Koran often does for God... why swap between "he" and "we" all the time if he wanted it to be clear... it seems to me that some sort of distinction is made, though my analysis of it may have been incorrect.
Peace
don't forgrt that Allah also referred to Himself in the Quran using "I"
peace
-
Hello
We for a singular in arabic and hebro languaes is used for honor and respect, this is very common
in datc it is even very common in other language
please explain the me why the Queen of England call herself "We"?
thanks
I will have to study this a bit further. Is it also common practice in arabic to refer to oneself by the singular third person pronoun "he" "??" as the Koran often does for God... why swap between "he" and "we" all the time if he wanted it to be clear... it seems to me that some sort of distinction is made, though my analysis of it may have been incorrect.
Peace
don't forgrt that Allah also referred to Himself in the Quran using "I"
peace
Ok... so we now have three pronouns used - "I", "we", and "he". Now, if the Koran is supposed to be as simple as it claims, why the confusion with using three different pronouns? Are there several narrators? From what I have seen "I" is much rarer than "we" - and it seems to be used predominantly in phrases directed toward the Jews... perhaps the Jews were more used to the "I" form in scripture, and so the language was adapted for the target audience of the ayat? Perhaps the verses with "I" are drawn directly from the Mother of the Book (Umm al-Kitab) whereas the "we" is some sort of narrator, and these phrases are more of the other allegorical kind than those which use "I" or "he"? It seems that the traditional explanation is to just wave your hands and say that all these pronouns refer to the same unity. Has this ever been studied in detail... as in what in the Koran is said by "we", what is said by "he", what is said by "I" and what is said by "Allah" - is there some kind of pattern there? (I'm not saying there necessarily is, but it would be an interesting line of research to figure our if there are multiple narrators - none of which BTW have to be human; they could very well be a mixture of God and angels). It seems to me that even among the Quran only people (and especially among the code-19 ones) there are still certain ground norms which are not questioned in light of what is said in the book, but are rather taken on blind faith.
One thing I can say is that from what I have seen, it really takes a lot of knowledge and intellect to put together how the different elements of the Koran work together - something which is alluded to in 37. It is very easy to misinterpret the Koran based on ones experiences and prior prejudices, and I think that is the greatest danger of the text, and in fact the great danger of any revelation. It is perhaps for this reason that it is encouraged to memorize all of it, so that you can easily make links between the different parts and to reconstruct the order in your head to make sense of it... unfortunately today people memorize it for totally different reasons that have nothing to do with critical analysis.
-
what makes you think it is the direct word of God, and not inspired as it states it is?
Say "Which is the greatest testimony?" Say "God is witness between me and you, and He has inspired to me this Quran that I may warn you with it and whomever it reaches, that you bear witness that along with God are other gods!" Say "I do not bear witness!" Say "He is only One god, and I am innocent of what you set up!"
Say "I do not say to you that I posses God's treasures, nor do I know the future, nor do I say to you that I am an Angel. I merely follow what is inspired to me." Say "Are the blind and the seer the same? Do you not think?"
And who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or says "It has been inspired to me," when We did not inspire anything to him; or who says "I will bring down the same as what God has sent down." And if you could only see the wicked at the moments of death when the Angels have their arms opened "Bring yourselves out, today you will be given the severest punishment for what you used to say about God without truth, and you used to be arrogant towards His revelations."
Say "I do not find in what is inspired to me forbidden except that it be already dead, or blood, or the meat of pig, for it is foul; or what is corruptly dedicated to other than God." Whoever is forced without seeking disobedience or transgression, then your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful.
in fact everybody is inspired from God
So We inspired him "Construct the Ship under Our eyes and Our inspiration. Then, when Our command comes and the volcano erupts, then you shall take on the Ship two from every pair, and your family; except for those of them upon whom the word has come. And do not address Me regarding those who have done wrong, for they will be drowned."
And We inspired Moses "Take away My servants, for you will be followed."
So We inspired to Moses "Strike the sea with your staff." So it split into two, each side like a great mountain.
And We inspired to Moses' mother "Suckle him, and when you become fearful for him, then cast him off in the sea, and do not fear nor grieve. We will return him to you and We will make him of the messengers."
Recite what is inspired to thou of the Scripture, and uphold the contact-method; for the contact-method prohibits evil and vice, and the remembrance of God is the greatest. God knows everything you do.
etc..
-
The Magi... you do realize that the word "inspire" here can have several meanings... the normal meaning of seeing something specific or hearing something specific and being to write about it, but also a second meaning of some sort of mental communication. Maybe instead of using the sense of hearing, the phrases are just sort of placed in the mind somehow by otherworldly being (and maybe not, just hypothesizing on possible meanings).
I think we have to realize that there is forcibly some level of human intervention... as it is humans who actually put the words on a piece of paper to make the first physical Koran. I don't think the Koran tells us precisely how it was transmitted and even if different ayats have different origins (yes, I know ultimately that everything, including evil surprisingly enough, has its ultimate source in God, but I'm referring to the more immediate origins here) or if they were all transmitted in the same manner. -
Peace Zein,
So We inspired to Moses "Strike the sea with your staff."
Whose words are "Strike the sea with your staff"... Moses'?.. Muhamad's?.. The staff's?..Firstly, one must know who "We" is, who inspired Moses. GOD, the one and only, cannot be "We". Secondly, in accordance to the Law of Nature, a sea cannot be struck with a staff to split open. And thirdly, science fails to substantiate this notion. I believe its either misconstrued or has a metaphorical understanding.
-
danish wrote...
Secondly, in accordance to the Law of Nature, a sea cannot be struck with a staff to split open. And thirdly, science fails to substantiate this notion.science refutes the concept of god (?), so if science fails to substantiate something here, it would be a poor criterion to base judgements upon, unless u challenge the very existent of god!
i am not quite sure what u mean by laws of nature, but if u mean science, then laws are mere hypothesis, good till the time they are proven wrong. science and its laws are as limited as the human mind, and as and when the inferences change, so do the laws!
i am not sure what u mean by quran being the word of god or man! -( could u or anybody else elaborate what it means. cry
-
i am not quite sure what u mean by laws of nature, but if u mean science, then laws are mere hypothesis, good till the time they are proven wrong. science and its laws are as limited as the human mind, and as and when the inferences change, so do the laws!
Yes that is correct. Scientific laws can never be absolute but only provisional. These laws stand as long as it is not disproven by a new observation...
Regards,
-
i am not quite sure what u mean by laws of nature, but if u mean science, then laws are mere hypothesis, good till the time they are proven wrong. science and its laws are as limited as the human mind, and as and when the inferences change, so do the laws!
Yes that is correct. Scientific laws can never be absolute but only provisional. These laws stand as long as it is not disproven by a new observation...
Regards,
Peace,
The creation is created according to a set of fixed laws defined by the creator. Science on the other hand tries to tune its equations and theories as much as possible with those laws. But the laws of the god are there, unchangeable, as long as the universe would stand.
--