The Quran and the previous scriptures
-
Peace be upon you Leyla,
idolfree1
When you read the arabic text it is not "before you" in a chronological sense, I`d say.Please elaborate for me. If you dont mind, use the arabic and translation together so I can get the complete picture.
-
idolfree1
The word that?s translated here as "before" is "min qablika".
The line is "walladh?na yu'min?na bim? 'unzila ilayka wa ma unzila min qablika".Well, min means from, then comes the word "qabl" with the ending "ika" which signifies something that belongs to you.
Qabl is interesting here. It refers to something that is phenomenologically in front of you, this can, but does not necessarily need to, refer to something before you in a chronological sense, I opine.
You will know the word "qiblah", which refers to your direction, that which is in front of you when you are in a certain position.
This comes from the same root.
The "qiblah" is not something that you have passed already. Rather it is the opposit. It is what you face.
You may also know the word "qab?l" which means "accepted", you take it as directly in front of you, you don?t push it far away.
Same root again. -
Peace be upon you MQ,
Quote
Kyle(24) And those who trust with what was descended to you, and what was descended from before you, and with the end (other life) they are sure/certain .This is a description of 'al-muttaqeen'. Al-kitaab is guidance for 'al-muttaqeen' who believe in what is revealed to you and what is revealed before you. 'al-muttaqeen' isn't said to be the present al-muttaqeen nor are the present al-muttaqeen told to trust what came before. What is descended remains the same and so al-muttaqeen of all time would believe in it.
And what is more steady and consistent than the objective universal laws? It is the very same sun that shines on every single person on this forum and every single person to have lived on this earth. The very same air. Everything the same. No change will you find in it  
Quote
No, I was talking about the truth, the book of life, the only book which can be read by all people at all times in any place, the Universe. When I said "all is considered Al Kitaab", I meantall of the TRUTHFUL (through verification) STATEMENTS that are made throughout the history of life. I was not referring to any book, UNLESS that book is verified through life experience as truth.Sorry, I understood you meant to 'divine books' on paper due to this context
We are told to trust what is descended upon us and that which was descended to those before us. Its not about book vs book, its about truthful statements vs false statements. We do not differentiate between truth given by one or the other. All is considered Al Kitaab.
Ok, I understand now, thanks. Let me ask you please.
Say you're 'reading the universe'. How do you deduce what is a 'universal law'. A law, if you agree is a statement whose truth happens if all conditions are met. How would you deduce a law?
We deduce a law by persistant observation, same way the laws of chemistry. physics, biololgy, etc were deduced. In this time of Television, radio, etc it is a difficult task. But the basics behind it is "measurment". Thats why there is talk of "weight of a mustard seed" etc. You try one way, it doesnt work, you try another you get closer, yuo try another you get further, so you move back the other way and get closer, fianlly you get there, and then you continue to follow that path to make sure you are really there. It is teh same proceedure used by our example Ibrahim, when he looked at the star he said "this is my Lord", but when it disappeared "I do not like those that disappear", then the same for teh moon , then sun, finally stating "You (my) nation, that I am innocent/renouncing from what you associate."
Ibrahim went after that which is consistent, that which lasts. All day long 1+1 will equal 2. Not Physical books that come and go. Books are written to prevent us from going all the way back to the beginning. Imagine if all the Physics books and teachers were gone, how we would have to start from the beginning. But the standard of physics is not the books or teachers but the universal laws that the teachers learned from and wrote the books according to.
-
We deduce a law by persistant observation, same way the laws of chemistry. physics, biololgy, etc were deduced. In this time of Television, radio, etc it is a difficult task. But the basics behind it is "measurment". Thats why there is talk of "weight of a mustard seed" etc. You try one way, it doesnt work, you try another you get closer, yuo try another you get further, so you move back the other way and get closer, fianlly you get there, and then you continue to follow that path to make sure you are really there. It is teh same proceedure used by our example Ibrahim, when he looked at the star he said "this is my Lord", but when it disappeared "I do not like those that disappear", then the same for teh moon , then sun, finally stating "You (my) nation, that I am innocent/renouncing from what you associate."
Ibrahim went after that which is consistent, that which lasts. All day long 1+1 will equal 2. Not Physical books that come and go. Books are written to prevent us from going all the way back to the beginning. Imagine if all the Physics books and teachers were gone, how we would have to start from the beginning. But the standard of physics is not the books or teachers but the universal laws that the teachers learned from and wrote the books according to.Ok, I take your point. Let me pose an example if you wish to go along
During the Hobbesian period of political thought, it was thought that the White Man was superior to the Afro-man. The reason for this is that by observation, the White Man had colonised and enslaved the Black-man. No less than certain American presidents thought that the Afroman was only 3/5'ths human.
Consider this example above to be a hypothetical one for now (to avoid pedantic and distracting conversations about it). What can we deduce from the above
-
The formulation of natural universal law is limited by mankind's capacity to observe, namely the space-time limitation.
-
Mankind has always a tendency to be biased in his observation.
The afro-man could easily say, this is the universal law that the chosen ones of God have to suffer before achieving heavenly bliss. How are we to contradict him?
-
-
Peace be upon you Leyla,
According to what I see and read al-qur'?n establishes the absoluteness of certain terms through the article, al.
Thus al-haqq is not simply a truth, it is the Absolute Truth, God.So, the qur'?n does not call itself qur'?n or qur'?nun, a reading.
It calls itself al-qur'?n, the absolute reading.
It is not one amongst others, it is THE.Yes, THE TRUTH (al haqq).
Mankind was once ONE community. We all come from ONE GOD, who is at the core of our being.
There is only one verse, the UNI(one) VERSE.
We are putting the pieces of the puzzle back together, that which the God commands to be joined. But right now we see things in pieces. So what looks like seperate truths, and seperate readings, are really ONE, therefore AL. All things come from "BE" and it becomes.
-
Peace be upon you Leyla,
The word that?s translated here as "before" is "min qablika".
The line is "walladh?na yu'min?na bim? 'unzila ilayka wa ma unzila min qablika".Well, min means from, then comes the word "qabl" with the ending "ika" which signifies something that belongs to you.
Qabl is interesting here. It refers to something that is phenomenologically in front of you, this can, but does not necessarily need to, refer to something before you in a chronological sense, I opine.
You will know the word "qiblah", which refers to your direction, that which is in front of you when you are in a certain position.
This comes from the same root.
The "qiblah" is not something that you have passed already. Rather it is the opposit. It is what you face.
You may also know the word "qab?l" which means "accepted", you take it as directly in front of you, you don?t push it far away.
Same root again.Thank you for your patience and detailed explanation. But it leaves further question. It seems redundant to say "that which was revealed to you and that which is "in front" of you , because that which is revealed to you would be in front of you.
So I still think of it as that which was descended upon you (which you have there by default) and that which was descended before you (which you ALSO have right there to compare one to the recent confirmation). Please give me your thoughts.
-
Peace be upon you MQ,
Ok, I take your point. Let me pose an example if you wish to go along
Always willing with the sincere seekers brother!
During the Hobbesian period of political thought, it was thought that the White Man was superior to the Afro-man. The reason for this is that by observation, the White Man had colonised and enslaved the Black-man. No less than certain American presidents thought that the Afroman was only 3/5'ths human.
Consider this example above to be a hypothetical one for now (to avoid pedantic and distracting conversations about it). What can we deduce from the above
-
The formulation of natural universal law is limited by mankind's capacity to observe, namely the space-time limitation.
-
Mankind has always a tendency to be biased in his observation.
The afro-man could easily say, this is the universal law that the chosen ones of God have to suffer before achieving heavenly bliss. How are we to contradict him?
The easy answer would be to compare that observation to Ibrahim calling the star "My Lord".
But certainly not all Africans had that view, there were others, who went deeper inside of thier being and rebelled agains the "masses".
The main point I want to stress is that TRUTH is never arrived at by following emotions. One must have what the ancients called a "stable heart", meaning they are not moved by emotion, they command the energies (e-motion).
The idea that the African was less than the European was a mental strategy to give Europeans a belief (thought + energy) in which to get behind and allow themselves to enslave another human being.
-
-
Sugarwhat makes you think that it aint one of the previous distorted scriptures?
Because I try my best to evaluate according to al-quraan and al-quraan has no concept of 'distorted scriptures'.
Well actually I did read a verse in the Quran which said;
?Woe to those who distort the scripture with their own hands and claim it?s from God, woe to them for thier illicit earnings?
I can?t remember where abouts it is written cause it?s from top of me head but I definitely do remember reading it a number of time.
Peace,
Sugar -
275 and 79, 4126 and 40, 541 and 446.....
-
The easy answer would be to compare that observation to Ibrahim calling the star "My Lord".
But certainly not all Africans had that view, there were others, who went deeper inside of thier being and rebelled agains the "masses".
Ok, lets consider the example to be hypothetical. I could never prove this took place one way or the other.
The main point I want to stress is that TRUTH is never arrived at by following emotions. One must have what the ancients called a "stable heart", meaning they are not moved by emotion, they command the energies (e-motion).
The idea that the African was less than the European was a mental strategy to give Europeans a belief (thought + energy) in which to get behind and allow themselves to enslave another human being.
Ok, so this is your view at how to get at the heart of the matter which I do appreciate. However, it will be your opinion vs the opinion of another person if for example you had a conference about how to change the situation. And in that situation, a criteria would come in handy. This is why the ultimate truth cannot be deduced (without guidance) by as you say 'We deduce a law by persistant observation, same way the laws of chemistry. physics, biololgy, etc were deduced. '. Humankind is too limited by time and space.
-
Peace be upon you MQ,
IF1
The idea that the African was less than the European was a mental strategy to give Europeans a belief (thought + energy) in which to get behind and allow themselves to enslave another human being.MQ
Ok, so this is your view at how to get at the heart of the matter which I do appreciate. However, it will be your opinion vs the opinion of another person if for example you had a conference about how to change the situation. And in that situation, a criteria would come in handy.The criterion is universal law. When you do not waste your energy in wasteful emotions, that same energy is what is used to go out and bring you what you need in life and to put you in the right place at the right time. SO much of life can be dealt with from WITHIN, from the Spirit. Did not the God say that the condition of a person is not changed until they change what is in thier Spirit? Most of us are materialistic. While we may not go after money and cars, we still feel like the only way to change a situation is by physical means, rather than spiritual.
This is why the ultimate truth cannot be deduced (without guidance) by as you say 'We deduce a law by persistant observation, same way the laws of chemistry. physics, biololgy, etc were deduced. '. Humankind is too limited by time and space.
Outwardly perhaps, but this is where inuition (prophets) come it at.
-
KyleThe criterion is universal law. When you do not waste your energy in wasteful emotions, that same energy is what is used to go out and bring you what you need in life and to put you in the right place at the right time. SO much of life can be dealt with from WITHIN, from the Spirit. Did not the God say that the condition of a person is not changed until they change what is in thier Spirit? Most of us are materialistic. While we may not go after money and cars, we still feel like the only way to change a situation is by physical means, rather than spiritual.
Universal law is not a thing the same way a table is a thing. If I said to a bad guy 'you'll be punished', my statement won't be concretised till some point in the future. This is the same with your universal law. Sure you can look within and sure you can acquire some truths of the world, but let me ask you, what happens when you want to live in the world according to those truths? You will then have to articulate those truths.
For me, the ultimate truth is encapsulated in a book. The world I deal with will interpreted according to the book. I think that's where our difference lies.
Outwardly perhaps, but this is where inuition (prophets) come it at.
Ok, but once again, the 'prophets' will have to articulate in order to be informative to people.
-
Peace be upon you MQ,
I am not sure where this is getting lost, so I will use Homosexuality as my example. Universal Law is objective, so the question is "what is the proper relationship for sex", buy observation of the Universe and the sexual organs, we see clearly that the male and female are designed to have sex with each other, not male and male, nor female and female.
Now when I talked about emotions and desires, this is the reason why people will come and say that Homosexuality is okay. BUt if we leave emotions and desires out, the objective law is clear. Its not about commandments, its about law. We dont needa commandment not to jump off Mount Kilamanjaro, the law of gravity is enough of a commandment. )
The God giving "commandments" is just a metaphor for observing universal law. Please tell me if I have clarified this more accurately.
One last thing that is crucial, Truth deals with RELATIONSHIPS, not Facts.
-
Peace mquran
Quote
Elkebut as far as i remember there is a verse in quran stating that quran abrogates previous scripturesThere's no such verse. Kindly bring your evidence if you're speaking the truth.
You are right Quran insists in many places on being a confirmation of previous revelations.
What i wrote was based on the memory of the following verses
And a verifier of that which is before me of the Taurat and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden t you, and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah and obey me. (3.51)
Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things? (2.107)
When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals,- they say, "Thou art but a forger" but most of them understand not.(16.101)
lk
-
ElkeWhat i wrote was based on the memory of the following verses
And a verifier of that which is before me of the Taurat and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden t you, and I have come to you with a sign from your Lord therefore be careful of (your duty to) Allah and obey me. (3.51)
Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things? (2.107)
When We substitute one revelation for another,- and Allah knows best what He reveals,- they say, "Thou art but a forger" but most of them understand not.(16.101)
Ok. Well 3/50 above is talking about at-tauraat and an-injeel and not al-quraan. The other 2 verses, 2/105 and 16/101 are talking about signs, ayaat. Not al-quraan. Al-quraan never mentions its an abrogation of a previous book. Indeed, all messengers were given the same message (41/43, 46/9).