Challenge to all rejectors of the Divinity of Al-Quraan : Moderated Debates
-
Peace,
Sorry for the intruding, and sorry elke if it wasn't your intention to discuss this, if it was not, then ignore my post please
As for the punishment, it says hit the skin, but the word used refers to that we cannot brake the skin. So by my best understanding, it has a metaphorical meaning, and never refered to real whipping. But public humilation.
242 The adulteress and the adulterer, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes. And let not compassion sway you in their case from carrying out Allah?s Law, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of believers witness the penalty. .
Quote
three month period after divorce for women... for me this is not valid anymore as today one can have a pregnancy test... and if it's not for pregnancy but for STD, why would the waiting be only for the women ?Not all pregnancy tests are 100% perfect, but then still we have DNA tests, so i understand what you are saying. So i agree we have to look a bit closer to this one, but still no reason to disclose it. Also you have to keep in mind that 80% of the people on earth don't have money for a pregnancy test.
Quote
I actually evolved on that coz when i left my husband i waited for over nine month before assuming relation with my beloved one, the one i left my husband for.... not "officially" divorced yet - i wanted to do it in a clean manner, waiting period included aso, but realized on the way that the cards were biaised - actually, my official divorce, which could have taken place in three month if my ex had asked for it, happened 3 years laterYou asked for divorce, then after the waiting period it is over. Have witnesses that confirm the divorce date, then there is no problem that the legal work is late, as these has nothing to do with the real islamic divorce. So the fornication doesn't apply at all here.
Quote
While by the way my ex was remarried three month after i left... thanks to the possibility of polygamyThis is the biggest lie of the tradition. Nikaa means contract/mixing/combining, and doesn't mean marriage throughout the Quran. So with the 4 women, it is directly refered them being poor and them having kids, and by thus giving the nikaa the meaning of social contracts to take care of them. As the prophet was the trustholder of the public money as the booty-verse gives, then this is the clear reason he got 11 'wives', they were not married to him, but he had contracts with them to take care of them, as he could disperse the money in a correct way. Polygamy doesn't occur in the Quran. This is one of the things that has to be rectified.
These things has nothing to do with interpretation but with the direct use of classic arabic and our glasses when we approach the Quran. You will probably have more problems with some other verses, but every problem people have with the Quran, are not real problems, but understanding-mistakes.
Sorry for the intruding, but i saw your examples, which i had a simple answer for....only the waiting period i'm still checking...These are my best understandings and really logical in my eyes.
Peace all
-
Peace arnold
thanx for your post - don't mind discussing these - i was the one mentionning things in the first place
but may be you could also tell me what is zina to you ? Not here though - wrong place
what you said does not come as a surprise to me as it reflects my views and understanding - divorce, waiting period... hope this doesn't include you in my "shoddy" research group never heard that word before...
peace mquran
Quote
you will not convince me, i'll not convince youHow good of you to speak on my behalf.
ok, i was looking for that one...
nowhere you told me that i was a kafir, but to tell someone that his views are "unislamic" is not far away, and that's what you did.
but if you criticise al-quraan in a public forum,
i dont criticise quran, i read and understand it differently sometimes
for the rest of your post i find your tone - as usual - inappropriate.
Pity, may be you could make a lot of good points and convince people if you only learned how to bring them over without sounding insulting.Once again, your demarcation of al-quraan and 'hearing,eyesight'brains' shows (im sorry to say) lack of research.
what do you mean by demarcation ? really most times you're just looking for the little beast (freely translated from french but i guess you'll get what i mean)
lk
-
Elkenowhere you told me that i was a kafir, but to tell someone that his views are "unislamic" is not far away, and that's what you did.
Once again, you need to look at the phraseology of al-quraan. Someone doesn't become something for holding a certain views. Your view is 'unislamic' to me, sure but I don't know of your general conduct etc. How am I to know what knowledge has come to you? I don't, not at all because and let me say this clearly I DO NOT IN REAL LIFE KNOW YOU.
I dont criticise quran, i read and understand it differently sometimes
A critique isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'll use the word 'air your views'.
for the rest of your post i find your tone - as usual - inappropriate.
Pity, may be you could make a lot of good points and convince people if you only learned how to bring them over without sounding insulting.Ok. Of course the possibility that you're oversensitive isn't ever in question, right?
what do you mean by demarcation ? really most times you're just looking for the little beast (freely translated from french but i guess you'll get what i mean)
If you explain how 'im just looking for the little beast' , I'll explain what I mean.
-
Peace elke and arnoldyasin. Elke;Your experiences to do with iddat,reality etc...are similiar to my reasons for rejecting literalism,and for looking for the underlying morality beneath the texts...The real world requires real,practical answers,not antiquated meanings,and obselete traditions.... I know that i have gone one further than you,and actually question/reject large chunks of the quran....But that doesnt mean i cant take some benefit from reading this book,just like i can benefit from reading SOME parts of the bible....I respect your way of viewing the quran,a great deal....At least it means you have a 'humanistic' vision for society,and that you can interact civilly with others,whether they are 'muslim' or not...
Arnoldyasin; I do appreciate your interpretations....They are much better than many others i have come acrosss.....However i sometimes feel that we are always 'inventing' new interpretations because the older interpretations are obsolete,antiquated,not relevant to todays society,or plain contradictory.....I do question how legitimate this constant re-interpreting is.....A christian can continually re-interpret the bible to keep in tune with mordernity and relevancy....However i respect your right to find solutions to interpretative problems,and more practical,'real'life,applicable morals from the quran...
Peace all. -
Peace elke and arnoldyasin. Elke;Your experiences to do with iddat,reality etc...are similiar to my reasons for rejecting literalism,and for looking for the underlying morality beneath the texts...The real world requires real,practical answers,not antiquated meanings,and obselete traditions.... I know that i have gone one further than you,and actually question/reject large chunks of the quran....But that doesnt mean i cant take some benefit from reading this book,just like i can benefit from reading SOME parts of the bible....I respect your way of viewing the quran,a great deal....At least it means you have a 'humanistic' vision for society,and that you can interact civilly with others,whether they are 'muslim' or not...
In 25 years of reading, Enquirer has failed to showwhat 'underlying morality' beneath the texts is. There's a simple reason behind this He doesn't know it. Al-quraan defines for itself the benefits one acquires from obedience to its laws and condemns those who leave it (5/48 tells u to judge with al-kitaab bil haqq, not your delusions so how would Enquirer deal with that?). For those who have the opportunity to talk to Enquirer (before he declines and starts peddling his falsehood elsewhere yet again) do ask him these things.
-
Peace,
enquirer, please point out any 'modern' interpretation i made? nikaa means contract/combining not directly marriage. The old interpretation is based on created tradition formed centuries after the Quran. So what are you directly refering to? I'm not into 'modern' interpretations, i'm into logic and what the arabic Quran really says. I NEVER try to re-interpretate the Quran or give 'new' meanings. A word can have such and such meaning, then i puzzle out how it fits best. This pure linguistic study. Has NOTHING to do with creating new meanings. As for the whipping, i'm still researching, but adultry/illicit sex is the main reason for aids, abondend baby's, sexual diseases, broken relationships, fatherless children. Compared to this, it makes the 'flogging' nothing. A quarter of the population is DYING because of zinaa, but people only look at the 'flogging', this is biased and ignorant. Parwez and Shabbir both have similar ideas on reading arabic, which has nothing to do with creating new meanings, but directly with the meaning of classic arabic, which is very very wide and deep, and uses a lot of symbolic language like we even do nowadays in english. That it doesn't coincide with 'traditional' thinking is because they have neglected and twisted the real meanings of the words. You have to only look at the verse that warns us for these fixed meanings that distort the message, verse 2530, the word mahjoor means 3 main things; desertion, avoiding and fixing/chaining/fettering, look how ONE word can make the understanding threefold
The prophet will say "O my Lord, my people have deserted this Reading, have treated it as something to be avoided and have fettered/ chained/fixed understandings (in the Reading)." (2530)
A horse or camel tied head to foot was called mahjoor, and the rope used for tying, al-hijaar(Taj). Making the animal immobile, as it stuck in its position, where the owners will leave it. The Quran today is thus fettered/chained by custom and tradition, fixed titles and meanings of words, hearsay reports compiled centuries later, and laws and by-laws enacted by men, each group having its own fiqah and shariah, which are held more sacrosanct and given predence over the Quran, and making thus the Quran fixed in meaning, where they want, and how they want. Making the versatile meanings immobile, freezing a certain meaning, and chaining the Quran with that meaning.Most people can't imagine the depths of the classic arabic. There is no need for symbolic interpretation, as in classic arabic, most words are metaphoricaly used in those times.
Peace
-
Peace arnoldyasin. I appreciate your civil response... )
One thing is a little puzzling...In all the 1400 years that the quran has been read,studied and interpreted,are you saying shabbir,parweez and a handful of mutazalites/free-minds were the only people that interpreted the quran correctly?... o If this book is supposed to be a clear arabic message/guidance for all mankind,for all times and situations,how come its soo hard for people to apply/translate it...?
Peace all. ps;by implying only a few can correctly translate the quran,we potentially open the way for 'corrupt priesthood',dogma,theocracy,and oppression of the 'uneducated' masses by the clergy... (especially non-arabs... .) ....Does mankind want to go the way of the taliban,inqusition,crusader mentality,religious extremism,once again? o -
Enquirer, i reacted civilezed as i'm a grown human being with no care of how or what you believe. And have you read all the books of the last 1400 years? How do you know nobody read it like them? The dictionaries they all use, are almost as old as the Quran. It has to do with approach enquirer, 200 years after the revelation, they used certain rules how to read the Quran, so its meaning got stuck/fixed, the Quran was made mahjoor. Throughout history there were a lot of geniuses how approached the Quran just as we do now. But because only now it is easy to print and distribute views around the world, these views are known. For more then a thousand years, only a certain approach was tolerated, so only those views survived the times. It is the same with the Christian writings that were hidden in caves, because only one type of thinking was allowed on paper. Abu Hanifa died for his struggle for following the Quran alone, but we have not a single book or manuscript written by him, you think that is a coincidence? No of course not. Only the winners write down history.
And as for only a few can translate, this is not true, as anyone can buy the old dictionaries and research on the classic arabic and how interpretations can be distorted. Anybody with good motivation can do all the research themselves. You only need an open mind, torough research, understanding of how old understandings were formed by who and why and be ready to amazed.
Peace
-
Peace arnoldyasin. If its easy to understand quran through good motivation,research,dictionaries etc...then why the monumental disagremenets between interpretations,and why the huge amounts of misunderstandings regarding the book?
Peace all. -
Peace
I'd like to make an association between a math class and clarity of the reading.
The teacher gives a problem to the class. None will know it's meaning until the end of the class when they have experience in the system to be taught there. People will come up with different answers initially, but is the problem really unclear?
Joe
-
Because people are still shaking of 1000 years of lies and misunderstandings...and not all are ready to do that or acknowledge that. They claim Quran alone, but their subconciousness is completly filled by misguided information. And the Quran take lifetimes to be studied...........
-
Salaam enquirer
I know that i have gone one further than you,and actually question/reject large chunks of the quran
I think it will be sensible for you to give example(s) of the bits you reject one by one so a logical discussion can take place.
As for your opinion that there different interpertation of the Quran over the last 1400 yrs. That might actually what was intended. There are issues which can be interperted only in a certain way but others do allow flexibility to accomodate human evolution. Simple example is the word Riba. It has always been interperted as meaning interest. However my understanding of the word from those arabic speaking is that it means unfair or unjust advantage. Now as a society, person etc you can decide whether interest in the modern world equates with Riba. However if you go back into not too distant past then interest many poor had to pay on borrowed goods or money was so crippling thay it virtually left them in slavery for all their life. In this situation you would interpert Riba as meaning interest would you not? I hope you have understood my point.
Dear Elke.
You have first decide on what you consider to be zina. let us assume it means adultery you then as a individual decide if it is a good or bad thing (sorry for such oversimplification). I dont know many who consider it to be a good thing. If you accept that its effect on society are detrimental to the well being of that society then you have accepted the Quranic principles and all then we are quibbling about is the extent of the punishment, hardly a point that the Quran in this is not valid.
On the otherhand if you consider adultery to be no big deal and dont consider it to have any relevant efect on any given society and most agree with you then you can have a society where liberal sex(for the sake of not using more offensive language ) is practiced you will soon see the results.
regards
-
peace arnoldayasin and nabi. I respect your answer...However,if the quran takes 'lifetimes' to understand,then how can it be useful in this life? (or what does a person do in the meantime,while studying quran,to guide himself?)
Nabi; Are you saying that we will understand the quran fully when we implement a quranic system,or when we die,or when we verify it in a real-life experience,or something else?...
Peace all. -
enquirer, your 'study life through experience' also takes a lifetime to study, why bother then?
-
Because people are still shaking of 1000 years of lies and misunderstandings...and not all are ready to do that or acknowledge that. They claim Quran alone, but their subconciousness is completly filled by misguided information. And the Quran take lifetimes to be studied...........
why don't you prove to me these 1000 years of lies?
I need solid proofs bro not a couple of corrupted hadith
salam
-
Peace still-learning and arnoldyasin. Still-learning; Your analysis of 'riba' is excellent,and one that i can agree with...
On the question of which bits i 'reject',this will be clarified in the moderated debate,and i will discuss some of these with you from tommorow,time permitting....
Peace all. ps;I think you have misunderstood elke....I will try to answer the 'zina' question tommorow,as well... Pps; Arnoldayasin;because the 'lifetime study' allows me to make judgements that are practically relevant to situations that actually occur,...just by using rational thinking and moral experience...Many of the necessary general morals are learnt very quickly,easily,and with only a little pondering....As opposed to years of research on the quran... -
This is the same with the Quran, God will enhance our understanding when needed...And AB, there are to many books on hadith that show the difference of religious issues and history. Only the history can be taken, and still they may not be used for understanding the Quran as it is based on classic arabic language, not on arabic history.
But there is enough info out there to study...Here read this then
http//www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/mh/mh.htmPeace