4 witnesses can be 4 sources of circumstantial evidence? and another thing

Mazhar

can it mean more than minor punishment?
It's definitely less than 100 lashes, which is considered "3thaab torture".

Perhaps " " cannot be stretched even to one lashing. I think quite a small number of women feel pain also in periods but it is not pain equal to that of lashing. Its meanings are more in the nature of irritation. How can we stretch it to mean anything we like?

Quran tells that before the nation of Lut alaissalam no men indulged in homosexuality, and then its cause has been told which was of course not of genes, it was deliberate obsession, emotionalism. Has that part of the "passive" any link with the cells of the brain controlling sex matters?

Samia

Quran tells that before the nation of Lut alaissalam no men indulged in homosexuality, and then its cause has been told which was of course not of genes, it was deliberate obsession, emotionalism. Has that part of the "passive" any link with the cells of the brain controlling sex matters?

Obsession and emotionalism existed before Lut, didn't they? If we believe what the qur'an says, then we have to suppose that the error is within our own understanding. The "fahisha" of the people of "Lut" was committed by both men and women (case of his wife). We were not made to understand otherwise. We have to look into the words "rijaal" and "nisaa'". In my opinion, if it were about men and women, and since it's about a biological behaviour, we would have been told that they "came unto males instead of females" and the words would have been "thukuur and inaath". My understanding is that they attcked people in the farm, street, workplace..etc and raped them. That would call for the utmost punishment because it hinders the society and make people unsafe. It also explains why Lut was afraid of them, and could really mean "a fahisha not committed by any people before".

Tlepsh

Obsession and emotionalism existed before Lut, didn't they? If we believe what the qur'an says, then we have to suppose that the error is within our own understanding. The "fahisha" of the people of "Lut" was committed by both men and women (case of his wife). We were not made to understand otherwise. We have to look into the words "rijaal" and "nisaa'". In my opinion, if it were about men and women, and since it's about a biological behaviour, we would have been told that they "came unto males instead of females" and the words would have been "thukuur and inaath". My understanding is that they attcked people in the farm, street, workplace..etc and raped them. That would call for the utmost punishment because it hinders the society and make people unsafe. It also explains why Lut was afraid of them, and could really mean "a fahisha not committed by any people before".

29.29 ?You sexually approach Alrijal (breadwinners),

and you commit highway robbery,?

?And you bring all vice to your society.?

But the only response from his people was to Say ?Bring us God's retribution, if you are being truthful!?

Mazhar

Obsession and emotionalism existed before Lut, didn't they? If we believe what the qur'an says, then we have to suppose that the error is within our own understanding. The "fahisha" of the people of "Lut" was committed by both men and women (case of his wife). We were not made to understand otherwise. We have to look into the words "rijaal" and "nisaa'". In my opinion, if it were about men and women, and since it's about a biological behaviour, we would have been told that they "came unto males instead of females" and the words would have been "thukuur and inaath". My understanding is that they attcked people in the farm, street, workplace..etc and raped them. That would call for the utmost punishment because it hinders the society and make people unsafe. It also explains why Lut was afraid of them, and could really mean "a fahisha not committed by any people before".

No doubt women were also obsessed with perversion but the point highlighted with emphasis is this

They were also fond of open and group sex

O
In quite open and distinct manner homosexuality has been mentioned, apart from other sexual lusts.

Samia

As if homosexual rape is worse than heterosexual rape!!

There was homo and heterosexuality, I would say they were even bisexuals. But it was not just that, it was raping and terrorizing active people in the society. This is more plausible to be something unprecedented than mere homosexuality.

Mazhar

As if homosexual rape is worse than heterosexual rape!!

There was homo and heterosexuality, I would say they were even bisexuals. But it was not just that, it was raping and terrorizing active people in the society. This is more plausible to be something unprecedented than mere homosexuality.

None was terrorizing and none was raping. All were doing with consent and desire. Here is the evidence of Allah

Samia

None was terrorizing and none was raping. All were doing with consent and desire. Here is the evidence of Allah

This verse just supports my understanding We found in it but one house of peaceful people.
Consent is not the opposite of peacefulness

unknownuser

780
And Lot when he said to his people "Do you commit the atrocious deeds such as none preceding you has committed in the Alamin (creations altogether)?

Figure of speech, doesn?t nullify the act existing before it nor were they punished for sexual preferences, rather for being criminals and disbelievers (5132) a matter of degree meaning unprecedented as in

520 And when Moses said to his people "O my people! Remember the blessings of God to you, when He made Prophets among you, and He made you kings, and gave you what he did not give anyone from the creations altogether.

Mazhar

As if homosexual rape is worse than heterosexual rape!!

There was homo and heterosexuality; I would say they were even bisexuals. But it was not just that, it was raping and terrorizing active people in the society. This is more plausible to be something unprecedented than mere homosexuality.

None was terrorizing and none was raping. All were doing with consent and desire. Here is the evidence of Allah

This verse just supports my understanding We found in it but one house of peaceful people.
Consent is not the opposite of peacefulness

Sister either I am not getting what you mean. Rape and terrorizing indicates as if there were two groups in the nation. But the fact of the matter is that except for one house, the entire nation was indulging in what has been reported against them. When they all were indulging how their act could be construed as raping and terrorizing? Everyone was punished which shows they were doing things with consent and desire not under force.

{5135-36]

Samia

Sister either I am not getting what you mean. Rape and terrorizing indicates as if there were two groups in the nation. But the fact of the matter is that except for one house, the entire nation was indulging in what has been reported against them. When they all were indulging how their act could be construed as raping and terrorizing? Everyone was punished which shows they were doing things with consent and desire not under force.

{5135-36]

What I want to say is that it was not just male homosexuality, and if the whole nation was indulging, how on earth should we understand "you go unto men lustfully instead of women"? How would this apply to the females in the society?
Also, why should there be a party that terrorizes and a party that rapes? Rape is the number one terror. It's the utmost level of humiliation.

Mazhar

What I want to say is that it was not just male homosexuality,

Yes it is quite evident. Sexual lust has many dimensions, and ordinarily it reflects two sexes. Homosexuality has distintly been mentioned and with regard to this it has been said that no nation did it earlier than the people of Lut.

Tlepsh

2829 And Lot, when he said to his people ?You commit a lewdness that no others in the world have done before!?

The lewdness committed by Lot?s people was not homosexuality alone but was as follows

They sexually approach men (2929)
They commit highway robbery (2929)
They bring all vice to their society (2929)
They were ?mufseedin? (&#1614 (2930)
They were ?zaleemin? (&#1614 (29.31)
They were ?ghabeerin? (&#1614 (2932)
They were ?faseekun? ( &#1614 (2934)

Why do we concentrate only on homosexuality and forget the others.

kn

Dear Brothers and Sisters

This conversation and many other conversations in different parts of the forum are very interesting as a result of a rather unclear meanings of the "words" as understood by us . The script writing tecnique used in the Qur'an is the script tecnique used by the able scribes which was prevalent at that time for writing anything during that period. In order to decode that technique, we will have to go back in that time period. Review of the literature, the lexicons and various grammar books, clearly point out that the meanings of the "words" were changing very fast as Quran was spreading to different parts of the world , beyond the bounds of the Quraish.

It was therefore felt necessary to immediately compile books in the very early period, explaining not only the writing rules but also meanings conveyed by those words in lexicons such as Lisaan ul Arab and multiple so called grammar books. It was then, when the need for Feteh, Kessra, Dummah, Gezm, Teshdeed and other signs were felt necessary to be described clearly, so we may not get confused and start assuming the meanings. Unfortunately, these works were not utilised by later scholars fully and hence disagreement on the meanings continued to grow wider.

Recent interest in these guide books to understand the correct meaning is now gaining some grounds because of fabulous translations of these grammar and lexicon books, and its easy availability in both Arabic and English because of the internet. We need to apply all these rules without assuming that we know it all just because we can understand and speak the modern Arabic as it exists today. Language evolves with time, but Quranic script technique is fixed, as we need to preserve the original meanings and the message without diluting or exagarrating it.

So let us all start a project of reading these books explaining these grammar rules for gezm, teshdeed, feteh, kesra etc. and not use them for the purpose of correct pronunciation only as we all have been doing. The very idea of putting these signs above and below the Quranic words was the worry of those people who felt that the meanings would otherwise be lost. Please review the meanings of gezm, teshdeed etc over and over again as it will then decode all the words, as in Quranic script multiple words were zipped together with the help of gezm and teshdeed. When these words are put separately, the meaning starts becoming clear. A simple example is Al'Kitab, where Al is separeated by a Gezm, meaning therby " The Book" and not just book. Has any one ever pondered on the word Al'Qur'aan with two gezm.

Seeking and praying for Hidaya constantly.

farida

4127 They ask your legal instruction concerning wmen. Say God instructs you in what concerns them and what's recited unto you in the book concerning
-mothers with orphans whom you want to mary yet you do not want to pay them what's due to them
-vulenrable children
-orphans
All these three categories are under the title "women".

I would say "the vulnerable", "the dependants"...

Verse 654 the context (maheed) shows it means "women"

I do not know a difference between allaa'ii and allaati or even allawtii

Salaam
Today I watched very interesting programme on BBC1 "The Hottest Place on Earth" The first of two programmes exploring the Danakil desert in northern Ethiopia, investigating the geology of the area and meeting the people and animals who can survive in the extraordinary environment.
) And the tough life of the Afar woman, who appear very happy doing all the work whereas the men sit around and drink tea eat
I look forward to the next episode to find out who is actually "the rijal" there, as the tribe appears to be from the Muslim community.
peace

Samia

Homosexuality has distintly been mentioned and with regard to this it has been said that no nation did it earlier than the people of Lut.

No homosexuality has been distinctly or explicitly mentioned. This part fo the verse is mstakenly understood to mean "men instead of women". As I commented in a previous post, if we were to uderstand it as such, it would have been .... (males instead of females). The verse that says supports this meaning, unless all the people of Lut were males, which is not true.

unknownuser

Yes it is quite evident. Sexual lust has many dimensions, and ordinarily it reflects two sexes. Homosexuality has distintly been mentioned and with regard to this it has been said that no nation did it earlier than the people of Lut.

3912
And I was commanded to that I be first the submitters

Is the above statement literal or figure of speech?

Likewise

780

520

Mazhar

No homosexuality has been distinctly or explicitly mentioned. This part fo the verse is mstakenly understood to mean "men instead of women". As I commented in a previous post, if we were to uderstand it as such, it would have been .... (males instead of females). The verse that says supports this meaning, unless all the people of Lut were males, which is not true.

It would change the fact reported. If the proposed words were there then it would also mean child abuse. is absolutely distinct from .
Peculiar had not been done earlier generations.

Tlepsh

No homosexuality has been distinctly or explicitly mentioned. This part fo the verse is mstakenly understood to mean "men instead of women". As I commented in a previous post, if we were to uderstand it as such, it would have been .... (males instead of females). The verse that says supports this meaning, unless all the people of Lut were males, which is not true.

It would change the fact reported. If the proposed words were there then it would also mean child abuse. is absolutely distinct from .
Peculiar had not been done earlier generations.

26165 ?Do you approach the males of the worlds??
26166 ?And you leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!?

Samia

26165 ?Do you approach the males of the worlds??
26166 ?And you leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!?

Thank you Tlepsh.
This is quite interesting! It confirms homosexuality, yet it does not answer the question what about the women? What was their sin? nless there'sa difference between "thukraan" and "thukuur", both used in the qur'aan, each twice!

Tlepsh

Thank you Tlepsh.
This is quite interesting! It confirms homosexuality, yet it does not answer the question what about the women? What was their sin? nless there'sa difference between "thukraan" and "thukuur", both used in the qur'aan, each twice!

Peace Samia,

The verses that are about Lot?s people in Al-quran are as follows

779 to 85
1169 to 84
15 51 to 77
26 160 to 174
29 28 to 35
37 133 to 139
51 30 to 38
54 32 to 39
6610

26165 ?Do you approach the males of the worlds??

males of the worlds ( &#1614 This shows that people of Lot were attacking to other people; the people around them or any other people bypassing their land.

26166 ?And you leave what your Lord has created for you of mates (&#1605? You are an intrusive people!?

Azwaj (mates) are both males and females, including Lot? wife.

Thukraan and thukuur are used to mean males in the following verses.

4249 To God is the sovereignty of the heavens and the Earth. He creates whatever He wills. He bestows females (&#1575 to whomever He wills, and bestows males (&#1614 to whomever He wills.

4250 Or, He may bestow them with both females (&#1575 and males (&#1575, and He makes whom He wills sterile. He is Knowledgeable, Capable.