Quran alone interpreted according to whom?

Kamzo19

Really I dont see what is so difficult in reading a book what has everything in it, and thinking about it and the message in it is there, open your eyes and stop searching for what color heifer it was for the sacrifice, just do the sacrifice, or whether sura 100 has racing horses or wild stallions, it does not affect the 'message' to know what or if they were horses.

Dear Ayisha, I think you're wrong in saying that this does not affect the message. God does not reveal signs in vain. Every word has got its precise measure. Maybe those simple words are a message , THE message, "a warning like the warnings of old" and maybe you cannot see it for reasons I don't know.

Anyway,I really valorize and appreciate your insistance on the concept of asking and submitting to God alone and the rational precautions you would take if someone comes saying that he has been taught or inspired correct meaning or understanding of the scripture.

Perhaps you and proponents of your view can do some research and formulate a logical, detailed and referenced argument. Until then I dont see how there is much to add.

I thank you for the suggestion. I think there is a great need of it.

that's giving too much power in the hands of a few

This has always been the system revoke power from the hands of a corrupted majority and give it to a good/reformer minority that are established on earth in place of the bad/not producing anything ones in spite of their aversion.

Thank you all for taking time to read and answer. If anyone has a different understanding/tanslation of chapter 100 or 105 Feel free to mail me or post it on the forum. May God increase our knowledge. Peace. )

Emil

Peace Emil

I do understand what you're saying but the unity is following Quran and following Allah and as Allah did not make us all into pre-programmed robots so there is always going to be differences in opinions, even in the prophets time there were differences. Belonging is to Allah, its not a club to belong to and its not about 'connecting' with anyone other than Allah. Here in FM there are those we can 'connect' with on some things and not on others but we are generally 'like minded' as we are looking at Quran only. You can still see the vast amount of differences in thought process and what we all take from it individually though. to have a set of rules other than rules in Quran would lead to something that is not true 'belief' but something the same as traditionlists have in that you are told what is right and what this means etc etc, it would be no different. One cannot force belief, you either do or you dont believe, so saying 'this means this' but one cannot 'see' that is not true belief, its submission to some doctrine invented by someone elses views on Quran.

39.18 Those who listen to the Word, and follow the best (meaning) in it those are the ones whom Allah has guided, and those are the ones endued with understanding.

This does not mean those who follow someone elses decision as to what the best meaning in it is, it means for US, each one, to listen and find the best meaning in it for US, each one of us, as Allah has made His verses clear for those who think and reflect so yes, we can find the answer and the reason by looking inside ourselves when reading Quran and thinking about it peace

of course this is my opinion from my reading, yours may be different, but thats why we discuss things so we have opinions from every angle and use others viewpoints to reach our own understanding.

Dear Ayisha

What you written above is very beautiful and I respect your ability to put thought into words. I also seek your patience if I have trouble expressing my opinion in words. I am a physical person, not a theoretical one.

I have to make myself clear on one point. In no way ever am I longing for a religious leader to follow or for someone to tell what is wrong or right. I would never want to put limits to free speech, free mind, or any other way of individual freedom. I am a stern follower of the "I totally disagree with your opinion and I will defend your freedom to have that opinion with my life" motto.

I am not talking about belonging to a club as you wrote, I am talking about unity. What I am looking for is unity in the fundamental philosophical theory of God Alone. I am not asking for rules to follow, I am asking for an "authority" declaring officially that YES! We stand for freedom of speech, we stand for Freedom of choice. At the moment, can you truly say that we do stand for freedom? I don't know because right now there are only words and opinions on the internet.

In my community I can almost see daily the segregation between immigrant muslims and the native population growing. Not because of islamaphobia or discrimination, but because the muslims find it increasingly difficult to merge their religion with the way of life in a western country.

I would so much like want to say to segregated muslims that "Look, I am a muslim and I can merge my belief and the society I live in". They would say, "O yeah? How did you manage that? I would say "Check this out, this is a group that calls themselves God Alone muslims. They believe in a system that actually keeps your connection to God no matter what society you live in, and the good part is that you can do so without risk of segregation". They would ask "But what if we don't agree with everything they say?" I would say "Of course you are allowed to disagree, in fact, God Alone muslims encourage questioning and they have a firm belief in freedom of speech, ask anyone of them, they would tell you the same as I am now."

Can I say that last sentence today? No, because I don't know if it is true...

are a good exemple of it aren't they
genociding the native americans and messing with the world's affair like no other
it did good, didn't it
you can have a grand nation very united (nazi germany) that can conquere like no other (nazi germany) with an unseen efficiency before

Sorry Yosemite, a "thinking in one language and writing in another" error. I didn't mean conquer, I meant go forward, evolve, become better.

Yosemite

Sorry Yosemite, a "thinking in one language and writing in another" error. I didn't mean conquer, I meant go forward, evolve, become better.

ok i see now
no problem

Emil

Ayisha

Just to give you an example of what I mean by muslims struggling to merge faith with western society I have translated an article from a Swedish newspaper. I am sorry for the translate mistakes.

In January 2009 Alia reports, born in Egypt but raised in Sweden, ?so adult high school to the discrimination ombudsman (DO) for discrimination. The school does not allow her to wear a niqab. She was told by the school that her place in the Child and Recreation Program would be canceled if she continues to cover her face. Alia makes a compromise proposal to the school, she agreed to remove the veil when no man can see her face. If she can sit in the front of the classroom and if the teacher in front is a woman, she can consider taking the veil off. She would only put it on when a man passes by. The school said no to the compromise proposal. Alia says that the Niqab ban violates her religious rights and her right to education.

?so Adult High School and Stockholm City argues that the reasons for the ban is educational, and social security. It is important that the teacher can see students' faces. Teaching is, except through lectures, through group work, role playing, field trips and more. Alias proposal would have limited teachers and other students' freedom. They would not be able to move freely in the classroom. In anticipation of the DO's decision the school will however allow that Alia continues to wear a niqab.

Alia continues her studies. The months go without DO deciding the case. When Alia is about to do her practical training the problem is back. Grimsta School, where she is to do her training, says no to giving her internship, instead, another school offers Alia a place with yet another compromise. She was allowed to wear the niqab during outside activities but not indoors. Alia asked if there were men working in the school and the answer was yes. Alia therefore declined the internship with the reason that she is not allowed to show her face to men.

Miriam, born in Guatemala and just arrived to Sweden. Miriam reports the Hjalmar Str?mer School in Stromsund to the discrimination board. The school does too little to fight the discrimination and harassment by Muslim men against female classmates - in adult education for immigrants (SFI) the men force the women to sit in the back of the classroom, also forcing the Muslim women to wear niqab and do not allow them to speak for themselves.

The school says Muslim men, mainly from Uzbekistan has for years relied on their belief that " it requires specific classes for men and women according to their faith", "their women must wear face veil" and "women are not allowed to speak when other men listen" . The school management did not fight. Managament?s approach was that ?The men would probably change over time.?

In Autumn 2006 the classes were still gender-segregated, but the in spring semester of 2008 Muslim men, could consider making a compromise, the men could say ok to being in the same classroom as the women if the school were to set up screens between them and the women.

Screens were set up and the women (muslim and non-muslim) were placed behind the screens. Teachers, however, were dissatisfied. Teaching became impossible when the women sat behind screens and they were still not allowed to participate in the talks by the men. Every issue that the teachers wanted to discuss the needed first to be taken up with the men.

Non muslim students were also appalled by the fact that no muslim women were allowed to be in a room alone with a teacher, no matter if they were one, two, or three women present.

School management managed to reach another compromise the screens would be removed if the women were placed at the back instead.

At this point in time, the fall of 2008, Miriam started attending the school. She refused to follow the rules and sat wherever she wanted. She was offended by how condescending the men acted towards all women and especially the Muslim. Miriam was not the first who complained to school management. Several women had pointed to gender discrimination.

Isn?t Alias and Miriam's reports two sides of the same coin?

In an email to the discrimination board Alias says that she refers her arguments to the Quran and Sunnah. This is her faith. This argument is the same that the muslim men in Hjalmar Str?mer school use. Their interpretation contains the idea that women and men can never be just friends and that's exercise qawama over the woman, that man is "supervisor" over the woman.

Near Hjalmar Str?mer the Vattudals school is located. There, the children of the adult Muslims who are Miriam's classmates attend. Girls in the 13-year-old or even younger wears the niqab. The muslim girls refuse to participate in swimming and physical education when boys are present. The muslim boys do not accept female teachers of physical education and they refuse to play or swim with the girls.

The discrimination board rules that in Miriam?s case the school has done all in its power to make Miriam comfortable in the gender segregation issue and her feeling inferior to the men because of their behavior.

Shortly before the discrimination board ruling Miriam?s school releases a statement in their annual report that during the academic year 2008/2009 one of the achievements had been that "The men and women can work together and in the same classroom."

Under the heading "Results and compliance rate" they wrote "We have succeeded in the academic year to remove the screens that uszbekik women previously sat hidden behind. However, one cannot say that the students can work together, because gender barrier makes team-oriented exercises and communicative activities in the classroom difficult / ... / contact with the teacher becomes worse if some students sit quietly behind a screen with a Niqab / ... / The men take more space, the speak loudly and freely, therefore speech therapy for the women is neglected / ... / Women also speak Swedish less in their daily lives when contacts with the surrounding community was mostly done by the men. "

Before the academic year 2009/10 one of school?s objective was "to teach students of SFI to not treat each other in a degrading manner ". I really want to emphasize that no shadow might fall on the teachers. They have had desperate working conditions and have sacrificed a lot of time, also private, to create a fair and equal manner. But they lacked support from both politicians and from the DO.

Aliases case concerning ?so adult high school is still pending. The investigation is complete and the case was delivered but the decision is not formulated.

I don?t believe that the DO will give Alia right. But I am worried.

A pilot case from 2003. Burg?rdens training center in Gothenburg, had questioned whether the school could prohibit two girls to wear burqas. National Agency for Education said If the "wearing of the burqa is a serious risk to the order in the school, then the burqa can be banned. So also for pedagogical reasons. Not otherwise.

The parliament has followed the pilot case. A no to the burqa can be admitted as exceptions to the prohibition of degrading treatment of pupils' clothing if in individual cases would significantly hinder the contact between teachers and students or to present specific risks related to laboratory or similar exercises.

Thus a ban only in exceptional cases and only for educational or practical reasons.

UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women prohibits not only discrimination but also obliges states to "alter or abolish / ... / customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women", to "change the men's and women's social and cultural patterns of behavior to the thus eliminate prejudices and customs based on the idea of the inferiority of one sex or the stiffened roles for men and women ". No authority, individuals, organizations and businesses should discriminate against women.

Why is the DO, National Agency for Education and the parliament not following the UN? What reason do they have to "forget" the most important international rules against discrimination against women?

Read the rules of the Convention quoted again and replace the "discrimination against women / ... / inferiority of one sex" with "racial / ... / inferiority of one race". With the reading ? do you think the Swedish authorities would have ?forgotten? the Convention then?

And is it a coincidence that almost all Muslim countries have made reservations to the Convention with reference to the Shariah?

Women and girls who cover their faces do it out of free will. There is an argument used many times. A burqa and niqab ban would violate the free will.

Possibly it is a violation, but the equation doesn?t add up. No one may invoke their human rights to nullify or impair somebody else?s right.. This basic rule is called "prohibition of abuse of rights".

And no, consent cannot be used as an excuse for certain actions. Slavery could not have been abolished if consent was considered. Trafficking Convention makes women consent to prostitution invalid. Female circumcision is not legal, with or without the consent of the female. Underage marriage is not legal, even though the underage person in question has given consent.

Precisely in view of the difficulty in separating genuine consent of cultural or religious habit, the European Council decided that "religion must not be accepted as an excuse for the violation of women's rights", the religious excuses to "open or subtle," infringing the rights of women must not be accepted even when the woman herself "expressly agreed" to infringement. States "must combat sectarian stereotypes of male and female roles and the States may" not accept freedom of religion or the respect of culture and tradition "as a reason for forcing including minor girls' religious dress codes".

Some claim that religious freedom is not important, it is about the right to dress as you want. But is a face-covering veil a fashion statement in general? Ku Klux Klan - is their hoods a dress? Protesters with black hoods over their face ? do they have the right to dress as they please?

Someone says okay, banning burqas and the niqab in schools and workplaces. But not in a public place.

But where we cannot meet someone face to face - it is still a public place?

Finally, some claim that it should not make a big thing of a phenomenon so rare. Those who wear burqa or niqab are few. And a prohibition is fueling Islamophobia.

Does the number matter? Should we refrain from legislation to remove the marriage of underage children because such marriages are not believed to be so many in our country?

And if the problem is so small - well, then it is difficult to understand how a ban would add to Islamophobia. Most Muslims and Islam experts believe that the niqab and burqa are impositions only in the most fundamentalist interpretation of Islam. Being opposed to prohibition of the burqa with reference to Islamophobia-threatening, it is by no means to pave the way for the prejudice that Islam itself would be extreme and fundamentalist.

The burqa ban which is now under way in France is often portrayed as Sarkozy's idea. But behind the ban is most women's rights organizations, especially those who daily work with vulnerable girls and women in immigrant dense neighborhoods, so-called banlieus. An investigation revealed that the France around 2000 burqa-bearing women, two thirds were born in France. The majority had their roots in North Africa where the custom to wear burqas never existed. Spontaneous you could think of two reasons, therefore, the "new" custom of covering her face. The fact that some Muslims have become radicalized - Talibanized if you like - just because they live in the West. Or that some Muslim women (and their families) feel special aversion to the infidels, that is, Christian or secular, men who have access to the woman's face.

It was a parliamentary commission that after an extensive investigation presented the proposal to ban the burka. The survey had consulted lawyers, human rights organizations, field workers, imams, historians and philosophers.

One of the persons asked by the French was Nadeije Laneyrie-Day, professor of art history. She referred to portraiture. Portrait painting is linked to humanism, the notion that the individual has value, its own personality, unique individuality. The face expresses the body. It is the individual's quintessence.

This is precisely what it extremely well all about. To discourage practices that de-personalise people and prevent us to meet each other as individuals. Open. Face to Face.

Zees

?O you who believe, obey God and obey the messenger, and those in authority amongst you. But if you dispute in any matter, then you shall refer it to God and His messenger if you believe in God and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for knowing.? (459)

An authority which decides upon a common interpretation maybe to run the affairs of the society. Who are the men of authority??

Ayisha

?O you who believe, obey God and obey the messenger, and those in authority amongst you. But if you dispute in any matter, then you shall refer it to God and His messenger if you believe in God and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for knowing.? (459)

An authority which decides upon a common interpretation maybe to run the affairs of the society. Who are the men of authority??

For a child your parents would be, for an employee your boss would be

Ayisha