Shahr/month in the light of the quran
-
Salam brother Shuaib,
i dont know what i've done to you that you feel compelled to try and prove me wrong even if it means purposely misunderstanding what i am trying to say. are we playing the game of lawyers here or are we trying to be constructive?
I don't know you and I can only understand you by what you say here. It is not my problem that what you say is illogical. If you take demanding logical arguments and exposing illogical arguments as "playing a game of lawyer" then please tell the readers of this forum what you would like them to do. Should I simply agree to your illogical arguments for the sake of "unity"? Of course not, and I wouldn't want you to agree to any illogical arguments of mine either. Appeal to unity and popularity are NOT logical arguments and that is a fact. It is not my problem that you take things personally and feel offended when I point this fact out to you.
I mentioned rituals, but i think you know perfectly well what my intention was. Waking up in the morning and brushing your teeth can be described as a ritual, since it is a routine action done in the similar way each day...but it has a purpose too.
No it is not a ritual. It is a tooth cleaning process. Hence, it is not the same as 100 years ago. People now use electric toothbrushes and Fluoride toothpaste. In the future, the way people brush their teeth will be totally different.
When I said that the rituals have become just rituals, perhaps i was being vague but the meaning should have been clear to you... but if you want to play the game of lawyers then i will just be more careful how i phrase things. What I meant was that the rituals at one time had purpose and were part of a working system... but the meaning was lost and now they are purposeless rituals.
Rituals don't have a purpose. A process has a purpose. Hence, rituals are static and mechanical while a process is dynamic and involves understanding.
Bro, again are you playing the game of a lawyer? It is perfectly clear what I intended... and my intention was not to say that fasting at the same time MAGICALLY results in perfect harmony.
My point was that BREAKING up the fast into 2 sections for various people DAMAGES unity.
Your point is baseless. The only thing that can result in unity is holding on to the rope of The God and the only thing that can break unity is not holding on to the rope of The God, the Truth.
You were unable to show any evidence from the great reading that the abstinence must be done at the same time and hence you resort to empty slogans, appeal to unity and appeal to popularity.
Do you ever just get the point? Did you even understand the analogy I was giving? Or are you just going to play games with the analogy i presented in order to clarify my points.
Your analogy is valid and I just demonstrated using your analogy that the whole can only be as good as the parts. If the parts are bad then the whole will inevitably be bad. This is a common analogy part vs whole (in this case of a clock). Again, it is not my problem that you don't understand the implications of your own analogy.
Again, playing the game of a lawyer. By drill OBVIOUSLY i meant a drill that prepares for battle, WHATEVER that may be.
Exactly, hence the drill changes and continuously improve to win the battle. You don't just keep doing the same 2,4,4,3,4 mechnical routine. If you disagree then tell us why 2,4,4,3,4 and why not 4,4,2,5,6?
The whole point was that these things you want to dismiss, they are just that... important drills, but there have been factions already created based on OTHER things... so even though the fast is kept, because there already are factions, it will not result in the appropriate results OR its results will be greatly diminished.
If they are so important then why are those who are diligently doing it losing the battle (to use your army drills analogy). Their "drills" doesn't prohibit them from evil. The fact is that the purpose of abstinance is not your fantacized unity.
Anyway, you can respond when you calm down and decide to have a constructive discussion. You ended your email that I was appealing to popularity etc etc, a ridiculous claim.
All I said was that you cannot throw away all the pieces of the clock just because it's not working. Just because the clock is stopped, it is not a license to condemn every part of it for being faulty.
You are the one who brough this analogy. Now you are not happy when I point out the fact that a clock is only as good as its parts.
IN OTHER WORDS, if you are going to claim that any particular ritual is seriously flawed... you cannot use our present DISUNITY as an EXCUSE to do it...
I am not the one who brought the EXCUSE of unity or disunity. My arguments were strictly based on the great reading and physical archeological evidence as confirmed by the great reading. YOU are the one who brought the bogus excuse of unity into the discussion.
because that can be a manifestation based on many other serious problems, like leaving the Quran and adhering more to hadith and not using their minds and closing off ijtihaad and making bid'a forbidden and scholar worship and peer-worship etc etc etc there are SO many reasons for disunity... and to make the argument that since we are disunited clearly the way we fast is incorrect, is a totally fallacious illogical argument. It might be a true statement, but you're arriving at that statement through a fallacious illogical argument. THAT was my point, my lawyer friend. (you didn't explicitly make this claim, but that is exactly what you are implying with your tirade on rituals). THAT was the point of the analogy.
Like those that you criticizee, you too are leaving the great reading, which tells you to abstain during the "shahr" of "ramadan"/extreme heat for the sake of bogus unity.
As for your slogans of unity and clock analogies, you are the one who brought them not me. It is not my problem that those analogies actually refute your argument and hence, you ended up refuting your own argument.
Find a better argument (i.e. one that is logical), that's the bottom line.
My only advice, is find an argument based on the truth from the great reading instead of empty but popular slogans that never guided anyone.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salams ayman,
just labelling my argument as illogical proves nothing.
No it is not a ritual. It is a tooth cleaning process. Hence, it is not the same as 100 years ago. People now use electric toothbrushes and Fluoride toothpaste. In the future, the way people brush their teeth will be totally different.
Rituals don't have a purpose. A process has a purpose. Hence, rituals are static and mechanical while a process is dynamic and involves understanding.
Ok, so now we are having a debate on the English word ritual. Good grief.
ritual
noun {C or U}
a set of fixed actions and sometimes words performed regularly, especially as part of a ceremony
-
Coffee and the newspaper are part of my morning ritual.
-
The birds were performing a complex mating ritual.
http//www.freesearch.co.uk/dictionary/ritual
I used ritual in THIS sense. Ok??? Rituals CAN have purpose... it's an English word that can be used to refer to actions with purpose that have become ROUTINE.
Your point is baseless. The only thing that can result in unity is holding on to the rope of The God and the only thing that can break unity is not holding on to the rope of The God, the Truth.
Here is where you are playing your games. I said that breaking the fast into 2 sections DAMAGES unity. And this is your response?
Let's face it... you just dont want to come out and say it but I will say it for you. What you believe, but for some odd reason are reluctant to just come out and say it clearly... is that if the "ummah" is ALREADY unified, then fasting in 2 groups will not damage the unity and your meaning for ramadan can thus be accepted.
The reason you are not coming out and saying it (i surmise) is because the mere fact of having to state it suggests that it is an action that can damage unity.
But unity is a dynamic concept, not a static one. Each aspect of Islam and it's principles/duties PROMOTE this unity... and there is no reason whatsoever to break up Muslims into 2 groups for fasting. But that is another discussion which has already been beaten to death.
Your analogy is valid and I just demonstrated using your analogy that the whole can only be as good as the parts.
You are the one who brough this analogy. Now you are not happy when I point out the fact that a clock is only as good as its parts.
You missed the entire point of the analogy. The analogy was meant to point out your faulty logic. Have you become THAT fixated that you can't even be expected to understand a simple analogy... you are getting carried away with the analogy and not answering the POINT of the analogy.
The POINT was that your logic is faulty... the logic which states that since the clock isn't working all the parts are garbage. Do you understand that this is a totally fallacious argument?? Can you acknowledge this point before you go about playing games with analogies.
If you disagree then tell us why 2,4,4,3,4 and why not 4,4,2,5,6?
Do you even know what you are saying? You yourself are claiming that Ramadan is timed on the summer solstice, and that the ummah would fast in 2 different groups. How is this all of a sudden dynamic and changing? That is JUST as fixed a principle as Ramadan occuring according to a lunar calendar, except that the ummah would fast in 1 group, not 2.
If they are so important then why are those who are diligently doing it losing the battle (to use your army drills analogy). Their "drills" doesn't prohibit them from evil. The fact is that the purpose of abstinance is not your fantacized unity.
Bro, it's a simple concept really. I dont know why it's so hard to get a simple point across. Doing one thing right, is not going to negate doing 100 things wrong. Fighting and bickering and worshipping ancestors, and then coming together to fast as one... heck it's better than nothing, but it's not going to "win the battle." Is this so hard to understand? NO ONE is saying that fasting as one nation will cure ALL our mistakes.
But you are bent on saying this because it aids your cause... you're desperate to prove that since ramadan/fasting the way I have described does not result in unity, therefore it is wrong. And of course then by DEFAULT, your idea would be considered valid (which you apparently avoid talking about directly since it clearly divides a group into 2). This is a real slick/devious way of talking about straightforward things.
wassalam
-
-
Peace brother Shuaib,
Bro, it's a simple concept really. I dont know why it's so hard to get a simple point across. Doing one thing right, is not going to negate doing 100 things wrong. Fighting and bickering and worshipping ancestors, and then coming together to fast as one... heck it's better than nothing, but it's not going to "win the battle." Is this so hard to understand? NO ONE is saying that fasting as one nation will cure ALL our mistakes.
But you are bent on saying this because it aids your cause... you're desperate to prove that since ramadan/fasting the way I have described does not result in unity, therefore it is wrong. And of course then by DEFAULT, your idea would be considered valid (which you apparently avoid talking about directly since it clearly divides a group into 2). This is a real slick/devious way of talking about straightforward things.
Notice how once again you don't heed my advice and hence utterly fail to support your arguments from the great reading. You are in fact ignoring the great reading (see 2185) and the clear Arabic meaning of the word "ramadhan" in favor of following the misguided majority. You seem to think that the most important thing is to unite with the majority hypocrites and idolaters. It is not thus surprising then that like them you forget about what the great reading says and resort to your empty slogans of "unity" and nonsensical analogies.
I have seen many poeple who like you jumped on the Hadith rejection bandwagon as it gained popularity and when it became "cool" to reject nonsensical Hadiths. However, they forgot that the objective is not to reject Hadiths. The objective is to follow the TRUTH, even if that TRUTH is different than what the majority follows. If you truly want real unity, then hold on to the rope of The God, the Truth and not the rope of the majority that you call unity.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salam ayman,
well what can i say.. i am not surprised by your response. i must say that back when we had our discussion about the full moon and you spent a significant amount of time trying to convince everyone that you can tell perfect symmetry by eye, and then finally were confronted with scientific evidence that such a thing would be impossible because of only 1% difference in illumination... you just kind of let that point slide by, never bothered to mentioned heck, whaddya know i was wrong about that or could be wrong about that... no, you just kept right on plugging along.
and this time, you don't admit that hey, you gotta point, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater... yes, it is a fallacious argument to claim that since the clock isn't working each piece is garbage...
you dont do that... but what you DO do, is make labels and accusions "you're a hadith follower" blah blah blah.
Bro, get a grip. We are all adults and can make our own choices. 2 interpretations for ramadan have been put forward.
In your interpretation ramadan firstly occurs twice in a solar year, once for northern, once for southern hemisphere (already a big stretch since no one can claim that ramadan=summer solstice... as i've posted previously, the hottest days are NOT the longest days).
In mine, ramadan occurs once a year according to a calendrical month which the same lexicons you use are telling you that it was a calendrical month, renamed to ramadan because when these months were renamed in a hot month, just as rabee' was named during a spring month.
people can make their own decisions... you've made yours, that you won't admit even the smallest mistake. THAT my friend, is no better than a hadith-follower... and THAT is the essential problem with those who stick to hadith, the inability to admit a mistake.
wassalam
-
Peace Shuaib,
well what can i say.. i am not surprised by your response. i must say that back when we had our discussion about the full moon and you spent a significant amount of time trying to convince everyone that you can tell perfect symmetry by eye, and then finally were confronted with scientific evidence that such a thing would be impossible because of only 1% difference in illumination... you just kind of let that point slide by, never bothered to mentioned heck, whaddya know i was wrong about that or could be wrong about that... no, you just kept right on plugging along.
What are yout talking about? Have you even read the threads. I PERSONALLY was able to discern that the moon was not symmetric on the 26th of October, just ONE night before the full moon!
On the other hand, we are still waiting on your empty promise to show us a picture that you PERSONALLY took of the new moon.
and this time, you don't admit that hey, you gotta point, you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater... yes, it is a fallacious argument to claim that since the clock isn't working each piece is garbage...
It is also a fallacious argument to say that each piece is working and yet the clock is garbage. Most likely, the clock is grabage because the pieces are garbage. ANY system is only as good as its compenents and that is a fact. It is not my problem that you are ignorant of the discipline of system analysis.
Bro, get a grip. We are all adults and can make our own choices. 2 interpretations for ramadan have been put forward.
One is based on logical interpretation of the great reading and the other is based on "unity" with the hypocrites and idolaters.
In your interpretation ramadan firstly occurs twice in a solar year, once for northern, once for southern hemisphere (already a big stretch since no one can claim that ramadan=summer solstice... as i've posted previously, the hottest days are NOT the longest days).
In mine, ramadan occurs once a year according to a calendrical month which the same lexicons you use are telling you that it was a calendrical month, renamed to ramadan because when these months were renamed in a hot month, just as rabee' was named during a spring month.
When was it renamed to Ramadan?
What was the original name?
Unless you answer those questions, then you obviously don't know what you are talking about.
people can make their own decisions... you've made yours, that you won't admit even the smallest mistake. THAT my friend, is no better than a hadith-follower... and THAT is the essential problem with those who stick to hadith, the inability to admit a mistake.
You are free to make your own decision but don't falsely claim that it is based on the great reading when it is in fact based on blindly following the majority.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salams ayman,
What are yout talking about? Have you even read the threads. I PERSONALLY was able to discern that the moon was not symmetric on the 26th of October, just ONE night before the full moon!
On the other hand, we are still waiting on your empty promise to show us a picture that you PERSONALLY took of the new moon.
Yes I read the thread, and you did not respond to the fact that often the day before and after full moon is 99% illumination. Your own words that you personally could tell the difference mean little in the face of this scientific data showing how impossible it would be to tell if something is 99% or 100% symmetric! There's no point in acting surprised now when back then you did not respond.
Bro, a kind brother posted the entire moon sequence, you dont need anything from me. Not only the moon sequence but the pertentage illumination which was more important.
It is also a fallacious argument to say...
So is this FINALLY an admission of a mistake? (in the most roundabout way possible) So that's the whole point bro, DONT make fallacious arguments. You may honestly think the current system is wrong, but you have to disprove it using LOGICAL, not ILLOGICAL arguments.
As far as what MY argument is for ramadan, I did not say that the primary goal of ramadan is to unite. BUT, I did say that fasting in 2 groups damages unity.
As far as your interpretation of wa'tasimu bi hablillahi wa la tafarraqu, I think it totally overlooks HOW differences start in the first place. Note that the statement is in 2 parts, hold fast to the rope, AND i.e. ALSO do not break yourselves into groups. Differences can start even when everyone is on the same plan/program... it is a separate conscious effort to avoid breaking yourselves into groups.
Each of the commandments of the Quran fosters unity, this is a common sense conclusion because unity is so highly prized in the Quran. Salat, hajj, and yes ramadan too should naturally AID unity as unity is a dynamic concept... they should not DETRACT from unity.
One is based on logical interpretation of the great reading and the other is based on "unity" with the hypocrites and idolaters.
No but I won't forsake other MUSLIMS (whom you declare hypocrates and idolators though you do not have this right), JUST for the sake of forsaking them.
As far as your LOGICAL interpretation, as I have explained it does not follow LOGICALLY at all... you are GUESSING that ramadan has something to do with the summer solstice, even though the hottest days ARE NOT the longest days. You are ALSO going AGAINST a direct order of the Quran WA LA TAFARRAQU, do not break into groups.
When was it renamed to Ramadan?
What was the original name?
Unless you answer those questions, then you obviously don't know what you are talking about.
There's no point in crying about it now, when you didn't respond when I had given a full post on the issue. The original name was natiq and it was changed in the pre-islamic era during a time of intense heat, and rabee' 1 and 2 were named in spring time!
The very lexicons you are using to tell you the meaning of ramadha, are telling you this.
You are free to make your own decision but don't falsely claim that it is based on the great reading when it is in fact based on blindly following the majority.
First of all, it's Quran. We all know what Quran is even most non-Muslims know what the Quran is.
Secondly, WA LA FARRAQU
wassalam
-
Peace Shuaib,
Yes I read the thread, and you did not respond to the fact that often the day before and after full moon is 99% illumination. Your own words that you personally could tell the difference mean little in the face of this scientific data showing how impossible it would be to tell if something is 99% or 100% symmetric! There's no point in acting surprised now when back then you did not respond.
Bro, a kind brother posted the entire moon sequence, you dont need anything from me. Not only the moon sequence but the pertentage illumination which was more important.
From the moon sequence, one can with a little concentration make out the full-moon. As for scientific data, no scientist ever said that it is impossible to make out the full moon so you are now resorting to falsifying information. What the data indicates is that it takes effort to make out the difference because the difference is small but it is not impossible. What the data in fact suggests is that it is impossible for an average observer to make out the new moon. Even an EXPERIENCED observer wouldn't be able to see it until one day after the new moon. Here is a quote
"Generally, the lunar crescent will become visible to suitably-located, experienced observers with good sky conditions about one day after New Moon."
On the other hand, scientifically the full moon of scorching heat is the EASIEST full moon to make out because it is in the line of sight of the observer and appears much larger than a regular full-moon. I don't think that this is a coincidence.
As far as what MY argument is for ramadan, I did not say that the primary goal of ramadan is to unite. BUT, I did say that fasting in 2 groups damages unity.
Abstaining at two different times is irrelevant to unity. The ONLY thing that will help unity is holding on to the rope of The God, The Truth. If the TRUTH tells us that abstaining is in the time of scorching heat then be it. You prefer to forgo the Truth for the sake of some bogus unity.
As far as your interpretation of wa'tasimu bi hablillahi wa la tafarraqu, I think it totally overlooks HOW differences start in the first place. Note that the statement is in 2 parts, hold fast to the rope, AND i.e. ALSO do not break yourselves into groups. Differences can start even when everyone is on the same plan/program... it is a separate conscious effort to avoid breaking yourselves into groups.
Each of the commandments of the Quran fosters unity, this is a common sense conclusion because unity is so highly prized in the Quran. Salat, hajj, and yes ramadan too should naturally AID unity as unity is a dynamic concept... they should not DETRACT from unity.
The fact is that those who have faith are united regardless of when they are doing their "salat"/learning connection and "sawm"/abstinence. Doing them at different or same times is irrelevant to unity.
Those who have faith are naturally united by holding on to the rope of The God, The TRUTH. Those who have faith in the TRUTH follow it and NOT some bogus unity which is in fact nothing more than blindly following what the majority is doing.
No but I won't forsake other MUSLIMS (whom you declare hypocrates and idolators though you do not have this right), JUST for the sake of forsaking them.
What other "muslims"? Do you call "muslims" the pagans who spin seven times around a stone thinking that this takes away their sins?
Given your logic, you probably would spin with the pagans around their beloved stone for the sake of "unity".
The word "muslim" is not a meaningless label. It has a meaning and if you call such pagans "muslim" then you clearly don't know the meaning of the word "muslim".
As far as your LOGICAL interpretation, as I have explained it does not follow LOGICALLY at all... you are GUESSING that ramadan has something to do with the summer solstice, even though the hottest days ARE NOT the longest days. You are ALSO going AGAINST a direct order of the Quran WA LA TAFARRAQU, do not break into groups.
I am not guessing. The clear Arabic meaning of "ramadan" is "scorching heat". The sun is scorching when it is at its highest point and the shadow is smallest. Hence, the times of scorching heat happen after the summer solstice. The full-moon of scorching heat is the first full moon after the summer solstice.
You, on the other hand, choose to ignore the clear meaning of the ARABIC word "ramadan" and just take it as meaningless label. Why? Because you know that the meaning goes against your illogical blind following of the majority that you decorate and rename to "unity".
There's no point in crying about it now, when you didn't respond when I had given a full post on the issue. The original name was natiq and it was changed in the pre-islamic era during a time of intense heat, and rabee' 1 and 2 were named in spring time!
The very lexicons you are using to tell you the meaning of ramadha, are telling you this.
Firstly, in "pre-quranic" times Rabi3 Alawal was in the spring and Rabi3 Althani was in early fall and they didn't follow each other as they do now.
Secondly, the current so-called Islamic calendar was established during the time of Caliph Omar, long after the death of the prophet and the revelation of the great reading. This is confirmed by archeological evidence from coins and manuscripts of the era. Hence, all his life, the prophet would have abstained at the time of "scorching heat".
As for the Lexicons, they were written by linguists not historians or archeologists and hence are best used to figure out the etymology of words not the history of what really happened. This is elementary.
First of all, it's Quran. We all know what Quran is even most non-Muslims know what the Quran is.
Like you demonstrated above that you don't know what the word "muslim" means, you are also demonstrating clearly that you are ignorant of what "quran" means. If you know what it means, then prove it by translating it and telling us what it means.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salams ayman,
Like you demonstrated above that you don't know what the word "muslim" means, you are also demonstrating clearly that you are ignorant of what "quran" means.
Bro if you think I am ignorant of what Quran means, then go and post on the topic that I started on "Quran - The reading?"
As far as this idea of being able to call Muslims pagans... bro get a grip. You have not been given the right to judge over people... everyone has their trials and tribulations. You can't even judge yourself, much less others... just look after yourself.
As far as khalifa Umar, I know very well that he established the calandar in terms of the YEAR to begin after hijra... where are you seeing that he has done more than this? I have never seen any record of him doing more than just establishing the year after hijra. I welcome any additional information on this.
As far as the full moon goes, I dont know why you quote one part and ignore the other part. I can only assume that you are intelligent enough to have read it... but then that leads me to believe you purposefully are being misleading. From the same web site
Although Full Moon occurs each month at a specific date and time, the Moon's disk may appear to be full for several nights in a row if it is clear.
The difficulty of detecting the hilaal is primarily a discussion of how EARLY one can see it. But just as we discussed way in the past, seeing a 1-3% sliver of light against a black sky is much easier than telling if something is 99% or 100% illuminated.
As far as ramadan goes and fasting in 1 group goes, at this point i've said pretty much all that i feel needs to be said. my goal is not to convince you, but rather to present the alternative. if you think i did a crappy job well heck then that just makes your job that much easier. You've presented your ideas about the solstice, and I've presented my ideas about the calendar.
wassalam
-
Peace Shuaib,
Bro if you think I am ignorant of what Quran means, then go and post on the topic that I started on "Quran - The reading?"
I will look there. You are also dodging here to explain what "muslim" means.
As far as this idea of being able to call Muslims pagans... bro get a grip. You have not been given the right to judge over people... everyone has their trials and tribulations. You can't even judge yourself, much less others... just look after yourself.
If you spin seven times around a stone thinking that this act takes away your sins then you are a pagan and that is a fact.
Clearly you don't take Ibrahim as an example. I doubt that he would have said "I will just look after myself and I will not say anything to my people who idolize stones". I guess saying the truth and exposing falsehood requires a certain amount of courage, which you clearly don't have.
As far as khalifa Umar, I know very well that he established the calandar in terms of the YEAR to begin after hijra... where are you seeing that he has done more than this? I have never seen any record of him doing more than just establishing the year after hijra. I welcome any additional information on this.
No he didn't establish the year after "hijra". He established the new calendar era. The "after hijra" was added much later.
As I pointed out, before the new Umar calendar, the order of the months was different so he also rearanged the months and disconnected them from the seasons that they occured in (as evident by what they are called). Hence, even the staunchest traditionalist is forced to admit that ALL HIS LIFE, the prophet abstained in the time of "ramadan"/scorching heat.
The difficulty of detecting the hilaal is primarily a discussion of how EARLY one can see it. But just as we discussed way in the past, seeing a 1-3% sliver of light against a black sky is much easier than telling if something is 99% or 100% illuminated.
Again, actions speak louder than words. Everybody is still waiting for you to show us the picture that you said you would PERSONALLY take of the new moon (which you claim to have seen many times). Don't try to wiggle out of it, otherwise people can only conclude that you were lying.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salam ayman,
Again, actions speak louder than words. Everybody is still waiting for you to show us the picture that you said you would PERSONALLY take of the new moon (which you claim to have seen many times). Don't try to wiggle out of it, otherwise people can only conclude that you were lying.
Ahem, i'll say it again... it was ALREADY provided by a kind bro. Are you just trying to make me work for futile reasons, or are you just clutching at straws. COME ON... you had nothing to say about the fact that you conveniently left out the important fact about how the moon appears full for 3 days... and incidentally, the hilaal hasn't even occurred since the discussion started... and where i am, it has been cloudy several days i couldn't even clearly see the recent lunar eclipse.
But actually just yesterday I bought a digital camera, so maybe in the future i will do it, but you might end up waiting several months cuz heck it ain't happening every night you know. But the whole point is that the entire moon sequence is right there taken by an astronomy lab... WITH percentage illumination.
really there's no reason to go back and forth on this and there's no reason to distract everyone by calling me a liar. the facts are quite clear, nothing is in question... and you've made your call, i've made mine. And the astronomy lab has made their call too.
About Umar, could you please provide me some references to the fact that he actually rearranged the months. I'm not saying youre lying, i just want to read up myself because I only found that he set the year starting from hijra.
As far as spinning around the stone and thinking sins are taken away... there is a difference between ibrahim and these muslims... because physical idols are not the only ones out there today... shirk is VERY easy to commit, and sometimes the worse shirk is the ideological shirk, or shirk in following individuals rather than allah. but the key difference in these people is that they DO claim by mouth at least that they believe in Allah the last day and the Prophets and the book and the angels. Ibrahim's people did not. Even Allah calls these people munafiqueen, not pagans.
wassalam
-
Peace shuaib,
Again, actions speak louder than words. Everybody is still waiting for you to show us the picture that you said you would PERSONALLY take of the new moon (which you claim to have seen many times). Don't try to wiggle out of it, otherwise people can only conclude that you were lying.
Ahem, i'll say it again... it was ALREADY provided by a kind bro. Are you just trying to make me work for futile reasons, or are you just clutching at straws. COME ON... you had nothing to say about the fact that you conveniently left out the important fact about how the moon appears full for 3 days... and incidentally, the hilaal hasn't even occurred since the discussion started... and where i am, it has been cloudy several days i couldn't even clearly see the recent lunar eclipse.
The image provided by the brother were taken using a telescope and by expert astronomers. You claimed that you PERSONALLY saw the new moon many times despite the fact that the moon is only visible to the naked eye one-two days after the new-moon. You probably NEVER saw the new moon and you know it as evident by your lame excuses for not PERSONALLY taking a picture and providing it.
But actually just yesterday I bought a digital camera, so maybe in the future i will do it, but you might end up waiting several months cuz heck it ain't happening every night you know. But the whole point is that the entire moon sequence is right there taken by an astronomy lab... WITH percentage illumination.
We will wait for however long it takes for you to provide your PERSONALLY taken picture, until then, your claim to have seen the new moon will be considered nothing more than empty boasting.
About Umar, could you please provide me some references to the fact that he actually rearranged the months. I'm not saying youre lying, i just want to read up myself because I only found that he set the year starting from hijra.
If you look in the Enc. of Islam II and other Encyclopedias, you will see that the two Rabi' months etymology denotes grazing in spring and fall. In Arabia the rainy season, which would promote the growth of grasses for grazing, occurs during autumn. This is confirmed by what is known about Arabs (and Persians) using a 6 season system that split fall into Rabi3 Althani (early fall) and Kharif (late fall) prior to the so-called Islamic calendar. In this system each season lasted two months.
What we are after is not how you or I understand the word "ramadan". We are after how a pre-quranic Arab when hearing 2185 would have understood it long before the establishment of the so-called Islamic Calendar. He would have simply understood it as the "shahr of scorching heat" and this is indisputable.
As far as spinning around the stone and thinking sins are taken away... there is a difference between ibrahim and these muslims... because physical idols are not the only ones out there today...
The stone cube is an idol. It is Dhu Al-Shaara, a popular pre-quranic pagan idol.
From archeological evidence, we have many examples of approximate stone cubes whose height is larger than the other dimensions (like the so-called Kaaba) bearing the name Dhu Al-Shaara and not the alleged name Kaaba. This confirms that, like the other stone cubes found elsewhere, the black stone cube in what is presently called Makka(t) was named Dhu Al-Shaara and not Kaaba.
The name was changed from Dhu Al-Shaara to Kaaba to match the common noun "kaaba" (base) in the great reading/"quran". This way, the pagan practice of spinning seven times could be resumed while pretending to be following the great reading/"quran".
shirk is VERY easy to commit, and sometimes the worse shirk is the ideological shirk, or shirk in following individuals rather than allah. but the key difference in these people is that they DO claim by mouth at least that they believe in Allah the last day and the Prophets and the book and the angels. Ibrahim's people did not. Even Allah calls these people munafiqueen, not pagans.
The fact is that we know from archeological evidence that The Nabataeans celebrated the festival of the birth of Dhu Al-Shaara. We have manuscripts of letters written by Epiphanius the bishop of Salamis, Cyprus in the 4th century AD describing cults with mother-gods such as the Egyptian, Greek, and Nabataean cults. It is interesting that he described the birth celebrations of Dhu Al-Shaara as culminating with circumbulation seven times around the inner sanctuary of the pagan temple. For Example please see Langdon, S., Semitic Mythology, The Mythology of All Races, Vol. V. Boston Archaeological Institute of America, Marshall Jones Company, 1931.
Pagan is as pagan does.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
Peace be upon you all,
The clear Arabic meaning of "ramadan" is "scorching heat". The sun is scorching when it is at its highest point and the shadow is smallest. Hence, the times of scorching heat happen after the summer solstice. The full-moon of scorching heat is the first full moon after the summer solstice.
Just to add, during summer solstice, the sun rays comes at a 90degree angle with the earths atmosphere, unlike winter solstice, when the sun rays "sideswipe" the earth, causing many rays to be reflected. The fact is, the sun is sometimes closer to the earth in winter than in summer, but the ANGLE at which the sun rays penetrate the atmosphere is what makes it hot and cold. You can think of a car accident being a sideswipe, or a head on collision.
-
salam ayman,
bro sometimes really you strike me as someone who doesn't want to understand, you just want to argue. Here's what I said in the past
I'm interested in actually taking a picture of the full and 1 day minus moons and surveying people to see if they can pick it out.
Then I would have another survey with pictures of the new moon (that is, black) and a picture of the hilaal... and see if they can pick the difference out.
When I said a picture of the new moon, OBVIOUSLY i meant (AND SAID) just a black picture.... a black background. Because you cannot SEE the new moon, any idiot knows that but apparently i have to point out even the simplicities to you. What i SAID was compare the picture of the HILAAL to a black background or just a simple sky shot with stars in the background.
I just can't believe you even have the nerve to talk about the moon still. BRO, 99% versus 100% illumination... you STILL claim to me that you can tell the difference? How much weight do you think your opinions will now carry, when you make claims like this? And instead of admitting any sort of folly, rather you clutch at straws and are whining like a baby for me to take pictures. Just admit it, you CANNOT determine the exact date of the full moon by the eye... as far as the hilaal goes, the question is only how EARLY you can see it after the new moon.
As far as your references about the calendar, i will continue my search but in the one I have available to me (Concise Encyclopedia of Islam) again it mentions that Umar only changed the year. So where did you see that Umar rearranged the months?
And in this reference actually, it mentions that all the months were lined up according to seasons but that the Arabs would occasionally add an extra month so that the lunar and solar calendars would line up (which apparently the Quran prohibited by saying there are only 12 months per year). But again, this source too claims that Ramadan was a month of the calendar prior to Islam... a calendar which was a lunar calendar, not at all aligned with the solar (or solstice) and in fact the Arabs would add a month in order to align it.
I've read this kind of thing in another place as well, but I have not researched it thoroughly... at least on the surface it WOULD appear to disprove your theory that the preIslamic Arab would think of the summer solstice month when ramadan was mentioned.... it disproves it because ramadan was already a month in a lunar calendar. Is there something you know that I dont, that would explain this?
wassalam
-
Peace Shuaib,
When I said a picture of the new moon, OBVIOUSLY i meant (AND SAID) just a black picture.... a black background. Because you cannot SEE the new moon, any idiot knows that but apparently i have to point out even the simplicities to you. What i SAID was compare the picture of the HILAAL to a black background or just a simple sky shot with stars in the background.
OK so now you are saying that it is NOT the new moon (the new "hilal") but the 2-day old "hilal" (because it generally appears to average observers 2 days after the new moon or 1 day in ideal conditions) is what we should base the "shahr" on. That is different from what you were saying before. It also means that you would normally start your fast 2 days after the so-called Islamic calendar start of the fast because they start with the new moon that is seen with great difficulty and not the 2 day old clearly visible crescent that everybody can normally see.
I just can't believe you even have the nerve to talk about the moon still. BRO, 99% versus 100% illumination... you STILL claim to me that you can tell the difference? How much weight do you think your opinions will now carry, when you make claims like this? And instead of admitting any sort of folly, rather you clutch at straws and are whining like a baby for me to take pictures. Just admit it, you CANNOT determine the exact date of the full moon by the eye... as far as the hilaal goes, the question is only how EARLY you can see it after the new moon.
Anyone can determine when the full moon after the summer solstice is because it is the most visible full moon and appears directly in the line of sight of the observer and appears much larger than a regular full moon. You ignore all those facts.
Now you finally admit that the new moon cannot be seen by you. Normally, YOU will personally see the "hilal" two days after the actual new moon, which means that you will start your fast two days later than the traditionalists.
As far as your references about the calendar, i will continue my search but in the one I have available to me (Concise Encyclopedia of Islam) again it mentions that Umar only changed the year. So where did you see that Umar rearranged the months?
And in this reference actually, it mentions that all the months were lined up according to seasons but that the Arabs would occasionally add an extra month so that the lunar and solar calendars would line up (which apparently the Quran prohibited by saying there are only 12 months per year). But again, this source too claims that Ramadan was a month of the calendar prior to Islam... a calendar which was a lunar calendar, not at all aligned with the solar (or solstice) and in fact the Arabs would add a month in order to align it.
I've read this kind of thing in another place as well, but I have not researched it thoroughly... at least on the surface it WOULD appear to disprove your theory that the preIslamic Arab would think of the summer solstice month when ramadan was mentioned.... it disproves it because ramadan was already a month in a lunar calendar. Is there something you know that I dont, that would explain this?
I encourage you to continue your research and I hope that the discussions here were beneficial although they get heated sometimes.
The extra month was added every three years to keep the seasons constant. Hence, "ramadan" always occured after the summer solstice in pre-quranic Arabia and this is how a pre-quranic Arab would have understood "ramadhan".
The fact is that the year is solar
017.012
YUSUFALI WE HAVE MADE THE NIGHT AND THE DAY as two (of Our) Signs the Sign of the Night have We obscured, while the Sign of the Day We have made to enlighten you; that ye may seek bounty from your Lord, and THAT YE MAY KNOW THE NUMBER AND COUNT OF THE YEARS all things have We explained in detail.Given that night and day is determined by the sun and not the moon, the sign in 1712 leaves absolutely no doubt that the year is solar.
Peace on who follwoed the guidance,
Ayman
-
salam ayman,
OK so now you are saying that it is NOT the new moon (the new "hilal") but the 2-day old "hilal" (because it generally appears to average observers 2 days after the new moon or 1 day in ideal conditions) is what we should base the "shahr" on.
Bro, maybe we have some confusion here. My understanding was that the beginning of the shahr (that is commonly understood) is the HILAAL... which is defined as the earliest visible (to the naked eye) illumination of the moon. My definition of new moon is the moon that is completely shaded by the earth, i.e. black, 0% illumination.
Now the EARLIEST according to that astronomical lab, is about 12-16 hours AFTER the new moon...
Generally, the lunar crescent will become visible to suitably-located, experienced observers with good sky conditions about one day after New Moon.
You see, there are only 2 points to start the month... either the hilaal, or the full moon. SO, the point is that you would be able to consistently begin the month on the lunar cycle using hilaal as it definitely becomes visible one day after the new moon but at MOST 2 days after (hence the 28-29 day month)... whereas the full moon there are 3 days at minimum where the moon may appear full AT EACH END, leading to GREAT variability in the month length, even 6 days. At the very least, you cannot argue that the using the full-moon point is better... and I for one argue that the hilaal is better because of less variability.
The extra month was added every three years to keep the seasons constant. Hence, "ramadan" always occured after the summer solstice in pre-quranic Arabia and this is how a pre-quranic Arab would have understood "ramadhan".
Well I understand that Ramadan then could have coincided with "summer" in Arabia... but my point was, that it was a CALENDRICAL month.... and when the Quran stated to only keep 12 months in the year, and the same 12 month calendar was kept in place, then wouldn't ramadan be understood as the calendrical month? And the fact that the Quran abolished this practice (by stating only 12 months in 1 year) ALSO points to the fact that Allah did not want this "floating Ramadan" practice.
Also, I still haven't heard about Umar rearranging the months. Did you actually see that written somewhere, or are you extrapolating?
Given that night and day is determined by the sun and not the moon, the sign in 1712 leaves absolutely no doubt that the year is solar.
Well I think the meaning of that verse is not necessarily regarding how to keep the calendar (but that's another discussion). But now you are saying the calendar is solar, but what happened to all your research on the word SHAHR, which is LUNAR?
wassalam
-
Peace Shuaib,
Bro, maybe we have some confusion here. My understanding was that the beginning of the shahr (that is commonly understood) is the HILAAL... which is defined as the earliest visible (to the naked eye) illumination of the moon. My definition of new moon is the moon that is completely shaded by the earth, i.e. black, 0% illumination.
Your definition of the new moon demonstrates that you are confusing no-moon with new-moon. Thursday the 11th is the no-moon night. Friday November 12th is the new moon night. Hence, if the moon is seen on Friday, Saturday will be the start of the new month. The clearly visible crescent moon you are talking about doesn't occur until the 13th and for most people the 14th. Hence, according to you the new month should start on Monday November 15th and not on Saturday, a two day difference. This is due to your ignorance of the difference between new-moon and no-moon. Here is the link that the kind brother provided earlier
http//www.stardate.org/nightsky/moon/
Get an eye exam brother because although it is hard to make out, the picture of the new-moon on the 12th does show a fine sliver of the new moon on the right side, however only expert observers in optimal viewing conditions may be able to see it (definitely not you).
Now the EARLIEST according to that astronomical lab, is about 12-16 hours AFTER the new moon...
That is the new-moon on the 12th, but the totally blackened moon on the 11th is not a new-moon. It is the last day of the previous month according to the so-called Islamic calendar. So stop making up your own definitions when I point out the inconsistencies in your arguments.
Well I understand that Ramadan then could have coincided with "summer" in Arabia... but my point was, that it was a CALENDRICAL month.... and when the Quran stated to only keep 12 months in the year, and the same 12 month calendar was kept in place, then wouldn't ramadan be understood as the calendrical month? And the fact that the Quran abolished this practice (by stating only 12 months in 1 year) ALSO points to the fact that Allah did not want this "floating Ramadan" practice.
I already stated clearly in my previous post what "ramadhan" meant for a pre-quranic Arab.
By making up terms like "calendrical month" the only thing you are doing is once again parading your odd nonsense on this thread because there is no such thing as a "non-calendrical month". A month by definition is part of a calendar.
The Georgian/Julian calendar also has 12 months in a year and this is a fact. The issue is not 12 months because "shahr" doesn't mean month so stop confusing "shahr" with month.
Given that night and day is determined by the sun and not the moon, the sign in 1712 leaves absolutely no doubt that the year is solar.
Well I think the meaning of that verse is not necessarily regarding how to keep the calendar (but that's another discussion). But now you are saying the calendar is solar, but what happened to all your research on the word SHAHR, which is LUNAR?
The verse is not about any man-made calendars. It is about how to determine the number (3adad) of the years. It is telling us that the sun (that defines day and night) is what we should use to determine the number of years NOT the moon.
As for "shahr", it is not their "3adad" that is 12 but the "3ida(t)" that is 12. For now, all I will say is that I think that we have finally resolved the puzzle and I will be posting the complete article soon. As usual, the correct solution is surprisingly clear and simple.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
Peace be upon you Ayman,
As for "shahr", it is not their "3adad" that is 12 but the "3ida(t)" that is 12. For now, all I will say is that I think that we have finally resolved the puzzle and I will be posting the complete article soon. As usual, the correct solution is surprisingly clear and simple.
Yes, please stop debating with Shuaib and bring forth the article and let him debate that. I am holding on with both hands trying to keep up, but I need it put together for me in article form because I just cannot gather the whole picture. I look foward to your insight.
-
Peace brother Kyle, all,
Yes, please stop debating with Shuaib and bring forth the article and let him debate that. I am holding on with both hands trying to keep up, but I need it put together for me in article form because I just cannot gather the whole picture. I look foward to your insight.
I will try to post the article this weekend, unless The God wills otherwise.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman
-
Peace all, ayman
If i am not mistaken one of the articles quoted claimed (and explained why) it is not the time imediately after summer solistice that is the hotest time .....but a month or so later....your comment?
also, whats the difference between &adadun and &aiddatun?
best wishes, Zlatan
