What is the language in heaven?
-
- If you have a car in the garage, and you are currently seeing it... do you consider that you know that your car is there , or that you only have faith that your car is there? I mean, is it knowledge or faith to you?
It is neither. It is a belief. I believe there is a car there, maybe because I am fooling myself or I am deluded. That is why we have the saying pinch me to see if this is real.
-
Regarding the abductees, I totally agree with the problem you highlight.
-
If, as you say, the definition of knowledge is something that can be verified and shared by others, then I agree with your standpoint. So, yes, I agree that there should be common definitions. But then I need more words to describe things...
-
Let's leave the topic of "physical science" until I find better words... like I said, I find it hard to express myself properly... almost like describing emotional feelings or flavors using only mathematical notation.
-
I disagree that we need to know the mechanics of it. If I order a dish in a restaurant, I don't need to know everything about what the cooks are doing in the kitchen, or the whole supply chain and production of the ingredients. I just have to be able to communicate with the waiter, and eat the meal when it is served.
Actually, I agree with what you point out, and I have already hinted at that when I said that knowledge has nothing to do with proof. If I alone observe a certain flower in the jungle, then that is knowledge to me, regardless whether or not anyone else will believe me, or ever find that spot again. I still know what I saw. Others agreeing with me doesn't make it true. Of course, perhaps I had an illusion, and I'm mistaken, but that's not what we are talking about here.
Hahaha, you've actually answered your own point you don't need to know the mechanics because you know there are cooks in the kitchen preparing your food. Your food doesn't appear by magic.
That's why I asked "what is the difference between making stuff up and claiming it happened through some super-natural, unproven entity?"- Scientist or not, you're missing my point, probably because I didn't explain myself clearly. I understand that you can describe the water particles and their location and diameter, the curvature of Earth, the angle of the incoming light into the droplets, the density difference between water and air, the refraction and how the light is "split" into colors. But my point was (perhaps it was a weak example) that you can fill volumes of books containing descriptions of all the physical properties of the constituents of the rainbow and all physical laws that give rise to it... but the blind scientist will never see the rainbow... he or she will only get an understanding of the physical scenario. The blind one will never understand color. Color is not the same as a wavelength of light. Color is something that your brain and you experience through your body. They're not the same. Are they?Unfortunately, no, you can't. It is not knowledge, but belief by definition.
Our main sense of perception is sight. That is why everything is centred around it. A deaf person can't hear, a blind person can't see. So my example was purely theoretical and can serve to show that a blind person can be made to understand what a rainbow is - without being able to visually appreciate its form, shape, colour or its emotional beauty. But yes, colour is a wavelength. Nothing mystical. We, humans have decided to call a reflection of light with a wavelength of ~700 nm and a frequency of ~450 THz red.
- Of course you can. I know when I have certain emotions, or when I smell certain scents. No brain wave machine can describe or prove this. It is still true.
If it is like you say, then the definitions are faulty and limited as per people's experiences. The definitions are after-all created by people and would reflect the limitations of the people who define the words.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this.
We are within the area of epistemology. Here we have only what we consider as knowledge and how we know it. There is no emotion here.
- You base this example on the idea that knowledge is defined as containing an element of inter-sharing between people and reproducibility and what not. I say that the term 'knowledge' is actually not that well-defined that one would like to believe.
If something should only be considered knowledge, how large group of people would have to agree on it's reproducibility? What if all these people who agree on certain things to be true or not, only have a limited understanding and perception... then what? If I cannot say (to myself) what is true (reproducible experience), then how can a group say it to itself? How large does this group have to be? Does it depend on the number at all? There is reproducibility in both cases, but the size of the subject/audience is different (one vs many).
Note that I'm talking about knowledge as a witness of a fact. The fact has been witnessed and knowledge has been obtained (assuming that it was a true fact that was witnessed!), no matter whether or not I can convince others about this. A fact is a fact regardless of proof.
Anyhow, I'm not sure we'll get much further in this discussion, but I have indeed enjoyed it.
Thanks and Peace!Quite the opposite. Epistemology is defined quite rigorously. And no, it does not depend on how many people think they know something. Just like people believing Earth was flat just a few centuries ago did not make this correct. So just because everybody said so, did not make this knowledge, but a belief.
My actual point was that because we have a limited number and range of senses we have developed tools, extending our sensory perception. But, and this is a huge but, we have only just scratched the surface. 200 years of research can't possibly get us anywhere near the full truth. Which I why I started my question regarding language in heaven with belief.
-
Peace StopS.
We have >7 billion humans on this planet.
~1.5 billion are Muslims.
That means ~20% or expressed differently 1/5 are Muslim.A creator creates a human. Not a Muslim. 1st
A creator creates a human. Not a Muslim. 2nd
A creator creates a human. Not a Muslim. 3rd
A creator creates a human. Not a Muslim. 4th
A creator creates a human. Yes, a Muslim. 5thThis means only 1 in 5 created humans is a Muslim.
This means that 4 out of 5 created humans are not Muslims. This further means 4 created humans don't do what they are intended to do and only 1 does what he is supposed to do.If by " Muslim" you mean -traditional islam religion- ,I am afraid you misunderstand what most on this forum say and mean.
" True Islam" means Total submission to the creator, a way of life/ a system. It is not a religion and most certainly it is not traditional islam as people know and define it.
How can we possibly know how many people have sincerely submitted to their creator? Where would any figures come from? Only God Himself could provide accurate figures. He is the only one who knows who has sincerely submitted to Him!
Therefore there could be " Muslim Christians", "Muslim Jews", Muslim Muslims", " Muslim... any sect or religion "... ie All those who seek God Alone and submit to Him.
I hope you will try and revise your figures, if indeed you have any figures at all.
Peace.
If that is your definition of what constitutes a Muslim, then you are right and I am wrong.
It also means that maybe, there is not a single true Muslim on this planet.
My definition of a Muslim is a person who accepts only one god, Allah, that there is a messenger, Muhammad and that Allah revealed his text as a means to salvation as the Koran over 23 years.
So my question of what language is spoken in heaven could be totally irrelevant as there's nobody there. Maybe I should have asked about hell......
-
If 4/5 is your conclusion, your conclusion is incorrect.
handshake
respectfully, I have no intentions of offending you, but your assumptions and conclusions are nonsense.Peace O0
OK, I give up with you. I have asked you on several occasions to be more specific and stop using these cryptic half-sentences. If you can't have a written discussion leave it. This is not helping me at all. Others here are telling me I am wrong and why I am wrong. Why can't you?
-
If that is your definition of what constitutes a Muslim, then you are right and I am wrong.
It also means that maybe, there is not a single true Muslim on this planet.
My definition of a Muslim is a person who accepts only one god, Allah, that there is a messenger, Muhammad and that Allah revealed his text as a means to salvation as the Koran over 23 years.
So my question of what language is spoken in heaven could be totally irrelevant as there's nobody there. Maybe I should have asked about hell......
Peace StopS ),
If I'm honest (I don't want to offend you) what good logic said is correct. There is a verse in the reading that states "you have submitted (al-muslimeen in Arabic = submitter in English <- someone correct me if I'm wrong) but belief (iman) has not entered your hearts". Something along those lines. A Japanese author wrote a book called God and man in the Quran that has a good explanation between a submitter (muslimeen) and believer (mumin) and I think there is an article on free-minds about this. I'll get back to you on the language of heaven. My logical reasoning has no basis of the Quran but in my opinion it will either be a universal language or everyone is advanced to the point where all languages in this world will be known to every person in the next... But that is an opinion not based on the reading so don't take my word for it, just a way of looking at it ). And yes, majority of people stray from the straight path, a minority of people don't. People who believe in some form of a transfinite creator and who try to live a righteous and healthy life (and many more much needed goodly attributes) even if they have never heard of the reading in their life could be easily granted paradise if God wills ).
Peace ) peace
-
If I'm honest (I don't want to offend you) what good logic said is correct.
Haha, no, I'm a big boy and not easily offended. I dish out, so I must be able to take it - and I prefer honest and straight to pussyfooting around.
There is a verse in the reading that states "you have submitted (al-muslimeen in Arabic = submitter in English <- someone correct me if I'm wrong) but belief (iman) has not entered your hearts". Something along those lines.
No problem with that. But doesn't that mean I don't even know if the Imam in my neighbourhood mosque is REALLY a Muslim? Nobody knows whether he REALLY submitted. So whatever he tells me about Islam might be wrong?
A Japanese author wrote a book called God and man in the Quran that has a good explanation between a submitter (muslimeen) and believer (mumin) and I think there is an article on free-minds about this. I'll get back to you on the language of heaven. My logical reasoning has no basis of the Quran but in my opinion it will either be a universal language or everyone is advanced to the point where all languages in this world will be known to every person in the next... But that is an opinion not based on the reading so don't take my word for it, just a way of looking at it ). And yes, majority of people stray from the straight path, a minority of people don't. People who believe in some form of a transfinite creator and who try to live a righteous and healthy life (and many more much needed goodly attributes) even if they have never heard of the reading in their life could be easily granted paradise if God wills ).
Peace ) peace
That's all I am looking for personal opinions. I realise that not many have been to paradise and can deliver a first person account of the language used.
-
Haha, no, I'm a big boy and not easily offended. I dish out, so I must be able to take it - and I prefer honest and straight to pussyfooting around.
No problem with that. But doesn't that mean I don't even know if the Imam in my neighbourhood mosque is REALLY a Muslim? Nobody knows whether he REALLY submitted. So whatever he tells me about Islam might be wrong?
That's all I am looking for personal opinions. I realise that not many have been to paradise and can deliver a first person account of the language used.
Peace ,
Haha that's good. In terms of personal account, unfortunately noone has come back with explanations of the language used. As far as I can remember (which isn't always too much considering I only started the Quran in April) God doesn't describe the language used, most likely because it shouldn't be of interest to us now, and we will find out when we end up there if we get there. In terms of your imam, I've always strongly disliked (I try not to say hate) them and never ever liked one. Luckily, my mum was catholic and my dad was brought up as a "Muslim" but he believes in God and ends it there... He hated the sunnism people believed in i.e hadiths. I don't care what an imam says. My advice to you is never trust, and never listen to them unless your logical consciousness doesn't throw it in the bin. I didn't know what the Quran was when I was young, I just followed God, and had my principles and morales intact and ways had utmost appreciation and respect for the creator without the reading. After reading the Quran I realised 90% of what I believed in was within it and the other 10% was things I was a bit unsure about before hand. Out of interest, do you not believe in some form of an external creator of some sort? Regardless of what you wish to call it? I was watching a documentary on BBC 4 about the start of the universe and how it could be cyclomatic and whatever external created it is independent of time and space (i.e eternal i.e transfinite). Was pretty interesting .
Peace peace
-
Peace ,
Haha that's good. In terms of personal account, unfortunately noone has come back with explanations of the language used. As far as I can remember (which isn't always too much considering I only started the Quran in April) God doesn't describe the language used, most likely because it shouldn't be of interest to us now, and we will find out when we end up there if we get there. In terms of your imam, I've always strongly disliked (I try not to say hate) them and never ever liked one. Luckily, my mum was catholic and my dad was brought up as a "Muslim" but he believes in God and ends it there... He hated the sunnism people believed in i.e hadiths. I don't care what an imam says. My advice to you is never trust, and never listen to them unless your logical consciousness doesn't throw it in the bin. I didn't know what the Quran was when I was young, I just followed God, and had my principles and morales intact and ways had utmost appreciation and respect for the creator without the reading. After reading the Quran I realised 90% of what I believed in was within it and the other 10% was things I was a bit unsure about before hand. Out of interest, do you not believe in some form of an external creator of some sort? Regardless of what you wish to call it? I was watching a documentary on BBC 4 about the start of the universe and how it could be cyclomatic and whatever external created it is independent of time and space (i.e eternal i.e transfinite). Was pretty interesting .
Peace peace
Yep!!! There's a lot out there still to be learned. Thanks for your input.
-
If that is your definition of what constitutes a Muslim, then you are right and I am wrong.
It also means that maybe, there is not a single true Muslim on this planet.
There are... babies... those who were just being born into this world..
All human are muslim (not Muslim the member of certain sect / religion) when they were initially born into this world..My definition of a Muslim is a person who accepts only one god, Allah, that there is a messenger, Muhammad and that Allah revealed his text as a means to salvation as the Koran over 23 years.
Ah you mean the member of certain sect or religion which is a mixed bowl of Judaism (Tribal / sectarian arrogance), Xtianism (Dead human worshipping) and Egyptian Paganism (one need a holy book in order to be saved).
So my question of what language is spoken in heaven could be totally irrelevant as there's nobody there. Maybe I should have asked about hell......
It is totally irrelevant.. yet for the wrong reason..
-
There are... babies... those who were just being born into this world..
All human are muslim (not Muslim the member of certain sect / religion) when they were initially born into this world..Ah you mean the member of certain sect or religion which is a mixed bowl of Judaism (Tribal / sectarian arrogance), Xtianism (Dead human worshipping) and Egyptian Paganism (one need a holy book in order to be saved).
It is totally irrelevant.. yet for the wrong reason..
You seem to be uniquely selective in your perception.
Babies can't defend themselves or protest, so you simply declare them to be something without proof. Regardless of facts like entire tribes who have never had a god and don't even have a god in their vocabulary. I wonder how you will explain this away, but I am sure you will find a way
Well, I don't know why you need to emphasise this. There is only one name for followers of a book called Koran which was transmitted via a man called Muhammad via an angel.
Egyptian Paganism? What about the Pharaohs who were single gods?
-
Regardless of facts like entire tribes who have never had a god and don't even have a god in their vocabulary. I wonder how you will explain this away, but I am sure you will find a way
There are moslems, the true moslems and not the Muslims among "tribes who have never had a god and don't even have a god in their vocabulary".
Well, I don't know why you need to emphasise this. There is only one name for followers of a book called Koran which was transmitted via a man called Muhammad via an angel
Egyptian Paganism? What about the Pharaohs who were single gods?
'moslems' is within the same domain as 'honest', it's an attitude and not a social identity / name of sect/cult/religion.
You should be able to recognize this by now..Regarding the Egyptian Paganism.. see this..
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2-0lfJQGGsThat's how the entire conception of "We need a book in order to be saved" got started among middle-easterners and western world..
Salam / Peace
-
There are moslems, the true moslems and not the Muslims among "tribes who have never had a god and don't even have a god in their vocabulary".
'moslems' is within the same domain as 'honest', it's an attitude and not a social identity / name of sect/cult/religion.
OK, thanks for your input.
-
I don't understand anything of what you wrote.
There is no unified or universal language. Otherwise the Koran would most probably be written in that language and maybe people people could understand it without arguing. As it is, the Koran is vague and ambiguous and ~20% is not able to be understood. It says it is clear and easy to remember and understand, but we require multiple scholars to explain some sentences and some will never be understood at all.
The heart carries no understanding. It is a muscle which pumps blood.
What is "absolute" falsehood? What is the difference between "falsehood" and "absolute falsehood"?
What is "non-dichotomous existence"?
What is "choice less language"?'The absolute falsehood' is just to denote that there is not the slightest element of doubt if 'it' is false or not.
'Non dichotomous existence' is to stress the point there are no two ways about the Truth.
'The choice-less language is one's own conscience that does not have 'multiple tongues'. It is the universal language.
. -
fun topic. I don't know what language is in the Garden maybe there's a thousand maybe there's none. maybe we could all speak the same language. anyway it's one of the things I find interesting. just imagine the site.. maybe we could even converse with other different species.
simple answer I don't know, but I want to find out. -
This is a misunderstanding of Quranic text. But it's not your fault. Some Quran translator put that the 'reward' for the people who passed the test is virgin lady rotfl
But if you want to do a little research, you will find that the word used in the verse has nothing to do with that.Here is the example
3748 waʿindahum qāṣirātu l-ṭarfi ʿīnun
Common Translation
3748 And with them are those with a modest gaze, with lovely eyes.My Translation
3748 And with them are adjacent house/palace with spring of water.Qasiratul = Qaf-Sad-Ra
become short, have little or no power, become niggardly, fall short, i.e. not to reach something, left/relinquish/abstain/desist/cease, took from its length, clip/shove, restricted/confined/limited, kept within certain bounds or limits, restrain/withheld, hinder/prevent, contract or draw oneself together, obedient, last part of day. qasr (pl. qusur) - ample and spacious house, castle, palace.tarfi = = Tay-Ra-Fa
attack the extremity of the enemy's lines, chose a thing, extremity, edge, lateral/adjacent/outward part, side, border, end, newly acquired, proximity, fringes.
leaders/thinkers/scholars, best of the fruits.
Look from outer angle of eye, twinkle in eye, putting eyelids in motion, looking, glance, blinking, raise/open eyes, hurt the eye and make it water.
descend from an ancient family, noble man in respect of ancestry.inun = Ayn-Ya-Nun
to hurt in the eye, smite anyone with the evil eye, flow tears, become a spy. Aayan - to view, face. 'Ainun - eye, look, hole, but of a tree, spy, middle letter of a trilateral word, spring of water, chief, personage of a place. A'yan lovely, wide-eyed, lovely black eyed. water, spring.As you can see, none of the Qaf-Sad-Ra literal translation means virgin ladies or something like that. I don't know how's the translator come into that conclusion.
But as I mention in the previous reply, that the second creation is repetition of the first creation. It including the men and women creation.
Here is the verse talk about humans creation
41 O people, be aware of your Lord who has created you from one person and He created from it its mate and sent forth from it many men and many women; and be aware of God whom you ask about, and the relatives. God is Watcher over you.
So there is no new creature called angels or virgins to accompany the man who passed the test..
"The virgin ladies" is no other than the woman who passed the test during the first creation. So basically, we are all in the same level.
Peace
Peace everyone...
Very very interesting.... So.. According to him, it seems no sex in Janna and no women partner...
Well it makes sense in angle.. Why we need sex in Janna?
Your well constructed opinions within Quran or logic pls..