What is the Qur'ans stance on homosexuality?
-
781 has the same incorrect hadith inspired and homophobic translation on this website. I would love to see it corrected. It's not a matter of speculation. The current translation does totally not hold up to scrutiny.
-
Peace runninglikezebras,
If I could choose and make a translation out of the words it would say something like this
781 ?You are approaching the people out of desire instead of the families! Indeed, you are a transgressing people.?
Be whole
-
I think that translation does the original text way more justice. In the context of 781 it is impossible only men are adressed as in the previous verses the subject is a whole society including men and women. The same verse is repeated elsewhere, no doubt that one is still contaminated as well.
-
Peace runninglikezebras,
If you repeatedly translate a word incorrectly then of course the whole narration falter.
Be whole
-
Some men who really hate homosexuals are hidden gay police
Apparently, I often read such statement/comment (similar statement/comment like what I quoted above).
Personally, I think it is vile statement, and such statement is clearly unfair.
Be careful, it's a big accusation.
Looks like some people often say such statement by lightly,
whereas, if the statement is brought to God's Court, perhaps it's not something with a light responsibility.
I suggest you to think carefully if next time you want to write/say such statement/comment.
Salm.
-
I distance myself from that comment. It was uncalled for. I do still stand with my statement that Edip is taking huge responsibilty when he kept that hadith contaminated translation in his QRT just because it suits his personal homophobic inclination. I would not want to be in his shoes.
-
Was listening to the radio today, and a person was narrating how he had changed opinion about homosexuality. He said that there was one idea that he had heard from a famous actor, and this idea changed his perception. The ideas was that if two people (in this case of the same gender) loves each other, how can this possibly be bad/wrong/evil?
There seems to be so much focus on sex when it comes to homosexuality, both by homophobics but also among homosexuals. But isn't it love that is the whole essence of the attraction? Yes, the human being was created with two genders, and was designed for having sex in order to procreate, but for a couple (hetero or homo) to come together, love is the thing the does it (unless we're talking about just simply sleeping around, which is another topic altogether).
Just wanted to share this idea, because I never thought about it much at all How can love ever be wrong? (And please, I'm not talking about love for money etc... so let's not play silly word games)
Anyhow, I think it's worth a thought or two. Personally I cannot take any particular stand on homosexuality, except that all human beings are equally much worth, and we should be very careful when judging others, and God knows what we don't know.
Peace
-
Your quote does not suggest that the people of Lut were actually attracted to women. Here, "in preference to" means "instead of"
Allah said his Quran is detailed. If he wanted to point the verse at real homosexuals he would have said "I condemn homosexuals because they do not force themselves to be attracted to women". He could have also said "men with no physical desire for women". He already used that line in one Surah. I pasted the verse. When he said instead of women, he made it clear that the men he was talking about were straight, but they chose the unnatural way by rejecting women for men. The idea of lust to me is one night stand which is punishable as stated in Quran. It is currently applied to sexual relationships of unmarried men and women.
As I said earlier, since Allah hasn't given anything on how to treat them we can't at this moment decide whether homosexuality is truly a sin. Just letting you know that I am talking about eunuchs.
-
Allah said his Quran is detailed. If he wanted to point the verse at real homosexuals he would have said "I condemn homosexuals because they do not force themselves to be attracted to women". He could have also said "men with no physical desire for women". He already used that line in one Surah. I pasted the verse. When he said instead of women, he made it clear that the men he was talking about were straight, but they chose the unnatural way by rejecting women for men. The idea of lust to me is one night stand which is punishable as stated in Quran. It is currently applied to sexual relationships of unmarried men and women.
As I said earlier, since Allah hasn't given anything on how to treat them we can't at this moment decide whether homosexuality is truly a sin. Just letting you know that I am talking about eunuchs.
I feel like you're grasping for straws. I'll leave you to read all the verses regarding this. The straightfoward interpretation is that homosexual acts are disapproved. Make note that we shouldn't be twisting the verses to suit our whims.
The verse you pasted refers to men with no sexual desire. These could be eunuchs or asexuals, and I would interpret homosexuals in there as well.
Furthermore, no one is saying that homosexual intercourse has its own specific punishment, but again, the straightforward interpretation leads us to believe that anyone who is caught by four witnesses having extramarital intercourse receives a number of lashes.
Allahu a'lim.
-
I think many are misinterpreting the story of Lut. Lets analyze what this verse means "you approach men with desire instead of women".
First lets identify these women (nisa). It's not hard to understand the women mentioned in this verse are referring to the daughters Lut offered for marriage to the people of Sodom. It clearly states the inhabitants refused this offer by Lut and were more interested in the men. It's not talking about all women, it's a reference to the two daughters of Lut. It's beyond doubt the nisa mentioned in this verse are referring to the only females mentioned in the verses leading to this one, Luts daughters.
Second lets identify the men (riyal) mentioned in this verse. Its easy to see the men mentioned in this verse are referring to the messengers/angels that were sent by God to Lut. God sent them to Lut as a sort of trojan horse. God knows the people of Sodom will try to take these angels from Lut which will in turn annihilate the city. All this is pretty clearly stated in the verses preceeding the one we are discussing. It's beyond doubt the riyal mentioned here are the messengers visiting Lut. This is proven by the earlier description of how the crowd approached on the messengers and this movement of the crowd towards the riyal gets repeated here. Who was the crowd approaching on and Lut felt unable to protect? The messengers.
Why did Lut offer his daughters to the people of Sodom? This is also explained. It's a peace offering. A way to resolve the taking of the angels from Lut. The people of Sodom were trying to take the messengers/angels away from Lut. Lut feels put to shame by this act as it is dishonourful (handing over messengers of God to the most sinful people in the world). Out of despair, or maybe even to prevent the annihilation of the city, Lut offers his daughters as alternative. Which gets refused and seals the faith of destruction of the entire city. The Quranic source tells us how Lut felt unable to protect them from a crowd that was approaching on them. It does not state what they are planning to do with them. This explains why Lut went to such desperate measures as offering his own daughters. Can you even imagine being so altruistic to protect something divine. This makes the story of Lut so beautiful. The traits of a prophet, a righteous man, offering his two own daughters in exchange to protect what is from God.
Why were the people of Sodom so interested in these messengers sent to Lut? We can only speculate since it is not mentioned. Traditional translations explain they wanted to rape them homosexually. There is no indication at all this is the case and it says a lot about the mind of the translator, not about the text. It's not unlikely the people of Sodom knew these visitors were angels and wanted their knowledge, power, use them for their own agenda. This is only speculation. But not more a speculation then insinuating they wanted to take the angels from Lut for sexual acts. Fact is when the crowd started approaching the messengers in a frenzy - instead of the two virgin daughters offered by Lut as compromise - to take them from him, they do not motivate why or what their objective is. They just state their desire to take them.
People who are so sure this verse involves any sexual act, should think about the different meanings of desire. Does me desiring an icecream imply a sexual act? Does me desiring knowledge involve a sexual act? Does me desiring company involve a sexual act? Of course it doesn't. Strange then, desiring to take men from someone implies homosexual rape isn't it? Unless one has a homophobic inclination to start with.
Summed up
"They wanted to take/were approaching on the riyal (angels/messengers) instead of accepting the Nisa (Luts daughters as a compromise)."
Im rather convinced this is the correct meaning, please check out the reptition of this story in the other chapter where the homosexual rape interpretation becomes totally illogical. The interpretation I elaborated here still is valid in the repitition and does not require some weird different translation as "highway robbery". The meaning is the same in both chapters.
The act that sealed their faith was rejecting the final desperate peace offer made by Lut. It's illogical to think their fate was sealed by what they they did to those messengers they took after seperation from Lut - as clearly it is not described in Quran. We can only speculate what they did to them but of course the homophobic mind of most translators already filled the gap with homosexual rape (because thats what homosexuals do). Lut offered two virgin daughters, prepared to hand them over to the most sinful people in the world to protect these angels from falling into the hands of sinners. It's irrelevant even what they were planning to use those angels for, even if they were planning to rape them homosexually, their fate had been sealed by rejecting Luts generous offer.
ps this is a quranist forum, has none of you detected this verse has been contaminated by hadith? dont you see the hadith translation fails to stand up in the repitition of the story where no desire is mentioned and it's often translated as highway robbery? Do people base themselves on Edip's QRT that has kept this homophobic hadith contamination intact just because Edip thinks homosexuals are abnormal? Kind of sad really. If you are still interpreting the story of Lut as a condemnation of homosexuality then that is your personal inclination. It's not in the objective text and I can back up this case even further to expose your personal homophobia that has no Quranic evidence whatsoever.
-
I seem unable to modify my earlier post. I thought it was lacking references so here goes
Identification of nisa subject in 781
The only nisa mentioned in 1177-80 and 1561-66 are the daughters of Lut. Making it clear Nisa in 781 refers to Luts daughters.
Identification of riyal subject in 781
The men/visitors are described as the messengers in 1177, 1567
1178, 1568 describes how they rushed towards them/the messengers and wanted to disgrace Lut "through them" and get offered Luts daughters in returnNotice how these verses describe a movement (rushing) wich gets repeated in 781 being 'approaching with desire'. Well that's what rushing is, it's approaching with desire.
Summed up the only riyal/men mentioned in the story of Lut in Quran are the messengers. The only nisa/women mentioned in the story of Lot in Quran are Luts daughters with the exception of Luts wife (which is singular). How can the subjects of riyal and nisa be anything else than the messengers and Luts daughters respectively?
26166 Refers again to the same choice Lut offered the people of Sodom. They rejected the wives he offered and were only interested in the messengers sent to Lut.
But the most interesting evidence of all can be found in 2928-31. Here we see the hadith translation utterly failing. 2929 repeats the accusation made in 781 and suddenly homosexual does not fit the arabic text anymore. So they change it to 'highway robbery' etc. Some translations even put 'highway robbery and desire for men', which is incredible because the verse does not even contain a word that expresses desire here. The verb used here means 'to cut off'. What were the people of Sodom "approaching" and trying to seperate from Lut? The messengers. It makes no sense at all the accusation in 2929 would suddenly be about highway robbery. The men they approach are the messengers, the subject they are trying to cut off are the messengers and thereby dishonouring Lut. You see what they did here? 781 speaks about approaching men for sexual acts and at the same time 2929 speaks about approaching men for robbery. You cant have both ways. It's a nice example of the liberties hadith-inspired translators use but they make mistakes and we can always trace back the lie they tried to implement.
My dear friends, Quran does not contradict and this hadith contamination has to go. Thank God for repeating one story multiple times so these fallacies in translation can be detected.
-
More evidence the verb used in 781 does not exactly mean approaching. It's used in other occurences in Quran. One example uses this for people drawn to magic. It's not just approaching someone, it's rushing to something that is out of this world. Are people sexually drawn to magic? I dont think so. The people of Sodom were drawn to Luts visitors like people were drawn to magic, like moths to the moon. The description of it in Quran is actually quite eloquent.
-
I agree with runniglikezebra ,the act want to do it's all about the Messengers.
Imaging These guys were rufnecks they were fighting since they were childs,it was a hard Environment,so does lut, they knew how hard he can fight and he had the biggest ally in this Region his uncle Abbraham.
And suddenly some handsome guys visited Lut,i don't think the messengers looked like someone who had to work hard everyday and from time time involved with fierce fighting.They looked like rich People and the gangs from Sodom wanted to Show them,if they want to stay there,where there rank is.
-
Possibly. We can only speculate. The fascination is to me also explained in the ambiguity of the identity of Luts visitors - where they angels? There are hints in the text saying they were. Add to this the verb used and it all makes sense. One would be drawn to angels just like one would be drawn to magic. The occurences of the same verb used add more weight to this understanding.
Notice also the verse where God asks why of all creatures they choose the men? This does not ask us why did they pick men as an opposite of women. It's referring to messengers/angels of all creatures including humans. If this was not referring to something beyond humans, it would have been phrased "why of all people they choose the men".
-
Has some one looked up the word "min doun"?
As far as i know it is used for a lot of different meanings,it is also used for escpecially so it can also mean" you are approaching men lustful but especially woman(suffer from your lust)"
But this is only what i remember i've read sometime ago,no qurantee.
-
I have looked into it but dont have a definite answer. It seems to point to an exception, exclusion. Min doun Allah = besides Allah, outside Allah. But I dont see much relevance in the light of the correct translation. People of sodom were offered nisa (daughters of Lut), but they chose min doun nissa the riyal. The riyal being the messengers. They did not approach them lustful they were drawn to them. Like one is drawn to magic or something remarkable.
-
I must say that Crow, recite, Man of Faith, Abdul-Hadi, and runninglikezebras have provided some of the most insightful replies on this thread, and I am most grateful for them. Others have also provided very good questions and insights, as well.
To clarify, though I believe it is completely unnecessary and should be considered irrelevant, I myself am heterosexual. Some people wonder why would I care so much if I am not homosexual?
Well, is this the same logic we should apply to others who live in ways that are unlike our own, or experience what we don't? I have never been assaulted, so why should I care about others who have been? I have never been murdered, so why should I care about others who have been? I think that should clarify my curiosity.
Allah bless you all for helping me understand the issue. I know there must be many threads discussing this topic, and some of you have expressed your resultant exasperation and exhaustion of which I am sympathetic towards, so I am most grateful for all of your patience and delicacy in providing insightful replies.
Salaam,
Bilal
-
I think this person makes some good points about homosexuality.
http//www.texasislam.com/2012/10/homosexuality-in-islam.html
Apparently, there is punishment for same gender sex. Once again, I would stick to bi because I can't imagine Allah telling a woman in man's body to marry another woman.
-
Peace All.
Translate this summary from Qoran and you have your answer folks?
7029
7030
7031
GOD bless you all.
Peace. -
Greetings and Peace, all group
There is a simple explanation. Look at the word that is often translated as "spouse." It appears that "mate" or "pair" is a better translation, and these are gender neutral. Plants and livestock don't have spouses, and the same word root is used. The use of the word "their" in 7030 changes azwjan into azwjihim; the meaning is unchanged. A quick example
26 These are the ones guided by their Lord , and these are the successful ones.
Notice how the word rabbi is modified into rabbihim by the use of "their?" In this same way, azwjan is modified into azwjihim.
Also, based on 425, same-sex marriage is permitted because it is beyond what is prohibited; it is indeed possible for same-sex people to be married/spouses--so even ~if~ 7030 refers solely to spouses, it does not exclude homosexuals.
Peace All.
Translate this summary from Qoran and you have your answer folks?
7029
7030
7031
GOD bless you all.
Peace.425 And the independent from the women, except those maintained by your oaths; the book of GOD over you; and permitted for you is what is beyond this, if you are seeking with your money to be independent, not for illicit sex. As for those whom you have already had joy with, then you shall give them their dowries as an obligation. There is no sin upon you for what you agree on after the obligation. GOD is Knowledgeable, Wise.
6143 Eight in from the lambs two, and from the goats two. Say "Is it the two males that He forbade or the two females, or what the wombs of the two females bore? Inform me if you are truthful!"
2053 The One who made for you the earth habitable and He made ways for you in it, and He brought down water from the sky, so We brought out with it of vegetation of all types.
3511 And GOD created you from dust, then from a seed, then He made you into . And no female becomes pregnant, nor gives birth, without His knowledge. Nor does anyone have his life extended, or his life is shortened, except in a record. This is easy for GOD.
4211 Initiator of the heavens and the earth. He created for you from among yourselves , and also for the livestock so they may multiply. There is nothing that equals Him. He is the Hearer, the Seer.
7029 And those who keep covered their private parts.
7030 Except around or those maintained by their oaths, there is no blame.
7031 Whoever seeks anything beyond this, they are the transgressors.788 And We created you in ?
ALLAH knows best.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi