Hot/"ramadan" Answer

progod

Peace,

Ayman why do you refuse to get this?

If you map out the 29 G's involved in a sunset to sunset day and then include all of the sunrises connected to those sunsets, you get 30 Quranic/sunrise days. You need to add a T to the front of and the end of the following

G T G(1) T(1) G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G

Why? Because the first G of the Islamic/Judaic day is naturally inside of the Quranic day that started at sunrise and ends at the next sunrise being T G T and not G T. The last G of the Islamic/Judaic day also belongs inside of the Quranic day that began the sunrise before it, and ends on sunrise the next day. Hence you should have T G T at the end, not T G. Therefore you cannot take those two T's out and be honest with this issue.

So it shoud be T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T

And not what you have because, I will repeat, you are forgeting that the first G is inside of the first Quranic day that began at sunrise and the last G inside of the Quranic day that will end the following sunrise.

As for disgusting and me being hypocritical about offensive descriptives, I do find how you twisted my words in the last post disgusting. I also find these long and invetibale diatribes disgusting as well. I hate having to untwist my words with most of the responses to my posts here. But I don't find your conclusions disgusting. You were implying that my conclusions were arbitrary. If you deny that I will be skeptical, but I will be forced to forgive you. I think your choice of words was loaded. Like using the word tactic instead of strategy. So picking any 30 days within summer is not an arbitrary choice. Whereas the particular thirty days we pick to fast during the summer may be an artibtrary choice for us. There is a difference in these two phrasings (whether you believe me or not), and you were not making that clear. Let me state that again so you cannot try to say I'm contradicting myself because you didn't understand it. The Quranic command as I see it of picking any 30 days during the summer is not arbitrary, whereas the particular set of 30 days within the summer that we decide to pick is. If you understood that you were not making your understanding clear to me. Why am I having to clarify your use of words? You should be looking for where I may have misunderstood you and helping to forge an understanding not letting these misunderstandings stand and seeking to take advantage of them.

From your words here I can now assume that you do understand what I am saying
On the other hand, we are not told to fast any arbitrary 30 day period in summer (which could be up to 6 months in tropical areas) as long as we fast.

But you point out these six months as to make it seem too long a period. But what God says goes. So even if summer is 6 months, we can pick any 30 days during those 6 months to fast, whether that sits well with you or not is a personal issue. But up until now you have not proven that ramadan can't mean summer, nor have you proven that shahr cannot be 30 days. You have only been twisting my words, repeating my points with opportune ommisions or denying what I've been saying in order to give the impression that you've dsproven these ideas. Denying and misconstruing do not equal disproving.

And I wasn't saying that arbitrary means malicious. I never said that. I am saying that your generalizing this concpet as arbitrary was a malicious choice of words.

I find it funny that you expect ny ideas to go along with your expectations and conclusions (almost as a requisite for being correct) about the ban on hunting. When fasting and when in the months for pilgrimage we are not to hunt, simple as that. So whenever you chose to fast during the summer making sure you have a full 30 days to fast, you, yourself, and anyone fasting along with you are not to hunt. Along the same lines, we are not to hunt during the 3 months for pilgrimage where our local spring equinox falls in the middle of these 3 months so that the time of pilgrimage falls in both winter and spring per Surah Al-Quraysh. I know you have these ideas about the ban on hunting following general patterns in the animal world for mating, times of plenty and times of scant, but these are your ideas which you pull from modern (albeit ecologically sound) policies of hunting bans and permits, rather than the Quran. These ideas are not in the Quran but you are forcing them into the Quran because that's how you think it should be. I'll admit that these are good intentions but they are just not Quranic injunctions when it comes to the prohibition of hunting during the sacred/restricted months. And by the way if you know you are not to hunt but you send someone else to go out and hunt for you that is obvious dishonesty. Imagine living among Christians, pagans or Jews (and early Quranists in Mecca did) who do not follow our book and we tell them to go out and hunt for us when we are not allowed to hunt. Is that right? Obviously not. So I don't see how you can assume that something like that would ever be Quranically permissable by following my understanding of the sacred/restricted months and what our Quranic duties in them are. The only other possiblity that you are implying is that we absolutely ban hunting for everyone during these times of prohibition even if they are not observing the hurum and that we impose Quranic injunctions onto those who don't follow our book, which I am adamantly against.

I don't think God uses 3adad and 3iddah haphazardly, rather I think you are exaggerating the differences in the meaning and usage of these two words to justify your ideas. Especially since in the context of 936 this difference is irrelevant because the counting is God's, since he created the heavens and the earth, and not man's. The difference between "3adad and 3iddah is exactly equal to the difference between a count of something and a number of something. Whereas I recognize the miniscule difference between the two words, as many people here in the U.S. say, "It's the same difference."

n order for you to arrive at 30 days, you have to start from a dictionary definition of 31 days. This is indisputable. This entire discussion is also besides the point since your very basis of 30 days is founded on shaky grounds and you ignoring that A=B and A=C then B=C.

I've shown you above probably for the 3rd time that you do not have to start from 31 sunset days to arrive at 30 sunrise days. But because you omit from the proper mapping out of this and refuse to understand the logic behind it you keep getting the wrong answer. I explained it earlier in this post and I'm gonna revisit it one more time.

Once you have mapped out all of the sunsets involved in 29 sunset-days to get the correct conversion to sunrise-days you have to include ALL of the sunrises associated with those sunsets in terms of a Quranic day.
What does that mean? It means that if an Islamic/Judaic day starts with a sunset you have to incude the previoius sunrise. Why? Because that sunset is inside of a sunset day that already started.
Here it is (G= sunset and T = Sunrise) G T G(1) = Sunset to sunrise to sunset. That is one Islamic/Judaic day. But a Quranic/sunrise day is T G T = sunrise to sunset to sunrise. You cannot have a Quranic day without this equation, and as you see any sunset is already inside of a Quranic day that started at the previous sunrise.
So If you have a sunset day of G T G, that naturally transates into two sunrise days, i.e. T G T G T. Why? Because no sunset can stand alone in a Quranic day without already being apart of a sunrise-day that began the sunrise before. And the sunrise after that sunset officially ends that Quranic day. Get it?

So count it again T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T

See it now?

Godbless,
Anwar

ayman

Peace Anwar,

If you map out the 29 G's involved in a sunset to sunset day and then include all of the sunrises connected to those sunsets, you get 30 Quranic/sunrise days. You need to add a T to the front of and the end of the following
Why? Because the first G of the Islamic/Judaic day is naturally inside of the Quranic day that started at sunrise and ends at the next sunrise being T G T and not G T. The last G of the Islamic/Judaic day also belongs inside of the Quranic day that began the sunrise before it, and ends on sunrise the next day. Hence you should have T G T at the end, not T G. Therefore you cannot take those two T's out and be honest with this issue.
So it shoud be T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T
And not what you have because, I will repeat, you are forgeting that the first G is inside of the first Quranic day that began at sunrise and the last G inside of the Quranic day that will end the following sunrise.

This is not based on the dictionary. What I gave are the 29 dictionary days which contain 28 "quranic" days. What you did was extend the dictionary days. If you had no preconception of 30 days and you simply looked up the meaning in the dictionary, then you wouldn't get 30 and you would get 28 sunrise to sunrise days within the dictionary's 29 days based on your theory. It is useless to reason with you.

As for disgusting and me being hypocritical about offensive descriptives, I do find how you twisted my words in the last post disgusting. I also find these long and invetibale diatribes disgusting as well. I hate having to untwist my words with most of the responses to my posts here. But I don't find your conclusions disgusting. You were implying that my conclusions were arbitrary. If you deny that I will be skeptical, but I will be forced to forgive you. I think your choice of words was loaded. Like using the word tactic instead of strategy. So picking any 30 days within summer is not an arbitrary choice. Whereas the particular thirty days we pick to fast during the summer may be an artibtrary choice for us. There is a difference in these two phrasings (whether you believe me or not), and you were not making that clear. Let me state that again so you cannot try to say I'm contradicting myself because you didn't understand it. The Quranic command as I see it of picking any 30 days during the summer is not arbitrary, whereas the particular set of 30 days within the summer that we decide to pick is. If you understood that you were not making your understanding clear to me. Why am I having to clarify your use of words? You should be looking for where I may have misunderstood you and helping to forge an understanding not letting these misunderstandings stand and seeking to take advantage of them.

Yeah right. An arbitrary choice is not arbitrary.

From your words here I can now assume that you do understand what I am saying
But you point out these six months as to make it seem too long a period. But what God says goes.

The god doesn't say things without a reason. According to you the hunting restrictions have no purpose and effectively you have voided and annuled them.

So even if summer is 6 months, we can pick any 30 days during those 6 months to fast, whether that sits well with you or not is a personal issue. But up until now you have not proven that ramadan can't mean summer,

You are contradicting yourself again. The word "ramadan" can't mean "summer" even per your mangled understanding. In case you haven't noticed, summer is longer than 30 days.

nor have you proven that shahr cannot be 30 days.

It can't mean 30 days, unless you invent your own meaning for the word "shahr" as you are doing and failing miserably at it, I might add. On the other hand, I don't have to cling to straws like you to invent anything, the meaning of full-moon is right there in the dictionary and it fits all the contexts in the great reading.

You have only been twisting my words, repeating my points with opportune ommisions or denying what I've been saying in order to give the impression that you've dsproven these ideas. Denying and misconstruing do not equal disproving.

No, disproving equals disproving except of course to the one who is clinging to straws and being disproved you.

I find it funny that you expect ny ideas to go along with your expectations and conclusions (almost as a requisite for being correct) about the ban on hunting. When fasting and when in the months for pilgrimage we are not to hunt, simple as that.

Why? What is the purpose of the hunting restriction if according to you everyone can hunt whenever they want? They can delay their own personal hunting restriction if they feel like hunting this month. As I said, you have practically abrogated the hunting restriction.

So whenever you chose to fast during the summer making sure you have a full 30 days to fast, you, yourself, and anyone fasting along with you are not to hunt. Along the same lines, we are not to hunt during the 3 months for pilgrimage where our local spring equinox falls in the middle of these 3 months so that the time of pilgrimage falls in both winter and spring per Surah Al-Quraysh. I know you have these ideas about the ban on hunting following general patterns in the animal world for mating, times of plenty and times of scant, but these are your ideas which you pull from modern (albeit ecologically sound) policies of hunting bans and permits, rather than the Quran. These ideas are not in the Quran but you are forcing them into the Quran because that's how you think it should be. I'll admit that these are good intentions but they are just not Quranic injunctions when it comes to the prohibition of hunting during the sacred/restricted months. And by the way if you know you are not to hunt but you send someone else to go out and hunt for you that is obvious dishonesty. Imagine living among Christians, pagans or Jews (and early Quranists in Mecca did) who do not follow our book and we tell them to go out and hunt for us when we are not allowed to hunt. Is that right? Obviously not. So I don't see how you can assume that something like that would ever be Quranically permissable by following my understanding of the sacred/restricted months and what our Quranic duties in them are. The only other possiblity that you are implying is that we absolutely ban hunting for everyone during these times of prohibition even if they are not observing the hurum and that we impose Quranic injunctions onto those who don't follow our book, which I am adamantly against.

Yes, if you really have faith in what the god is telling you then we absolutely should ban hunting for everyone during the restriction period, in the same way that stealing and killing is banned on everyone.

Do you go hunting deer in rural PA outside of the hunting season and you tell the park rangers "I am a follower of Anwar's interpretation of the book and therefore you can't impose your hunting restrictions on me"?!!

I don't think God uses 3adad and 3iddah haphazardly, rather I think you are exaggerating the differences in the meaning and usage of these two words to justify your ideas.

At least there is a difference and I am not making up completely baseless meanings and then working backwards to find any straw to hang to.

Peace,

Ayman

truthseeker11

Peace everyone,

After the latest posts and clarifications by Anwar, following are the 10 holes in his defective logic about this issue

10 REASONS "SHAHR" CANNOT BE "30 DAY MONTH"

1 - 936 uses the word "3iddat"/count and not "3adad"/number. It makes a big difference contrary to what Anwar keeps saying. If it had said "3adad"/number, then the number of "30 day months" in a solar year can be 12 but the "3iddat"/count of "30 day months" in a solar year is 12 and 1/6 and not 12, and would thus contradict al-quran. Anyone with an understanding of basic mathematics knows that a time period can be counted in fractions, and that there is a difference in count of something versus number of something. God did not say "there are 12 shuhoor", but says "the count of shuhoor is 12".

2 - There is no DIRECT COMPENSATION for fasting anywhere in al-quran except in 2184, so 583-4 or 589 cannot be used as reference to deduce something pertaining to compensation for fasting, or the meaning of "shahr".

3 - When different alternative compensations are stated for a certain negative behavior, all the alternate compensations are EQUIVALENT, and the order of mentioning them does not matter. 583-4 talks about compensation for estranging one's wife, and the different compensations are all equivalent, no matter what the order. 589 talks about compensation for breaking oath, and the different compensations are all equivalent, no matter what the order. If A=B, and B=C, then A=C, and C=A, and C=B, and B=A. According to 589, the ratio of fasting to feeding the poor is 13.33. Using this ratio, 60 people would equal 18 days, which would make 2 shahr equal 18 days and each shahr equal 9 days ! Because there is a discrepancy in the ratio of fasting to feeding people obtained from 583-4 and 589, neither can be used to define the meaning of "shahr".

4 - No Classical Arabic Dictionary defines "shahr" as "month always containing 30 days". 29 sunset to sunset days can never be equated to 30 sunrise to sunrise days, but can be equivalent to 29 sunrise to sunrise days, or can contain 28 sunrise to sunrise days. This logic of 29 sunset to sunset days being equated to 30 sunrise to sunrise days is the most absurd and ridiculous argument I have ever heard in my life, and cannot possibly fool any educated person even with elementary knowledge of counting.

Where in al-quran it says that a day is sunrise to sunrise? It could be sunset to sunset, as sunset has been mentioned in the context of timing of salat, but cannot possibly be sunrise to sunrise.

5 - Arbitrary starting time of four 30 day months will abrogate the hunting restriction commanded in al-quran. If everyone can arbitrarily determine their own starting time for the 30 day period during summer, and also arbitrarily determine their own starting time for the four restricted 30 day periods over a 9 month period, then it is a fact that hunting animals will continue at all times by some people, and therefore there will be no practical hunting restriction at all. This would abrogate the hunting restriction according to al-quran, and is mockery of God's signs at the highest level.

6 - Why can a menstruating woman wait for 56 days but a menopausal woman whose menopause is doubtful has to wait 90 days? The meaning of "month of 30 days" in 654 would result in a major inconsistency in al-quran, because then the minimum waiting period for menstruating women would be the time period between 3 menstruations or approximately 56 days but the waiting period for menopausal women would be 90 days.

7 - All 30 days have to be witnessed in order to witness a month of 30 days. No one can witness a month of 30 days just on seeing the first day. The only way to fulfil 2185 will be to witness all the 30 days first and then start fasting, but then how long do we fast? If we start fasting during that 30 day month, then we are violating the command to witness it first. Hence it is impossible to witness the 30 day month before fasting AND fast during it.

8 - 2185 tells us to fast it and not fast in it. How can a person fast for 30 days non-stop? The usage of "fast it" obviously implies that "it" is an event/marker, and not the time period for fasting.

9 - It is a ridiculous redundancy to say "complete the count" after saying "whoever among you witnesses the month of 30 days then fast it" (meaning fast for 30 days). There is no clarification needed to complete the count if it is already stated to fast for 30 days.

10 - 2185 mentions DESCENT of al-quran, and not repetition or compilation. Where in al-quran does it say that it was repetitively descended each day for 30 days? 443 and 971 clearly tell us that the descent was in a single night.

ayman

Peace Truthseeker,

10 REASONS "SHAHR" CANNOT BE "30 DAY MONTH"

There are many more than ten. For example, we are told that the crescents are used as timing devices for the people and for the feast ("hajj&quot. Anwar completely ignores the moon cycle. He has also not said exactly when his solar year would start. The start of his solar year would determine when the 30 day periods would occur. So this is another arbitrary factor since he doesn't precisely specify it. Also, the feast/"hajj" is said in the great reading to be in KNOWN "ashhur". By making those "ashhur" up to each person, they become unknown because we can't read people's minds. etc. etc.

At this stage, I don't think that we can convince Anwar of anything. However, if he is serious about finding the correct timing of the restriction and the fast, then he should try to at least figure out a timing that wouldn't abrogate the restriction. Because fasting a random month is one thing but violating the god's restrictions is unacceptable and has specific legal consequences (see 595). A not well known arbitrary restriction period that is left up to each person's desires would make a mockery out of the god's law.

Peace,

Ayman

truthseeker11

Peace Ayman,

Thanks for drawing attention to the additional reasons. I should have titled it "at least 10 reasons"!

Another point came to my mind while I was pondering over 973. Why would God compare a night with "months"? It would be more consistent and make more sense to compare a night (which contained the scorching full-moon - 2185) with 1000 full-moons, rather than 1000 "months".

unknownuser

Peace all -- to clear up a few miss truths...

1 - 936 uses the word "3iddat"/count and not "3adad"/number. It makes a big difference contrary to what Anwar keeps saying. If it had said "3adad"/number, then the number of "30 day months" in a solar year can be 12 but the "3iddat"/count of "30 day months" in a solar year is 12 and 1/6 and not 12, and would thus contradict al-quran. Anyone with an understanding of basic mathematics knows that a time period can be counted in fractions, and that there is a difference in count of something versus number of something. God did not say "there are 12 shuhoor", but says "the count of shuhoor is 12".

count -- to assign a number, to enumerate.

time -- an agreed upon standard; an hour, a day, a month, a year, etc...

2217 They ask you about the full moon the restricted...

ONE full moon? How much time is that exactly?

There is NO such thing as a FULL MOON unit of time and never was in the history of the world.

Fast 2 full moons is meaningless; if want to translate it as the time between 2 full moons or 1 month then do so.

6 - Why can a menstruating woman wait for 56 days but a menopausal woman whose menopause is doubtful has to wait 90 days? The meaning of "month of 30 days" in 654 would result in a major inconsistency in al-quran, because then the minimum waiting period for menstruating women would be the time period between 3 menstruations or approximately 56 days but the waiting period for menopausal women would be 90 days.

Get the full moon out of your head; women's menses have NOTHING to do with it.

menstruating women wait 3 cycles which can vary from weeks to 90 days or longer
menopausal and non menstruating women wait 3 months
widows (menstruating or not) wait 4 months and 10 days regardless

The above are all different categories and therefore different -- there is NO contradiction except when using full moon.

8 - 2185 tells us to fast it and not fast in it. How can a person fast for 30 days non-stop?

Read the rest of the book.

Now tell us how you fast it "a full moon" which occurs for a minute?

Another point came to my mind while I was pondering over 973. Why would God compare a night with "months"? It would be more consistent and make more sense to compare a night (which contained the scorching full-moon - 2185) with 1000 full-moons, rather than 1000 "months".

Yeah to you; what's the difference between 1000 months and 999 months (1000 full moons) -- 1 month right?

Also, how do you know that particular scorching full moon happened in the night; what if it was during the day?

http//www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/astronomy.html?n=151&month=7&year=2009&obj=moon&afl=-11&day=1

Moonrise, Moonset and Moonphase for Saudi Arabia ? Makkah ?

Jul 2, 2004 Full at 209 PM
Jun 22, 2005 Full at 714 AM
Jul 11, 2006 Full at 602 AM
Jun 30, 2007 Full at 449 PM
Jul 18, 2008 Full at 1059 AM
Jul 7, 2009 Full at 1222 PM
Jun 26, 2010 Full at 231 PM
Jul 15, 2011 Full at 940 AM

Full moon shortchanges every commandment by a month; a serious mistake and Ayman said so will be no excuse.

Peace

ayman

Peace Nun,

count -- to assign a number, to enumerate.

No it is not to assign a number. You are repeating Khalifa's false idea. It is to enumerate. It involves an act of counting, not arbitarily assigning a certain number.

time -- an agreed upon standard; an hour, a day, a month, a year, etc...
2217 They ask you about the full moon the restricted...
ONE full moon? How much time is that exactly?
There is NO such thing as a FULL MOON unit of time and never was in the history of the world.

The restricted full moon signals the begining of the restriction period. Read the rest of the great reading, we have to count four restricted full moons (out of the 12 in a year) to know the restriction period.

Fast 2 full moons is meaningless; if want to translate it as the time between 2 full moons or 1 month then do so.

Fasting two full moons is like waiting the time between two menstruations. You fast between the two full-moons in the same way that a woman would wait between two menstruations and doesn't get married in between. This is why full-moon is used to substitute for menstruations, the way we count them is the same.

Get the full moon out of your head; women's menses have NOTHING to do with it.

menstruating women wait 3 cycles which can vary from weeks to 90 days or longer

Yes.

menopausal and non menstruating women wait 3 months

No menopausal and non menstruating women who have despaired from menstruation completely wait ZERO time. They wait for 3 full-moons only on the rare occasion when you (not they) are suspicious. You are still unable to read 654.

widows (menstruating or not) wait 4 months and 10 days regardless

It is four full moons and ten days. The extra ten days is the time for the full-moon to reach the crescent stage again. This allows the crescent to be used for timing as per 2189. You on the other hand, don't use the crescent to time anything.

Now tell us how you fast it "a full moon" which occurs for a minute?

This is why we are told to complete the count of "a few days". It is the same way if I told you to fast "now" for ten days. "Now" is less than a second.

Yeah to you; what's the difference between 1000 months and 999 months (1000 full moons) -- 1 month right?

Even 10000000 months spent in the darkness of ignorance is not better than one night of enlightnment.

Also, how do you know that particular scorching full moon happened in the night; what if it was during the day?
http//www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/astronomy.html?n=151&month=7&year=2009&obj=moon&afl=-11&day=1
Moonrise, Moonset and Moonphase for Saudi Arabia ? Makkah ?
Jul 2, 2004 Full at 209 PM
Jun 22, 2005 Full at 714 AM
Jul 11, 2006 Full at 602 AM
Jun 30, 2007 Full at 449 PM
Jul 18, 2008 Full at 1059 AM
Jul 7, 2009 Full at 1222 PM
Jun 26, 2010 Full at 231 PM
Jul 15, 2011 Full at 940 AM

The scorching full-moon doesn't appear red except when it rises above the horizon after sunset. The "red moon" is an optical phenomenon, it is not just about the moon being full. It is about it also rising over the horizon and taking the lowest path which makes it appear more red than any other full-moon.

Full moon shortchanges every commandment by a month; a serious mistake and Ayman said so will be no excuse.

When you know what "month" means and when your arbitrary "month" starts then we can talk. Otherwise, it is useless to argue with someone who follows an arbitrary traditional calendar where all that his arbitrary Ramadan is based on is when arbitrary Shaaban occured and who is absolutely clueless about when the restriction period is and yet dares to accuse others of violating commandements.

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM

If you map out the 29 G's involved in a sunset to sunset day and then include all of the sunrises connected to those sunsets, you get 30 Quranic/sunrise days. You need to add a T to the front of and the end of the following
Why? Because the first G of the Islamic/Judaic day is naturally inside of the Quranic day that started at sunrise and ends at the next sunrise being T G T and not G T. The last G of the Islamic/Judaic day also belongs inside of the Quranic day that began the sunrise before it, and ends on sunrise the next day. Hence you should have T G T at the end, not T G. Therefore you cannot take those two T's out and be honest with this issue.
So it shoud be T G T(1) G(1) T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T G T
And not what you have because, I will repeat, you are forgeting that the first G is inside of the first Quranic day that began at sunrise and the last G inside of the Quranic day that will end the following sunrise.

This is not based on the dictionary. What I gave are the 29 dictionary days which contain 28 "quranic" days. What you did was extend the dictionary days. If you had no preconception of 30 days and you simply looked up the meaning in the dictionary, then you wouldn't get 30 and you would get 28 sunrise to sunrise days within the dictionary's 29 days based on your theory. It is useless to reason with you.

Ayman, it is clear as day and all you can do is deny it. Fine, I explained it well enough for anyone to understand that this can also be understood by the dictionary. Accept if you will or deny if you will.

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
From your words here I can now assume that you do understand what I am saying
But you point out these six months as to make it seem too long a period. But what God says goes.

The god doesn't say things without a reason. According to you the hunting restrictions have no purpose and effectively you have voided and annuled them.

You mean to say that God doesn't say things without your line of reasoing. I have voided and annulled nothing in the book. I am only complying with it. Our restrictions on hunting are personal during Ramadan, and only for our community during the 3 month period where the spring equinox falls in the middle of them. No arbitrariness. And we can never impose our beliefs on others. What you are proposing is like imposing the Shariah on non-Muslims. And how can you compare hunting restrictions to murder? Will you stop at nothing to justify your personal agenda? Do you also think that the pilgrimage is an obligation for all mankind that must be enforced as well? This is dangerous and completely unquranic. Laa ikraaha fee deeni. Don't ever forget that.

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
So even if summer is 6 months, we can pick any 30 days during those 6 months to fast, whether that sits well with you or not is a personal issue. But up until now you have not proven that ramadan can't mean summer,

You are contradicting yourself again. The word "ramadan" can't mean "summer" even per your mangled understanding. In case you haven't noticed, summer is longer than 30 days.

Right right. Ramadan = constant/intense heat. A time of constant/intense heat is a perfect equivalent to the natural phenomenon of summer. If you think that is a mangled understanding, well that is on you. And of course I have noticed that summer is longer than 30 days. Have you noticed that I've been saying for the past 5 + posts that we can chose 30 days DURING summer to fast? Remember, you called it arbitrary. And now you are acting like you don't understand the concept again. Wow, is all I have to say.

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
nor have you proven that shahr cannot be 30 days.

It can't mean 30 days, unless you invent your own meaning for the word "shahr" as you are doing and failing miserably at it, I might add. On the other hand, I don't have to cling to straws like you to invent anything, the meaning of full-moon is right there in the dictionary and it fits all the contexts in the great reading.

All it seems you can do to discuss your opinions is use strong language and try to bash me. These low blow tactics are nothing but vitriol. How can you say this meaning fits in all contexts of the Quran when you are having trouble explaining how God has created 13 full moons in a year, yet he has only counted 12 of them since the beginning of the heavens and the earth. You have not even addressed this issue. You just focus on the miniscule difference between 3adad and 3iddat, and still totally avoid that when we look at 3iddah as the act of counting in 936, why has God only been counting 12 full moons since he created the heavens and the earth, when he made 13 of them?

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
You have only been twisting my words, repeating my points with opportune ommisions or denying what I've been saying in order to give the impression that you've dsproven these ideas. Denying and misconstruing do not equal disproving.

No, disproving equals disproving except of course to the one who is clinging to straws and being disproved you.

These are empty words, Ayman. Why did you waste your time writing this?

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
I find it funny that you expect ny ideas to go along with your expectations and conclusions (almost as a requisite for being correct) about the ban on hunting. When fasting and when in the months for pilgrimage we are not to hunt, simple as that.

Why? What is the purpose of the hunting restriction if according to you everyone can hunt whenever they want? They can delay their own personal hunting restriction if they feel like hunting this month. As I said, you have practically abrogated the hunting restriction.

You keep saying I abrogated the hunting restriction, when the only thing I've abrogated is your understanding of it.

Yes, if you really have faith in what the god is telling you then we absolutely should ban hunting for everyone during the restriction period, in the same way that stealing and killing is banned on everyone.

Again this has dangerous and very unquranic implications. All I have to say is Laa ikraaha fee deeni.

Do you go hunting deer in rural PA outside of the hunting season and you tell the park rangers "I am a follower of Anwar's interpretation of the book and therefore you can't impose your hunting restrictions on me"?!!

What the heck do the man made laws of PA have to do with anything? We are talking about God's words not man made laws and restrictions. These man made hunting restrictions in actuality are changed from time to time as different environmental factors play on animal populations. Again these are man-made laws why are you trying to put man made laws into the Quran?

Quote from progod on Yesterday at 042814 AM
I don't think God uses 3adad and 3iddah haphazardly, rather I think you are exaggerating the differences in the meaning and usage of these two words to justify your ideas.

At least there is a difference and I am not making up completely baseless meanings and then working backwards to find any straw to hang to.

And neither am I, although you would love for others to think so. The Quran implies that a shahr in its context is 30 days. The dictionary defintion of 29 Islamic days when seen as Quranic days equals 30 days, and there are other Old Arabic sources which also imply these 30 days. So I didn't make this up, and the Quran does confirm this meaning. The problem with you and others as it concerns the Quranic implication is that you guys think the Quran is one big mathematical equation, and it is not. We can only take the passages that offer compensation for fasting into consideration when seeing this implication of a 30 day shahr. It is not an if A =B and B = C than A = C situation. Because this is more like a bartering that is going on between actions. In this bartering a daily fast can always be bartered for feeding 1 person, whereas feeding a person cannot be bartered for one daily fast. Obviously God doesn't accept the reverse of this. For instance the Quran says in the passage under discussion that we can either feed or clothe 10 people. But is clothing the same as feeding? Which do you think a person who needs food and clothing would need more in the moment? Food or clothes? And that is the point. We can't look at actions as if they were integers. It just doesn't work like that. Whether you want to understand that or not is your prerogative. But the fact that a daily fast can be bartered through feeding one person (chpt. 2) and we also see in the Quran that 2 shahr can be bartered through feeding 60, makes the conclusion more than obvious. Again, in every other passage that would seem to go against this, fasting cannot be bartered for anything. It is the very last option.

Also you still have not even addressed (and probably won't address) the real issue of 936 which is the fact that according to your preference for shahr God has been counting 12 full moons instead of the 13 that he created since he created the heavens and the earth. Don't you see the problem there?

As always . . .

sun Godbless,
Anwar

I think this conversation is starting to wind down. If it is, thank God. This useless back and forth is time consumnig and tiring. I hope someone is benefitting from it.

truthseeker11

Peace Nun, eveyone,

I would just like to make a few comments, in addition to what has already been said by Ayman

Also, how do you know that particular scorching full moon happened in the night; what if it was during the day?

I know it happened during the night because God says so and I have faith in al-quran, don't you?

443 We have sent it down in a blessed night. Surely, We were to warn.
971 We have sent it down in the night of decree.

2185 The shahr/full-moon of scorching heat, in which the Qur?an was sent down.

Combine 443 and 971 with 2185 and it becomes clear that the scorching full-moon when al-quran was descended occurred during night.

Now tell us how you fast it "a full moon" which occurs for a minute?

The wording "fast it" makes it clear that God is treating "shahr ramadhan" as a marker/event and not a time period. This marker/event has to be witnessed first and marks the onset of the fasting period. He then goes on to tell us how to fast it, by fasting from start of dawn to sunset, and then He tells us to complete the count, i.e. do the same for 10 days.

If "shahr" means "month", then 2185 tells us to witness a month first and then to fast it. According to this wording, "month" has to be considered a marker/event to be witnessed first, and the fasting will start after the month has been witnessed. The fasting could not be during the month, because if that was meant, the wording would be "when the month starts, fast in it". How can we fast during a month when we have not even witnessed it first? Therefore, the fasting would be after the shahr and not during it.

Understanding "shahr" as "month" would imply that we have to witness the whole month first by witnessing all days of an arbitrary time period, and use the whole month as a marker to signal the onset of fasting, and then fasting will start after the month. The problem is that when we consider "month" as a marker (it cannot be a time period for fasting because it does not say "fast in it&quot, then what does a "month" mean according to al-quran and when exactly does the month start according to al-quran?

Shahr cannot be "month of 30 days" because of all the reasons already given in my previous post. I know that any educated person cannot agree with the nonsense that 29 sunset to sunset days are equivalent to 30 sunrise to sunrise days, because that is an obvious addition of one whole day. In addition to that, not once in his lengthy posts has Anwar told us how a day is sunrise to sunrise according to al-quran. That does not matter anyway because 29 sunset to sunset days can only be equivalent to 29 sunrise to sunrise days, or can contain 28 sunrise to sunrise days.

If we read Anwar's post above, he himself admits that

We can't look at actions as if they were integers. It just doesn't work like that.

He then contradicts himself by trying to equate two actions by treating them like integers to fudge up a definition of shahr as "month of 30 days". This despite the fact that direct compensation for fasting has been mentioned only once in al-quran in 2184. 583-4 is about compensations for estranging one's wife and 589 is about compensations for breaking oath. The alternative compensations given in these two places are equivalent for each case, and the order in which the compensations are mentioned makes no difference because they are all equivalent. This results in different ratios of fasting to feeding people from the two verses, which shows that there is no fixed formula in al-quran to determine that ratio.

He then arbitrarily starts the first restricted 30 day month at any time during the summer, and arbitrarily starts the remaining three restricted 30 day months at any time in a 9 month period. This makes the time of hunting restrictions completely arbitrary and up to the whims and desires of the people, thus making a mockery of God's commands at the highest level. He also rejects 92 which indicates that the four restricted shuhoor are consecutive, and not arbitrarily determined any time we wish.

Shahr cannot be a "lunar month" also because of all the contradictions and inconsistencies created in al-quran by this understanding.

It can only be "full-moon", and this meaning fits perfectly in every usage of the word "shahr" in al-quran and does not create any contradictions and inconsistencies.

progod

Peace,

Shahr cannot be "month of 30 days" because of all the reasons already given in my previous post. I know that any educated person cannot agree with the nonsense that 29 sunset to sunset days are equivalent to 30 sunrise to sunrise days, because that is an obvious addition of one whole day. In addition to that, not once in his lengthy posts has Anwar told us how a day is sunrise to sunrise according to al-quran. That does not matter anyway because 29 sunset to sunset days can only be equivalent to 29 sunrise to sunrise days, or can contain 28 sunrise to sunrise days.

You only think this because you refuse to see the logic of this, and i've explained enough times not to have to explain it again. Atleast you finally posted the only valid question to my conclusion which I challenged you and Ayman to ask a long time ago. And that is how a day is Quranically from sunrise to sunrise. Ayman didn't mention it because he agrees with this definition as well.

If we read Anwar's post above, he himself admits that

Quote from progod
We can't look at actions as if they were integers. It just doesn't work like that.

He then contradicts himself by trying to equate two actions by treating them like integers to fudge up a definition of shahr as "month of 30 days". This despite the fact that direct compensation for fasting has been mentioned only once in al-quran in 2184. 583-4 is about compensations for estranging one's wife and 589 is about compensations for breaking oath. The alternative compensations given in these two places are equivalent for each case, and the order in which the compensations are mentioned makes no difference because they are all equivalent. This results in different ratios of fasting to feeding people from the two verses, which shows that there is no fixed formula in al-quran to determine that ratio.

Here again you refuse to understand that despite the original reason for fasting everytime in the Quran that fasting can be substituted/compensated it always equals feeding 1 person per daily fast missed. You continue to ignore this fact, and we can't look at actions in the Quran and their compensations like mathematical equations flipping values on either side of an equal sign. But we do have a consistent bartering rule in the quran where missing a fast can be compensated by feeding a person and that leads us to see that two shahr of fasting is equal to 60 days worth of fasting. But that is on you if yo don't want to see that.

He then arbitrarily starts the first restricted 30 day month at any time during the summer, and arbitrarily starts the remaining three restricted 30 day months at any time in a 9 month period. This makes the time of hunting restrictions completely arbitrary and up to the whims and desires of the people, thus making a mockery of God's commands at the highest level. He also rejects 92 which indicates that the four restricted shuhoor are consecutive, and not arbitrarily determined any time we wish.

Buzz words again. Arbitrary, Arbitrary, Arbitrary. Get it all out. Anyway the point of Ramadan is accurate, despite your negative choice of words. The other 3 months are not arbitrary and you refuse to address the fact that they are not any time during a 9 month period. They are 90 days where the spring equiniox splits these days in equal parts, hence falling in both winter and spring per surah Al-Quraysh.

Shahr cannot be a "lunar month" also because of all the contradictions and inconsistencies created in al-quran by this understanding.

Shahr can be a lunar month. But we are talking about in the context of the Quran and I don't see any inconsistencies for this meaning in the Quran. The only inconsistency is in accuracy of the lunar year itself.

It can only be "full-moon", and this meaning fits perfectly in every usage of the word "shahr" in al-quran and does not create any contradictions and inconsistencies.

It can be more than full moon. But full moon does not fit into every usage of the Quran. That is under discussion now with other members on this forum. And it doesn't seem to be holding ground.

sun Godbless,
Anwar

Umm_Tariq

Peace everyone,

For all of the bystanders just taking this debate in, I personally see the argument for 'full moon' to be clear, consistent, simple, no need for fancy calculations and you all who support it have presented the case clearly, thoroughly and fully. I don't see that there is much more that can be said as evidence after taking the one definition of 'full moon' and applying it in ALL of the verses and related topics and everything agrees with itself, CONSISTENCY. If one does check every verse that uses 'shahr' and understands 'full moon' as the meaning, it fits in ALL of the verses. Anyone just coming in without any biased leaning towards 'month' and they just want the god's words with no additions nor subtractions, the case is clear for 'full moon' without having to ignore any issue nor using fancy long arguments that don't actually answer the issues of contradiction.

The one verse I questioned how to understand it pertaining to the wind of Sulaiman (3412), no one has answered but that doesn't prove that full moon doesn't fit the context either. When one uses 'month' as the meaning, they have to insert the word 'journey' in the verse and the god knows the word for journey but HE didn't include it so those people need to fear the god.

Here are the verses using shahr and it's plural in which ones does the meaning 'full moon' not fit?

2184, 194, 217 52, 97 936 3412 4615 973 597 shahr

492 584 shahrain (dual)

2197, 226, 234 95, 36 654 92 (plural)

Overall, debates like these are beneficial and healthy for those searching for the truth.

Umm Tariq

progod

Accoding to 936 has God been counting 12 full moons instead of the 13 that he created since he created the heavens and the earth. Don't you see the problem there?

I want to note that this question is not an invitation to attack my conclusions on the issue. So if you feel tempted, resist. It will be obvious that you are just looking for a fight. I just want to see the logic that deals with the problem exemplified in the above question when we see shahr as full moon in the Quran's context.

sun Godbless,
Anwar

progod

Peace,

I also want to clarify

I got this online

A Full Moon occurs when the Moon is 100% illuminated, as seen from Earth. This happens each month when the Sun and Moon are exactly opposite each other in the sky. In other words, when the Moon is 180 degrees away from the Sun. Having stated that, you could say that a Full Moon only lasts for a minute because the Moon is constantly revolving around the Earth and just BEFORE it reaches that special point in its orbit - 180 degrees away from the Sun - it is 179.99 degrees away from the Sun and at that point it is not, technically speaking, 100% illuminated. Instead, it is 99.9999999% illuminated. If you want to be a stickler for details, that is not 100% illuminated and therefore it is not a Full Moon. Also, just moments AFTER the Moon reaches that special point in its orbit - 180 degrees away from the Sun - it is 180.01 degrees away from the Sun and at that point, once again, it is not, technically speaking, 100% illuminated. Instead, it is 99.9999999% illuminated.

It is not possible to discern the difference between a Moon that is 100% illuminated and one that is 99.9999999% illuminated. So, we would say that it is a Full Moon in both situations. However, there does come a point when an observer will notice that the Moon is not quite 100% illuminated. This point is different for different observers and is probably largely dependent on how much experience you have observing the Moon and how carefully you make your observations. I would like to think that most people would notice that when the Moon is 95% illuminated it no longer appears perfectly round and so it is no longer a Full Moon.

So, with this in mind, you may be interested to know how long it takes for the Moon to go from being 95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) to 100% illuminated (Full Moon) to 95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous). I will state times and dates for an observer located in Toronto and will use the most recent Full Moon as an example.

95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) 15 Jul 2008 90000 PM (EDT)

100% illuminated (Full Moon) 18 Jul 2008 40000 AM (EDT)

95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous) 20 Jul 2008 100000 AM (EDT)

So, as you can see, it took 109 hours for the Moon to go from 95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) to 100% illuminated (Full Moon) to 95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous). Therefore, it would appear that we had a Full Moon on the nights of July 15/16, July 16/17, July 17/18, July 18/19, and July 19/20. That's five nights in a row! Although, the actual Full Moon occurred on the night of July 17/18, and to be more specific, it occurred at exactly 359 AM (EDT) on July 18.

So according to Ayman's theory when we site the full moon of Ramadan we fast all of the days following 95 percent illumination waxing to 95 percent illumination waning. I assume predertermiend calendars can be used for thse caculations on cloudy days, and there is pobably leeway for people to witness a full moon from their own perspective.

I still have an issue with Ramadan as red. But I want to clarify this above point in the theory. Thanks.

sun Godbless,
Anwar

unknownuser

Peace everyone,

Here are the verses using shahr and it's plural in which ones does the meaning 'full moon' not fit?

2184, 194, 217 52, 97 936 3412 4615 973 597 shahr

492 584 shahrain (dual)

2197, 226, 234 95, 36 654 92 (plural)

ALL of them! They are not nonsensical.

Today is Oct 7. Take verses below and apply in real life...

A man dies -- exactly how many days does his wife wait? (2234)

A man divorces his wife (he is suspicious) exactly how many days does she wait? (654)

A man accidently kills another believer -- exactly how many days must he fast? (492)

A man vows not to have sex with his wife -- exactly how many days must he wait? (2226)

Now apply the same events above a week later on Oct 14 which is a full moon date.

Then apply again a day later on Oct 15.

Please provide exact number of days so we can see how consistent and clear your interpretation is.

Thanks.

ayman

Peace Nun,

All of this has been addressed over and over again on this thread. If you have something of value to say then say it instead of repeating your mindless arguments. The only way for you to add value is to propose an alternative understanding of the timing and then compare side by side your proposed timing with others such as Anwar's and mine. When Anwar did this (after I had to put it for him in bold) it became immediately clear which timing is more in line with the great reading and reflects a better understanding. So either put out an alternative better understanding of the whole timing issue or if you are happy to stay with having no understanding then you are really in no position to criticise anything.

Peace,

Ayman

unknownuser

Peace Ayman,

A typical non answer to a simple question applied in real life.

You know all your timings will be different/inconsistent and depend on the date of the event.

At least answer the case of the event happening on Oct 14, 2008 or on day of a full moon...

A man dies -- exactly how many days does his wife wait? (2234)

A man divorces his wife (he is suspicious) exactly how many days does she wait? (654)

A man accidentally kills another believer -- exactly how many days must he fast? (492)

A man vows not to have sex with his wife -- exactly how many days must he wait? (2226)

Tell your followers HOW MANY DAYS so they know exactly what to do.

Peace

ayman

Peace Nun,

A typical non answer to a simple question applied in real life.
You know all your timings will be different/inconsistent and depend on the date of the event.

At least we know them while you don't know anything and this is why you are mindlessly criticizing and all your arguments are essentially fallacious arguments from ignorance. Again, if you disagree and think that you have any understanding then please tell everyone what your understanding of the timing is.

At least answer the case of the event happening on Oct 14, 2008 or on day of a full moon...

A man dies -- exactly how many days does his wife wait? (2234)
A man divorces his wife (he is suspicious) exactly how many days does she wait? (654)
A man accidentally kills another believer -- exactly how many days must he fast? (492)
A man vows not to have sex with his wife -- exactly how many days must he wait? (2226)
Tell your followers HOW MANY DAYS so they know exactly what to do.

This has already been answered many times on this thread. So first you answer

A man divorces his wife exactly how many days does she wait? (222

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Ayman instead of wasting your time by talking trash, please answer our questions clearly and without attitude. That would be the best way to shut us up. If what you say is true than you should be glad to repeat these same things over and over again until we get it. My advice is that after you repeat it forus here, you just copy and paste the response again if we're too bone-headed to get it. Thanks.

Peace Nun,

All of this has been addressed over and over again on this thread. If you have something of value to say then say it instead of repeating your mindless arguments. The only way for you to add value is to propose an alternative understanding of the timing and then compare side by side your proposed timing with others such as Anwar's and mine. When Anwar did this (after I had to put it for him in bold) it became immediately clear which timing is more in line with the great reading and reflects a better understanding. So either put out an alternative better understanding of the whole timing issue or if you are happy to stay with having no understanding then you are really in no position to criticise anything.

Peace,

Ayman

Godbless,
Anwar

ayman

Peace Anwar, Nun, and everyone,

Anwar, how come you have never criticized on this thread the people here who are dogmatically pushing the traditional understanding or lack of understanding as in the case of Nun?

By the same token, Nun, why haven?t you criticized Anwar?s arbitrary 30 days in the summer timing of the fast and arbitrary four 30 days restriction period in summer, spring and winter?

As we can see on this thread, it is the best available understanding that is most menacing to dogmatic miscreants like those we have seen here pushing the traditional understanding or those with no understanding or those with arbitrary understanding. Therefore, they ignore each other because they don?t really take each other seriously and instead they throw their logical fallacies ad nauseam at the understanding that has real merit and thus poses real threat to their dogma. On the other hand, the best understanding has taken on and shattered ALL existing understandings. So thanks guys.

Peace,

Ayman

progod

Peace,

Unfortunately that was not an answer to Nun's questions or to mine. Saying that your understanding is the best and how come we don't criticize others is not exactly an answer to our questions. Did we ask you if your opinion was the best? No. Did we ask about others' traditional/dogmatic opinions here? Couldn't I claim the same thing about your fierce criticsim of my conclusions? I believe my questions are more fitting Quranically than yours, but that is not the point. So please don't try to turn that into an argument. I'm not criticizing your conclusion here or comparing them to mine, I just want some clarification. It hoenstly seems like you are trying to avoid our questons on purpose. Why? Because this is the second time we've asked you these straight up questions with no criticism at all of your conclusions. So please answer our questions. I'll quote them below. In your next reply I hope to see some straight up no nonsense answers to these specific questions.

Nun's question which she summarized for you

At least answer the case of the event happening on Oct 14, 2008 or on day of a full moon...

A man dies -- exactly how many days does his wife wait? (2234)

A man divorces his wife (he is suspicious) exactly how many days does she wait? (654)

A man accidentally kills another believer -- exactly how many days must he fast? (492)

A man vows not to have sex with his wife -- exactly how many days must he wait? (2226)

Tell your followers HOW MANY DAYS so they know exactly what to do.

Peace

My first inquiry

Peace,

I got this online (online info is in italics)

A Full Moon occurs when the Moon is 100% illuminated, as seen from Earth. This happens each month when the Sun and Moon are exactly opposite each other in the sky. In other words, when the Moon is 180 degrees away from the Sun. Having stated that, you could say that a Full Moon only lasts for a minute because the Moon is constantly revolving around the Earth and just BEFORE it reaches that special point in its orbit - 180 degrees away from the Sun - it is 179.99 degrees away from the Sun and at that point it is not, technically speaking, 100% illuminated. Instead, it is 99.9999999% illuminated. If you want to be a stickler for details, that is not 100% illuminated and therefore it is not a Full Moon. Also, just moments AFTER the Moon reaches that special point in its orbit - 180 degrees away from the Sun - it is 180.01 degrees away from the Sun and at that point, once again, it is not, technically speaking, 100% illuminated. Instead, it is 99.9999999% illuminated.

It is not possible to discern the difference between a Moon that is 100% illuminated and one that is 99.9999999% illuminated. So, we would say that it is a Full Moon in both situations. However, there does come a point when an observer will notice that the Moon is not quite 100% illuminated. This point is different for different observers and is probably largely dependent on how much experience you have observing the Moon and how carefully you make your observations. I would like to think that most people would notice that when the Moon is 95% illuminated it no longer appears perfectly round and so it is no longer a Full Moon.

So, with this in mind, you may be interested to know how long it takes for the Moon to go from being 95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) to 100% illuminated (Full Moon) to 95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous). I will state times and dates for an observer located in Toronto and will use the most recent Full Moon as an example.

95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) 15 Jul 2008 90000 PM (EDT)

100% illuminated (Full Moon) 18 Jul 2008 40000 AM (EDT)

95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous) 20 Jul 2008 100000 AM (EDT)

So, as you can see, it took 109 hours for the Moon to go from 95% illuminated (Waxing Gibbous) to 100% illuminated (Full Moon) to 95% illuminated (Waning Gibbous). Therefore, it would appear that we had a Full Moon on the nights of July 15/16, July 16/17, July 17/18, July 18/19, and July 19/20. That's five nights in a row! Although, the actual Full Moon occurred on the night of July 17/18, and to be more specific, it occurred at exactly 359 AM (EDT) on July 18.

So according to Ayman's theory when we site the full moon of Ramadan we fast all of the days following 95 percent illumination waxing to 95 percent illumination waning. I assume predertermiend calendars can be used for thse caculations on cloudy days, and there is pobably leeway for people to witness a full moon from their own perspective (possibly beginning or ending the fast at 92% illumination or 94% for example).

I still have an issue with Ramadan as red. But I want to clarify this above point in the theory. Thanks.

My second inquiry

Accoding to 936 has God been counting 12 full moons instead of the 13 that he created since he created the heavens and the earth. Don't you see the problem there?

I want to note that this question is not an invitation to attack my conclusions on the issue. So if you feel tempted, resist. It will be obvious that you are just looking for a fight. I just want to see the logic that deals with the problem exemplified in the above question when we see shahr as full moon in the Quran's context

These are quite simple. You should be able to quote our statements and give answers to them point by point. Please don't continue to dodge answering these questions as you are putting your integrity and the consistency of your conclusions in doubt. We just want to see how you have worked out some of the details so we can be more clear on what you believe. Isn't that fair?

sun Godbless,
Anwar