Is there a single Muslim on this whole website?
-
What if the vast majority (99%) of a Muslim community decide to do away with life for life punishment in the Quran for murder and instead sentence the murderer to life imprisonment even though the family of the murdered person demand that he should receive the death penalty as stated in the Quran?
If the Quran is just "help"/guidance then I'm assuming that according to your understanding they should be allowed to override the command in the Quran since 99% of the Mulsim community don't want to implement it.
Salam Ted.
Actually "life imprisonment" can also qualify as a life-for-life punishment. The "life" of a killer imprisoned for life is effectively taken away without committing another man-slaughter. If that is the interpretation that 99% of a "Muslim" community is satisfied with, that is the law they would make and that would be binding upon the community.
Let's look at the verse on Qisas
2178 O! Those who have put faith - qisas (equitable rettribution) is prescribed for you ? for murder - the freeman (for murder) by the freeman, and the slave (for murder) by the slave, and the female (for murder) by the female. Then whoever is pardoned for it by his brother (accepting) anything then follows up with due fairness and discharges upon it nicely ? that is a concession from your Master and mercy. Then whoever transgresses after that so for him - a painful suffering.
(My personal translation, cross checking is recommended.)
Does the verse literally say that you have to "slaughter" the killer?
=====
However, to give you a more general answer - when absolute majority of the community become suspicious or doubtful about a specific ruling based on Qur'an that is sufficient red flag to revisit the earlier interpretation. God's message can never be conflicting to human conscience. We should always keep the doors open to revisit Qur'an and accept the best interpretation that conforms to our conscience and intellect. Qur'an gives the generic guideline - the interpretation/ implementation may change over time to suite the changing needs of the society and changing circumstances.
The verses of Qur'an are "signs" from our Master. We should take the guidance from the signs in deciding what is the correct course of action. We should not be fanatic about a specific interpretation to be the only correct / plausible interpretation.
1039 No! They denied whatever they couldn?t capture of its knowledge and whose interpretation had not been brought to them ? that?s how denied those from before them. Then see ? how the end of the wrongdoers happened to be.
(My personal translation, emphasis added, cross checking is recommended.)
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
I can choose to bequeath 80% of my wealth to my daughter and 20% to my son based on consultation with my children.
The key thing is that you need approval from your children and wife before you do that. They have rights as laid out in the Quran which you must obey as a muslim and follower of the Quran. If your other children and wife disagree and are extremely wealthy and want their share in full you can do nothing at all as a muslim. However as someone who just regards the Quran as help/guidance then feel free to ignore it but you wouldn't be classed as a muslim since you have disobeyed the will of God..
-
Actually "life imprisonment" can also qualify as a life-for-life punishment. The "life" of a killer imprisoned for life is effectively taken away without committing another man-slaughter. If that is the interpretation that 99% of a "Muslim" community is satisfied with, that is the law they would make and that would be binding upon the community.
This is just your opinion and I don't agree with it. It's life for life. If a community of Muslims re-interpreted such clear verses to something else then in my opinion they are deviants and no longer muslims.
Does the verse literally say that you have to "slaughter" the killer?
Yes it does. Your comment reminds me of verse 3167.
3167 And the Hypocrites also. These were told "Come, fight in the way of Allah, or (at least) drive (The foe from your city)." They said "Had we known how to fight, we should certainly have followed you." They were that day nearer to Unbelief than to Faith, saying with their lips what was not in their hearts but Allah hath full knowledge of all they conceal.
When people don't like something or agree with it they try to change it or make excuses up.
-
However, to give you a more general answer - when absolute majority of the community become suspicious or doubtful about a specific ruling based on Qur'an that is sufficient red flag to revisit the earlier interpretation. God's message can never be conflicting to human conscience. We should always keep the doors open to revisit Qur'an and accept the best interpretation that conforms to our conscience and intellect. Qur'an gives the generic guideline - the interpretation/ implementation may change over time to suite the changing needs of the society and changing circumstances.
You say "God's message can never be conflicting to human conscience". What do you say of the verse below?
5822 Thou wilt not find any people who believe in God and the Last Day, loving those who resist God and His Apostle, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever). God will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of God. Truly it is the Party of God that will achieve Felicity.
So far I have not seen any verse in the Quran whose interpretation/implementation could change over time. Do you know of any?
-
Salam Ted.
I can choose to bequeath 80% of my wealth to my daughter and 20% to my son based on consultation with my children.
The key thing is that you need approval from your children and wife before you do that. They have rights as laid out in the Quran which you must obey as a muslim and follower of the Quran. If your other children and wife disagree and are extremely wealthy and want their share in full you can do nothing at all as a muslim. However as someone who just regards the Quran as help/guidance then feel free to ignore it but you wouldn't be classed as a muslim since you have disobeyed the will of God..
Qur?an gives me full responsibility and 100% authority and autonomy to decide what I would do with my wealth (See verse 2180-182). It is every parent?s responsibility to support their children ? one child may need more financial support than the other - it is up to the parent to decide, the parents are not bound by any responsibility to establish "clinical" equality among their children. Still, it is possible to act unfair - If I am being unfair ? that is between me and my Master.
The guidelines in Surah 4 are exclusively guidelines for intestate legacy distribution. They apply after all debts and any will that the deceased left have been settled. These verses do not imply a ?right? of the heirs to claim / coerce their relative to not leave a will.
The verses are clear enough for me. If you know better, let?s agree to disagree.
Actually "life imprisonment" can also qualify as a life-for-life punishment. The "life" of a killer imprisoned for life is effectively taken away without committing another man-slaughter. If that is the interpretation that 99% of a "Muslim" community is satisfied with, that is the law they would make and that would be binding upon the community.
This is just your opinion and I don't agree with it. It's life for life. If a community of Muslims re-interpreted such clear verses to something else then in my opinion they are deviants and no longer muslims.
Good; let us both keep our opinions. Or do I become a non-muslim if I have an opinion? Perhaps, I become a non-muslim if I freely think on the verses of Qur?an, right?
Does the verse literally say that you have to "slaughter" the killer?
Yes it does. Your comment reminds me of verse 3167.
If it really did you would give me the exact words or an another verse on the same topic instead of jumping to an unrelated verse to show me how ?munafiq? I am.
You say "God's message can never be conflicting to human conscience". What do you say of the verse below?
5822 Thou wilt not find any people who believe in God and the Last Day, loving those who resist God and His Apostle, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever). God will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of God. Truly it is the Party of God that will achieve Felicity.
Wow! The above verse shows that God?s commands CAN be against human conscience? How wonderful ?interpretation?! Exalted be Him! And Exalted is He above what they depict.
728 And when they perform an immoral act they say, ?We found our fathers on it ? and Allah commanded us with it.? Say, ?Indeed Allah does not command immorality? do you say about Allah what you do not know??
(My personal translation, cross checking is recommended.)
So far I have not seen any verse in the Quran whose interpretation/implementation could change over time. Do you know of any?
Let?s see ?
- Creation of heavens and earth in six days (754) used to be interpreted as six solar days ? but now that our knowledge has advanced, we know it is better interpreted as six epochs.
- Sun moving in orbit (1433) used to be understood as an orbit around the earth. But now-a-days ?generally? understood as sun moving in its orbit in milky way galaxy.
Now let?s move to commandments - Cutting-off ?hands? of thieves (53 used to be understood purely literally. But a more allegorical interpretation is gaining increasing acceptance.
- To marry in twos, threes and fours (43) used to be considered as a permission to marry multiple wives concurrently. But, that interpretation is increasingly losing ground.
- ?What your right hand possess? (43) used to be understood as referring to slaves. But it is now almost universally accepted that Islam does not accept slavery.
- Husbands were thought to have ?license? to beat-up their wives (434). But the verse has seen changing interpretation throughout time from scholars of both conservative and reformist school.
Dear brother Ted ? you live in a dogmatic world where you have been made to believe that Qur?an came with one fixed interpretation and being ?muslims? it is our inviolable obligation to learn that interpretation from the scholars and follow them blindly. Praise be to Allah ? my Master has led me out of that darkness (blindness=darkness, you know). I have now understood being ?muslims? my only inviolable obligation is to uphold my God-gifted conscience and intellect and only if I can do that with full sincerety, I can take the ?best? from the Qur?an and perhaps my Master would guide me accordingly.
As I said before, for now this difference in our outlook seems irreconcilable. Let?s pray to Allah ? your Master and my Master. Perhaps one day He will guide us both to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman -
Ted, Arman,
May I remind you that Quran, even in its traditional biased interpretation, says that it is much better to forgive the offense no matter what the crime if you can. That is more righteous and shows that you can display mercy which is part of our test of character. It is never good to be forced to punish someone, even if it may be a solution.
It does say life for a life, but that is to protect the culprit from abuse in the original "law" of Moses primarily from exaggerated punishment rather than focusing on giving rights to the victim and family. If a community chooses to employ a different punishment such as life imprisonment that it a substitute and not even that punishment a good one. The community should attempt to mend the incarcerated person rather than just seal him or her off, in a real muslim-oriented society.
The ultimate retribution God/Rabb will deliver so there is no need to worry about that and the Rabb is not unfair. I am not sure why people are so attracted to delivering punishment such as it matters anyway in the end because man can only kill bodies but the Rabb can kill both body and soul. Get some faith.
A person with some real faith would not really seek to get anyone at all prosecuted. Rather help those you can and leave those who never reformed to the Rabb. Pity them.
Amen that
Salaam
-
Cutting off hands, marrying multiple women etc, were never okay. It is a wishful interpretation of the original Arabic discourse. It is not that the text has ever changed for over thousand years, only perhaps that some people have become wiser when it comes to interpretation of something that had the same meaning for all that time.
Salaam
-
Cutting off hands, marrying multiple women etc, were never okay.
Salam.
I would humbly express my disagreement with the above remark.
Cutting off hand as an "exemplary punishment" could be okay, if the original act of theft/robbery*, had the comparable level of barbarity involved in it. This was specially true for societies which lacked organized prison systems.
Marrying multiple women and even not marrying at all (i.e. sex without marriage) was acceptable at certain stage of development of human society. Human beings did not bring the institution of marriage "from heaven". The institution of marriage was developed in human societies through gradual evolution. And gradual was the move from socially acceptable polygamy to socially mandated monogamy (observed in virtually every society).
We cannot take the reality of our time and based on that judge our forefathers - that they were worng to take multiple wives or have slaves. Nor can we take their reality to judge what is acceptable for us. The verses of Qur'an are generic. We need to interpret and understand them based on the need of our time and our society. Hunt for a "one-size-fits-all" interpretation will only lead us to debate and disagreement.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman
*P.S. The arabic term Saariq covers both theft and robbery
-
May I remind you that Quran, even in its traditional biased interpretation, says that it is much better to forgive the offense no matter what the crime if you can. That is more righteous and shows that you can display mercy which is part of our test of character. It is never good to be forced to punish someone, even if it may be a solution.
Should the followers of the prophet Mohammed fought and killed others when God commanded them to? Or maybe you think that's another wishful interpretation? Maybe the followers should have just suffered or debated with the pagans until they managed to convince them.
What about when the Children of Israel refused to fight when God commanded them to fight the Canaanites? Were they right to refuse? Should God and Moses have gone and fought on their behalf?
Maybe God wasn't right to cause the floods and drown the people of Noah killing many, many women and children. Or maybe God should have left Pharaoh just be instead of drowning him and his people? Or left Qarun alone with the his riches and just let him enjoy it. Is exulting in wealth a crime punishable by death?
Seems to me some people on this forum are forgetting that we need to fear God first and the love him.
-
Ted,
Lot of the warfare allegedly in Quran are wishful interpretations, yes.
If God truly gives the command to go in and kill people somewhere then it is unquestionable, but usually that is not the case.
But my point in no matter if your life is ended now or in 1000 years you cannot avoid your destiny. Being instantly killed through punishment is not really any big deal but rather what comes next. If you live 30 years or 80 years does not really matter.
It was God who ended the lives of Noah's people and not Noah. And that was due to their noteworthy unrighteousness.
It was God who ended the lives of Pharaoh and company and not Moses' people. God could have made it for the Children of Israel to rebel and start a civil war instead but that is simply not the essence of this faith you are supposed to follow.
God is only ending a society when it indulges in oppressive, violent and very sinful behavior. And that is because they would otherwise disturb the test. Otherwise God does not do any particular interference in this world except for those who have joined the realm of Allah.
Salaam
-
Salaam Arman,
That does not have any Quranic support however even if you find it just to cut off a man's hand. It is barbaric.
However, if a man wounds a person, the law gives right to equal punishment and if the wound was a lost hand the "law" makes it possible to cut off the hand of the culprit, although some kind of mercy is always better.
On the other hand, in the case of theft then the punishment should be taking from the resources of that man to an equal value of what was taken or some sort of justification in jail time if this is in the law. This goes entirely after the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth".
These kinds decapacitation punishments are considered inhumane in the developed world and it is thus not able to use as a punishment under current laws. And I never hope we go back to such system either.
And polygamy was never anything intended by God but man and woman separate from their parents and become as one body. That was the original design. If man has allowed it then that is from men and God knows better what is better for its own design and that is one and one.
The passages of Quran are not generic or to be interpreted according to our time because they are so general that they can be followed "as is" at any time in history. It is about principle.
Quran mentions not polygamy nor any cutting of hands but that is people who have forced this interpretation out of an innocent text.
Salaam
-
Lot of the warfare allegedly in Quran are wishful interpretations, yes.
MoF,
Did God not order the Children of Israel to fight the Canaanites and inherit their land? Does the Bible contain wishful interpretation as well now?
Was there no battle of Badr?
Did God not say fight those who fight you?
-
Let?s see ?
-
Creation of heavens and earth in six days (754) used to be interpreted as six solar days ? but now that our knowledge has advanced, we know it is better interpreted as six epochs.
-
Sun moving in orbit (1433) used to be understood as an orbit around the earth. But now-a-days ?generally? understood as sun moving in its orbit in milky way galaxy.
Now let?s move to commandments -
Cutting-off ?hands? of thieves (53 used to be understood purely literally. But a more allegorical interpretation is gaining increasing acceptance.
-
To marry in twos, threes and fours (43) used to be considered as a permission to marry multiple wives concurrently. But, that interpretation is increasingly losing ground.
-
?What your right hand possess? (43) used to be understood as referring to slaves. But it is now almost universally accepted that Islam does not accept slavery.
-
Husbands were thought to have ?license? to beat-up their wives (434). But the verse has seen changing interpretation throughout time from scholars of both conservative and reformist school.
-
This is six solar days. If it wasn't God would have clarified like He does in other verses. Our knowledge is very very limited when it comes to historical events. Please don't be fooled by evolution/geological/science evidence when it comes to dating the earth. The evidence that you read/listen to is not as true as they make it out to be. What they teach is not science bust their opinions.
-
The geocentric model is just as valid as the heliocentric one. In some cases the geocentric model is still used. The geocentric model makes most sense. Look at the clouds, they are evidence that the earth does not rotate. If the earth did rotate you would not see the clouds being stationary. You can even try this yourself - create some smoke then try to make it spin round. You can't. We have jet streams, they don't change much. We have earthquakes, they don't impact the rotation of the earth. Gravity is not as simple as you think. etc, etc.
-
Just because it is gaining increasing acceptance does not make it correct. Just as in the ancient times people are forgetting Gods word. They fear other people more than they fear God. They desire comfort and ease and the temporary things of this life. Whereas God has purchased the life and property of the muslims hence they are expected to suffer and strive in order to be given the good things in the hereafter that will last. In the hereafter many will wish they had suffered and strived even more when they see what God has prepared for them, they may even feel guilty that they are being given so much and being treated so well for just a few moments of hard work. God knows the cutting of hands is barbaric, hell is far far worse.
-
Same as point 3 above - Just because it is gaining increasing acceptance does not make it correct. Just as in the ancient times people are forgetting Gods word. I don't approve of multiple wives however as a muslim I accept it. I do think that some women actually don;t mind being one of many wives. However the person keeping more than one wife has to do it with the right intention. In the end God knows us best and justice will be done.
-
Islam and Judaism both have to accept slavery whether they like it or not. By saying Islam does not accept slavery is wrong. God does not approve of slavery hence he does tell us that we should try to free slaves. However God does allow it.
-
Beating is allowed but I don't believe it's allowed in a manner that will cause bruising and severe pain. Again Muslims are changing things due to pressure from non believers. Need to fear God more than other people.
-
-
Ted,
The Bible is mixed up with hadith which has no basis of truth. And there is no guarantee that the original Hebrew has not met the same corruption in interpretation as Quran.
You have the right to defend yourself against aggressors, but you may not attack a country without any valid reason. And anything you can do without violence is seven times better than to initiate an armed conflict.
Quran's traditional interpretation implies fight/kill based on the Arabic word , but I have met grave inconsistency if you are to interpret that as kill. From a literal standpoint it appears to mean "to talk some sense to/convince". To convince people about the faith of God is also your mission rather than military conquest.
Chapter 9 and passages 1-12 speak about the convincing of sectarian people rather than some armed conflicts. The traditional interpretation is very bloodthirsty.
Salaam
-
Beating wives is not allowed at all. That has never been a valid interpretation of 434 and is a wrong interpretation of it. Someone has forced the passage to say something like it and the interpretation has not changed due to the lapse of time.
Salaam
-
Beating wives is not allowed at all. That has never been a valid interpretation of 434 and is a wrong interpretation of it. Someone has forced the passage to say something like it and the interpretation has not changed due to the lapse of time.
MoF,
I think your interpretation of the Quran is strange and I don't agree with it. I don't see any point in debating it with you since you use a different dictionary that the vast majority of people use. I shall respectfully decline to discuss/comment on your responses. Peace and best wishes to you.
-
Salam.
I would humbly express my disagreement with the above remark.
Cutting off hand as an "exemplary punishment" could be okay, if the original act of theft/robbery*, had the comparable level of barbarity involved in it. This was specially true for societies which lacked organized prison systems.
Marrying multiple women and even not marrying at all (i.e. sex without marriage) was acceptable at certain stage of development of human society. Human beings did not bring the institution of marriage "from heaven". The institution of marriage was developed in human societies through gradual evolution. And gradual was the move from socially acceptable polygamy to socially mandated monogamy (observed in virtually every society).
We cannot take the reality of our time and based on that judge our forefathers - that they were worng to take multiple wives or have slaves. Nor can we take their reality to judge what is acceptable for us. The verses of Qur'an are generic. We need to interpret and understand them based on the need of our time and our society. Hunt for a "one-size-fits-all" interpretation will only lead us to debate and disagreement.
May Allah guide us all to the straight route.
Regards,
Arman
*P.S. The arabic term Saariq covers both theft and robbery
Armanaziz I feel that you are relunctant to do things which are difficult for people to do. I suggest you think why so few people believed the prophet Mohammed. They were ordered to fight but they were relunctant, they were ordered to leave their loved ones, they asked to give up the good things of this world, they were asked to sacrifice their lives. My guess is that many people declined. They would rather live peacefully with their families and die naturally. Struggle and sacrifice for God was not strong enough in their hearts.
Your comments remind me of this. They also remind me of what I do in my own life. I'm the same as those who turned away from the message and want an easy life. I'd like to think that doing a bit of charity and good deeds will be enough as long as I don't do any major sins.
I feel I am no better than the people who turned away from the message. So, God willing, I will try to put myself on the hard path and die struggling and striving on the path of God rather than die being satisfied with the all the wealth I have accumulated and the family I have.
-
MoF,
I think your interpretation of the Quran is strange and I don't agree with it. I don't see any point in debating it with you since you use a different dictionary that the vast majority of people use. I shall respectfully decline to discuss/comment on your responses. Peace and best wishes to you.
ever tried beating anyone with a tooth brush? it's embarrassing... imagine trying to beat your wife with a toothbrush, she'll look at you and smirk then walk off... the ayaat in question forces one to reflect on things like beating a wife and liken it to something embarrassing for the male to engage in.
The Quran is a book of subtleties Ted... you have to seriously reflect on the ayaat (lit. 'signs' in order to gain some understanding.
Scimi
-
Salaam to you too, Ted. I hope your life in your man-made religion will feel fine and you still will have a good ending.