On intuition and false prophets
-
I am late, but watched the video. Its all true, but it does take time to learn it all. I must still say that sometimes the truth can be so hurtful that its better to stay away from it for the sake of sustaining life. Same of course can be spoken about the false. This world is a weird maze.
-
I am late, but watched the video. Its all true, but it does take time to learn it all. I must still say that sometimes the truth can be so hurtful that its better to stay away from it for the sake of sustaining life. Same of course can be spoken about the false. This world is a weird maze.
I very much agree. We are frail human beings after all.
-
Hello Samira,
I am disappointed, but I accept your opinion.
You still miss the purpose why we are here and in these bodies. It is a deception and the only way to get out of the body instead of Gehennom is separation, "separation of the spirit from the flesh".
Nevertheless, sex with someone you have married is not forbidden, but manifestly being a primate is dangerous. To have a family and children is part of the "game", but we must guard ourselves every minute for the impulse of satan. The more careful and mindful you are the better. However, if it becomes a habit there is not very much distraction to live like Being (Allah) and you will feel very powerful (because the "Door" opens), and eventually you will be a ruler as well and free of your awkward body, but you perhaps revere it?
We are not here to enjoy the world, even if entertainment is not forbidden and I have even seen the Sustainer have more humor than in the sectarian interpretation of Quran. It is a little like schizophrenia, where you have a conflict between two personalities; the spirit that is an image of the Sustainer and the body which is made from energy and is highly deceptive because it is basically a primate. The body clouds the spirit when it takes precedence and this is what a person must fight to prevent. If you tried the life I am propagating you would see.
Be well
-
I am sorry MoF for disappointing you, but I felt I still needed to voice my opinion.
You say this
Nevertheless, sex with someone you have married is not forbidden
But the you also said this
but manifestly being a primate is dangerous
You still miss the purpose why we are here and in these bodies. It is a deception and the only way to GET out of the body instead of Gehennom is separation, "separation of the spirit from the flesh".
In other words you seem somewhat disappointed that the Quran does not explicitly forbid sex for pleasure (if it was forbidden, female and male genital mutilation would be totally justified). Thats why you seem to fill in with your words to make it sound that sex for pleasure would land you in Gehennom. And you are probably against birth control as well, seeing the emphasis on family alongside sex. I am just saying, I am sorry if I sound offensive in any way.
What is wrong with sex with full pleasure with a partner with whom you share love, compassion, security and understanding? And particularly if with a committed lifelong partner? Or, ahem, if you dont mind me saying, some self exploration to understand better how our body works and how to relax and achieve pleasure? These, especially the last point, should of course be treaded on cautiously, lest one does not end up being sucked in the labyrinth of the world and end up feeling empty and distant from the Source, and also somewhat damaged and insecure inside, instead of the other way around. So individually there are multiple ways of figuring out how this area of life applies to them.
We are not here to enjoy the world
Um, this point needs to be treaded on cautiously as well. I am still figuring things out, so I cannot comment for now properly on it.
Peace.
-
Nevertheless, sex with someone you have married is not forbidden
Well, if sex with someone we married was forbidden, we people wouldn't even be here on this forum in the first place. Our main topic of discussion here is fulfilling sexual desires for pleasure versus for procreation only.
Peace.
-
Well, if sex with someone we married was forbidden, we people wouldn't even be here on this forum in the first place. Our main topic of discussion here is fulfilling sexual desires for pleasure versus for procreation only.
Peace.
The mainstream versions of the Qur'an seem to describe a situation where sexual intercourse for pleasure exists rather than for procreation only.
It describes spouses as a mutual comfort and garments for one another, and talks about having intercourse with your wives with no implication of children related to it, such as the permission to have sexual intercourse during Ramadan.
-
Of course our (finite) existence on earth is a test!
What the people wish to know is why are we being tested in the first place.
Because the "Sustainer" likes to grow a kind of "super-race".
Gibberish,
In a sectarian interpretation, yes!
It rarely has any connection to reality but just some clergymen who sat down trying their best to make their doctrine fit into a context they did not really understand.
The real story is on collision course with that. The Sustainer made the new spirit, based on the Sustainer, enter into the body and as a test environment and told them to not to "know" the World, i.e. indulge in it. But the instinctive drive (what you call shaytaan) tempted them and they failed to uphold what the Sustainer said and indulged nevertheless. But the humans are born with this shaytaan in them and it is not a separate entity or person. Adam was exposed to a cycle of gehennom in the parable because of his sin (the body was renewed), but the original tale has been poorly interpreted by later generations and the original tale from the Genesis probably needs a reinterpretation too. And shaytaan was fabricated as a separate being while it was in the flesh itself. And know that the story of Genesis was a parable itself just like the Sustainer seems to have humor in making a parable of everything through the prophets.
That is why I have said that the body was made to deceive.
Each procreated soul from a father and a mother is a child soul just like Adam's soul was the child of the Sustainer. But, one has to separate the soul from the flesh, because the Sustainer is not the Father of the dead but of the living.
You can use it as a tool to do the best of the situation, but you are yet trapped inside that vehicle and your primary goal is to be freed from it rather than the recurring Gehennom.
Okay. I respect your opinion.
But the morphological meaning of Rabb is to supply something, permanently, unconditionally per the word's literal meaning. That is no one but the Sustainer can be Rabb since they do not fill the prerequisites and are themselves sustained. Rabb refers to the fact it upholds the world, visible or invisible. It could also be translated as 'Platform'. That also has etymological backup from ancient lexicons. And here you have English definitions for platform and sustain. It is important to realize that in the Semitic languages words are always spiritually descriptive in what is their meaning so Sustain-er is not very strange since the Rabb upholds the world. But it does not have any image of anything so one cannot really substantiate it and that is the danger.
platform / pl?tfrm / W3 noun
2 STRUCTURE a tall structure built so that people can stand or work above the surrounding area
5 SUPPORT something that gives you the support, help, power etc. that you need to do somethingsustain / ssten / Ac W3 verb
1 MAKE SOMETHING CONTINUE formal
to make something continue over a period of time SYN maintain
2 sustain damage/injury/defeat etc. formal to be damaged, hurt, defeated etc.
3 FOOD/WATER to provide enough food, water etc. for people to stay alive
4 GIVE STRENGTH to make it possible for someone to stay strong or hopeful
5 WEIGHT formal to hold up the weight of something SYN supportSource Longman Advanced American Dictionary (with removed irrelevant definitions)
all of it.
-
Gibberish,
In a sectarian interpretation, yes!
It rarely has any connection to reality but just some clergymen who sat down trying their best to make their doctrine fit into a context they did not really understand.
The real story is on collision course with that. The Sustainer made the new spirit, based on the Sustainer, enter into the body and as a test environment and told them to not to "know" the World, i.e. indulge in it. But the instinctive drive (what you call shaytaan) tempted them and they failed to uphold what the Sustainer said and indulged nevertheless. But the humans are born with this shaytaan in them and it is not a separate entity or person. Adam was exposed to a cycle of gehennom in the parable because of his sin (the body was renewed), but the original tale has been poorly interpreted by later generations and the original tale from the Genesis probably needs a reinterpretation too. And shaytaan was fabricated as a separate being while it was in the flesh itself. And know that the story of Genesis was a parable itself just like the Sustainer seems to have humor in making a parable of everything through the prophets.
That is why I have said that the body was made to deceive.
Each procreated soul from a father and a mother is a child soul just like Adam's soul was the child of the Sustainer. But, one has to separate the soul from the flesh, because the Sustainer is not the Father of the dead but of the living.
You can use it as a tool to do the best of the situation, but you are yet trapped inside that vehicle and your primary goal is to be freed from it rather than the recurring Gehennom.
Okay. I respect your opinion.
But the morphological meaning of Rabb is to supply something, permanently, unconditionally per the word's literal meaning. That is no one but the Sustainer can be Rabb since they do not fill the prerequisites and are themselves sustained. Rabb refers to the fact it upholds the world, visible or invisible. It could also be translated as 'Platform'. That also has etymological backup from ancient lexicons. And here you have English definitions for platform and sustain. It is important to realize that in the Semitic languages words are always spiritually descriptive in what is their meaning so Sustain-er is not very strange since the Rabb upholds the world. But it does not have any image of anything so one cannot really substantiate it and that is the danger.
platform / pl?tfrm / W3 noun
2 STRUCTURE a tall structure built so that people can stand or work above the surrounding area
5 SUPPORT something that gives you the support, help, power etc. that you need to do somethingsustain / ssten / Ac W3 verb
1 MAKE SOMETHING CONTINUE formal
to make something continue over a period of time SYN maintain
2 sustain damage/injury/defeat etc. formal to be damaged, hurt, defeated etc.
3 FOOD/WATER to provide enough food, water etc. for people to stay alive
4 GIVE STRENGTH to make it possible for someone to stay strong or hopeful
5 WEIGHT formal to hold up the weight of something SYN supportSource Longman Advanced American Dictionary (with removed irrelevant definitions)
all of it.
You'll all have ample amounts of time to discuss this in hell together (along with me?)
-
G-D forbid!
If I were to be a failure,
then I deserve the penalty.Never will G-D wrong the insignificant me!
I don't know, I don't think anyone really deserves being a monster in the first place.
-
What's the quranic word for "monster"?
Haha, I don't know, maybe
"Whenever the Sentence prevails against them, We shall bring forth a monster from the earth for them who will speak to them"
haha T.B. Irving's translation of "dabbah" or "dabbatan" in this case.
I was more referring to villains mentioned here
7179
And certainly We have created for Hell many of the jinn and men. For them (are) hearts (but) not they understand with them, and for them (are) eyes (but) not they see with them, and for them (are) ears (but) not they hear with them. Those (are) like cattle, nay they (are) more astray. Those - they (are) the heedless.It doesn't seem a matter of "deserving" it really, so much as God creating whatever God wills to create.
God is not "condition-based", that is, God does whatever God does freely, unconditionally, there are no conditions ruling over God or God "needing" to do anything or sustain anything, or having any pre-requisites or requirements.
2868
Thy Lord does create and choose as He pleases no choice have they Glory to Allah! and far is He above the partners they ascribe! -
I consider Man of Faith as having a lot of wisdom in general. Yes, I do sometimes disagree with him, and at other times I am uncertain of what he is saying, but a lot of his words have been otherwise positive and beneficial teachings for me, for the spiritual path I am on.
Peace.
-
I consider Man of Faith as having a lot of wisdom in general. Yes, I do sometimes disagree with him, and at other times I am uncertain of what he is saying, but a lot of his words have been otherwise positive and beneficial teachings for me, for the spiritual path I am on.
Peace.
Yeah he has a good message to give.
-
The real story is on collision course with that. The Sustainer made the new spirit, based on the Sustainer, enter into the body and as a TEST environment and told them to not to "know" the World, i.e. indulge in it. But the instinctive drive (what you call shaytaan) tempted them and they failed to uphold what the Sustainer said and indulged nevertheless. But the humans are born with this shaytaan in them and it is not a separate entity or person. Adam was exposed to a cycle of gehennom in the parable because of his sin (the body was renewed), but the original tale has been poorly interpreted by later generations and the original tale from the Genesis probably needs a reinterpretation too. And shaytaan was fabricated as a separate being while it was in the flesh itself. And know that the story of Genesis was a parable itself just like the Sustainer seems to have humor in making a parable of everything through the prophets.
I have problems with this parable. There is something fishy about it. I suspect the entire story of Adam and Eve, parable or not, to be a purely man-made story, to fill in the gaps where humans are unable to understand, such as why there exists a separation between them and the Source in the first place, and how it was human beings' fault for it that time.
Peace.
-
Yeah he has a good message to give.
Thanks for agreeing ) MoF does work hard to refine what he is learning himself.
Peace.
-
I have problems with this parable. There is something fishy about it. I suspect the entire story of Adam and Eve, parable or not, to be a purely man-made story, to fill in the gaps where humans are unable to understand, such as why there exists a separation between them and the Source in the first place, and how it was human beings' fault for it that time.
Peace.
I take the whole story to be a demonstration of Satan (which I mention in the Shaytan and Anger thread in the general forum) and what humans are in for, more than there being any real separation between humans and God.
-
The mainstream versions of the Qur'an seem to describe a situation where sexual intercourse for pleasure exists rather than for procreation only.
It describes spouses as a mutual comfort and garments for one another, and talks about having intercourse with your wives with no implication of children related to it, such as the permission to have sexual intercourse during Ramadan.
I have trouble with the mainstream version of the Quran. That version also talks about allowance for taking multiple wives. So basically under some circumstances, a man can have multiple women providing him with comfort and as sources of garments. Makes me partly wish I was a man. Would have been temptation enough to marry a widow or something along with my original wife, so I can experience having multiple garments and sources of pleasure this way.
Normal people are supposed to recoil at what I wrote above. And on top it is clearly precisely written that it is forbidden for a woman to do the same. Kind of puts female chastity and faithfulness above that of a man's, right? Even though both have the exact same need for faithfulness and chastity from each other? And what's with that mainstream version's idea of protecting and safeguarding women through marrying them in multiple numbers? Couldn't more alternatives have been mentioned just as precisely instead?
Bunch of ancient ideas written by ancient men. And then daring to call this mainstream version of Quran as "timeless". Well, if societies decide to become more matriarchal, then the idea of men needing protection and safety by having multiple co-husbands with one wife would be just as valid.
Peace.
-
I have trouble with the mainstream version of the Quran. That version also talks about allowance for taking multiple wives. So basically under some circumstances, a man can have multiple women providing him with comfort and as sources of garments. Makes me partly wish I was a man. Would have been temptation enough to marry a widow or something along with my original wife, so I can experience having multiple garments and sources of pleasure this way.
Normal people are supposed to recoil at what I wrote above. And on top it is clearly precisely written that it is forbidden for a woman to do the same. Kind of puts female chastity and faithfulness above that of a man's, right? Even though both have the exact same need for faithfulness and chastity from each other? And what's with that mainstream version's idea of protecting and safeguarding women through marrying them in multiple numbers? Couldn't more alternatives have been mentioned just as precisely instead?
Bunch of ancient ideas written by ancient men. And then daring to call this mainstream version of Quran as "timeless". Well, if societies decide to become more matriarchal, then the idea of men needing protection and safety by having multiple co-husbands with one wife would be just as valid.
Peace.
I don't find that the Qur'an gives permission for multiple wives really. I think it says "you'll never be able to treat them equally, so take one".