On intuition and false prophets
-
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".
-
The pervert seems to be stuck @M0F!
Help her "separate the spirit from the flesh" dude!
I wouldn't recommend the shortest route to your "goal" tho!lol I thought you were calling me "the pervert" for a second.
Is Samira somehow famous for some perverted thing?
-
Hello Samira,
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.
It is not sex for pleasure that causes you to end up in endless cycles of Gehennom. It is not becoming a good enough "fruit" that the Sustainer will pick you out that will.
I have however not said that sex for pleasure is forbidden, but it is not your primary objective and there is danger in doing what makes your hormones flow and activate primate instinctive drives. Quran tells a person to abstain from the world and that includes sex as well which is unnecessary if one has the spiritual strength to do this. If the Quran says one should abstain from worldly indulgence then sex is included in that, but it is just a friendly advice just like all words of Quran is.
It is not my opinion, it is the Sustainer's and because this is a contradicition we live in and the body and the world meant as a trap.
The Sustainer does not really forbid anything dogmatically nor do I, but I am posting recommendations.
if it was forbidden, female and male genital mutilation would be totally justified
Not at all. Even if it would theoretically be forbidden, this kind of act is an abomination.
And the Sustainer is explicit that those recommendations or decrees can never be enforced dogmatically, but it is the wise man or woman who follows them and I said I was disappointed because I have enlightened you so much, however I am not more than your teacher. It is up to the student to do what they like with the words, although I feel sad that the student failed the exam. (parable)
I do not understand where you get forbidden from like that I am a zealous or dogmatic cleric. The real word for the lines of the "Ten Commandments" are synonymous with stone in Arabic (Hajjarateh) and implies that something is a prevention or block to not cause a person to do a certain thing, but you can still walk around a stone if you like. The same is true for the Sustainer's advice.
What is wrong with sex with full pleasure with a partner with whom you share love, compassion, security and understanding?
It is not wrong per se and you can have sex with your bondmate that you have become one body with, but one must know sex is an instinctive drive and such is among what should be suppressed for a maximum spiritual ascension. You should not do something when the body tells you to do it but because you do something from your spirit when you see it fit. That is not falling victim to satan.
You misunderstand me. You misunderstand the whole point. The real question is not really just about sex here, but it is about worldly indulgence at all. The one who cannot abstain they are victim of their instincts, but one can be slave to it on different levels. Some give in totally, some have mastered partially.
And you are probably against birth control as well
This is actually irrelevant since it is the giving in to bodily signals that matters, but certainly when you use birth control you are intentionally doing it for pleasure. I have however used birth control myself because I do not want to end up with an army of kids. Lately it is my wife who likes to do this and I do it because I have to. I have my drive under control.
Men and women need to learn that one can love each other through the spirit with something other than sex. The sex reinforces the attachment to body and not spirit.
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.
This is also why you have failed to understand even a tiny word of what I have ever said to you. The world is a deception and was not meant to be enjoyed. It a growing ground for a spiritual being with a body as a distraction.
If you understood this then you would not argue about this sex thing.
Be well
-
Because the "Sustainer" likes to grow a kind of "super-race".
Gibberish,
all of it.
In your opinion it can be.
One day you will be familiar with the fact it was not gibberish.
Be well Mr. Hicham