Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
-
thanx for your answer.. i can understand you also think secterian interpretation is against homosex whatever heading it comes with dosent make any difference ... peace
-
Bender,
Thanks for clarifying. I believe that gives us enough info to test your theory. It seems MofF also agrees with you, so perhaps he too will provide answers.
You may recall in the past you and mmkhan claimed (without evidence) there were no synonyms in Quran, and when I produced one simple example, both of you were stumped and could not explain any difference between the words. Reference thread.
You have a good memory.
I don't understand why you insist I am claiming something.
If you do not agree with my approach then you are totally free to do it your way.
I can not prove that my method is the correct method just like you can not prove yours is the correct one.
I am just following what I think is better.Your simple example in that thread did not prove your approach nor did it disprove my approach in case you thought so.
1131
1141
Are the red words synonyms?
btw this example of me is of course not a proof that there are no synonyms in the quran, it's just an example.
I am just against such ideas because I think such ideas are only bringing more and more confusions while I think the quran should be clear if it is indeed the book I think it is.Let's move onto your claim(s) in this thread. Please answer the following questions
-
what is the root concept of Daad-Ra-Ba AND the meaning of the first form verb DaRaBa
Root http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=Drb -
what is the root concept of Ra-Alif/Hamzeh-Siin AND the meaning of the word 'raas'
Root http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=rAs -
what is the root concept of Siin-Jiim-Dal AND the meaning of the word 'masjid'
Root http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=sjd -
what is the root concept of Ya-Dal-Ya AND the meaning of the word 'yad'
Root http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=ydy
Once you provide the answers we will test them in Quran occurrences. If others have better test examples, feel free to cite them.
How exactly are my answers to these questions going to prove or disprove anything?
Lets say I take for "daraba" "violence" as root concept and first form is "beating" then what? -
-
o
well let me know where i insult any women...
Ok, here you go
"and about homosexulty you already send the quote which is not answer by anyone yet apart from screaming like a loser... that what clearly show someone defeat when they start screaming or giving up on anything..."hmm so according to your understanding...
interpretation should be like this..
why do you approach the foot(with lust) instead of women.. indeed you are ignorant people
orwhy do you approach foot(footjob) instead of women , indeed you are intelligent people
tafseer by bender this verse indicates the invention of footjoob rotfl rotfl rotfl rotflthis boy is funny ... i love his interpreatation he will bring a change in free minds by his reasonings and interpreatation...
look i already know it will be faulty interpretation so i already guessed it... aww i think my prediction was correct ... yay
anyway everybody have a right to beleive and understand what they want... handshake
it looks like wakas also raise some points lets see where the wind will blow..
i think we missed your point and you missed your homework... or you are careless enough to check the previous reference... but this time i will make sure i will take you to the tour of words... lol look word tour and world tour just one letter difference make it so big and small... hmm
26165
26165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?"
incase if you have some issues with the meanings of males...
1697
1697 Whoever does good works, whether male or female, and is a believer, We will give him a good life and We will reward them their dues with the best of what they used to do.
incase if you you are looking for arabic of foot ...
1694
1694 And do not use your oaths as a means of deception between you, that a foot will slip after it has been made firm, and you will taste the evil of turning away from the path of God, and you will have a great retribution.
you always welcome again to try foot, hand, or anything with this word ( )
interestingly this word we can methphorically use for move/advancement.. same like a move in chess !
peace.. peace
I guess I have no useful moves anymore, so I think it's time for me to resign this game.
Congrats handshake -
Your simple example in that thread did not prove your approach nor did it dissaprove my approach in case you thought so.
I never thought so and I even explicitly said this in the very link I referenced.
I can not prove that my method is the correct method just like you can not prove yours is the correct one.
I disagree. We can easily test methods to see which ones are consistent, lead to logical/practical results, and perhaps even falsify some. Methods (for various things) are tested all the time.
Are the red words synonyms?
No.
btw this example of me is of course not a proof that there are no synonyms in the quran, it's just an example.
I agree, your example is irrelevant and proves nothing.
I am just against such ideas because I think such ideas are only bringing more and more confusions while I think the quran should be clear if it is indeed the book I think it is.
Have you even considered the potential benefits of synonyms (in terms of clarifying)?
How exactly are my answers to these questions going to prove or disprove anything?
Lets say I take for "daraba" "violence" as root concept and first form is "beating" then what?It's real simple, and I already implied how, we insert "beating" into the Quran occurrences and whenever it results in an illogical/impractical/contradiction (if any) I ask you to explain it. If you cant make it make sense your method fails.
Of course there will be an element of subjectivity to it, e.g. you may think your translation of a certain verse makes sense, whereas I do not. That's fine, but evidence needs to be put on the table first before we can test/decide anything.
If you are ready to put the results on the table, let's begin. Please confirm your answers for all 4, or if you want, we can do one at a time. Please confirm your actual understanding of the root DRB and verb DaRaBa.
MofF has already ran away, so it's just you.
-
Ok, here you go
"and about homosexulty you already send the quote which is not answer by anyone yet apart from screaming like a loser... that what clearly show someone defeat when they start screaming or giving up on anything..."brother bender in that case , you must have to look this ... why i use red thingie... people due to their comments make me to write this... you can always verify the insults ...
No se le pueden pedir peras al olmo. ( i dnt know what that really means)
It is useless to attempt to reason or teach them grammar. They are impervious and they are not interested because women simple are not there nor, what is mor eimportant, SHOULD BE there.
I do not know why anybody still bothers to indulge talking to those peoples. If once they do no take any notice of what is explained to them, it is a waste of time to even bother taking any further notice of such contrived stupidity. For them a condition for being muslim is to be thouroughly stupid and brainless. Ignore them is the most charitable attitude towards and specially towards oneself.
handshake
-
Peace all,
Notwithstanding my arguments presented above, this matter, as I stated above, is a judgement that must be made by each person who is affected by, or who is inclined to, homosexuality.
It is a judgement that must be made after the assessment of the relevant verses of the Quran.
Then, we shall all be raised after death, brought before God, and made to answer for our judgement.
Peace!
-
I never thought so and I even explicitly said this in the very link I referenced.
I thought I read something else there...
No.
I agree, your example is irrelevant and proves nothing.
Ok, then you really lost me now.
I thought when you brought up synonyms and even a link to an old thread were you gave the next example, you wanted to discuss synonyms.- idrib bi AAasaka al hajara fa infajarat min hu
- idrib bi AAasaka al hajara fa inbajasat min hu
But I guess I am wrong.
So before I make the same mistake, can you please clarify why you were talking about synonyms and homonyms and why the reference to a 4 years old thread if that was not what you wanted to discuss?
I disagree. We can easily test methods to see which ones are consistent, lead to logical/practical results, and perhaps even falsify some. Methods (for various things) are tested all the time.
I welcome every feedback or correction
Have you even considered the potential benefits of synonyms (in terms of clarifying)?
Well the potential "benefits" are exactly the reason why I am against synonyms.
It's real simple, and I already implied how, we insert "beating" into the Quran occurrences and whenever it results in an illogical/impractical/contradiction (if any) I ask you to explain it. If you cant make it make sense your method fails.
Not my method fails but my understanding of that word fails.
And this is what I am doing for years, see if undersatnding x fits everywhere, if not then I try to come up with a better defintion.
A loooooooooooot of defintions failed by this method but not the method itself.Of course there will be an element of subjectivity to it, e.g. you may think your translation of a certain verse makes sense, whereas I do not. That's fine, but evidence needs to be put on the table first before we can test/decide anything.
yes this is testing defintions not methods.
If you are ready to put the results on the table, let's begin. Please confirm your answers for all 4, or if you want, we can do one at a time. Please confirm your actual understanding of the root DRB and verb DaRaBa.
I seriously do not get the point of this, except if you want to see if my understanding of a particular word is consistent everywhere or not.
I admit that my approach does not bring a lot of results, this means that I have for a loooooooooooooot of words/verses no clue, but I am confident that this is the way to go as I believe that this approach will lead to a better understanding.
Allowing homonyms and synonyms will for sure bring a lot of results, but it allows also a lot of different interpretations, and I am confident that this is the wrong approach.MofF has already ran away, so it's just you.
I guess he is wiser than me.
Is every discussion here a game of thrones?
-
I guess he is wiser than me.
Is every discussion here a game of thrones?
The point is that I have tried before, but the way I perceive it the tone tends to get very arrogant and presumptuous and seldom I get any answers on remarks that I give. And a while ago I was warned by the administration of saying things with no evidence, but evidence on an esoteric topic like this is obviously difficult to reach definitely just like that. I think no one or very few in this forum agree the Arabic is understood properly and the more people seem to open-mindedly study it the less coherent the traditional understanding is.
I stand by the results of my own study and the way I see it Arabic would be exceedingly ambiguous in case the language's words would carry multiple clearly different meanings. My research has also pointed me towards one single general meaning for each Arabic root although with attached affixes it can be altered slightly, but still keeps the root's fundamental meaning.
The most common counter-argument I receive is that "when your claim is applied to Quran in general it does not add up. Well, that is usually because in those circumstances the traditionally generated rendition is incorrect and needs reinterpretation. Quran is not so well interpreted as people may think. In fact it is a chaos and the whole understanding of the language needs to be revised. Pure amateurs made it look like this version is right.
Aramaic and Arabic are "God's" languages, but left mysterious and gotten into the hands of paganistic clergymen who could not understand it and also did interpret it as according to themselves. The abuse of this family of languages is systematic.
But very seldom does any intelligent people care to listen and it is indeed futile as Bender likes to imply in his comment to you, you are stuck in a clerical fabrication and do not seem to find your way out of it just like every person for the past 1000-2000 years who has tried to interpret it. Most people fail because they take for granted that what was already known for centuries before has any basis in the real family of Semitic languages.
I have written it before, but it is like someone just fabricated a context upon another innocent one which also does to a great extent speak of something quite different.
But that is not so difficult to figure out, the deity of the traditional interpretation of Quran is awfully primitive and not what you would expect from an advanced being like the Rabb of the world. This is because this image of Rabb was developed by Pagan-minded clergymen who actually did not have so much knowledge on the real truth and whose understanding of things is shown by reading Quran from their perspective.
Like the most advanced being in existence would care whether people are homosexual or not, no, the one who is interested in something as primitive as physical intercourse is just indulgent in vanity, but it is their own choice to be underdeveloped. No punishment except what they cause for themselves.
Prophet Lut was primarily concerned about his people's aggression and keeping of slaves and having orgies and it may be true that they were homosexually inclined but it was mainly because of the vanity in it. He offered his daughters because he had offered them in marriage to male young men who came to his home, but they were too obsessed with their spree and strange religious practices. But the story is twisted quite much throughout the history.
Lut had been forbidden to speak to outsiders and they came to isolate his guests and to prevent the word from spreading from them, but it was also to enslave and abuse strangers and take their possessions and the angels which had arrived looked tempting. And nothing in the text says the angels did not look like females in their disguise.
But this is where your translation has gotten it entirely wrong since you make "male" out of zekar for example while it does not say that.
And does not "males of the world" sound stupid as a translation and even in the native tongue point of view? Al-'Alemeen does obviously not mean world but it is a form of Alem which connotes on "to know". I have not worked on this particular segment of text, but contextually it tends to be feasible to regard zekar as something about the memory, mind or remember when you have a word with connotation on "know".
But then again this is the result of my work and I am laying forth the point of view that I am having, and in that view the family of Semitic languages has been hijacked by people who have not had a clue about what they were doing.
Be well
Amenuel -
Bender,
The reason I brought up that thread (which involved your method of understanding Quran) was because in this thread your method of understanding Quran came up again. It's simple.
In that old thread you were shown to be using an unproven method to govern how you interpret Quran - sounds dodgy to me. I felt in this thread you were doing the same thing, hence discussing testing your method - if possible.
Not my method fails but my understanding of that word fails.
Agreed BUT if your method is found lacking multiple times then we may be able to conclude your method may be weak/suspect.
Well the potential "benefits" are exactly the reason why I am against synonyms.
You're against benefits? Weird.
I assume you are referring to the "benefits" of being able to choose another meaning when our understanding doesn't fit - a suspect "benefit" hence your use of " ". If so, I wasn't even on about that hence why I referred to clarification. Forget Quran, forget Arabic, have you even considered how in a language, any language, synonyms can actually help clarify? THINK.I admit that my approach does not bring a lot of results, this means that I have for a loooooooooooooot of words/verses no clue, but I am confident that this is the way to go as I believe that this approach will lead to a better understanding.
Allowing homonyms and synonyms will for sure bring a lot of results, but it allows also a lot of different interpretations, and I am confident that this is the wrong approach.If one were to limit the scope of variation by utilising a robust checklist to check whenever one wants to choose a different meaning of the same word then that would certainly reduce variant interpretations, e.g. the same word could mean a different thing in another occurrence BUT only if
- the dominant meaning in the other occurrences has been tested extensively in this occurrence under question and found problematic (by intra-Quran analysis)
- AND there is an intra-Quran logical reason for choosing another meaning, e.g. an illogical outcome results
- AND this other meaning has some basis in Classical Arabic dictionaries or at least theory
- AND this other meaning fits a pattern, e.g. if its with a certain preposition, part of an idiom, all other occurrences fit like a glove
- AND obviously this meaning does not contradict anything anywhere else in Quran
And don't worry if you don't understand what I mean by the above, here is the method I try to stick to http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html
Generally, I prefer to use explicit methods of understanding Quran, e.g. those said in Quran itself (see link above), rather than making up interpretational rules then using these made up rules to understand Quran. If that's what others want to do, then good luck in that minefield.
Each to their own.
-
Bender,
The reason I brought up that thread (which involved your method of understanding Quran) was because in this thread your method of understanding Quran came up again. It's simple.
In that old thread you were shown to be using an unproven method to govern how you interpret Quran - sounds dodgy to me. I felt in this thread you were doing the same thing, hence discussing testing your method - if possible.
Does any one here has a proven method?
Agreed BUT if your method is found lacking multiple times then we may be able to conclude your method may be weak/suspect.
I see it differently, I think the method I use is the best there is, but it's me who is lacking skills.
You're against benefits? Weird.
I assume you are referring to the "benefits" of being able to choose another meaning when our understanding doesn't fit - a suspect "benefit" hence your use of " ". If so, I wasn't even on about that hence why I referred to clarification.
RED pedophiles, murderers, slaveholders, oppressors, thieves, etc also make use of those benefits.
I prefer correctness over benefits.Forget Quran, forget Arabic, have you even considered how in a language, any language, synonyms can actually help clarify? THINK.
Maybe there are some benefits from poetic point of view, but besides that I don't see any benefit.
I was watching a serie last week.
The bad guy Boyd Crowder held a man hostage, when he was done questioning him, he said to his sidekick Colt "Take care of him"
So Colt shot the hostage in the head.
Boyd actually meant for Colt to untie the hostage, and then reflects that he will have to be more careful with his choice of words next time.
I believe the language of the quran should be clean, it should not allow such misunderstandings.btw great serie, Boyd Crowder is O0
If one were to limit the scope of variation by utilising a robust checklist to check whenever one wants to choose a different meaning of the same word then that would certainly reduce variant interpretations, e.g. the same word could mean a different thing in another occurrence BUT only if
- the dominant meaning in the other occurrences has been tested extensively in this occurrence under question and found problematic (by intra-Quran analysis)
- AND there is an intra-Quran logical reason for choosing another meaning, e.g. an illogical outcome results
- AND this other meaning has some basis in Classical Arabic dictionaries or at least theory
- AND this other meaning fits a pattern, e.g. if its with a certain preposition, part of an idiom, all other occurrences fit like a glove
- AND obviously this meaning does not contradict anything anywhere else in Quran
And don't worry if you don't understand what I mean by the above, here is the method I try to stick to http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html
Generally, I prefer to use explicit methods of understanding Quran, e.g. those said in Quran itself (see link above), rather than making up interpretational rules then using these made up rules to understand Quran. If that's what others want to do, then good luck in that minefield.
Each to their own.
I respect your method and it will bring for sure only positive results for people who use the quran quotes you quoted in your link.
-
Peace Adem, the ayats you quoted are not commandments or
directives from Allah. There is no "o you who believe" or
"o mankind" in those ayats. Please continue.peace
bravo bravo bravo
sorry for giving reply to someone else post
i will continue actually just for this of your point .. becoz i feel due to the faulty reasonings what you guys are bringing here .. can confuse the believers...
look very carefully now...
1732 Do not go near adultery, for it is a sin and an evil path. ( missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"
1733 Do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice(missing "o mankind" oh "o you who
believe"1736 Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that. (missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"..
and lot more.... more ref will be provided on request...
i wonder what type of logics members are bringing here... really shocked... confused
-
brother hawk for you... again... look into bold parts.. and use your reason/aqal what God provided you..
26160 The people of Lot denied the messengers.
26161 For their brother Lot said to them "Will you not be righteous?"
26162 "I am to you a trustworthy messenger."( messenger by who) next verse will clear it..
26163 "So be aware of God and obey me." (messenger always bring a message from God..)
26164 "I do not ask you for a wage for my reward is upon the Lord of the worlds."
26165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?" (warning of what they do)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"
26167 They said, "If you do not cease O Lot, you will be among those driven out."
26168 He said, "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"
26169 "My Lord, save me and my family from what they do."
26170 So We saved him and his entire family.
26171 Except for an old woman who remained.
26172 Then We destroyed the others.
26173 We rained upon them a rain. Miserable was the rain to those who had been warned.
26174 In that is a sign, but most of them are not those who acknowledge.but if you think it was not by God. then you are free to believe.. that if a phrase is without oh who you beleive or oh mankind then we are exempt of obeying it .. you claim is very weak infact its not even weak its wrong... from my perception...
handshake peace -
26165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?" (warning of what they do)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"Salam, peace
It is not that simple and it is not that obvious. For some reason (I suppose biblical interpretation influence) when it comes to Lut's story everything is suddenly about homosexuality and orgies and the meaning of ?inmorality? is limited to sex. Why? Are those the really worst crimes for which a whole generation should be destroyed? Promiscuity is not welcome either it is hetero or homosexual. But I still dont understand why being homosexual is worst than being a people who destroys the earth and makes wars and does not respect basic and universal human rights.
The root for ?latatuna? is translated as ?approach? only TWICE in the Quran and it is precisely in the verses regardind Lut's people.
2929 You approach the males, and you sever the way, and you bring all vice into your place.
2755 You are approaching the men out of desire instead of the women!
Nowhere else it is translated like that, I mean, like ?approach? or ?commit?. A coincidence? hmm When it comes to Lut everything suddenly is made to fit into homosexuality while there are many other interpretations more suitable for God's sense of Justice. If it is a coincidence or a lapsus or just a very convenient interpretation, I don't really know.
The same happens to the root of ?shahwatan? in 2755, ?with lust?. There are much more appropiated roots for sexual desire, and shahwatan rather means - at least for me - ?give priority / give preference? and not sexual desire. It is exclusively ?sexual desire? and ?lust? TWICE in the Quran, precisely related to Lut's people. Like if ?passions? were only sex and precisely homosexual desire. I find it a very limited interpretation.
The root of shahwatan is the one used to say that dwellers of paradise will have in it ?whatever they desire?. So, wow, Heaven is going to be an orgy and Lut's people will be in there? Come on giveup
For example, do you see any hint of ?lust? in the use of the root of sahwatan here
1657 And they assign daughters to God; be He glorified; and to them is what they desire.
or here
3 14 It has been adorned for people the desire of women, and sons, and ornaments made from gold and silver, and trained horses, and livestock, and fields. These are the enjoyment of the world, and with God is the best abode.
I will insist once more We are more concerned about homosexuality than God is. Let's fight injustice and real evil.
At some point it really seems like shaytan is achieving to hide the real evil behind all those interpretation issues for us not to see real evil so it can go on spreading while we sit and get into meanless discussions about homosexuality.
This is my interpretation, you are welcome to desagree, of course, only God knows better. May the One and Only God give us understanding and knowledge hail
Have a greaaaaaaaaaaat day peace
-
bravo bravo bravo
sorry for giving reply to someone else post
i will continue actually just for this of your point .. becoz i feel due to the faulty reasonings what you guys are bringing here .. can confuse the believers...
look very carefully now...
1732 Do not go near adultery, for it is a sin and an evil path. ( missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"
1733 Do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice(missing "o mankind" oh "o you who
believe"1736 Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that. (missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"..
and lot more.... more ref will be provided on request...
i wonder what type of logics members are bringing here... really shocked... confused
) Peace imrankhawaja the ayats you quote are commandments and directives from
Allah, again, there are no such ayats regarding homosexuality! Please reread my
post again. handshakePeace Adem, the ayats you quoted are not commandments or
directives from Allah. There is no "o you who believe" or
"o mankind" in those ayats. Please continue.peace
-
I remember me and my friends used to think that there was something vaguely Satanic about San Francisco. We felt uncomfortable. Later on, I found out Anton LaVey's Satanic Church was based in San Francisco.So Satanism definitely has influenced the city.
rotfl
No, its not Anton LaVey's Satanic Church, but commercialism for the sake of tourism responsible for that uncomfortable feeling.And I would say more than 90% of the gay men I knew were extremely promiscuous. San Francisco was so gay as a straight male I was actually a minority and I felt kinda isolated (I knew there was gay people in San Francisco but I didn't know it was THAT gay!).
25% gay population in SF... because they are accepted. Absence of marriage leads to promiscuity. True for heterosexual people also.
I remember a man who looked like he was 50-something years old randomly came up to me and offered me money to perform oral sex on me. That kinda thing was actually kinda normal.
An Arab man of somewhere around 80 one night showed 500 dirhams to my mom for something similar back in UAE. We were shocked, but then we came to know it was "normal" there.
I would get approached constantly by gay men. I remember sitting on a bus and noticing the guy across from me was (very blatantly) checking me out.
But men do that to women. I am sure he did that too. I am also sure he never thought it was bad.
The history behind prophet Lot's people is spoken of in Quran Al-Kareem
in such concise terms that understanding the verses requires an expansive
view. The Quran states that basically the people of Lot were a criminal
society and culture and were doing things like rape of men which was
never practiced as a societal norm before them.29/29 (interesting verse and chapter no.)
What! you approach males and commit robbery on the highway,
and you commit evil deeds in your assemblies? But nothing was the
answer of his people except that they said Bring on us Allah's punishment,
if you are one of the truthful.That whole culture had to go, be destroyed the people of Lot were irredeemable.
peace
That's how I saw it too. Thank you very very much for the summary.
I understand the views of both sides.
We are not used to seeing same gender couples for which we feel uncomfortable and wrong about it. For us girls, gay men aren't big deal maybe because they behave like us. Its a familiar zone. But for straight males, it will probably remain a matter of discomfort. I won't hold it against them. I know neither my dad nor my fiance finds even a tiny clip of gay men acceptable. But, that's okay. I do feel a bit weird when I see such couples in public, but then I ask
Will I ever want my sister to marry a man who behaves like a woman and shows interest in males?
My answer is no and with that I lose the right to say homosexuality is wrong. -
Does any one here has a proven method?
"proven" is a strong word, but certainly methods can be tested. People test methods all the time, every day, including you, e.g. the method you used to make your breakfast. THINK.
Maybe there are some benefits from poetic point of view, but besides that I don't see any benefit.
How about this
Arabic is a living language, meaning it evolves with time and in different regions it is also different. People who speak a language are not robots, in the sense they only use a certain word only in one context and never in another context, or never as part of a metaphor or never as part of an idiom etc. Language has wide variation in usage.
So, let us say there are two words in Quran, let's call them X and Y. The author of Quran wishes to use word X with a specific meaning, but word X is used in many different ways/contexts in the real world so what is one way the author of Quran can utilise to ensure people understand it in a certain way?
Well, one way is to utilise synonyms and use another word, e.g. Y, in the same or similar context, instead of X, so if a reader was unsure of what shade of meaning/nuance the author meant for X they would note the use of Y in the same/similar context, which helps narrow down the meaning of X.
Of course, there are many ways for an author to narrow down a meaning, which are more common in my opinion, e.g. use of logic, practical application, contexts etc but synonyms can also be used.But even if you disagree, it does not matter, because my main point is you are using impossible to verify methods to govern how you interpret Quran. Any way you slice that, it can't be Justified.
-
"proven" is a strong word, but certainly methods can be tested. People test methods all the time, every day, including you, e.g. the method you used to make your breakfast. THINK.
On what test(s) does my method exactly fail?
How about this
Arabic is a living language, meaning it evolves with time and in different regions it is also different. People who speak a language are not robots, in the sense they only use a certain word only in one context and never in another context, or never as part of a metaphor or never as part of an idiom etc. Language has wide variation in usage.
So, let us say there are two words in Quran, let's call them X and Y. The author of Quran wishes to use word X with a specific meaning, but word X is used in many different ways/contexts in the real world so what is one way the author of Quran can utilise to ensure people understand it in a certain way?
Well, one way is to utilise synonyms and use another word, e.g. Y, in the same or similar context, instead of X, so if a reader was unsure of what shade of meaning/nuance the author meant for X they would note the use of Y in the same/similar context, which helps narrow down the meaning of X.- Why exactly would the author of the quran not just use word Y?
- I hope you can see that in your example word Y can never be a homonym as that would not make things clearer but bring only more confusion (while you are pro homonyms).
- According to you in that old thread you gave an example of a synonym, but you thought that my example was not a synonym. So how exactly do we determine that 2 words are synonyms?
Of course, there are many ways for an author to narrow down a meaning, which are more common in my opinion, e.g. use of logic, practical application, contexts etc but synonyms can also be used.
But even if you disagree, it does not matter, because my main point is you are using impossible to verify methods to govern how you interpret Quran. Any way you slice that, it can't be Justified.
I use what I think is best, if I knew a better method then I would for sure have used that, I am not stupid.
-
On what test(s) does my method exactly fail?
Oh dear. We just went over this. Let me simplify even further
Bender my method of interpreting Quran is XYZ
Wakas let's test that method. Here are 4 words in Quran, what meaning results using your method.
Bender provides no answerPreviously
Bender there are no synonyms in Quran, each word has a distinct meaning.
Wakas here are two words used in the same context, what is their difference?
Bender provides no answer- Why exactly would the author of the quran not just use word Y?
I already explained. Words in every single language in the world are used in many different contexts and therefore likely have nuance and/or regional variation. Thus, word Y will also have this issue.
- According to you in that old thread you gave an example of a synonym, but you thought that my example was not a synonym. So how exactly do we determine that 2 words are synonyms?
I dont think I explicitly said it was a synonym, but I did ask you for the difference and you had no answer.
To identify a synonym in any language would employ a similar method I'd imagine. It would be done by context, logic, cross-reference - if after a careful analysis we cannot find any difference in meaning then they could be considered potential synonyms.
I use what I think is best, if I knew a better method then I would for sure have used that, I am not stupid.
How about using what Quran says as your method?
Does Quran say there are no synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can only have one meaning regardless of use? No.I prefer
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html -
Oh dear. We just went over this. Let me simplify even further
Bender my method of interpreting Quran is XYZ
Wakas let's test that method. Here are 4 words in Quran, what meaning results using your method.
Bender provides no answerYou can repeat or simplify as much as you like but I thought we already kind of agreed that this is testing defintions. This is thus NOT testing methods.
And Bender did provide an answer for the word "daraba", Bender said lets take "violence" for daraba, so please tell me what is wrong with my method, where exactly does my method fail?Previously
Bender there are no synonyms in Quran, each word has a distinct meaning.
Wakas here are two words used in the same context, what is their difference?
Bender provides no answerBecause I simply do not know the answer to that question, just like you.
I can give you with ease 1000 quran questions on which you have no answer, does that mean your method is bad?What I (and you) know for sure is that those 2 words are written differently.
But somehow you where hinting that they are synonyms, but when I gave you a similar example you had a different opinion.
If you can not provide me at least a method how to reconize synonyms then there is not much to discuss.I already explained. Words in every single language in the world are used in many different contexts and therefore likely have nuance and/or regional variation. Thus, word Y will also have this issue.
Did you actuallunderstood what I wrote in my previous post?
According to you the value of synonyms is that word Y can help to narrow the meaning of word X, with other words demanding that word X should have only 1 meaning and also requires word Y to have only 1 meaning.
So the question still remains the same, IF word Y is so powerful and clear, then why would the author of the quran use word X in first place and not simply word Y?I dont think I explicitly said it was a synonym, but I did ask you for the difference and you had no answer.
Maybe you forgot but you clearly said that it was an example/evidence (you have the link so you can check it yourself).
And what are we actually talking about if you do not think they are synonyms?
If you just want to show that I do not have an answer for a particular question of you then you have indeed succeeded.To identify a synonym in any language would employ a similar method I'd imagine. It would be done by context, logic, cross-reference - if after a careful analysis we cannot find any difference in meaning then they could be considered potential synonyms.
Thus with this method you have indentified potential synonyms, do you have a list for me with potential synonyms? In the example you gave 1 word was only used once in the quran.
How about using what Quran says as your method?
Does Quran say there are no synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can only have one meaning regardless of use? No.Ok lets check
Does Quran say there are synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can have more than one meaning? No.I prefer
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.htmlYes I know, I prefer (= believe in) a clean and clear quran.
