What is it with sh-h-w?
-
Root sh-h-w seems to have been lost in the fry.
The root appears a few times in the Qur'an. Most of the times seems to have been resonably translated as desire, long for, covet, seek...
Except ?surprise! in the ayas where magnificent prophet Lut speaks. Then happens something which some of us who look for sense and meaning in the Qur'an are already used to here the fundamental meaning is bent so that it can fit a pre-conceived idea, the idea inseminated by the biblelers, for whom anything in the Qur'an that by near or far recalls the bible must be subjected to the meanings and words of the bibles, so in this case shahwa becomes "lust". But it would be the only occassion in which sh-h-w is connected to lust.
Must any wish or longing for a person of the opposite sex be necessarily lust. Is it for lust that men seek or desire women and women desire men? Is that all? Lust? Then when Lut rebukes his people is it because they do not approach women with lust, only men? Can anybody attribute that kind of speech to a prophet of God?
Does not God call the sexual relation between man a woman in 4.21 a mithaq ghalith, enormous pact. Is it lust God is talking about?
Those that are called "homosexuals" do not desire or long for women? Really? My experience is that indeed some of them appreciate women enormously, they do appreciate them and long for their company and appreciation. On the other hand it is not so that those called "hethero" can be real pigs and really have for women plenty of lust and no desire, so that once they are finished, women better dissappear?
Do those who delude themselves that men are leaders and women followers (of them of course) really desire women, long for women? Or long for convenience?
Once again I repeat that I reject the labels and categorisations in homo, hetero, bi, x-sexual as I think they are wholly artificial and do not say a thing about the person and in fact may bundle together people who may be as different as black and white.
But would a prophet of God, Lut, be shocked because people are not lustful never mind after whom?
Salaam
-
It is a pity that nobody has shown any interest in this thread. It seems that debate is only interesting when somebody can bludegeon the opposite opinion as if this was a socce championship.
No wonder that it is not so easy to come to a really interesting debt like some I can remember in this forum where you do go beyond the usual trash.
Salaam
-
Dear weliyy, maybe people who read it are not informed about it, as I am not.
But, I'll wait for more good posts from you, as I read one a few days ago while I was banned.Selam and I pray to Allah swt to show you what you wanna see if He's satisfied with it.
-
It is a pity that nobody has shown any interest in this thread.
Salaam
Oh dont say that, i am still "reading" it since the moment you posted it and waiting for versed people to express themselves...
I don't see any connection with the verb "desire"... Would you please expoubd your interpretation? What does it mean?Salaaam peace
-
How or where you do not see any connection? That is what dictionnaries give and that is also the consistent use in the Qur'an ns I do not see why it wouldn't also be when Lut speaks if it is not becuse there is alredy the preconceived idea that it should be about lust that it speaks, and not about the well known and usual meaning of sh-h-w.
What is it exactly that you do not see? Or what is it that you do see.
I take it for grnted that desire and lust aretwo different things, as the Qur'an well shows.
Salaam
-
Salam Huruf
Desire and lust. As verbs the difference between desire and lust is that desire is more formal or stronger word for want while lust is to very strongly desire.
Are we being punished for wanting or action? Wanting without action = ? nothing.
Wanting with action = something
I donno what exactly you are getting at.
Is it wanting that leads to action? = lust??
-
How or where you do not see any connection? That is what dictionnaries give and that is also the consistent use in the Qur'an ns I do not see why it wouldn't also be when Lut speaks if it is not becuse there is alredy the preconceived idea that it should be about lust that it speaks, and not about the well known and usual meaning of sh-h-w.
What is it exactly that you do not see? Or what is it that you do see.
I take it for grnted that desire and lust aretwo different things, as the Qur'an well shows.
Salaam
Don't misunderstand me because I have no idea. I just looked up at 2 dictionaries when you started the thread and I saw it related to the verb "desire", as for examle in 1657, but (God forgive my ignorance), I don't see why this "yashtahuna" is related to sh-h-w... That is the only thing I don't see. On the other hand what I see is not clear so I pray God to enlight me.
I agree desire and lust are 2 veeeeeeeeeeery different things.
Salam peace
-
Yashtahuna is he same root sh-h-w en otra formaverbal y conjugado.
On the other hand whenever it is a question of lust the root sh-h-w is never used.
On the other hand if one insists on it meaning lust when Lut says it, wat we attribute to him is that there is nothing wrong with lust if it is women that you pursue with it, that is, you are entitled to lust after women, but neither God nor any prophet says that in the rest of Qur'an. That would
And God only speaks of mithaq ghalith in the case of woman and man.
Salaam
-
Also I have a question about the verses where shahwatan appears... in both 781 and 2755 what follows and connects "shahwatan" with "nisa" is "min duni". My question is if "min duni" is always exclusive or it can be inclusive, I mean it can mean not only "instead of/ excluding" but also "as well as / besides" (inclusion).
As our "adem?s de" versus "en lugar de".
Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge peace
-
On the other hand if one insists on it meaning lust when Lut says it, wat we attribute to him is that there is nothing wrong with lust if it is women that you pursue with it, that is, you are entitled to lust after women, but neither God nor any prophet says that in the rest of Qur'an.
Absolutely and 200% agreed
-
10.38
21.43
18.90
22.5
/11/55/53/58
/16/20
/29/17
/10/106
These are some ayas where the same expression "min dun" appears.
It amounts to "apart from... "
InSpanish "fuera de... Aparte de..."
It does not deny nor confirm as to the fixed term, in this case women. They may long after women or they may not, the same as God in some of the quoted or mentionned ayas. God my help or may not help, but they seekhelp apart from him.
It is not, as is usually translated, instead of.
This ayas concerning great prophet Lut, are startin tolook to me as the Blue Beard room (el cuarto de Barba Azul). Everybody wants that it continues to be locked.
I still believe tht God does not use words haphazardly, that He uses them for a reason.
It is also starting to look to me as one more of the disastrous instances in which Muslims at whatever costs want to follow the bible and make the Qur'an submit to the bible. In Lut's yas they are subjecting the Qura'nic tests to the fables of the Bible. And whatever does not fit what has been extracted from the bible (rightly or wrongly) simply does not existe and the room must not be opened.
I wondered how many dismembered women are going to find when we do open it. It is like that in all bible subservient passages of the Qur'an as intepreted by usual muslims, the thing we find dismembered is usually women nd some times others, but mainly women. I guess that is the trends in most religions.
Salaam
-
Salam Huruf
Desire and lust. As verbs the difference between desire and lust is that desire is more formal or stronger word for want while lust is to very strongly desire.
Are we being punished for wanting or action? Wanting without action = ? nothing.
Wanting with action = something
I donno what exactly you are getting at.
Is it wanting that leads to action? = lust??
I do not see how you connect lust to wish, long for, desire... At any rate YOUR connections is not the one that counts, I spoke about the Qur'an. For the Qur'an sh-h-w is onviously not connected to lust, see all the instances of it in the Qur'an. Lust matches fahisha, and that indeed is action, and in another way with s-f-h...
Check instanes of sh-h-w and again the Qur'n is there for us to refine our concepts and feelings and passions, to purify us. We must do that constantly, and the first thing we must purify is our understanding, not to let it be muddled, know the difference between one thing and another and be reminded tht we my muddle up our understandings but God does not.
On further reflecting, ist it not surprising that neither Lut not God utter the word fahisha in connection with Lut's people. It should have been expected, even if after to be magnified by others words, but most certainly it should have figured.
There is a lot to Lut's history. I have the feeling that we have not scratched the surface.
Salaam