What Constitutes a Muslim?

mquran

Salaamun alaikum Anwar,

But it is. It is in the sense that the Koran can only speak from a pre-koranic world view. It was revealed to a people who knew nothing about concepts that were to come after the Koran was revealed. Because the Koran was revealed to them it was revealed in their language.Because the revelation of that book is dated, the language it uses is also dated to the initial audience. Any new definitions of words that this book has in common that come about after this book is written and published cannot be read into "the Coorany." Despite the timeless message of "the Coorany"

If you in 2005 come upon this book and want to read it, to correctly understand it you have to be aware of recent innovations (post-publication of "the Coorany" in your language that can't be read into "the Coorany."

This is the same thing with the Koran. We have to be aware of the linguistic innovations that came about after the revelation of the Koran and be sure not to read them into the Koran. Where our lack of awareness about the language in question causes us to misread certain words in both the Koran and "the Coorany" we cannot help that.

But where the dictionaries and lexicons on the language in question let us know that a meaning of a word came about after the revelation of the Koran, or the publication of "the Coorany" we have to take that in mind in our understanding of the book.

Firstly, let me say that the below is my worldview which is the reason why I've reached my conclusions. I don't wish to force my views and your friendship is more important than proving a point.

Ok, well lets call this point in time 'x'. X can never be known to me because I do not believe in history.I agree with you, al-qur'aan was revealed to ppl at X first and so lisanun arabiyun mubeen should refer to thier language. I'll never know what constitutes their language though, because I stand in a post-quranic time zone and I'll never know what came when.

However, all is not lost. To me, all other books than al-qur'aan are laden with conjectural, zanni interpretation. I believe that al-qur'aan contains tools to purify ones understanding so we will get to the message, but only through al-qur'aan itself.

I agree that there is alot of misunderstanding among people. And people's experience with a word creates a visual picture or feeling that is associated with that word. Where our points of view on a word overlap is where we get a general understanding. But there are alot of words whose meanings we do share, otherwise we would not be able to communicate. Some people have myopic or limited understandings of words, other people have more extensive understandings of words. It is the level of understanding of our language that determines how we can understand each other when we communicate. Some people hear the word 'communicate' and think that it only means 'to speak', other people understand that it is not that specific and just means to present information so that someone else can understand it. So I understand what you mean, but the fact that you can generally understand what I say, and I you, says that we do share a language.

Well, I believe this is where muhkamat/mutashabihat system comes in. To me 'muhkamat' refers to something decisive sign in ones horizon and one's soul. Seeing birds in flight gives us a visual of 'salat' and 'tasbeeh' and this transcends sounds and writing communication. To me, this is the start and the end of God's communication.

thanks and peace.

progod

Salaatullaahi alaikum,

Mquran you said

I'll never know what constitutes their language though, because I stand in a post-quranic time zone and I'll never know what came when.

What I have been trying to say is that that language of time x is accessible. It is accessible in the same way that knowledge of God is accessible; through deduction. We deduce that God exists. Do we see God, or hear him, or know that he is one. No. But we look at everything around us and deduce that God is real, we think about the phenomena of God and deduce that he is one. Therefore we know that God is real through deduction.

This is the same case with the language of Muhammad's day, the language of time X. We can deduce from all of the available evidence that the language of time X was still existent in the later time Y, because we have a book from time X that is consistent with a language of time Y. The pre-Islamic poetries though they were officially written down in time Y it cannot be proven that they didn't originate in time X as it is claimed.

Also the bedouins talk. It was analyzed in time Y, but all the evidence points to the fact that they talked a language that originated in time X and is consistent with the language from time X. Looking at all the evidence we can deduce that we still have available to us the language of time X through the work that was done to write it down and analyze it in time Y.

What we have to be careful to exlude are meanings of words and other words that are dated to specifically time Y (or to later times), but if there is no evidence that says that those meanings originated in time Y (and they are consistent with the language of time X), we have to fairly assess that they could have orignated in time x and view them as meanings that originated in time x.

I hope all that was clear.

Godbless,
Anwar

You also said

Firstly, let me say that the below is my worldview which is the reason why I've reached my conclusions. I don't wish to force my views and your friendship is more important than proving a point.

World views can change depending on how we change in our lives about what we find important, and in the ways that our understanding of the world around us and within us change. So your conclusions are relative to your current world view, as mine are also. But that doesn't mean that our world views are fixed in place, forever. That is called stangancy. I appreciate the fact that you care about maintaining friendships. But I am not on here so much for friendships but for setting the record straight and clearing up issues that have carried with them alot of confusion. Respecting the fact that somone can have their own opinion doesn't mean that you have to, or even should, be their friend. That is not a personal attack either, because I admire you for having the bravery to even discuss and critique this issue. That's just my current world view.

unknownuser

I shall revert back to the original posting, having joined the discussion at a latter stage.

Layth (Lion) put forward the following as suggestions for discussing what constitutes a 'Muslim'

Believing in and upholding the commands of 6151-153.
Believing in and upholding all the social and legal laws of the Quran as per 37.
Believing that the traditional interpretations and rituals must be followed.
Believing in the Quran's text (word for word, verse for verse).
Believing that messengers will come after Mohammed.
Believing in the number 19 as a sign of the Quran.
Believing that 2 verses (128&129) must be removed from the Quran.

In essence, these are all very narrow understandings of alkoran and aleslam. What one should really be asking is this

What is the reason for alkoran?

Why is this text here? For what purpose did this text come into existence? What is it?

This is really the key issue. This takes a much broader approach to the big questions, which is what we should all be thinking of when approaching this subject. Honestly, all this talk about various 'codes' and so forth is really just going way, way beyond the real simplicity and purpose that alkoran is here to serve. Its kind of like an Ocham's Razor thing, if you see what I mean.

So my answer is, the question needs to be redefined totally. Still adhering to the 'Muslim' label perpetuates the narrowness, when width is required in order for us to see the bigger picture.

progod

T.A.F.K.A.G, Salaatallahi alaika,

First let me say, I love the Aramaic text underneath your name. What does it read and mean?

Secondly let me say that I agree with you perfectly. I've been trying to get people on this list to understand this through reading alkoran from the perspective of the language that it was revealed in. I've had dificulty in convincing people (because of their skepticism of early Arabic/Persian scholars) that the language of alkoran can really be discerned from these people's works, and the meanings that are post-koranic in origin sifted out (even though they are dated by these manuscripts as post-koranic when they are post-koranic -although they were not dated with the intent to exclude them from our understanding of the Koran).

All in all, alkoran definitely came with a broader message than what the word Islam has ever meant (and unfortunatley will every mean). Reading alkoran in its original language (in the best way that we can, without resorting to inventing meanings of Arabic words) leads us to understand that the Koran wants us to follow the religion of Abraham, and that religion is not submission (al-islam) all by itself. It is submission (al-islam) to and for God (lillaahi). We should submit (submission/al-islam) to God (lillahi). Al-Islam= Submission. And just as Submission doesn't mean 'submission to God' al-islam doesn't mean that either. If someone asked us our religon and we said 'We submit.' or 'Submission.' What does that mean? Nothing. It means nothing unless we clarify and say 'to God.' When you say your religion is Islam, you are saying that your religion is 'Submisssiveness' and that means nothing. Submissiveness to what? 'To God' you say. 'To whom else would I submit.' "You could submit to a number of other people, things or ideas" i exactly how I answer and how everyone else in the world naturally thinks. As long as you say 'to God' its cool. When you leave out God, you leave 'the submission' open.

That is the same case with Islam. When you leave out the word 'Allah' you leave the question of to who your 'Islam' is for open.

Now Islam on its own can mean 'Salvation' and I believe that is the most appropriate when the Koran says that God has chosen for us 'Islam(salvation) deenan(as our deen).' The question will come up what does 'deen' mean. Well besides ONE of its meanings which is 'system/order/rule' it can also mean 'judgement/dues/just deserts.' So 'This day God will chose salvation (al-Islam) for us(God's loyalists) as our due, our just deserts.'

So the Koran promotes 'submissiveness to God' and 'Salvation'. Those are its messages. However you translate the message of al-islaamulillaahi and Al-Islaam into another language doesn't matter, as long as you translate it and make the message comprehendible to everyone. That's what we have translators for, because the messages that foreign words communicate are lost on those who don't understand the foreign languages. Trying to convince them to prefer the Arabic word over an equal wording in their languages fosters a feeling that the Arabic language is superior and doesn't take into account all of the other people who haven't been convinced of this but who would still agree with message if it were said to them in a comprehendible way.

Godbless,
Anwar

unknownuser

Peace bro Goinsy

First let me say, I love the Aramaic text underneath your name. What does it read and mean?

It reads, from right to left of course, as follows

mkyl@ mls

I am sure that you can pick out the Arabic likeness from the final mym, as well the initial ayn, lam and syn . This is the script from which classical Arabic drew upon, I am quite sure.
Although in correct Aramaic the phrase would read shlma lykn. There is no definite article at all in Aramaic hence the absence of an 'al'.

I actually believe that the 'Pro-God' label is the one that fits best at present. The purpose of alkoran was really to do away with the rife bickering and schismatism that was prevalent during that part of history when various establishments made declarations that went against the true spirit of alktab.

hlatif

Salam all,

I believe that I need to venture into explaining how I understand and explain the word Islam. I think that the word Islam can be a little confusing since the meanings of words derived from the root S-L-M include delivery, safety, peace and submission. Therefore, my way of explaining this meaning is first to see how those different meaning connect with each other and therefore explain them all.

I feel that the essence of the meaning of the Root S-L-M is To receive no harm or to receive someone or something with no harm depending on the situation. Here are words that may explain it

Salam or salem with short vowels means He received no harm or he received something with no harm. This basically means he became safe.
Salaam Means Cause of reception of No harm and that is peace.
ASLAM
means To make receive (someone or something) No harm which basically means to deliver no Harm or to deliver something with no harm
therfore Muslim is the one that delivers No Harm or that delivers (something) with no harm
As for ASLAM WAJHAHU LILLAHI then it means HE DELIVERED his Face/Front/Direction/Acceptance TO GOD, basically For everything he/she does, GOD is the focus. Submission is included in this meaning, but is only part of the meaning of the word.

Since the word ISLAM comes alone and in relation to ASLAM WAJHAHU LILLAH then the meaning of Islam as I understand it is the following

One that delivers No Harm to ALL, and One that delivers his direction to GOD, and his accpetance to GOD.

I hope that this makes sense and is understandable. Take care all and have a good day

Hussein

progod

Hussein,

You have to be damn good to translate Arabic thinking into English, as in salima being an active verb in Arabic but translating into English as a passive state.

Wajh can mean more than just face, it can mean 'self, soul, countenance, presence and a number of other things in Cl. Arabic.' So be wary of interpreting things with a limited understanding of the Classical Arabic language, despite fluency in your own modern Arabic languages.

Aslama can mean 'to cause peace (no conflict or harm)' as well as 'to enter into a state of peace (no conflit or harm).' That translates into 'submission.' or 'salvation.' However Aslama also has meanings that have nothing to do with peace. It has the meanings o 'to quit/abandon, to give over and to salute.' Don't be myopic in your understanding of Classical Arabic roots.

Godbless,
ProGod

hlatif

Salaam Anwar,

You have to be damn good to translate Arabic thinking into English, as in salima being an active verb in Arabic but translating into English as a passive state.

I am not clear if you agreed or disagreed. In case you disagreed, then I have an example

Ana Salimtu min alkhatar means nothing dangerous happened to me and not necessarily because of my work. In case you agreed, then I thank you.

However Aslama also has meanings that have nothing to do with peace. It has the meanings o 'to quit/abandon, to give over and to salute.

Please give examples in sentences so that I can think and meditate on it some more. Please note that I wrote no harm and not peace.

Thanks Anwar for your response and I look forward to more. Salaam

Hussein

progod

Aslam on its own as ?to submit?is a reflexive sense. Other ones like asbaha (to pass through morning) ah'sana (to become exellent or better) and others I would have to research. Im in the Domican republic right now and I cannot reach my grammar book. You can grab a Classical Arabic grammar book for yourself and there are given plenty of examples.

Salimtu is better rendered in Arabic as (I was safe). IT is passive like hazina (he was said), alima(he was discerning) and ghadiba(was angry). In Arabic they are considered active these are not things that you do, they are thinks that overtake you. Ahzana can mean ?he became said? or deemed someone else to be sad, like kadh-dhaba is to declare or think that something is false kadhib.

Please grab an extensive Classical Arabic grammar book and all this will be explained to you. This is not the Modern Arabic that you learn in school. You have to go out and research this Arabic. You intuitions do not work with this Arabic because this Arabic is foreign to you.

What you are doing is the same thing that scholars do which leads us to all of these deficient translations and understandings of the Koran and even the hadeeth.

Does anyone remember the debate about the age 40. Everyone was translating it as -when a man reaches forty he says ?. . . When understanding the grammar of Classical Arabic better renders it ?When a man reaches forty may he say . . .? I have seen time and time again how understanding the language of the Koran opens up our understanding of the Koran, even with the issue of ?beat your women.? Understanding Classical Arabic better allows us to understand that the word can mean ?to ignore?. I guess the burden is to hard to bear for the so called ?reformers?here to accept and learn Classical Arabic completely to render better understandings of the Koran. But this is the only way, and all of the Arabic speakers need to stop confusing the issue more with their own confusion about Arabic, believing that the Arabic that they learn in school is really Classical Arabic. It is not, nor do the books that you consult teach Classical Arabic. Look and think harder. You are still far from the mark and that is why you are still so confused.

Godbless,
Anwar

hlatif

Salaam progod,

Thank you for responding to my note. However, I have some disagreements with you.

Progod wrote

Aslam on its own as ?to submit?is a reflexive sense

I disagree because Aslama needs a Mafool bihi that is either in the sentence or that is understood. The word that could stand on it's own to mean Submit is ISTASLAMA

ah'sana (to become exellent or better)

I also disagree because the verb means To make/do Good (To someone or something including oneself). What you wrote above is an adjective and not a verb. exapmles

ANA AHSAN MINKA adjective= I am better than you
ANA AHSANTU ILAIKA verb = I made/did good to you

Salimtu is better rendered in Arabic as (I was safe).

I also disagree because the way you explained it you remove the sense that there was a possibility of harm. It is better to translate it as I became safe or I received no harm. The reason that I used the receive because clearly there is the Receive and deliver aspect in the derivatives of the root. As in

ASLAMTUKA AL KITAB which I will translate as I made you receive the book (with the sense that the book is intact and that I delivered it in an amicable manner. That is the no harm component)

Please grab an extensive Classical Arabic grammar book and all this will be explained to you. This is not the Modern Arabic that you learn in school. You have to go out and research this Arabic. You intuitions do not work with this Arabic because this Arabic is foreign to you.

Thanks and I am actually working on it.

Salaam and have a great visit to the Dominican republic

hussein

progod

I understand your misunderstandings. But check an intensive grammar book on the form IV in Cl. Arabic. Your meanings are valid but they are not the only ones. My meanings are also ways in which the form of the verb can be used. Arabic forms have more than one shade of meaing that they can give to a root. But you have to check an intensive grammar book to get past the popular understanding. You gave popular usages of the word and popular understandings of the words in use, which happen to be correct. But consider the form. The form can mutate the meaning of the root in a number of specified ways. THose ways are specified in intensive grammar books. Look for one and read it and then you will know what Im talking about. The one I have is not in hand but I list it as a source in some of the articles on my site, if you look at the bottom of some of those articles you will be able to find the grammar book that Im using. If you can get your hands on it then you will know what im talking about a little better.

Godbless,
Anwar

jonny_k

The reason I am asking is to have a clear vision to share (according to brother Damon's suggestion) that will be the foundation of the new "Islamicreform.org" site and the base of all unity.

Khi- Salam. I dont like 2 see the term Islmic Reform coz this wld indicate tht it was not true or outdated in it's original form n thus needs 2 be adjusted 2 society. No our way of life shld be according 2 the Quran not vice versa. We r 2 search 4 the logical meaning in the context of the Quran. I wld call it the revival of true Islam based on Quran Alone.

Here is a list for discussion on what you may think constitutes a Muslim

Believing in and upholding the commands of 6151-153.

Khi- Yes i believe thts correct.

Believing in and upholding all the social and legal laws of the Quran as per 37.

Khi- Absolutely, 2 the best of our ability.

Believing that the traditional interpretations and rituals must be followed.

Khi- Traditional interpretations if they suit the context in the Quran correctly then yes otherwise no. Fundamental traditional meanings of Arabic Quranic words shld however be used in context. Inventing new meanings wld destroy the meaning of the Quran. Regarding the rituals tht issue cld be debated.

Believing in the Quran's text (word for word, verse for verse).

Khi- Absolutely.

Believing that messengers will come after Mohammed.

Khi- Absolutely n strictly messengers only who r NOT Prophets(those coming with a new scripture/law).

Believing in the number 19 as a sign of the Quran.

Khi- Absolutely.

Believing that 2 verses (128&129) must be removed from the Quran.

Khi- Actually the correct phrasing wld be 'removed from the Mushaf' where the Mushaf doesnt equal 2 Quran. Ive written an article on this at
http//19.org/forum/index.php?t=msg&goto=4320&rid=222&S=3ce3468246c5d1bff0138642f8fac4f3#msg_4320
N yes i believe those two verses NEVER BELONGED 2 THE QURAN N NOW WE HAVE CLEAR MATHEMATICAL EVIDENCE 2 SHOW THIS.

This post is addressed to everyone...Those for the unity, and those against it, and those who could not care one way or another.

Let your voices be heard...

Khi- U heard mine bro. Now it's upto u wht u make of it. GOD Bless!

Fahad1

salam.

Here is a list for discussion on what you may think constitutes a Muslim

Believing in and upholding the commands of 6151-153.

yes . and believing in and upholding the all the cammands in the koran .

Believing in and upholding all the social and legal laws of the Quran as per 37.

yes .

Believing that the traditional interpretations and rituals must be followed.

traditional interpretion is not necessarily true . and since the details of some rituals are not in the koran , this issue is debatable.

Believing in the Quran's text (word for word, verse for verse).

yes.

Believing that messengers will come after Mohammed.

messengers like the angels of death ,yes .

Believing in the number 19 as a sign of the Quran.

ppl can have different understanding about how exactly number 19 is a sign .

Believing that 2 verses (128&129) must be removed from the Quran.

no.

progod

There is no need for us to be Muslim anyway. Yes Islam is outdated and it was always an inappropriate religion as it concerns the Koran.

Godbless,
ProGod

unknownuser

Peace Anwar,

There is no need for us to be Muslim anyway. Yes Islam is outdated and it was always an inappropriate religion as it concerns the Koran.

That depends on how one words Muslim and Islam to begin with, no?

Personally, by understanding these words by the very nature of discussions previously held on these words and how their usage and application pertains to Quran, I believe these are not proper nouns. Any thoughts?

And by the way, islam has never been outdated nor becoming a muslim. The underlying fundamental principals of GOD's System has always been the same throughout history.

unknownuser

Here is a list for discussion on what you may think constitutes a Muslim

Believing in and upholding the commands of 6151-153.

You must also be willing to kill and be killed for Gods cause to be a Muslim... cant forget that one

That's one that sets it apart from the two major religions

Fahad1

Here is a list for discussion on what you may think constitutes a Muslim

Believing in and upholding the commands of 6151-153.

You must also be willing to kill and be killed for God?s cause to be a Muslim... cant forget that one

That's one that sets it apart from the two major religions

yes . we must not forget that one.
its better than turning the other cheek .
SLAP!

progod

God bless,

Peace Anwar,

progod wrote
There is no need for us to be Muslim anyway. Yes Islam is outdated and it was always an inappropriate religion as it concerns the Koran.

That depends on how one words Muslim and Islam to begin with, no?

Personally, by understanding these words by the very nature of discussions previously held on these words and how their usage and application pertains to Quran, I believe these are not proper nouns. Any thoughts?

They are and they aren't. There is the language of the Koran and then there is the language that people use now and have used during the time after the Koran. Just as the Latin bible was written in ancient latin and that langauge is specific to its time and has its own usages (even if it can be learned and understood today) which have nothing to do with how we might use the same latin words today that it employs, the Koran was written in an ancient Cl. Arabic which is specific to its time and has its own usages (even if it can be learned and understood today) which have nothing to do with how we might use the same Arabic words today that it employs.

Yes, I believe that the Koran was written in an ancient language, with ancient words that belong to that time and that time only. BUT LISTEN, ITS MESSAGE IS WHAT IS TIMELESS, NOT ITS LANGUAGE. Let me repeat that, THE LANGUAGE IS DATED BUT THE MESSAGE IS TIMELESS. Some people have an issue with this because they think that an ancient language is not capable of expressing modern concepts and ideas. But everyone should understand that all the words that we have today to express new concepts are not new. WE PULL FROM OLD WORDS TO NAME NEW CONCEPTS. So God, especially, is quite capable of composiing a timeless message in a dated langauge. In the language of the Koran, which is Jahileeyah Classical Arabic, Islam and muslim are not proper nouns but in todays world and for over a thousand years, after the Koran, these words have been used as proper nouns.

First let me say that I have never been trying to change the meaning of Islam. All this time I have been trying to clarify what islam really is and how those who follow the Koran should not even be calling themselves Muslim or their religion Islam.

Islam IS a proper noun in todays world and it has been for over a thousand years. Islam consists of the beliefs that are the common beliefs of Sunnis, Shiites and Sufis, with all their sects and factions(which may also include the Ahmadeeyas). Unfortunately, I cannot include fringe groups whether positive or negative because they do not form the basis of the people who call themselves Muslims and their religion Islam. Whether the people here like that or not, that is the fact of the matter.

Everyone here, out of pure brainwashing and misconception, believes that Islam is the true religion and that whatever falsehood that Muslims follow must be thrown out to make true Islam. But Islam doesn't mean pure religion or submission to God, and its main concern is not following the Koran unfortunately, it is following in the way of Muhammad. Despite the fact that they view his way mistakenly, just as Christians view Christ's way mistakenly.

But maybe everyone here is just here to save Islam, and they will do it any cost. Maybe truth is not the real issue here, and I've' got it all twisted.

Because the basis of Islam is to follow Muhammad, it makes sense that groups would arise that would try to squeeze out those practices that truly are not based on following Muhammad. That is where you guys would come into play (and where I used to come into play), especially if you insist on calling yourselves Muslim. But you are a fringe group, like it or not. The only similarity that you have with the Muslims as it concerns the idea of Islam as it exists today is the idea of following Muhammad. What I'm trying to do with you guys is like what I would be trying to do with Jews, if I were to try to convince them that Judaism is not the religion of God. Judaism doesn't mean submission to God, or even following Moses teachings, i.e. the real Torah despite the fact that that is their proclaimed common ground. Just like Islam doesn't mean submission to God or even
following Muhammad's teachings, which is really the Koran, despite the fact that that is their proclaimed common ground.

And by the way, islam has never been outdated nor becoming a muslim. The underlying fundamental principals of GOD's System has always been the same throughout history.

Islam was outdated the very first moment that someone decided to use the word to describe followers of Muhammad and his message. Sects and their exotic, mystical or ambigous names is a an outdating thing completely. Had those people been more concerned with calling themselves submissive to God rather than with some 'cool' mystical and ambigous religious title maybe we would have the problems we have today. Maybe those people would have kept their sites on God by saying that they were submissive to God instead of Muslims. It is obvious that just about everyone here and all Muslims have been more concerned with this title Islam rather than what their religon should actually be, and be called.

It's just like what happened in Senegal. In Senegal Muslims (even amongst themselves) are called 'jureet' which means someone who prays alot. Yeah maybe its good that Muslims pray but that title takes away from what Muslims are really about (follwoing Muhammad), such an ambigous name makes room for alot of (mis)interpretation. But atleast it has more concrete meaning to the people who use the term than Islam has to everyone who uses the term Islam.

I hope i was clear, I know that what I'm saying is hard for most people to get.

Godbless,
ProGod

savage_carrot

Peace Anwar,

It can be a little hard to follow, so to summarise are you saying that for example, islam means compliance, period...not compliance to God as a whole? And muslim means submitter, not a submitter to God as a whole?

But maybe everyone here is just here to save Islam, and they will do it any cost. Maybe truth is not the real issue here, and I've' got it all twisted.

Thus, by using the above... if someone claims to be saving islam then all he is really doing is saving compliance?

I hope i got that right? Or please clarify...

progod

Peace,

Peace Anwar,

It can be a little hard to follow, so to summarise are you saying that for example, islam means compliance, period...not compliance to God as a whole? And muslim means submitter, not a submitter to God as a whole?

Yes, Islam means compliance, period, not compliance to God as whole. You've got it. And muslim only means 'submissive' and not submissive to God as a whole. That is atleast in Classical Arabic.

Now what it means to the modern world and what it has meant to Muslims for over 1000 years now (after the Koran) is another issue. But it is an issue that has nothing to do with Classical Arabic despite the lies and interpretations of the scholars.

Quote
But maybe everyone here is just here to save Islam, and they will do it any cost. Maybe truth is not the real issue here, and I've' got it all twisted.

Thus, by using the above... if someone claims to be saving islam then all he is really doing is saving compliance?

In its classical Arabic sense yes. But when I said it in that sentence above I meant it in the sense that Muslims have been understanding the word for over a thousand years now, which is basically Mohammadenism in all its "accepted" forms, from moderate to extreme.

I hope i got that right? Or please clarify...

Yeah, you got it right. I'm glad you did. It is very hard for Muslims to free themselves of the brainwashing that they have been raised with and see Islam, both the word and the religion, as it really is.

Godbless,
ProGod