People of the Qur'an are more divided?
-
People are individuals and no two people are exactly the same or have the same views in all the subjects/topics. This is a fact in all sects/religions/races...etc.
So, if people have disagreements ,this is natural. It does not mean "divided" .
Qoran confirms this ,but asks that we respect our differences and find a common ground in "GOD Alone" and the basics of being good and having good morals.
Respecting others includes respecting their choice providing they do not aggress.
GOD bless.
Peace.That is also my view.
Also, in a sense, the Qur'an is new. There is predominante view today or at least a limited range of interpretations that are viewed as "cannonical". Of course those views are "fossilized" and impose lie on the real history of the understanding of the Qur'an. So a lot of what is done by Qur'anists is investigative and therefore open to many possiboities, somo more fortunate than others. It is something that has to be done if we are going to have the Qur'an and not turn it into a decorative very much worshipped object.
On the other hand, as good logic says, a nromal society is one that is diverse where any opinion may be possible without it meaning enmity or hostility. That living and rubbing together is what makes a normal healthy living. We experience it inside the family and inside any circle without it being a tragedy or something bad. That is the way to evolve and go through life and having lived.
Salaam
-
Who?
On one hand, that is true. You have feminist, NWO science supporting, atheist allying, ritually praying Edip Yuksel and then you have people like Sam Gerrans, who can be very dismissive but at least does not spew junk ideologies and talks about how the elite is teaching corrupt science and brainwashing people. Even then, I agree on some things with Edip Yuksel while I disagree on some things with Sam Gerrans. On this forum, no two members believe exactly the same things. The Quran is a message for mankind, not a message for a particular religious group. You will find many groups addressed. Simply calling yourself "Quran Alone Muslim" (trademark registered; copyrighted; all rights reserved) is sectarian since you are making a distincition between yourself and others "muslims" (peacemakers? submitters? implementers of soundness?)
Even in the Quran God instructs some men to stay behind in war to study the deen (obligation? judgment?) It is not like they all magically knew what to do just because a messenger was there.
Why do we even need to conform? That is a very collectivist thing to do. Everything in life is made up of individuals, whether they be households, businesses, national populations or governments. No two people are the same.
-
Peace.
People are individuals and no two people are exactly the same or have the same views in all the subjects/topics. This is a fact in all sects/religions/races...etc.
So, if people have disagreements ,this is natural. It does not mean "divided" .
Qoran confirms this ,but asks that we respect our differences and find a common ground in "GOD Alone" and the basics of being good and having good morals.
Respecting others includes respecting their choice providing they do not aggress.I agree with this to a certain degree, but there are also problems with this notion. If we look at things from the perspective of the Sunni and/or Shia, the so-called Qur'an-Alone movement looks insanely "divided", even when it comes to basic ideas. Both of those groups embrace principles regarding the 5 Pillars of Islam. When it comes to Qur'anist groups as a unit, in comparison to a 5-Pillar ideology
-
They don't agree on the "shahaada" - some of the differences there are pretty stark.
-
They don't agree on "salaat", or (in some instances) even what the term means and implies. For those who believe it to refer to prayer, they can't agree on whether they're supposed to do 2 prayers, 3 prayers, 5 prayers, or even 7 prayers! Some people believe it refers to a general type of communion or meditation with God or with others, and some people have different meanings altogether.
-
They don't agree on "zakaat", or (again) even what the term means. Some people say it refers to 'purity', and some people say it refers to 'charity'; some people say it means something completely different than both of those concepts. For the ones who say it refers to charity, some believe it means a certain percentage of one's income (like the traditional-Islamic 2.5%), while others say that it simply refers to the 'excess' of what you have. There are many variances in what this even implies.
-
There's vast disagreement on "siyaam". Most people I've talked to say that this refers to fasting, but some people even disagree with that notion. For those who believe in fasting during the month of Ramadhan (and some don't believe in that either, citing that "ramadan" isn't referring to a month at all), there's still disagreement regarding the degree of fasting. Some believe that people should fast for a 30-day month, while I've seen other people believe that the timeline of fasting is as low as 3 days.
-
There's even a massive disagreement on "hajj" and what this means. Some people believe it doesn't refer to a pilgrimage at all, and many of those who do believe it to be a pilgrimage don't know whether this pilgrimage goes to Makkah, Jerusalem, India, or even Egypt!
My overall point is this the Qur'an-Alone group is extremely "divided", in nearly every sense of the word. They don't even agree on what it means to follow the "Qur'an Alone" in a general sense - some believers follow traditional (historical) connotations inherent in the hadiyth and sunna, while some follow the Appendices of Dr. Rashad Khalifa, etc. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there really isn't a Qur'an-Alone "movement" at all; they're just a bunch of random people believing whatever they want to believe. In order for there to be a movement of any sort, there has to be a unifying factor to establish a connection between the group. In this case, there really isn't.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
-
Salam 'Alaikum,
One guy was telling in Youtube that people who follow "Only Qur'an" are more divided than Sunni and Shia put together.
Why is that so? hypno
The most "United" society in the world now is North Korea.
No differing opinion, no dissent..
And those who dare to have differing opinion (than the one approved by authority) shall face harsh and torturing punishment.Religion and occult are invented for political purposes.
Religion and occult are NOT invented to seek out truth or to foster innovation and creativity.
To obtain a political objective, unity IS A MUST.
Everyone must have only one opinion and follow one command issued by one authority.Diversity of opinion in "Only Qur'an" society is a problem..
IF
"Only Qur'an" is a religion / occult with political objective in mind.Otherwise, it is not a problem at all....
-
Peace.
I agree with this to a certain degree, but there are also problems with this notion. If we look at things from the perspective of the Sunni and/or Shia, the so-called Qur'an-Alone movement looks insanely "divided", even when it comes to basic ideas. Both of those groups embrace principles regarding the 5 Pillars of Islam. When it comes to Qur'anist groups as a unit, in comparison to a 5-Pillar ideology
-
They don't agree on the "shahaada" - some of the differences there are pretty stark.
-
They don't agree on "salaat", or (in some instances) even what the term means and implies. For those who believe it to refer to prayer, they can't agree on whether they're supposed to do 2 prayers, 3 prayers, 5 prayers, or even 7 prayers! Some people believe it refers to a general type of communion or meditation with God or with others, and some people have different meanings altogether.
-
They don't agree on "zakaat", or (again) even what the term means. Some people say it refers to 'purity', and some people say it refers to 'charity'; some people say it means something completely different than both of those concepts. For the ones who say it refers to charity, some believe it means a certain percentage of one's income (like the traditional-Islamic 2.5%), while others say that it simply refers to the 'excess' of what you have. There are many variances in what this even implies.
-
There's vast disagreement on "siyaam". Most people I've talked to say that this refers to fasting, but some people even disagree with that notion. For those who believe in fasting during the month of Ramadhan (and some don't believe in that either, citing that "ramadan" isn't referring to a month at all), there's still disagreement regarding the degree of fasting. Some believe that people should fast for a 30-day month, while I've seen other people believe that the timeline of fasting is as low as 3 days.
-
There's even a massive disagreement on "hajj" and what this means. Some people believe it doesn't refer to a pilgrimage at all, and many of those who do believe it to be a pilgrimage don't know whether this pilgrimage goes to Makkah, Jerusalem, India, or even Egypt!
My overall point is this the Qur'an-Alone group is extremely "divided", in nearly every sense of the word. They don't even agree on what it means to follow the "Qur'an Alone" in a general sense - some believers follow traditional (historical) connotations inherent in the hadiyth and sunna, while some follow the Appendices of Dr. Rashad Khalifa, etc. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there really isn't a Qur'an-Alone "movement" at all; they're just a bunch of random people believing whatever they want to believe. In order for there to be a movement of any sort, there has to be a unifying factor to establish a connection between the group. In this case, there really isn't.
Peace,
Ahmad
The 5 pillars are made up and using them as a reference point is irrelevant and demonstrates a status quo bias. We should focus on what is important, such as 262. Does it mention salat? zakat? fasting? It simply says believe in God, the last day and work righteous deeds. Any monotheist, however he classifies himself, should be able to get behind that.
Also, God does not tell us to form a "Quran Alone Movement." God told the people following the messenger to be witnesses to people just as the messenger was a witness to them. We can do that. Spread the message, not a dogmatic religion.
-
-
Peace upon all!
As a group we are divided due to humans general expectations of a pyramidical structure for so called unity. Historically, societies that form along the structure of a pyramid last longer, but are also easily corrupted at all levels. While the higher classes get corrupted by greed, the lower classes get corrupted by identity politics to find personal value. These are the so called earthly sicknes that drives us further away from the path of truth and Allah.
My understanding is that we, Quran alone followers, are a small minority. While we live under immense pressure from traditionalist, we still choose to follow our path free from the shackles of tradition. Therfore we exist in the darker corners of the internet, trying to find others with the same view. In our seeking for the truth we will find unity, truth is our unity. This is an ongoing process that organizations have a hard time to adopt.
We could ask ourselves what kind of unity would be desirable within an framework that encourages honesty and truth? The traditionalists have tradition and political power on their side. They also maintain good public relations. Even though this is the case, the traditionalists have huge differences among them. Unity for them is an illusion. Some may have a glimse of unity facing a common enemy or problem, but when this disappears unity becomes a part of the past. Therfore the truth is not their source of uniting, it is simply identity politics and imbalance of power. Truth unites naturally. If we have truth on our side, it will automatically make us want to unite. I think this is where we have a lot of work to do. Still, being free from tradition makes it seem far more possible than being a follower sunni or shia doctrine. -
Peace.
I agree with this to a certain degree, but there are also problems with this notion. If we look at things from the perspective of the Sunni and/or Shia, the so-called Qur'an-Alone movement looks insanely "divided", even when it comes to basic ideas. Both of those groups embrace principles regarding the 5 Pillars of Islam. When it comes to Qur'anist groups as a unit, in comparison to a 5-Pillar ideology
-
They don't agree on the "shahaada" - some of the differences there are pretty stark.
-
They don't agree on "salaat", or (in some instances) even what the term means and implies. For those who believe it to refer to prayer, they can't agree on whether they're supposed to do 2 prayers, 3 prayers, 5 prayers, or even 7 prayers! Some people believe it refers to a general type of communion or meditation with God or with others, and some people have different meanings altogether.
-
They don't agree on "zakaat", or (again) even what the term means. Some people say it refers to 'purity', and some people say it refers to 'charity'; some people say it means something completely different than both of those concepts. For the ones who say it refers to charity, some believe it means a certain percentage of one's income (like the traditional-Islamic 2.5%), while others say that it simply refers to the 'excess' of what you have. There are many variances in what this even implies.
-
There's vast disagreement on "siyaam". Most people I've talked to say that this refers to fasting, but some people even disagree with that notion. For those who believe in fasting during the month of Ramadhan (and some don't believe in that either, citing that "ramadan" isn't referring to a month at all), there's still disagreement regarding the degree of fasting. Some believe that people should fast for a 30-day month, while I've seen other people believe that the timeline of fasting is as low as 3 days.
-
There's even a massive disagreement on "hajj" and what this means. Some people believe it doesn't refer to a pilgrimage at all, and many of those who do believe it to be a pilgrimage don't know whether this pilgrimage goes to Makkah, Jerusalem, India, or even Egypt!
My overall point is this the Qur'an-Alone group is extremely "divided", in nearly every sense of the word. They don't even agree on what it means to follow the "Qur'an Alone" in a general sense - some believers follow traditional (historical) connotations inherent in the hadiyth and sunna, while some follow the Appendices of Dr. Rashad Khalifa, etc. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that there really isn't a Qur'an-Alone "movement" at all; they're just a bunch of random people believing whatever they want to believe. In order for there to be a movement of any sort, there has to be a unifying factor to establish a connection between the group. In this case, there really isn't.
Peace,
Ahmad
This is true, even I thought like that. More I study on the Qur'an Alone Movement, more I see they can't accept the concepts of each other. Infact, there is debate between "Qur'an Alone" vs "Quranist" hypno
What I personally do is, I read the ahadith (narrations). If it came from multiple sources, I just take the hints from that.
Like, in only "Quranic" terms, no one still agrees what is the meaning of "Salat". So atleast, I go back to the history/narrations to check what actually is "Salat". I'm sure hundreds of people didn't lie regarding "Ruku", "Sujud", "Facing Qiblah"
I was more confused when i heard Qiblah is not in Makkah hypno
Peace! peace
-
-
This is true, even I thought like that. More I study on the Qur'an Alone Movement, more I see they can't accept the concepts of each other. Infact, there is debate between "Qur'an Alone" vs "Quranist" hypno
What I personally do is, I read the ahadith (narrations). If it came from multiple sources, I just take the hints from that.
Like, in only "Quranic" terms, no one still agrees what is the meaning of "Salat". So atleast, I go back to the history/narrations to check what actually is "Salat". I'm sure hundreds of people didn't lie regarding "Ruku", "Sujud", "Facing Qiblah"
I was more confused when i heard Qiblah is not in Makkah hypno
Peace! peace
Salaam armom
Breaking shackles is not easy and rapid. It took me years to get out of hadithi propaganda and break the shackles. But once I got conviction that Quraan is the criteria there was no turning back.
-
The more I am at it the more convinced I am that we do need to rediscover the Qur'an.
There is too much eagerness to square the detail, and may be not enough awareness that we are missing the forest from looking at the trees.
For instance, i you are giving an anesthesia for a surgery, what is the fores? That it serves its purpose of making the patient not feel the pain, while not harming him. The forest would be the whole instrumental and chemicals you will use for that. It is obvious that those will be the ones that for that particular operation and person will best serve the purpose of keeping him without feeling pain while not harming him.
It is by grasping well the forest that we may go into it and examine carefully its trees and get knowledge a to how each of them works.
It is to be noticed that for instance Qur'an does nto go much into dates and into specific places or even specific persons. That is a hint that what matters are not the places or the dates but what is being enlived before our eyes.
Many times it happens that people complain that the Qur'an does nto go headlong into detail. If we do believe that the Qur'an is the revelation God did want to give us, guaranteed, ou understanding should be that if we are not given specific details, we simply do not need them for he teachings the Qur'an wants to transmit us.
Salaam
Salaam
-
Salaam armom
Breaking shackles is not easy and rapid. It took me years to get out of hadithi propaganda and break the shackles. But once I got conviction that Quraan is the criteria there was no turning back.
I agree brother, but have you noticed that no one still agrees on SALAT. It's a very important matter according to the Qur'an, and nearly 82 times mentioned. But we still couldn't even agree what does the word SALAT means.
So some starts praying Physically while others aren't praying and believing that it's not physical ritual. And you will find many threads in this forum who are arguing on how many prayers are there and all are claiming to be arabic experts. They all proving through arabic their point of view and still couldn't agree with the prayer which is an important subject of our faith.
If you look deeply, we are really getting divided, If not then why there has to be a debate between a "Quran Alone" vs "Quranist"
I am still seeking for the truth and I hope God guides me and everyone to find the truth.
-
I agree brother, but have you noticed that no one still agrees on SALAT. It's a very important matter according to the Qur'an, and nearly 82 times mentioned. But we still couldn't even agree what does the word SALAT means.
If salat is not detailed in Quran as a ritual then why we want to make it a ritual? Why not take it as an arabic word which has a meaning of following closely and try to understand it in the context of ayats?
If it is meant to be a ritual then would it not be fair to detail it in the Quran in a simple way so everyone could follow it without wrestling to find the details?
-
If salat is not detailed in Quran as a ritual then why we want to make it a ritual? Why not take it as an arabic word which has a meaning of following closely and try to understand it in the context of ayats?
If it is meant to be a ritual then would it not be fair to detail it in the Quran in a simple way so everyone could follow it without wrestling to find the details?
So if the Qur'anic prostration and bowing down is not physical, then why do the bible have bowing and prostrating too as a physical sense?
-
So if the Qur'anic prostration and bowing down is not physical, then why do the bible have bowing and prostrating too as a physical sense?
If you think that the Bible is the Injeel in the Quran then you may be suprised that root word which is Nuun-Jiim-Lam (--ل and it does not mean Bible it means
evangel, to become verdant, disclose/manifest, have wide/large eyes.
anjala to pasture (cattle) on herbage.
minjal luxuriant (robes), clever camel-driver.
Has been implied to mean "good news" due to 616. Much of the message of Jesus is implied to have been forgotten by his people, see 514.
wide wound, reaping hook, toothed/serrated/plain edge.injil n.com. 33, 348, 365, 546, 547, 566, 568, 5110, 7157, 9111, 4829, 5727
Lane's Lexicon, Volume 8, pages 282 ## http//ejtaal.net/aa/#q=njl
-
So if the Qur'anic prostration and bowing down is not physical, then why do the bible have bowing and prostrating too as a physical sense?
Please explore
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html
Brother the Quran is the criteria, so are you using bible to define the Quran.
-
Salam,
I agree brother, but have you noticed that no one still agrees on SALAT. It's a very important matter according to the Qur'an, and nearly 82 times mentioned. But we still couldn't even agree what does the word SALAT means.
So some starts praying Physically while others aren't praying and believing that it's not physical ritual. And you will find many threads in this forum who are arguing on how many prayers are there and all are claiming to be arabic experts. They all proving through arabic their point of view and still couldn't agree with the prayer which is an important subject of our faith.
If you look deeply, we are really getting divided, If not then why there has to be a debate between a "Quran Alone" vs "Quranist"
Why does it bother you that people agree or disagree? That is exactly what the freedom of choice that God has given us is about - that we challenge each other and we challenge our understanding (like Abraham challenged his own understanding of the the nature of God).
Also, be careful you are not trying to replace the Sunni sect that you have grown-up with with a new sect that you are searching for. Following the Quran is about personal salvation, not group mentality.
And to answer your final point, we are to be "Muslims" (not Quranists, not Quran Alone, etc..). Any name other than what God has given is creating a sect.
Regards,
Layth
-
Salam,
Why does it bother you that people agree or disagree? That is exactly what the freedom of choice that God has given us is about - that we challenge each other and we challenge our understanding (like Abraham challenged his own understanding of the the nature of God).
Also, be careful you are not trying to replace the Sunni sect that you have grown-up with with a new sect that you are searching for. Following the Quran is about personal salvation, not group mentality.
And to answer your final point, we are to be "Muslims" (not Quranists, not Quran Alone, etc..). Any name other than what God has given is creating a sect.
Regards,
Layth
Great post.
Salaam
-
Salam,
And to answer your final point, we are to be "Muslims" (not Quranists, not Quran Alone, etc..). Any name other than what God has given is creating a sect.
Regards,
Layth
peace all.
these words are "height of excellency"
God bless you layth
-
Salam,
Why does it bother you that people agree or disagree? That is exactly what the freedom of choice that God has given us is about - that we challenge each other and we challenge our understanding (like Abraham challenged his own understanding of the the nature of God).
Also, be careful you are not trying to replace the Sunni sect that you have grown-up with with a new sect that you are searching for. Following the Quran is about personal salvation, not group mentality.
And to answer your final point, we are to be "Muslims" (not Quranists, not Quran Alone, etc..). Any name other than what God has given is creating a sect.
Regards,
Layth
Salaam brother,
Thanks for your reply.Honestly, I was never into any sects now or before )
Always tried to search for truth.Majority of the people follow Tablighi Jamat in our area and people can't go against them as these people pray, zikr etc whole day.
But I used reason and kept searching. As I've read the Qur'an, I found Allah says there is no sect in Islam. And after that I started calling myself only "Muslim" following Qur'an and Sahih Hadith. It's recently that I found the videos of Edip yuksel who was telling Hadith is not the source of Islam and I started researching more and found about Rashad Khalifa.
And then I read that even he is wrong about 19 theory. tempt
So, now still searching and I appreciate the answers that I am getting here from people which is helping me in my research.
Many of the answers seems logically and many I do find illogical.Again, thanks for your efforts of answering )
-
Please explore
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/meaning-of-SuJuD-from-Quran.html
Brother the Quran is the criteria, so are you using bible to define the Quran.
Thanks brother, will read the article.
And no, I am not using the bible to define the Quran. As the bible still contains some words from God and it's the old scriptures, I just game an example that we also find quite similar prayer on the bible. Allahu A'lam
I still need to find atleast home historical facts regarding "Salat Sessions" which is not bowing or prostrating.
Do contribute if you have more information.
Thank you for your efforts!
-
Physically prostration gives a lot of peace. It does a lot of good. It is restful, feels great, gives peace and expansion.
I cannot do it due to a physical condition and I miss it to the point that the whole salaa, as ritual for me now has no benefit that I can notice and that I cannot get by praying in some other way.
That said, physical qualities of experiences have theire parallel in the nonphysical realm. In a sense, when we feel the sensation of postrating, we are feeling the sensation of pure islam, abandonment in the hands of God.
When we bend in ruku3 in deference, in acknowledgement of Gods benevolence towards us adn feel grateful, it is paralleled in the non physical by the recognition of God providing for us, for our existence and development.
So I do recognize the essential meaning of prostration and bending and of rituals in general, they do have a value as physical confirmation of the confirmation of essence. But rituals devoid of essential meaning is nothing, are a trevesti and a door to hyporicy. A waste.
It is also a matter of individual make up. For some people ritual may be absolutely necessary, for others they may be completely superfluous.
In this as in many other matters there is no need to be dogmatic. Let us think of the sura Al ma'ida, at this table of God we are given everything and the best, we should not reject anything and we do not have all the same capacity or tast to eat the same amounts of every single thing. So let each help himself to whatever does him best service.
Salaam
