Is Swine Hallal
-
Salaam Sweet Br Jaxal,
But why are all keep saying that it means unclean?
Peace
Sis Majidah -
Peace all,
All food was lawful to the children of Israel except that which Israel had forbidden to himself before the Taurat was revealed. Say Bring then the Taurat and read it, if you are truthful.
Has anyone who says swine has been sanctioned by God taken this advice? I have, I?ve asked those who say they have the torah and no it?s not in the law. It?s Talmud. That was easy!
Have you at least checked historical references? I have, they are unable to find how this prohibition originated other than to speculate. That was easy!
Have any of the scientific minds declared swine unfit for human consumption? No.
I will provide historical references to anyone interested.
I say let's take God's advice. It's easy.
-
SaLaM PB
I just have to say. This is better than Jerry Springer Show Looooooooooollllllllll.
Well, the pig is a clawless animal/qaudruped, hence, at the time these ayats were being revealed, the pig would have had to have been halal for both the Jews and the Muslims, because it was never made haram by Allah in first place.
4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that part the hoof the camel, because he cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you.
5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you.
6 And the hare, because she cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, she is unclean unto you.
7 And the swine, because he parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, but cheweth not the cud, he is unclean unto you.With that said, lahma khinzerin cannot mean pig in the literal sense, because that would then contradict ayats 55 and 6146.
No you got that wrong. It actually effects the rotation of Jupiter.
Hmmm...I see. You prefer to take the word of scriptures which are known to have been tampered with, hence, doubtful, rather than, the word of a scripture--Al-Quran, which is untampered and without doubt. is this your position? You know, Jax, you should just stop posting, because you sound like a braying ass
3119 ...surely the most hateful of voices is braying of the asses.
-
PEACE, GROURSELF,
Peace all,
All food was lawful to the children of Israel except that which Israel had forbidden to himself before the Taurat was revealed. Say Bring then the Taurat and read it, if you are truthful.
Has anyone who says swine has been sanctioned by God taken this advice? I have, I?ve asked those who say they have the torah and no it?s not in the law. It?s Talmud. That was easy!
Have you at least checked historical references? I have, they are unable to find how this prohibition originated other than to speculate. That was easy!
Have any of the scientific minds declared swine unfit for human consumption? No.
I will provide historical references to anyone interested.
I say let's take God's advice. It's easy.
Thanks much for your input. Perhaps they will believe you! I think, as you some times say, "it's a slam dunk", that khinzerin cannot mean a literal pig. Don't disappear on us now. Peace.
-
PEACE, MZ357,
Salaams SC,
I believe the quranic Dictionery explained this"lahma khinzerin" = Flash you see is Bad
and "see" is not just with the eyes ,it can be see,smell taste -literally using any of your senses.
I am into foods and believe me meat you buy today ,unless you keep it in a fridge will be off tomorow ,and more then likely cause food poisoning - and you can usualy tell from its smell if its off.
Just imagine meat in the hot countries.
Salaams All.
Good point. A blind person, for example, would have to rely on smell in determining the quality of food. Al-Quran was meant for the blind as well.
-
SaLaM PB
because you sound like a braying ass
Brother you were sounding like that a long time ago. I just caught it from you. Its terrible. I know
As for the Torah, i can see you still have not made any efforts to increase ur knowledge about it. So while u rant about how Khanzeer means ill-seeming and bad and rotten lollllll, i will sit back and just watch you humiliate urself. I enjoy it lol . At times, i will join in and contribute to this hilarious thread.
But why are all keep saying that it means unclean?
Well Priest thinks he has the truth while we are all blinded by the EVIL CORRUPTION of the Quran Lollllllllllllllll. Khanzeer means pig. To say anything would be down to the lack in knowledge about the Quran and its language http//www.geocities.com/bigjaxal/s1.gif
Have any of the scientific minds declared swine unfit for human consumption? No.
Thats is incorrect. Dont post false and ridiculous information like Priest does.
-
Salaam Sweet Br Jaxal,
But why are all keep saying that it means unclean?
Peace
Sis MajidahMain Entry KHANIZA compound word comprised of khinz-bad and ara- I see it bad; to stink; to be evil; to be bad; dirty; piggy; pig/swine/hog; proud; greedy; stubborn, obstinate, stupidly perverse. The Dictionary of the Holy Quran, by Abdul Mannan Omar, pg. 166
-
JAXAL As for the Torah, i can see you still have not made any efforts to increase ur knowledge about it. So while u rant about how Khanzeer means ill-seeming and bad and rotten lollllll, i will sit back and just watch you humiliate urself. I enjoy it . At times, i will join in and contribute to this hilarious thread.
Jaxal, what is the Book of Guidance to all of mankind...the Torah or Al-Quran? Here's a clue for ya 2185. Yeah, by all means, keep watching me humilate myself. LOL!!
-
SaLaM PB
Another word which is a compund. NONSENSICAL. This word is comprised of NON - SENSE - ICAL. It means Lacking intelligible meaning a nonsensical jumble of words.. Something like what comes out of PRIEST. Especially when one does not does his research and blindly beleives what someone else thinks.
by all means, keep watching me humilate myself
Tho misguided, you are a brother to me PB. And i WILL watch u humiliate urself. Funnily God tells us at one point that if we are in doubt, we consult the previous scripture. Amazing isnt it?
-
Peace mz357,
health of people is of prime importance to health authorities world wide and for that countries have taken measures to penalise people for using /selling bad meats AND/BUT not selling PIGS MEAT AS SUCH AND THIS I THINK YOU WILL AGREE was with the help of those with knowledge in this field, health experts and such.
These are the same health authorities who are not banning cigarettes and are allowing people to continue using the most toxic substance ever for the human body. Cigarette smoking has been scientifically proven to cause cancer and at least 10 different diseases and is killing or making ill millions, yet the health authorities have turned a blind eye to that. Cigarette smoking causes more mortality and morbidity than all the other drugs combined, yet it is not banned, because billions of dollars are being made in the cigarette smoking industry, and the authorities care more about making money rather than the health of the people.
And to me this applies to Bad meat ? what the health authorities are banning now using the strong hand of the law . Bad meat causes food poisoning and other things ? and is a killer as well.
Bad meat can kill in a few days, yet Allah in his infinite mercy allows bad meat to be eaten when forced out of need even though it will kill ? Do you mean to say that Allah says when you are starving and cannot find good food, then go ahead and eat bad meat even though it will kill you in a more agonizing way ?
-
Peace Grourself,
Have any of the scientific minds declared swine unfit for human consumption? No.
I did not expect a person like you who seems educated and learned to make an irresponsible statement like that. You tell others to do research before making any statements, yet you yourself do not even bother to do the scientific research and make a statement like this.
Please read the following, if you have not already done so, and verify all the information given by reading the referenced articles in the scientific journals quoted.
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=53218#53218
What surprises me is how come everyone keeps ignoring the grammatical rules while translating "lahma alkhinzeerin". Grammatically, there is NO WAY anyone can translate "lahma alkhinzeerin" into "ill seeming or bad/dirty meat". Making "alkhinzeerin" an adjective of "lahma", will violate the Arabic grammar rules. Grammatically, the ONLY translation of "lahma alkhinzeerin" can be "meat of pig". The relevant rules of Arabic grammar have been posted multiple times by Someone, and I have quoted them at the following link
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=53173#53173
-
SaLaM Tanveer
I was working as a butcher for a year. This is how meat is works. Once the meat is cut fresh its quality is excellent for 1 day unless you freeze it in which case its good for a longer than that. But not all of us do that. Then after one day, you can see it turning brown. ITS STILL GOOD. It stays like that for another day. This is when it becomes really soft. People think its bad and they throw it away. ITS NOT BAD and it will cook better and it tastes better. The meat is matured. After 3 days, it begins to give off smell. Thats when the meat is regarded as being bad.
With pork, its different. I used to work on the counters of a super market. I handled meat, chicken and pork. What i found supprising was that pork was the worst. As a test, i took 2 freshly cut pieces of meat and pork and put them in the chillers. The temprature in the chillers is 5 degrees centegrate. after JUST a week, the meat was being matured where as the PORK HAD FUNGUS ON IT. I did this test with several different types of meat and pork and the result was the same. Never once did i found fungus on meat. ONLY ON PORK. When i showed it to my christian collegues, they were supprised as well.
So, where meat just goes bad, pork goes bad and grows fungus. Its absolutely ridiculous to say pork has no bad health effects.
-
Salaam all,
one thing I have notice is that PB don't give some people salaam, why!?
So maybe he is not here for peace, just arguing and to belittle us.
peace
Sis Majidah -
Peace Grourself,
PB has evaded this question persistently, maybe you can answer.
If the foods mentioned in 6146 were the ONLY foods made haram for Jews due to their punishment, then dead animals, blood, lahma khinzeerin (whatever it means), and "what is dedicated to other than Allah" must be halal for them. If that is true then per 55 all those categories of food will also be halal for mankind, which would DIRECTLY CONTRADICT 6145, how would you explain that ?
According to that logic, even if you translate "lahma khinzeerin" to be "ill seeming bad/dirty meat", it would become halal for mankind per 55, because it was halal for Jews !! MAJOR DIRECT CONTRADICTION with 2173, 53, 6145, 16115
-
Peace Tanveer,
I see that you have shown some more scientific ignorance in your post. Just as expected.
And I notice that you lack proper understanding throughout this debate and when you can?t support your views coherently, you start babbling in irrelevant issues and pointing fingers at others to show how ignorant and careless they are. Well, let me give you a taste of your own invented medicine.
Cirrhosis, a disease, is generally an invasion of microorganisms which cause it and not by meat itself.
Microorganisms are only one cause of cirrhosis; there are many others, and one of the biggest is alcoholic liver disease. Some other non-infectious causes are autoimmune hepatitis, inherited diseases including Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, hemochromatosis, Wilson's disease, galactosemia, and glycogen storage diseases, nonalcoholis steatohepatitis (NASH), blocked bile ducts, drugs and toxins, and congestive heart failure. In addition to that, according to the scientific studies I quoted from, pig meat is another cause of cirrhosis.
Firstly, this has nothing to do with my quote above. You?re simply blabbing about various forms of diseases and nothing substantial to add. Prove to me that all diseases mentioned above by you have anything to do with specifically pig?s meat (the core issue at hand). If not, then don?t waste my time with garbage. I don?t need lectures on diseases. Prove the point at hand.
Secondly, it is medically. scientifically and linguistically incorrect to say that ?pig meat is another cause of cirrhosis?, go figure. Shows your own ignorance in your own field.
Any meat can be infected by such microorganisms which can cause Cirrhosis, hence not specific to pig?s meat, understand
Some more scientific ignorance. This is getting hilarious. Only hepatitis B, C, and D viruses are the microorganisms that can cause cirrhosis, and none of these are transmitted by eating infected meat. The only hepatitis virus that is transmitted by eating infected meat is hepatitis A, which does not cause cirrhosis. Pig's meat causing cirrhosis is not due to it being infected.
Once again, I am not discussing various forms of microorganisms and diseases. And secondly, saying that ?Pig?s meat causing cirrhosis? is once again medically, scientifically and linguistically an incorrect statement. Stay on track dude, be a little focused and taste your own ignorance. Laugh it out with self-infliction, if that helps you.
What conclusions, what proofs, which studies and which journals?
That is what happens when you talk to someone who is ignorant of the scientific process.
No one is talking about any scientific ?process or processes?? Where did you get this from? Another one of your babbles. Stay focused and keep the discussion in line.
I will paste the references of the relevant articles and the scientific journals again. Go look them up in a library and do not be lazy. Any scientific person will easily be able to read what I am writing as follows, and will know exactly which article in which journal
REFERENCES- A.A. NANJI and S.W. FRENCH, "Lancet" 1, 681 (1985).
- T. SORENSEN et al, "Lancet" 2, 241 (1984).
- Food and Agricultural Organization. "Production year book 1975-1983".
- B. AMSTRONG and R. DOLL, "Int. J. Cancer", 15, 617 (1975).
- G.E. GRAY et al, "Br. J. Cancer" 39, 1 (1979).
- R. SMITH, "Br. Med. J" 283, 895 (1981).
- A.A. NANJI and S.K FRENCH, "Cancer" 56, 2711 (1985).
- J.F. KURTZKE, "Acta Neurol Scand" 51, 110 (1975).
- M.C. GRAVES, "Ann Intern Med." 101, 514 (1984).
- A.A. NANJ1, "Int. J. Cardiol" 8, 487 (1985).
- Z. PISA and K. UEMURA, "World Health Stat" 35, 11 (1982).
- A.S. ST-LEGER et al, "Lancet" 1, 1017 (1979).
- A.A. NANJ1 and S.W. FRENCH, "Atherosclerosis" 60 197, 1986
You expect people to go visit libraries upon libraries to find the above referenced articles if at all they carry them, yet hesitate to provide one single web-link that supports any one of the referenced articles which can be readily and easily available, not just for me but for all of us here.
Secondly, after collecting these articles, it would take weeks or months to read and extract the alleged scientific information from them, that is, if time permits. What a waste of time and efforts and as if I have nothing else to do. Clearly, it is you who is not only lazy to provide any substantial backing but uncooperative, arrogant and spending so much time on-line frivolously debating.
Thirdly, I have a hunch that all articles above are inconclusive, unproven or both and are simply theories/assertions/conjectures and nothing concrete.
Fourthly, isn?t there one article on the entire ?World Wide Web? that supports your alleged claims specific to pig?s meat. Hint go google.
Fifthly, you think that all the references you provided above are more authoritative, controlling and supersedes all the links I provided. Did you even care to check the authenticity of the links. I guess not, just bragging and babbling along about some references and then point fingers at me for laziness.
Lastly, almost all members here provide on-line web links to support whatever they quote. Since I provided many links, of course then it becomes easy for you and others to visit those links and respond right away. Either you cannot back-up your own references/assertions to support those conclusive and proven cases specific to pig?s meat via web-links or simply scared of getting exposed for lying, cheating and being hypocritical.
The word ?statistics? is also wrongly used in your own statement above. I do not see any statistics either in your entire post and has nothing to do with my quoted statement.
Some more scientific ignorance. I never used the word "statistics" in my arguments. I used the phrase "statistical significance". Go take a course in statistics and learn what "statistical significance" means, including what "p" value means.
Once again, my above quote has nothing to with science. Now here?s another lesson for you to learn there?s no such thing as ?scientific ignorance?. One can be ignorant of science or scientific studies/analysis but ignorance itself cannot be scientific or unscientific.
Here?s the word ?statistics? used in your previous reply. The fact that the word is used, speaks volumes about your statement above, yet neither statistics nor statistical data provided. What a bummer? You?re not only lying but becoming hysterical. Here
In my last post, I showed you the conclusions of scientific studies that prove that there is a significant (meaning statistically significant) causal correlation between cirrhosis mortality and pork consumption. I gave a list of references at the end, from scientific journals. Please take a course in statistics to understand what statistical significance means, and please read up the referenced articles in those scientific journals, before making a careless and inaccurate statement.
Pig meat is NOT bad by nature/creation.
Says who ? Please back up your claims by scientific studies and give me the references that show that pig meat does not cause disease of noninfectious etiology. I have backed up my claims by an extensive reference list.
Says nature/ceation, our GOD given faculties that even scientific studies rely upon. Simply put, logic. Pig meat or any meat for that matter is NOT bad by the very nature of their creation. Any meat can become bad when infected and/or by noninfectious diseases, and this has nothing to do with specifically pig?s meat. It does not mean that all pigs born in this entire world already carry infectious meat and therefore we mustn?t eat them. Likewise, not all animal meat are bad by nature and by their very creation. There are no scientific studies/analysis that claim otherwise that every pig born must carry infectious meat and neither are there enough studies done on each and every animal on earth. That would be a redundant, misleading, incorrect and a foolish statement. If you cannot grasp this simple notion, then you are simply not fit for further discussions.
All the links you gave, nowhere show that pig meat DOES NOT cause disease of noninfectious origin.
LOL! What a twister and an ignorant statement you bring about? Show me anywhere in those links that it even mentions specifically pig?s meat, let alone your gibberish talks and twisting words. Secondly, LOL, you proved my point. Now think hard on how and what you write, and laugh at yourself.
Anecdotal data??? What I presented was a natural and factual occurring incident, not a scientific theory.
Some more scientific ignorance. It clearly shows that you have no idea what "anecdotal data" means.
Anecdotal data = natural and factual occurring incident, not based on scientific evidence. Anecdotal is not scientific. You say "anecdotal data ???" and then say "what I presented was........" and actually define "anecdotal data" and then at the end equate "anecdotal data" to "scientific theory". Hilarious
Scientific studies are themselves based on natural and factual incidents, without which there wouldn't be any studies to base upon. What are you talking about? You need some serious thinking to do before you babble out and point fingers.
But yeah, go ahead and research all you want on how a human can be transformed into pig and a stick into snake, but please don?t present some baseless scientific unproven and inconclusive analogies or some magical loop-de-loop coming from wonderland into play.
So you do not believe Allah's words when He tells you that He turned Moses' staff into a serpent ?
I can?t speak or claim certainty over something that neither I nor anyone has ever witnessed. What Allah can do or cannot do, is beyond my perceptions and irrelevant of discussion. We are discussing, studying and analyzing Quranic injunctions and contextual understanding of what is written as per our current natural ways. But since you babble and rely upon scientific studies which is quite apparent on all your posts, perhaps you can prove or bring about scientific analysis/journals on how a stick can turn into serpent or a human into pig, as mentioned above? This would be very interesting indeed and will truly expose your redundancies and alleged claims. More serious research and thinking for you to do mate, scientifically.
I have noticed that you did not comment at all on the translation of "lahma alkhinzeerin" according to the Arabic grammar rules. Grammatically, there is NO WAY you or anyone can translate "lahma alkhinzeerin" into "ill seeming meat". Making "alkhinzeerin" an adjective of "lahma", will violate the grammar rules completely. Grammatically, the ONLY translation of "lahma alkhinzeerin" can be "meat of pig". Be careful of mistranslating Allah's words, for that is tantamount to saying lies about Allah
Already been analysed, discussed and translated/interpreted. Cannot contemplate, that is your problem, not mine.
Last but not least, I request you to stay focused, discuss the relevancy of topic/quotes, stop finger-pointing, becoming personal, hysterical, degrading, and reply succinctly. If you do reply back and persist in unethical ways, then I will only answer the relevant points and recommend you take-up some courses that may teach you how to debate/discuss. This will be my last reply given in the fashion similar to yours.
-
SaLaM PB
Another word which is a compund. NONSENSICAL. This word is comprised of NON - SENSE - ICAL. It means Lacking intelligible meaning a nonsensical jumble of words.. Something like what comes out of PRIEST. Especially when one does not does his research and blindly beleives what someone else thinks.
by all means, keep watching me humilate myself
Tho misguided, you are a brother to me PB. And i WILL watch u humiliate urself.
Funnily God tells us at one point that if we are in doubt, we consult the previous scripture. Amazing isnt it
While Allah does tell us to refer to prior books, it is not in total, but for a specific matter.
Btw, we are not brothers.
-
Jaxal and Sweden,
Please dispense with the personal comments. People get personal when they have nothing of value to contribute. If you want to make personal comments, then refer yourselves to the TRASH BIN.
-
PEACE, TANVEER,
What surprises me is how come everyone keeps ignoring the grammatical rules while translating "lahma alkhinzeerin". Grammatically, there is NO WAY anyone can translate "lahma alkhinzeerin" into "ill seeming or bad/dirty meat". Making "alkhinzeerin" an adjective of "lahma", will violate the Arabic grammar rules. Grammatically, the ONLY translation of "lahma alkhinzeerin" can be "meat of pig". The relevant rules of Arabic grammar have been posted multiple times by Someone, and I have quoted them at the following link
The supposed rules of grammar, cannot supercede the Ayats of Allahs. When taken together, ayats 393, 55, 6146, 16118, prove that Someone and you, are mistaken about the grammar. What is your...Quranic refutation for the following
Allah, relative to food, specifically, in regard to the Jews says
6146 And to those who were Jews We made unlawful every animal having claws, and of oxen and sheep We made unlawful to them the fat of both, except such as was on their backs or the entrails or what was mixed with bones this was a punishment We gave them on account of their rebellion, and We are surely Truth.
Now, what is the realtionship between ayat 6146 and 55? I've explained this in depth
55 This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them....
At the time these ayats were being revealed, what animals for food were not haram for the People of the Book/The Jews to eat? That's right ALL the animals which were...CLAWLESS. Well, the pig is a clawless animal/qaudruped, hence, at the time these ayats were being revealed, the pig would have had to have been halal for both the Jews and the Muslims, because it was never made haram by Allah in first place. With that said, lahma khinzerin cannot mean pig in the literal sense, because that would then contradict ayats 55 and 6146.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
SaLaM PB
While Allah does tell us to refer to prior books, it is not in total, but for a specific matter.
Like the matter of pig. Especially since you are very misguided about this issue. So take God's advice and don't feel ashamed about your lack of knoeledge, brother. http//www.geocities.com/bigjaxal/s1.gif
-
PEACE, TANVEER,
Peace Grourself,
PB has evaded this question persistently, maybe you can answer.
If the foods mentioned in 6146 were the ONLY foods made haram for Jews due to their punishment, then dead animals, blood, lahma khinzeerin (whatever it means), and "what is dedicated to other than Allah" must be halal for them. If that is true then per 55 all those categories of food will also be halal for mankind, which would DIRECTLY CONTRADICT 6145, how would you explain that ?
According to that logic, even if you translate "lahma khinzeerin" to be "ill seeming bad/dirty meat", it would become halal for mankind per 55, because it was halal for Jews !! MAJOR DIRECT CONTRADICTION with 2173, 53, 6145, 16115
Tanveer, stop with the "ONLY" baloney already. I've already rescinded that position in my response to Thor. Here it is
6146 And to those who were Jews We made unlawful EVERY animal having claws , and of oxen and sheep We made unlawful to them the fat of both, except such as was on their backs or the entrails or what was mixed with bones this was a punishment We gave them on account of their rebellion, and We are surely Truthful.
Main Entry EVERY being each individual or part of a group without exception.
Listen, I'll accept that there is no "only" in the ayat, no problem. Let's change "only" then...to "every", kewl? LOL! Now, my problem is solved, however, yours and the others is not. Ayat 6146 still says that, the animals with claws were made haram for the Jews to eat. Now, have you ever seen a pig...with claws? In that, pigs do not have claws, they are exempt from the animals made haram to the Jews, period, end of story. Now, given that Allah did not make the pig haram to the Jews, guess what?...you and the others cannot extrapolate or claim that He did.
16116 And, for what your tongues describe, do not utter the lie, (saying) This is lawful and this is unlawful, in order to forge a lie against Allah; surely those who forge the lie against Allah shall not prosper.
If the claw don't fit...you must acquit. lol
Stop pursuing phantoms and canards.