Is Swine Hallal

unknownuser

SC,

Was 6146 the ONLY restrictions on Jews? Yes OR No?

I don't know...do you?

SC Thats the crux of PB's argument down the drain. Read the posts in this thread in case one hasn't for my answer.

LOL!! My, God. Listen, your sleight of hand will not work. The crux of my argument is what I know and NOT what I do not know. What I know is the following

A. the Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws.

B. the animal pig...doesn't have claws.

c. THEREFORE, the animal pig, was not haram for them.

Now, are you going to call Allah a liar?

Tell us, how would a physically blind person, know if he/she were eating pork or if meat were bad? Remember, they can't see it.

How would a physically blind person know the animal was strangled? By playing sherlock holmes? How would they know it's dead meat or slaughtered meat? How would they know it's even meat or synthesized veggie burgers? What an idiotic question.

How do you know you KNOW the above?

When are you going demonstrate your much vaunted "integrity" and answer the following

A. But, if you don't believe me, perhaps you will believe YOUR OWN EYES.

Here's a very simple proof

Tell us, have YOU ever seen a pig with claws? Yes or no?

B. Tell us, how would a physically blind person, know if he/she were eating pork or if meat were bad? Remember, they can't see it.

Jaxal

SaLaM PB

SC asked a very crusicial question

Was 6146 the ONLY restrictions on Jews? Yes OR No?

To which, not supprisingly, you answered

I don't know
c. THEREFORE, the animal pig, was not haram for them.

Brother, dont make wild assumptions and guesswork. Read the Torah if you get the time. Specifically read . And you will see ur ridiculous assumptions going up in smoke. There is no shame to be wrong. Dont be a fool and keep repeating your mistakes. We are all trying to help you here brother.

savage_carrot

Peace,

You say you have access to a professor whom you obviously have ?faith? in his scholarship

If I had only faith to go on, I wouldn't have posted information as well now would I? You posted something saying it's NOT in the Torah. I posted some information, would you refute it then? Would you post your references that prove this swine injunction is NOT in the torah?

I will give you one hint. They have not yet after 2000 years been able to prove to those who call themselves Christian scholars that this injunction against consuming swine is an unbreakable, infallible, rational order from God for mankind given first to the Jews.

Hints? Christian scholars? What the?

Do you think they haven?t tried? No one wants to be thought a fool, only religionists don?t mind. They think have the ?key? to the kingdom, blind following.

Er, yeah okay...I would like you to cut to the chase, if that's okay with you? You posted a quote

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!

Now, do you have any resources that prove that it's not in the torah but in the talmud as that is the point of the discussion at hand and your first quote.

If you have any interesting reading regarding this subject though, I would be more than happy to read it and make up my own mind after.

unknownuser

SC,

Are you going to duck my last post to you or are you going to show us how much integrity you have and answer the questions?

Jaxal

SaLaM PB

Are you going to duck my last post to you or are you going to show us how much integrity you have and answer the questions?

Show us???

How many of you are there? Dont ask someone for integrety when you yourself dont have it. Brother there is no shame learn from other people. I sujjest, reading the Quran without your personel agenda.

unknownuser

SC,

Don't use jaxal, as an excuse not to answer what is put to you.

SAVAGE C. My answers have been what they've always been...have the courtesy and integrity to answer other people's points...

Well, keep you're word and respond to the following

SC,

Was 6146 the ONLY restrictions on Jews? Yes OR No?

I don't know...do you?

SC Thats the crux of PB's argument down the drain. Read the posts in this thread in case one hasn't for my answer.

LOL!! My, God. Listen, your sleight of hand will not work. The crux of my argument is what I know and NOT what I do not know. What I know is the following

A. the Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws.

B. the animal pig...doesn't have claws.

c. THEREFORE, the animal pig, was not haram for them.

Now, are you going to call Allah a liar?

Tell us, how would a physically blind person, know if he/she were eating pork or if meat were bad? Remember, they can't see it.

How would a physically blind person know the animal was strangled? By playing sherlock holmes? How would they know it's dead meat or slaughtered meat? How would they know it's even meat or synthesized veggie burgers? What an idiotic question.

How do you know you KNOW the above?

A. But, if you don't believe me, perhaps you will believe YOUR OWN EYES.

Here's a very simple proof

Tell us, have YOU ever seen a pig with claws? Yes or no?

B. Tell us, how would a physically blind person, know if he/she were eating pork or if meat were bad? Remember, they can't see it.

unknownuser

SaLaM PB

Are you going to duck my last post to you or are you going to show us how much integrity you have and answer the questions?

Show us???

How many of you are there? Dont ask someone for integrety when you yourself dont have it. Brother there is no shame learn from other people. I sujjest, reading the Quran without your personel agenda.

jaxal, get professional help...ASAP.

Jaxal

SaLaM My Brother

Look brother, You need to understand that we are all trying to help you here. You are misguided and confused. Dont push our help away. This what God says. Seek knowledge. Your posts are getting weaker and weaker by the minute. For example

Don't use jaxal, as an excuse not to answer what is put to you.

She didnt roll . It is you who is runny away from answering our questions. And we can understand that right now you dont have the knowledge. But ATLEAST make the effor to learn. There is no shame in having no knowledge. But only a fool argues with hollow arguments. Plz brother, dont be a fool.

Grourself

Peace,

Grourself wrote
You say you have access to a professor whom you obviously have ?faith? in his scholarship

If I had only faith to go on, I wouldn't have posted information as well now would I? You posted something saying it's NOT in the Torah. I posted some information, would you refute it then? Would you post your references that prove this swine injunction is NOT in the torah?
Grourself wrote
I will give you one hint. They have not yet after 2000 years been able to prove to those who call themselves Christian scholars that this injunction against consuming swine is an unbreakable, infallible, rational order from God for mankind given first to the Jews.

Hints? Christian scholars? What the?
Grourself wrote
Do you think they haven?t tried? No one wants to be thought a fool, only religionists don?t mind. They think have the ?key? to the kingdom, blind following.

Er, yeah okay...I would like you to cut to the chase, if that's okay with you? You posted a quote
Grourself wrote
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!

Now, do you have any resources that prove that it's not in the torah but in the talmud as that is the point of the discussion at hand and your first quote.

If you have any interesting reading regarding this subject though, I would be more than happy to read it and make up my own mind after.

Peace,

I see, you have more than faith but you have not posted what this is and you cannot percieve of scholarship in any field but something you agree is worthy.

Anyway?

Here are a couple of reference books you may like to check.

The Complete Biblical Library The Old Testament Hebrew English Dictionary
World Library Press Inc. Springfield Missouri Inc. USA- The Book Of Leviticus Page 2480 Article 2478

Hastings Dictionary Of The Bible
Edited by James Hastings 1963
Page 943

savage_carrot

Peace,

I see, you have more than faith but you have not posted what this is and you cannot percieve of scholarship in any field but something you agree is worthy.

Anyway?

Here are a couple of reference books you may like to check.

The Complete Biblical Library The Old Testament Hebrew English Dictionary
World Library Press Inc. Springfield Missouri Inc. USA- The Book Of Leviticus Page 2480 Article 2478

Thank you for the links, I will definitely look into this when I can.
Best Regards.

unknownuser

13 pages on this thread and still going? -wow what a swine of a thread!! -)

Regards,

Jaxal

SaLaM LT

Yea 13 pages of PB's NONSENSICAL posts.

savage_carrot

Peace all,

PB wants me to answer two questions.

Do pigs have claws?
Can the blind tell bad meat?

Right. You know it's over when these questions are all thats left.

A. the Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws.
B. the animal pig...doesn't have claws.
c. THEREFORE, the animal pig, was not haram for them.

PB says he doesn't know what else the Jews were forbidden other than 6146.
The Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws as per 6146.
The animal pig doesn't have claws. (cutting edge deduction there...)

HUGE LEAP TO

THEREFORE, pig was not forbidden for the Jews!

I don't even have to explain this one. It's as clear as day.

unknownuser

Peace all,

As explained by br/sis Tanveer, according the grammar, khinzeer cannot be cannot be an adjective for "lahma" (6145), if this is the case we should read lahman khinzeeran like daman masfoohan/running blood - - instead of lahma khinzeerin

Qul la ajidu feema oohiyailayya muharraman AAala taAAimin yatAAamuhu illa an yakoona maytatan aw daman masfoohan aw lahma khinzeerin... (6145)

Another example from 1614, we read lahman tariyyan / a tender meat and where tariyyan is an adjective for lahm/meat.
See also 3512

Thank you Marie for the proof about rules of Arabic grammar using the internal grammar of Qur'aan itself. That refutes the following very easily

Grammar cannot contradict the Ayats of Allah, nor, does the interanl grammar of Al-Quran contradict the Ayats, this is simply impossible. The grammar explanation offered by Someone, contradicts the Ayats of Allah. Now, either Allah's Ayats are wrong or the grammar explanation is misunderstood. Which do you think it is?

As per the ayaat brought to attention by Marie, the internal grammar of Qur'aan itself confirms the pertinent rules of Arabic grammar, proving that in the phrase "lahma khinzeerin", "khinzeerin" CANNOT be an adjective of "lahma". The phrase "lahma khinzeerin", therefore, can ONLY mean "meat of pig" and CANNOT mean "ill seeming bad/dirty meat" or "flesh seen as bad".

Good work Marie. That was a death blow to PB's theory of the alternate translation.

As everyone can easily notice by reviewing the complete thread, even though me, Nadia, Thor, and others have answered PB's questions before and refuted all his points time and again, PB has evaded and eluded answering any of my questions put forth to him. For the sake of the audience, I will reproduce the questions put forth to PB, that he has persistently evaded answering, with addition of some new questions, with the hope that he can give coherent and sensible answers to these questions

LIST OF QUESTIONS FOR PRIEST BOKMEI

Given that 6145 lists food made haram for mankind, and that mankind includes Jews, Why do you keep denying what Allah EXPLICITLY makes forbidden for Jews in 6145 ? Why do you keep saying that "lahma khinzeerin" is halal for Jews, whereas Allah has EXPLICITLY made it haram for them according to 6145 ?
Why do you keep denying that 6146 is a continuation of 6145, and because of that 6146 contains restrictions for Jews IN ADDITION to 6145, because of punishment ?
If you say that the foods mentioned in 6146 are the ONLY foods made haram for Jews, then were dead animals, blood, lahma khinzeerin, and "what is dedicated to other than Allah" halal for them ?
If you say that dead animals, blood, lahma khinzeerin, and "what is dedicated to other than Allah" is halal for Jews, then per 55 all those categories of food will also be halal for mankind, which would DIRECTLY CONTRADICT 2173, 53, 6145, and 16115; how would you explain that MAJOR DIRECT CONTRADICTION created in Qur'aan by your flawed logic ?
Given that 6145 is a FACTUAL LAW GIVING STATEMENT with NO CHRONOLGY, why do you keep denying that it is not applicable to Jews in the times before revelation of Qur'aan, especially when Allah repeatedly says that Qur'aan authenticates and supercedes previous scriptures ?
If you say that 6145 does not apply to Jews before the revelation of Qur'aan, and therefore, dead animals, blood, lahma khinzeerin, and "what is dedicated to other than Allah" were ALL halal for Jews before revelation of Qur'aan, then by the same twisted logic, the list of forbidden things in 6151 and 6152 would also not apply to Jews before revelation of Qur'aan and those forbidden things would have also been halal for Jews before the revelation of Qur'aan; how do you explain that ?
As per your own admission, you DO NOT KNOW what else was forbidden for Jews other than 6146. That clearly shows that you admit that restrictions in 6146 are not the ONLY restrictions on Jews, thus collapsing your whole argument. So then how can you say "lahma khinzeerin" is DEFINITELY NOT restricted on Jews, when you DO NOT KNOW what else was restricted on them ?
Given that "rijsun" is the word used by Allah in 6145 to mean "bad/unclean/dirty/filthy" as an adjective for lahma khinzeerin, how can you say that "khinzeerin" used in the same ayat is also an adjective of "lahma" meaning the same as "rijsun" ?
Can you show ONE other ayat/verse/sign in Qur'aan, where Allah uses 2 adjectives in a row, meaning the same, for the same noun ?
Given that according to the internal rules of grammar in Qur'aan, and the rules of grammar in Arabic, the phrase in Arabic meaning bad/dirty meat using the word "khinzeer" would be "lahman khinzeeran", and not "lahma khinzeerin", why do you keep insisiting that "LAHMA KHINZEERIN" means "bad/dirty/ill seeming meat" ?

Only sensible, coherent, and reasonable answers to ALL these questions will be acceptable, and evading even ONE of these questions will prove that PB's assertions and arguments hold no water and are untenable, and will be a concession that his theory has been refuted.

unknownuser

Jaxal,

It is obvious you have a deep seated need for attention. This is not the forum for that...get professional help.

unknownuser

Salaams All,

just came across this info

The word ?EER ,part of some words like khanz accurs in a number of places

540 Qad-EER(un)
560 Khanaz-EER
589 Tahr-EER

And also accurs independently

311 -EER ,They were SEEING/THINKING them

And

1076 -EER ,To be SEEN.

And using Lanes 998

It essentially means to see/understand/tTo know , using any of our senses e.t.c

I hope this helps . some of us.

May God show us what he wants to.

Salaams.

savage_carrot

Peace all,

http//www.fda.gov/opacom/lowlit/foodsfe.html

It is hard to tell if a food is safe.

Foods that go bad may look, smell, and taste like safe foods.

So, bad meat can be perfectly normal/safe/good to the senses of sight, smell and taste YET bad...hmmm, what a quandary. Before someone even tries, let's not bring up touch and sound please.

unknownuser

SC, you like to remind us that you are brimming with integrity, yet, when asked repeatedly two very easy questions, your integrity vanishes along with your indefensible assertions.

Peace all,

PB wants me to answer two questions.

Do pigs have claws?
Can the blind tell bad meat?

Right. You know it's over when these questions are all thats left.

A. the Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws.
B. the animal pig...doesn't have claws.
c. THEREFORE, the animal pig, was not haram for them.

PB says he doesn't know what else the Jews were forbidden other than 6146.
The Jews were forbidden to eat animals with claws as per 6146.
The animal pig doesn't have claws. (cutting edge deduction there...)

HUGE LEAP TO

THEREFORE, pig was not forbidden for the Jews!

I don't even have to explain this one. It's as clear as day.

LOL!! Sorry, your post does not fly. Of course you have to explain it, what are you talking about? Are pig clawed animals or not?

Right. You know it's over when these questions are all thats left.

If the following two questions are all I have, and it is clear as day and that it's all over, why, then, don't you give a clear and decisive answer to them? Why do you keep stalling? LOL! Your stalling is only proving that it is you who has nothing left, and that you aren't about the truth and integrity at all. Don't you get it that, by not answering here, but knowing the answer in your heart, is concealing the truth? What does Allah call those who conceal the truth when they know it? Answer the questions and demonstrate some integrity or continue to stall and demonstrate fraud. The choice is yours.

A. But, if you don't believe me, perhaps you will believe YOUR OWN EYES.

Here's a very simple proof

Tell us, have YOU ever seen a pig with claws? Yes or no?

B. Tell us, how would a physically blind person, know if he/she were eating pork or if meat were bad? Remember, they can't see it.

IF THE CLAW DON'T FIT, YOU MUST ACQUIT...GOT PIG?

Jaxal

SaLaM mz357

Khanzeer is a noun. Its the arabic word for pig. Its the whole word. Not a part of it. Not Khanz. But Khanzeer. like *Kabeer" which means big/great. You will also find Kabeerun. But you wont find Kab Lollllll. Its a whole word Kabeer or Khanzeer. I hope you understand.

SC, i can completely back that up for you. When i was a butcher, sometimes the meat wont smell bad at all. It would just look bad. Sometimes, the meat would look perfectly ok and it would smell bad. So I completely agree with you on this one. Even pork looked perfectly ok. Sometimes i had to smell the pork to see if its good or not.

Priest my misguided and confused brother, I have a deep seated need to help you. Im completely guilty of that. Inshallah we will all help you despite your complaining, lack of knowledge and your lack of effort to understand and research http//www.geocities.com/bigjaxal/s1.gif

If the claw dont fit, you must acquit.. got it?Now Priest, stop throwing a fit. It IS a pig. its too big! yet you cant See it? What wrong? Why dont u understand IT!! Now stop with the IT. you look like a misfIT!!

unknownuser

Peace all,

Scientific journals are not scanned online. My obligation was to provide you with references, so you can verify the information yourself. Now if you are lazy, that is not my problem.

A BIG LIE, EXPOSED. The persistent refusal to provide a web-link by this ill-seeming (khanzeer) individual speaks volumes about his overall character. Falsifying records to mean they are proven and concluded is another BIG LIE, talk about definitive and certain. Seems like he not only knew about this link all along but also pasted and copied all references in ditto from the bottom of the link, not to mention his own ignorance on the subject matter, the references and his laziness to provide such a link.

Arrogantly, selfishly and cunningly presenting himself ?scientific information? all along to support his pathetic stance towards specifically pig?s meat as being all that bad and other scenarios from an Islamic perspective whilst blaming me for becoming lazy, ignorant, careless, unscientific, etc., etc., he continues to be defensive and supportive to such claims, has no clue what he is talking about and neither has the audacity to bend, accept where wrong or correct himself but babbling and fudgling along.

The following site is not only an Islamic site but the participants are not all scientists and neither is this site internationally recognized. Its but natural that HISLAM (not ISLAM) will defend on its own biased merits and findings to support what is allegedly meant to be pig in the first place. Here, check this site for yourselves

http//www.islamset.com/index.html
http//www.islamset.com/hip/pork/Amin_Nanji.html

The links that I provided much earlier are all Nationally/Internationally accredited, none of which has anything to do with specifically pig?s meat. Here they are once again and many more

http//digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/cirrhosis/index.htm

http//cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/gi/cirrhosis.html

Liver Cancer
http//www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/wyntk/liver/page2

http//www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/wyntk/liver/page4

Sclerosis
http//www.nationalmssociety.org/Brochures-Research.asp

http//www.msaa.com/

http//www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/multiple_sclerosis/multiple_sclerosis.htm#What_research_is_being_done

Vascular diseases
http//www.sirweb.org/patPub/vascularOverview.shtml#prevent

http//www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4692

Atherosclerosis
http//www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4440

http//www.4woman.gov/faq/atheroscle.htm

All those diseases that Tanveer has pointed out earlier in one of his posts, please Google search and find out for yourselves that none of them pertains to the animal pig or specifically its? meat.

Having personally researched several scientific studies, including what is mentioned in Islamset, here are my relevant thoughts

Scientific studies/researches are only assertions, observations, inaccuracies, conjectures and oral testimonies, what Tanveer believes in.
None of these studies are neither proven nor conclusive, as Tanveer blatantly emphasizes.
None of these studies are specific to pig?s meat only, as Tanveer blatantly emphasizes.
None of the scientists have any clue whatsoever in their alleged findings and the researches are either still ongoing or left incomplete and not specific to pig?s meat either, which supports points 1, 2 and 3.
We all know the general consensus that scientists carry out research upon research, present varying information from time to time and even misinform to say one thing on one occasion and then turn around to mean something else on another. Specific to pig?s meat then, there?s nothing to be alarmed about unless such a case study is proven, concluded and backed/certified by the collaborated National/International Food, Drugs and Agricultural Associations.

Now then, considering the points above, some questions for our ?wise md ? Dr./scientist Tanveer?,

Do you blindly believe in any research done regardless of them being preliminary or wishy-washy or where they are coming from?
Are scientific studies the ONLY criteria you rely upon or do you ever use your own GOD given faculties and logic to witness anything yourself first hand irrespective of any studies done?
If no scientific studies have been done on specific cases, does that mean the incidents and other facts-of-life are never witnessed and cannot exist?
Are scientific researches done via incidents/events that occur or vice-versa?
Are scientific studies certain and absolute and never change?
Specific to pig?s meat, if there are two contradicting results by a team of scientists in oppositions, whom would you believe and why?
Would such scientific studies referenced above and the points made, enslave ?Allah?s Words? specific to pig issues?
Are scientific journals same as and above that of Quran? If not, then why do you keep bitching and extrapolating scientific studies to that of Quran without being certain yourself?

Please answer the above?