Is Swine Hallal
-
Another Major Discrepancy
393 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.
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.
There is a discrepancy between verses that talk about "children of Israel" and other verses that talk about the "Jews". They are not the same
Verse 6146 is ONLY applying this food law to ONE Tribe of the "Children of Israel" this is the Tribe of Judah.
Israel (Jacob) had 12 sons who became the "12 Tribes of Israel" . Those who called theself Jews (Judeans) at that time only came from the one Tribe (From Israels son Judah)
So at the time these so called food restriction were inposed we are talking about two different groups of people.
All Judeans were Israelites (Children of Israel) but NOT All Israelites are Judeans because Judeans were only ONE Tribe out of the 12 Tribes of Israel when those so called Extra food restrictions were imposed
....
I will be adding this Discrepancy to the list
The twelve Tribes of Israel are
Reuben, Gad, Aser, Judah, Nephthalim, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zabulon, Joseph, Dan, and Benjamin
Judaism only came from the Tribe of Judah... The line Abraham - Isaac - Israel - Judah is also the line of the prophets that the Messiah Jesus came from...
-
Peace all,
There is no mention of Allah making anything haram in ayat 393. Ayat 587, expressly, tells mankind not to make lawful things unlawful, hence, if Israel is a prophet, he definitely would not have made something haram which Allah did not, at least not consciously anyway.
It appears that, per ayat 587, Israel, in ayat 393, made some food or another, haram, which Allah didn't. All food was halal to the COI, then, Israel, made one or more halal foods...haram.
My understanding is that in 393 both halal and haram were from Allah, i.e. decreed by Allah; Israel was just following Allah's decree by forbidding on himself the food made haram by Allah's decree. The reason it was Allah's decree is because of the word "except"
393 All the food was made lawful to the Children of Israel except what Israel forbade for himself before the Torah was sent down. Say "Bring the Torah and recite it if you are truthful."
If all food was halal by Allah's decree, and Israel made haram on himself something that was not haram by Allah's decree then 393 would have contained a "BUT" instead of "EXCEPT" and its wording would be as follows
"all the food was made lawful to COI, BUT Israel forbade some food on himself....."
The "except" in 393 makes it crystal clear that the haram food was Allah's decree.
Regards,
Tanveer
-
PEACE, /JM/
PB, I would like to re-ask you a question that have already been asked to you, and which you have not already responded to.
-> Are dead meat (carrion), blood, and anything that has been dedicated to other than Allah permitted, or forbidden, to Children of Israel ?
If you answer it has been forbidden, does it not contradict with "All the food was made lawful to the Children of Israel " ( ?
Thanks in advance for your response to this clear question,
Peace
Carrion, can be any kind of dead animal specie, correct? Do you think at any time that, carrion, was created as food? Did Allah, by nature, create dead/carrion things, blood or ill-seeming flesh, as food...good or otherwise? Are things, dedicated to Allah, always food stuffs?
Hope this answers your question.
Thanks for tour response
So, you are stating that carrion, blood, lahma alkhinzeeri (left untranslated for the moment), and things dedicated to other than Allah were forbidden to the CoI.
Even though there is no verse in the quran explicitly stating this.
You are also stating that carrion, blood, and lahma alkhinzeeri cannot be called food.Do I have well understood you ?
Just something I don't agree with.
Carrion, blood, lahma alkhinzeeri are creations of God, because God has created everything.
And, we cannot say that carrion is not good, because it is good for animals such as vultures, and maggots, and these animals have been created by God.
Even your excrements are good for some some animals, as well as for the plants.
Everything that God has created has been made excellently, including carrion, blood, excrements, vultures, maggots, etc...
So, we cannot not conclude from that all animals are edible. This is not the meaning of the verse.Looking forward for your response,
Peace
-
Salam Tanveer, all,
If all food was halal by Allah's decree, and Israel made haram on himself something that was not haram by Allah's decree then 393 would have contained a "BUT" instead of "EXCEPT" and its wording would be as follows
"all the food was made lawful to COI, BUT Israel forbade some food on himself....."
The "except" in 393 makes it crystal clear that the haram food was Allah's decree.
You raised a good point. Praise th the God the language of the Reading is very concise.
Just a reminder, the following text is from Shabir
Tasreef is the Qur'anic process where verses in one part of the Quran explain or provide deeper understanding of the verses in other parts of the Book. Concisely, it means looking at the Qur'an in its Big Picture.
Below is a good example
- All the food was made lawful to the Children of Israel EXCEPT what Israel forbade for himself before the Torah was sent down. Say Bring the Torah and recite it if you are truthful.
6145.Say I do not find in what is inspired to me forbidden EXCEPT that it be already dead, or blood, or the meat of pig, for it is foul; or what is corruptly dedicated to other than God. Whoever is forced without seeking disobedience or transgression, then your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful.
The messenger speaks for himself according to what is inspired to Him. Then according to 929, the messenger maked lawful all food for himself EXCEPT some unlawfull foods (6145) according the God's decree.
- Fight those who do not believe in God or the Last Day, and they do not forbid what God and His messenger have forbidden, and they do not uphold the system of truth; from among the people who have been given the Scripture; until they pay the fine, willingly or unwillingly.
From 929, Only the God and His messenger make lawful or forbid. The mission of the messenger is to forbid according the God's message.
The duty of each one is to forbade on ourselves what the God and His messenger forbade.
If we believe that this Reading autenticates the previous books, then the answer to What the prophet Israel forbad for himself is stated clearly in the Reading. One cannot attain this goal without considering the Whole Reading.
Salam
-
...
-
PEACE, MARIE,
Are you going to respond to the following?
Two things
-
Was the Prophet Israel...a Messenger? If not, then, Allah, didn't authorize him to make any halal food haram.
-
The Messengers, did not make anything haram, only Allah makes haram. It is the...Message, which the Messenger brings, which makes things haram and not the Messenger himself. The Message...are the words of Allah and not the words of the Messenger. Subtle, but true.
393 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.
587 O you who believe! do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.
Am I reading these ayats clearly?! It appears that, per ayat 587, Israel, in ayat 393, made some food or another, haram, which Allah didn't. All food was halal to the COI, then, Israel, made one or more halal foods...haram. As I've said repeatedly, Allah, did not give him permission do this, no more than He gave the Last Prophet permission to make something haram.
- By what authority did Israel make a halal food haram? Did Allah tell him to do that? Please provide the ayat/proof.
Please address these concerns.
-
-
PEACE, /JM/,
PB, I would like to re-ask you a question that have already been asked to you, and which you have not already responded to.
-> Are dead meat (carrion), blood, and anything that has been dedicated to other than Allah permitted, or forbidden, to Children of Israel ?
If you answer it has been forbidden, does it not contradict with "All the food was made lawful to the Children of Israel " ( ?
Thanks in advance for your response to this clear question,
Peace
Carrion, can be any kind of dead animal specie, correct? Do you think at any time that, carrion, was created as food? Did Allah, by nature, create dead/carrion things, blood or ill-seeming flesh, as food...good or otherwise? Are things, dedicated to Allah, always food stuffs?
Hope this answers your question.
Thanks for tour response
So, you are stating that carrion, blood, lahma alkhinzeeri (left untranslated for the moment), and things dedicated to other than Allah were forbidden to the CoI.
Even though there is no verse in the quran explicitly stating this.
You are also stating that carrion, blood, and lahma alkhinzeeri cannot be called food.Do I have well understood you ?
Just something I don't agree with.
Carrion, blood, lahma alkhinzeeri are creations of God, because God has created everything. And, we cannot say that carrion is not good, because it is good for animals such as vultures, and maggots, and these animals have been created by God. Even your excrements are good for some some animals, as well as for the plants. Everything that God has created has been made excellently, including carrion, blood, excrements, vultures, maggots, etc...So, we cannot not conclude from that all animals are edible. This is not the meaning of the verse.
I'm discussing what Allah gave to mankind for food. Is excrement, blood, carrion or ill-seeming meat, by nature, created as food for mankind? Is this your position? It certainly isn't mine. Mankind is not prophibited from eating maggots or vultures...now are we?
-
Peace PB,
I am sorry, but you have not understood my message.
You use to prove that all animals are edible.
What I was trying to show you is that this is now the meaning of this verse.Kindly read my message again.
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&start=475&highlight=#54340Looking forward to your response
-
Peace PB,
I suggest you to take much time to digest the previous posts and meditate each verses. They contain all answers you requested.
Don't be hasty, that can take you several hours, days, months ....If GW, you will find the answers to all your questions based only on the Reading and without conjecture and self interpretations.
Deep reflection on the whole Reading is a key for a best understanding. Maybe I failed to rephrase well the answers to your questions but I cannot make better (I know my english is weak but that doesn't prevent some members to get what I mean).
Do reflect only on the verses I quoted in my last posts, it is sufficient to answer your questions because they speak for themselves.Peace
-
PEACE, /JM/,
327 Who made good everything that He has created, and He began the creation of man from dust.
I am sorry, but you have not understood my message. You use to prove that all animals are edible. What I was trying to show you is that this is now the meaning of this verse.
No, you misunderstood me. 327, says that nothing, by its created nature, is fasiqun/rijisun/evil. I said nothing about all animals being edible. I'm discussing what Allah gave to mankind for food. Is excrement, blood, carrion or ill-seeming meat, by nature, created as food for mankind? Is this your position? Allah, made no species of animal haram for eating, except for the Jews, during a particular part of their history as a punishment. He did not make haram to them any food because it was, by its created nature, fasiqun/rijisun/evil.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
SaLaM my misguided brother PB
Why would God forbid something that was never meant to be eaten in the first place? To say God is forbidding us to eat "ill seeming" meat is like saying God is forbidding us to eat wood or stones. "ill seeming" meat would be out of the category of edible food. This is where your lack of kowledge and understanding of the Word of GOD shows. Completely ignoring that pig fobidden in the Torah, and completely ignoring that God asks us to refer to the previous scripture when in doubt, to say Khanzeer means "ill seeming" will still be the wrong translation. Even according to your own translation
Again, ur guesswork and assumptions are leading you astray priest. Dont talk what you have no knowledge. Your post lack intelligence and cohesion. Plz brother, dont let your pride get in your way of understanding the true ayats of Allah.
-
PEACE, MARIE,
I suggest you to take much time to digest the previous posts and meditate each verses. They contain all answers you requested.
Don't be hasty, that can take you several hours, days, months ....If GW, you will find the answers to all your questions based only on the Reading and without conjecture and self interpretations.
Deep reflection on the whole Reading is a key for a best understanding. Maybe I failed to rephrase well the answers to your questions but I cannot make better (I know my english is weak but that doesn't prevent some members to get what I mean).
Do reflect only on the verses I quoted in my last posts, it is sufficient to answer your questions because they speak for themselves.I'm certain conveying your thoughts in a language which is not your primary one is challenging and, while I respect that, rest assured that you are not going to post anything to me which I will not understand, providing, you make yourself clear. With that said I have not asked you anything complicated, so, please just answer the following questions with a yes or no. This will relieve you of having to struggle with expressing yourself in English
587 O you who believe! do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.
1059 Say, "Did you note how GOD sends down to you all kinds of
provisions, then you render some of them unlawful, and some lawful?" Say, "Did GOD give you permission to do this? Or, do you fabricate lies and attribute them to GOD?"-
- Was the Prophet Israel...a Messenger? Yes or no?
-
Can you provide the ayat where Allah gave the prophet Israel permission to make something haram which Allah didn't? Yes or no?
-
Doesn't the above ayat preclude believers from making something halal, haram? Yes or know?
393 All food was lawful to the children of Israel except that which Israel had made haram to himself, before the Taurat was revealed. Say Bring then the Taurat and read it, if you are truthful.
-
Do you know what food Israel made haram for himself? Yes or no?
-
Did you know if the COI, followed suit and made haram for all of them what Israel had made haram for himself? Yes or no?
-
A. Do Messengers recite what they wish or?
B. Do they recite what Allah reveals/commands them to recite? A or B?
- A. Can a prophet err in judgement? Yes or no?
B. Can a Messenger err in judgement? Yes or no?
Please answer these questions with either a yes or no or pick A or B. Now, I think I can understand a yes or no/A or B reply to the above questions. I hope you won't offer anymore excuses for not answering.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
-
SaLaM my misguided brother PB
You cant answer simple and intellegent questions asked by other members which question your ridiculous understanding while you cry about no one answering your meaningless questions. Questions that you yourself can answer if you increase your poor knowledge in Quran. Again brother, try to let go of the pride and try to learn the WORD OF GOD
-
TANVEER,
Peace all,
There is no mention of Allah making anything haram in ayat 393. Ayat 587, expressly, tells mankind not to make lawful things unlawful, hence, if Israel is a prophet, he definitely would not have made something haram which Allah did not, at least not consciously anyway.
It appears that, per ayat 587, Israel, in ayat 393, made some food or another, haram, which Allah didn't. All food was halal to the COI, then, Israel, made one or more halal foods...haram.
My understanding is that in 393 both halal and haram were from Allah, i.e. decreed by Allah; Israel was just following Allah's decree by forbidding on himself the food made haram by Allah's decree. The reason it was Allah's decree is because of the word "except"
393 All the food was made lawful to the Children of Israel except what Israel forbade for himself before the Torah was sent down. Say "Bring the Torah and recite it if you are truthful."
If all food was halal by Allah's decree, and Israel made haram on himself something that was not haram by Allah's decree then 393 would have contained a "BUT" instead of "EXCEPT" and its wording would be as follows
"all the food was made lawful to COI, BUT Israel forbade some food on himself....."
The "except" in 393 makes it crystal clear that the haram food was Allah's decree.
Regards,
Tanveer
Ahh, more sleight of hand and canards, Tanveer.
587 O you who believe! do not forbid (yourselves) the good things which Allah has made lawful for you and do not exceed the limits; surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.
393 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.
Main Entry ILLA if not unless except some otherwise less but and also. The Dictionary of the Holy Quran, by Omar, pg. 27.
Main Entry EXCEPT/EXCEPTION a case to which a rule does not apply.
Main Entry BUT except for the fact on the contrary.
Main Entry CONTRARY a fact or condition incompatible with another being not in conformity with what is usual or expected.
Now, given the above ayats and definitions, on what grounds then, did Israel make some food haram, despite the fact that, Allah said not to? What he did, regardless if you use but or except, his action was contrary to a rule of law given by Allah..."do not make haram for yourselves the good things given by Allah". Please post the ayat where Allah gives any human the right to undo any of His Laws without His permission. If you accept that prophets can undo Allah's Laws, then, the Sunnis/Shias have an argument when they say that, it is permissable to kill those who commit adultery, despite the fact that Allah says to give lashes, because the Prophet did.
Looking forward to your reply.
-
Peace everyone,
Lengthy post and still ZERO evidence from Qur'aan to back up your translation ! Speaks for itself.
Here?s another lengthy one in case my previous one wasn?t enough
The verses of the Quran are grammatically correct certainly doesn?t mean that they are Logically and Naturally correct. Not only that we must study and understand what is within the Quran but more importantly what is outside of Quran to better guide us for it states. All that is revealed/ordained/commanded for us to serve its purpose in our earthly domain, must concurrently and with reason be applicable to our lives in its NATURAL and LOGICAL STATE respective of our Ways of Life and by virtue of its Nature/Creation/Origin. It is but natural and obvious that the Quran was revealed simply because of events and circumstances outside of Quran for it to have been written in the first place. How we apply the Quran?s message then, must certainly be understood, seen and witnessed, in order for whatever it states, to be true. This, then, can only be achieved by PROVEN knowledge of current and past events/circumstances for which we beg to reflect upon.
This lengthy thread, in reference to ?lahma khinzeerin? has become beyond recognition simply because of those who are quite satisfied with only grammatical aspects in which it?s written. In other words, the grammatical aspect of the internal Arabic language and internal sentence (whatever that means) being correct for whatever it states must be true, hence ?GOD says so? or ?isn?t GOD enough? or ?don?t you believe in GOD?s Words? or ?one is ignorant of Arabic language?, etc., etc., without thinking, realizing and understanding as to ?why GOD said so? or ?what is the reason behind what it states? which is of utmost importance, logically and naturally as stated. We have gone through many a time to understand the Quranic MESSAGE. Simply parroting about the verses being grammatically correct this way or that way, or simply because GOD said so, without proper understanding its cause and effect, is the difference between a blind and a seer, Arab?s Religion and GOD?s System, Hislam and Islam.
Pig?s meat to have been restricted/forbidden because its bad/rotten/infectious by nature/creation/origin must stand by what it states. This is certainly not the case. The pig is considered filthy by nature, not because their meat is bad, but because they swirl around their bodies in dirt and mud, especially when there is insufficient or no water available. This is only to cool off their bodies due to lack of sweat glands. The ?ill-seeming? meat (all meat and not specific to any animal) is bad by its very nature but certainly not the pig?s meat.
Scientific studies bought about by ?Mr, md? had been skillfully designed to deceive and mislead others via a Hislamic site only, neither proved nor concluded anything to support both the nature and the Quarn. When confronted and cornered, he lied and begged us to visit libraries because such journals/articles are not scanned online. When the Hislamic link was exposed, he twisted and said that these are not ?originals? and again wanted us to visit libraries. He then volunteered to provide scanned documents of the ?originals?, which when requested for, along with several unanswered questions, simply decided to duck and budge out.
He shamelessly comes back, deliberating ignoring all about the requests, and starts stalking upon translations, grammatical issues, Arabic knowledge, lengthy posts, copying and pasting other members, quoting and misquoting others, this verse says EXCEPT and that verse says AND, no one can translate this and no one can translate that, each time regurgitating, circling and chattering thoughtlessly and aimlessly.
All the above and other unreliable/untrustworthy agendas he brings about truly speak for him. What is even more fascinating is that some of you follow such traits by merely accepting the so-called ?good points? when he has presented none, insofar. Like I mentioned earlier, extreme denial, yet every which way but loose.
-
err BummER!!!
-
SaLaM Danish
Your lenghty post has no meaning. Pig is forbidden for a reason. Im sure you know that pig eats human excrement? if you didnt know that, then well, now you do. If you did know that, how can u not say that pig's meat is not ill-seeming? How can u eat something that eats human excrement?
I dont know what kind of an enviornment you were brought up in. Frankly, i dont care. But to twist the word of God to make urself feel better or justifed about doing something which God spcifically forbids is ridiculous. If God told you to to stop drinking water, will u obey your GOD or will you stand there and argue the finer points of God's command? Will you be like " Allah, how is your command concurrent and with reasons to be applicable in my life in its natural and logical state?".
God clearly forbids pig in the Torah and God clearly forbids pig in the Quran. Only a misguided fool will even consider thinking otherwise. Somethings are the way they are weather YOU agree with them or not. The people who have been learning this language for better part of their lives, the people who have been learning the Quran for the better part of their lives, say without a shadow of a doubt that Khanzeer means pig. And your proof? This is your proof
Main 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
Even Abdul Mannan agrees that pig is a possible meaning. Not only this agrees with the gramatical rule of the Quran, it also agrees with the other translators who have taken a chunk of their life and devoted to translating the Quran, studing its language and its meaning. And out of ALL the possible meaning you could pick, you choose one, which suite YOU better. Hey, you want to eat pork? Go ahead, its not on my concious. But when you bring such a ridiculous proof to the members who are either learning or not have much knowledge of the Quran, like you and bokmei, then not only are twisting the word of ALLAH for your own purpose but you are spreading lies backed up with a pathetic proof. And members who ARE knowledgeable in the Quran and its gramatical rules of the word of God, have a duty to correct you. So far, bomkei has not given even one intelligent argument. His questions can be answered by just a general kowledge of the Quran. When backed into a corner, the last resort is to blame it on the arabs and their big conspiracy on pigs. Like someone gives a hoot if you eat pig or not. Its from God. I would sujjest you break out of this pride defending and learn the quran without an agenda. It will rally help )
-
Peace Priest Bokmei, Tanveer, All,
QXP
1736 And you shall not follow blindly any information of which you have no direct knowledge. (Using your faculties of perception and conception) you must verify it for yourself. In the Court of your Lord, you will be held accountable for your hearing, sight, and the faculty of reasoning.I have abstained from this debate for 2 reasons. First, because, neither argument has been conclusive enough for me to say outright that I have verified and confirmed my understanding of this topic. 2nd, because I feel this debate has fostered much more heat than is necessary. The way I see it, eating or not eating pork is pretty low on the totem pole of what we, as Muslims, as humans, should be concerned with. .
On to my observations
Priest, your argument is solid except for the fact that it disagrees with the grammar. This is a contradiction, albeit, passive. I do recall a while back, however, in my inquiries of brother Ayman concerning the influence of the Qur'an on the Arabic language, it was concluded that the Qur'an should be considered the catalyst of the Arabic language, as there is no evidence of any sort of structured written language pre-dating the Qur'an. That being said, one must wonder how it is that we can judge the Qur'an's grammatical structure when the Qur'an itself pre-dates all grammatical rules. The answer, I would surmise, is tasreef. It would be educational for all if we could locate all, if any, similar grammatical inconsistencies in the modern understanding of the Qur'an.Tanveer, the position that "khanzir" means "flesh of swine" is weakened by the qualifier "rijisun". I've not read any explanation that justifies this apparent contradiction. The animal is not intrinsically foul, nor is it's flesh. Sure, it is a scavenger of sorts, but so are many other animals that are not distinctly forbidden. Until it can be conclusively proven that pig meat is intrinsically foul, the contradictions stands.
Overall, I think the implications of this debate are much more than meets the eye. The Qur'an is a favor, a blessing, a reminder, a book of guidance. Look at how stressing over the details has caused so much separation in the midst of these 20 pages of debate.
2533 And no question do they bring to you but We bring to you the Truth and the best explanation.
Where is this best explanation regarding dietary restrictions??
54 They ask you (O Prophet) what foods are Permissible. Tell them all good things of life are Lawful to you.
See how simple it should be? If it's good, eat it. If it's bad, avoid it. How do we know if it's good or bad?
3917-18 Therefore, congratulate My servants who listen to all views, then follow the best. These are the ones guided by God; these are the intelligent ones.
Peace,
Tay -
Salam All,
From http//www.thepigsite.com/pighealth/article.asp?ArticleID=3
The digestive system of the pig has the ability to convert vegetable and animal materials into highly digestible nutrients. Its anatomy and physiology are similar to that of humans.
It is Haram to eat a creature that can prey (= Harramna Kulla Thee Thufrin/Thufurin).
The swine is omnivore. It can eat and well-digest meat, bone and blood. Please check the swine diet. -
Salam Taj,
Salam All,
From http//www.thepigsite.com/pighealth/article.asp?ArticleID=3
The digestive system of the pig has the ability to convert vegetable and animal materials into highly digestible nutrients. Its anatomy and physiology are similar to that of humans.
It is Haram to eat a creature that can prey (= Harramna Kulla Thee Thufrin/Thufurin).
The swine is omnivore. It can eat and well-digest meat, bone and blood. Please check the swine diet.Thanks for your understanding, "a creature that can prey" seems more accurate and concise than "all that have claws" which is vague and ambigous. Then the meat of a creature that can prey is not good to eat it for us human but edible for other animals.