Good food & Bad food
-
Peace sis Majidah,
lol I understand what you are saying and it's not what my questions have been about. It's about clarifying the logical divisioning of food as detailed in the quran.
God is only mentioning what is bad for us and that he do with Love to us the rest we have to deal on our own.
Thats exactly what I'm saying...as in my posts
"Good and bad is relative...the good things are the things that are allowed to us...anything can be good or bad depending on the situations/variables/factors... that is why ALL good things = lawful things are not specified but restricted things are.
"Because it's not specified in the quran what good food/lawful food is. All we know is that good food is lawful food and everything NOT restricted. What is restricted is specified in the quran."
All good/lawful food by virtue of it not being ALL named/specified is allowed, we make up our own mind as to what we want to eat and what is good and bad for us out of the good/lawful food (defined as that which is not restricted/forbidden/haram in the quran). What we can't do is say God forbade this and that out of the good/lawful food, as thats personal choice. As for ALL the restrictions, they are OFF LIMITS unless forced by necessity etc...
But my question is if Good Food = Lawful Food can Restricted Food = Bad Food OR Neutral Food
Bad Food = defined by God as being bad.
Neutral Food = only defined as being restricted.In both cases we can't eat it under normal circumstances but
does that make restricted food bad because God called it bad,
OR
only bad because it is restricted (e.g is it just a test?)
-
Peace,
To add in case there was any confusion
Good food = Lawful food = Unrestricted food
Restricted food can be lawful under special circumstances but because it is under the category of restricted food, it cannot be called good food as
Good food = Lawful food = Unrestricted food.
-
Peace Nadia,
2172 O you who believe, eat of the good things We have provided for you, and be thankful to God; if it is Him you serve.
2173 He has ONLY forbidden for you what is already dead, and the blood, and the meat of pig, and what was dedicated to other than God. Whoever finds himself forced out of need and without disobedience or animosity, then there is no sin upon him. God is Forgiving, Merciful.The use of the word "only" in 2173 means that everything other than the forbidden food is good, and that is my understanding.
So I agree with you that good things = not restricted things = lawful things.
Restricted food could be bad in nature (lahma khinzeerin, for it is rijsun), or it could be neutral (e.g. blood, what is dedicated to other than Allah).
What is dedicated to other than Allah is corruptly dedicated to other than Allah, but it is not called "rijsun". Just because it is corruptly dedicated to other than Allah does not mean it is bad by nature. The "dedication to other than Allah" is what is corrupt (fisqun), not the food itself. Similarly blood by itself is not bad, unless it is infected. But then beef can be infected too.
As far as personal likes and dislikes, that does not make a particular food good or bad. There are people in India, and Cambodia who eat rats. Please see the following links
http//www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume02/017/339.htm
http//in.rediff.com/news/2003/aug/19tn.htm
Even improperly cooked beef can cause diseases, does not mean it is not good food. Some people can be grossed out just by KFC chicken (SM is an example). On the other hand, there are many places in the world where frogs, spiders, snakes, monkey brains etc. are considered a delicacy. Recently, contestants in "fear factor" ate rats.
Best Regards,
Tanveer
-
Peace Tanveer,
Thank you for adding your comments! I see it more clearly now, in which case it would be
Good Food = Lawful Food = Unrestricted Food
Restricted Food = Bad Food + Neutral Food
I agree with you on personal likes and dislikes, I have the same understanding. It could also be forced on a person to not eat that which is normally good food obviously (diseases etc). Makes sense.
-
Peace Tanveer,
Restricted food could be bad in nature (lahma khinzeerin, for it is rijsun), or it could be neutral (e.g. blood, what is dedicated to other than Allah).
What is dedicated to other than Allah is corruptly dedicated to other than Allah, but it is not called "rijsun". Just because it is corruptly dedicated to other than Allah does not mean it is bad by nature. The "dedication to other than Allah" is what is corrupt (fisqun), not the food itself. Similarly blood by itself is not bad, unless it is infected. But then beef can be infected too.
One could take perfectly GOOD food and dedicate it to a god, if one wants. Restricted food does not mean it is either bad or neutral.
Anwar Azim
-
Peace Anwar,
One could take perfectly GOOD food and dedicate it to a god, if one wants. Restricted food does not mean it is either bad or neutral.
Restricted food can be lawful under special circumstances but because it is under the category of restricted food, it cannot be called good food as
Good food = Lawful food = Unrestricted food.
Restricted food, eg, food dedicated to another god is under the category of restricted food, whether it started off as good doesn't matter as it never came under the restrictions when it was good. Most of the restricted food starts off as good food and the restrictions detail particular cirumstances in which it comes under the category of restricted. As soon as it does, it's not good food obviously, as it's restricted. Except for blood and pig meat. These are always restricted unless forced etc.
-
Peace all,
After further discussion, I think it's fair to conclude that Neutral Food under the category of Restricted food is misleading as per my original question. As all the Restricted food is called corrupt/vile/fisqun...then we have
Restricted Food = Fisqun plus a subset of Fisqun which is Rijsun.
As all restricted food is fisqun and one item in that category is called rijsun.
Restricted Food = Fisqun(subset Rijsun).
Any comments welcome, especially what appropriate words to use as opposed to the arabic.