Is swine halal-2?

wildguest1956

Poor guy, unable to read. Your anti-sunni psychosis is getting the better of you turning you into a (bigger) rambling fool. The question is

Was Lahumul Khinzeer forbade BEFORE THE DESCENT OF AL-QURAAN ?

Did I translate lahumul khinzeer? You claim 'lahumul khinzeer' wasn't forbidden at the time of Muhammad, being the closet sunni that you are D

Was Lahumul Khinzeer forbade BEFORE THE DESCENT OF AL-QURAAN ?

Can't answer it, can you )

Salam mquran

I fear PB will now ignore what you are writing (as his habitual tactic when he is trapped).

But he has already made the mistake to answer your question

Allah, from its inception, did not create a dead animal, blood, and ill-seeming meat as FOOD for people.

http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=550#54664

See also
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=625#55205
http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4031&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=625#55493

His deceiving stuff has now been exposed.

Peace

unknownuser

All nabiyeen brought the SAME TEACHINGS (2/213) and Muhammad was told that NOTHING was said to him that wasn't said before (41/43)

Therefore LAHUMUL KHINZEER was always forbidden.

I agree, in that, lahma khinzeer, means the "ill-seeming/that what is seen as bad", however, you still have not proven that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. Ayat 4143 could apply to both translations, meaning, if lahma khinzeer means the animal pig it applies or if it means ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad, it applies. So, you haven't proved your claim that lahma khinzeerin means the animal pig. Ayat 4160 tells us that a people, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, were forbidden some good and wholesome things which were previously halal to them. Ayat 6146 tells us what those things were and the pig could not possibly be one of them, because pigs don't have claws. In addition, the following ayat and definitons also rule out the quadruped/pig, being haram

2228 That they may witness advantages for them and mention the name of Allah during stated days over what He has given them of the cattle quadrupeds, then eat of them and feed the distressed one, the needy.

Main Entry BAHIMATUN beast. any quadruped, even if in the water.

Main Entry QUADRUPED an animal having four feet.

Guess what, pigs are quadrupeds.

Therefore LAHUMUL KHINZEER was always forbidden.

You quote ayat 4143 to support your superstition that, the animal pig was always haram and I refuted that assertion. Now, tell us, according to Al-Quran, WHY was/is the pig haram. What is the reason/reasons why Allah made the pig, according to you, haram?Remember now, Allah, per ayat 1736, rejects blind following "And do not pursue/follow that of which you have no knowledge", hence, if the pig was/ is haram in this deen, then, Allah, has given a reason or reasons for it being so. Just your quoting ayat 2173 or 51 and then saying, "well, Allah says its haram and that's that", is blind following, hence, is not proof of your claim.

unknownuser

I fear PB will now ignore what you are writing (as his habitual tactic when he is trapped).

But he has already made the mistake to answer your question

PBM Allah, from its inception, did not create a dead animal, blood, and ill-seeming meat as FOOD for people.

What trapped?! Listen JM, Mquran has no more proved the pig is haram than you did. You failed miserably and so has he. As with Mquran, you too, were unable to refute, when taken together, ayats 4160, 55 and 6146. But seeing how you are back, enlist Mquran's help and answer the following

Why did Allah, make the pig haram.
Provide the evidence where, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, Allah, to some peoples or another, made the pig haram and why.
Do pigs have claws?
Is the pig a quadruped?

I can't wait to see what excuse/s you two will concoct in order to avoid answering the above pertinent questions to your assertion that the pig is haram. If you won't or can't, via Al-Quran, answer the above 4 items, then you continue to fail miserably to meet your burden of proof, and all you are peddling is superstition, fraud, and deception. So... put or simply shut up, it's your choice.

Good luck. lol

mquran

Salaam JM,

I fear PB will now ignore what you are writing (as his habitual tactic when he is trapped).

Admittedly, its harder. There are people who refuse to answer at all, but PBM after some teeth-pulling, has addressed the point. So I'll stick around while he's doing that because he's still better than those who don't/can't answer at all.

So far, the 'jews' , 'people of the book' , 'lahumul khinzeer was never haram before Muhammad' etc has all fallen. Lets work on the rest, inshaa Allah.

mquran

I agree, in that, lahma khinzeer, means the "ill-seeming/that what is seen as bad", however, you still have not proven that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. Ayat 4143 could apply to both translations, meaning, if lahma khinzeer means the animal pig it applies or if it means ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad, it applies

Ok good. So you admit lahmul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haram. Now I will approach your questions.

You quote ayat 4143 to support your superstition that, the animal pig was always haram and I refuted that assertion. Now, tell us, according to Al-Quran, WHY was/is the pig haram

I quoted 41/43 NOT to prove that lahmul khinzeer refers to the pig but instead to refute your initial statement about 'the jews at the time of the prophet' argument. I want to remove this historical 'jew', people of the book, torah stuff from the equation. Once we do this, I will approach your questions. It appears you've acknowledged this.

I will repeat

Lahumul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haraam as per 2/213 and 41/43 and even 46/9.

Let us continue

Ayat 4160 tells us that a people, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, were forbidden some good and wholesome things which were previously halal to them

4/160
Fabiulmin Mina Al-Ladhna Hd So for the zulm of alladhina haadu
arramn Alayhim ayyibtin 'Uillat Lahum We restrict on them the wholesome Wa Biaddihim An Sabli Allhi Kathran And for thier preventing many from the path of Allah.

The phrase 'SOME good and wholesome things' isnt there. Haramna alahim tayyibaatin means 'we restrict/forbade on them wholesome things'. There's no 'min' there. Don't forget you said

This is my understanding, because Allah chooses His Words and means what He says

Therefore, 'some' cannot be in there without 'min' or 'fareeqan min'.

Once again, this isn't a refutation to the pig argument but merely to show that 4/160 cannot apply in your argument because it talks about wholesome things (tayyibaatin) and not 'some wholesome things'

Moving on...

Ayat 6146 tells us what those things were and the pig could not possibly be one of them, because pigs don't have claws
.

I agree that the pig isn't one of those mentioned in 6/146 but I need to ask you, where's your QURANIC evidence to show that zhufrin means 'claws' ?

Lisaanun arabiyoon mubiin gives both 'claws' and 'hooves'. Please give your reason for choosing one over the other. Sorry but the mu'jam's not going to be of help today

2228 That they may witness advantages for them and mention the name of Allah during stated days over what He has given them of the cattle quadrupeds, then eat of them and feed the distressed one, the needy.

Main Entry BAHIMATUN beast. any quadruped, even if in the water.

Main Entry QUADRUPED an animal having four feet

Wow, I can sense your elation coming through the screen! Yes, sadly you've 'won' the argument. I'm just now going to McDonalds for a Bacon McDouble. Congratulations, you've converted me into a pig-eater. Oh wait, just let me check the context to be sure

Dhlika Wa Man Yuaim urumti Allhi Such is those who strive for the restrictions/forbidden of Allah Fahuwa Khayrun Lahu Inda Rabbihi For them is the goodness in thier sight of thier Lord.
Wa 'Uillat Lakumu Al-'Anm and lawful for you are the cattle 'Ill M Yutl? AlaykumEXCEPT WHAT IS RECITED UPON YOU
Fjtanib Ar-Rijsa Mina Al-'Awthni Wa Ajtanib Qawla Az-Zri
but shun the abomination of idols, and shun the word that is false,

So funnily enough, there are exceptions, namely what is recited on you from the cattle. Would you care to tell me what that exception is? Is 'ill-seeming' a type of cattle?

Why did Allah, make the pig haram

Because it is not tayyib. All tayyib food is halal.

Provide the evidence where, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, Allah, to some peoples or another, made the pig haram and why

Lahumul khizeer's always been haraam. 22/30 above is definitive proof of this now. Thanks for pointing out 22/28. Word 'backfire' sort of comes to mind now, doesn't it?

Do pigs have claws?

No.

Is the pig a quadruped?

Yes.

All your questions have been answered directly. Awaiting your response to 22/30. Thanks.

unknownuser

Salaams Br. Mquran,

My understanding for now

Wa 'Uillat Lakumu Al-'Anm and lawful for you are the cattle 'Ill M Yutl? AlaykumEXCEPT WHAT IS RECITED UPON YOU
Fjtanib Ar-Rijsa Mina Al-'Awthni Wa Ajtanib Qawla Az-Zri
but shun the abomination of idols, and shun the word that is false,

An-ama = Beneficience, favour to a person, gifted

This word isn?t cattle always and mostly it can/does mean other things! Please check your dictionaries.

And the answer lies in the same verse

Lawful/allowed to you the beneficence/gifts/favours except what is mentioned to you so SHUN THE ABOMINATION OF IDOLS AND SPEECH LYING.BEING UPRIGHT TO ALLAH NOT ASSOCIATING PARTENERS UNTO HIM e.t.c

Also Al-Anam can be plants and birds according to lanes so it isn?t even quadrupeds all the time??????????

God Bless.

marie

al-anAAami

And from the livestock (al-anAAami) are those for burden, and also for clothing. Eat from what God has provided you and do not follow the footsteps of the devil; he is to you a clear enemy.
Eight pairs from the lambs two, and from the goats two; Say Is it the two males that He forbade or the two females, or what the womb of the two females bore? Inform me if you are truthful!
And from the camels two, and from the cattle two; Say Is it the two males that He forbade or the two females, or what the womb of the two females bore? Or were you witnesses when God ordered you with this? Who is more wicked than one who invents lies about God to misguide the people without knowledge. God does not guide the wicked people.
And He is the One who created all the pairs, and He made for you from the ships and the livestock (al-anAAami) that which you can ride.

A. Shabir
6142 Among the large and small quadrupeds some are for work and transportation and others for flesh, and their skins for bedding materials. Enjoy what Allah has provided you. And follow not the footsteps of Satan. Satan, your selfish desire, is your open enemy.

6143 Take the example of eight quadrupeds Two sheep, one male and one female, two goats, one male and one female. Say, Is it the two males that He has forbidden, or the two females, or the calves in the wombs of the females? Tell me if you have true knowledge.

6144 Then two camels, one male and one female, two cows, one male and one female. Say, Is it the two males that He has forbidden, or the two females, or the calves in the wombs of the two females? Were you witnesses when Allah made such prohibitions? Who can be a greater transgressor than the one who invents a lie and attributes it to Allah? They mislead people without knowledge. Allah does not intervene to guide those who displace knowledge with conjecture.

al-anniAAam, the plural form of niAAmat/favour/blessing
3120. Did you not see that God has committed in your service everything in the heavens and the Earth, and He has showered you with His blessings (niAAamahu), both apparent and hidden? Yet from the people are some who argue about God without knowledge, without guidance, and without an enlightening Scripture.

O you who believe, remember God's favour (niAAmata) upon you when soldiers attacked you and We sent upon them a wind and invisible soldiers. God is Seer of everything you do.

mquran

Salam brother Mz,

In this case, there's the context to think about. 22/28 continues on to 22/30. That's why an'aam here cannot mean other than cattle. Furthermore, the word 'dhalika' (that) connects directly the procedure in 22/28 to 22/30.

unknownuser

Salaams Mquran,

Lawful/allowed to you the cattle/beneficence/gifts/favours except what is mentioned to you so SHUN THE ABOMINATION OF IDOLS AND SPEECH LYING.BEING UPRIGHT TO ALLAH NOT ASSOCIATING PARTENERS UNTO HIM and whoever assigns partners to Allah as if he had fallen from the sky and had snatched him the birds or blown him the wind to a place far off that and whoever honours the Symbols of Allah then it is truly from the piety of the hearts.You have in them benefits for an appinted term

I hope you don?t think Allah is saying we have benefits in the cattle ? I think even a tiger knows there are benefits in cattle no one needs telling ? but what we do need is to be told we have benefits in doing good deeds ? symbols of Allah ?

God Bless.

Jaxal

SaLaM Marie

the plural form of niAAmat/favour/blessing

Just a side note really, but niaamat means the same in urdu. D

I think even a tiger knows there are benefits in cattle no one needs telling ? but what we do need is to be told we have benefits in doing good deeds ? symbols of Allah ?

Indeed. Why would God tells us "dont eat ill-seaming food coz its bad for health"? Stating the obvious shock

mquran

Salaam brother Mz,

Lawful/allowed to you the beneficence/gifts/favours except what is mentioned to you so SHUN THE ABOMINATION OF IDOLS AND SPEECH LYING.BEING UPRIGHT TO ALLAH NOT ASSOCIATING PARTENERS UNTO HIM and whoever assigns partners to Allah as if he had fallen from the sky and had snatched him the birds or blown him the wind to a place far off that and whoever honours the Symbols of Allah then it is truly from the piety of the hearts.You have in them benefits for an appinted term (before you start to get old and weak) then you go unto the house of the old.

I hope you dont think Allah is saying we have benefits in the cattle I think even a tiger knows there are benefits in cattle no one needs telling but what we do need is to be told we have benefits in doing good deeds symbols of Allah ?

Indeed I don't think that. Here's my tafseer of the passage

22/26 Allah says that site of the house was established for Ibrahim.
22/27 The call is made among humankind with al-hajj. They go to the site
22/28 These people who go will witness the benefits during the appointed days over (and please note there the wording) what Allah has 'rizq'ed (maa razqahu) from 'bahimatul an'aam' (quadrupeds of the cattle). This definitely doesn't refer to general benefits.
22/29They then complete thier rites and tawaaf to the Baitul atiq
22/30Dhalika is mentioned here, liking the preceding passage with the verse. Whoever honours the hurumaat/restrictions of Allah, its good for him. He's made halal al-an'aam EXCEPT that which is recited on us. If you take 'an'aam' to be benefits, why would Allah make any benefit haraam?
therefore avoid rijus min al-awthaan and avoid a word which is zoor.

I suggest taking a look at al-awthaan and qaulan zoor. Clearly the usual word for idols like 'aaliha, andaada and asnaam' arent used there and 'zoor' isn't the same as 'kazb' or 'ifk', the usual word for lies.

The context tells me that bahimatul an'aam is the subject here though and there is from them, somethign recited which is haraam. So the word 'benefits' (man'faa, usually) doesn't come into it.

unknownuser

Salaams Br. Mquran,

i think what i was really trying to get accross was that whether Allah is saying cattle or anything other ,In this Ayah Allah is allowing something and forbidding something and these both are written in this same ayah-as far as i understand it.

lets see

Lawful/allowed to you the cattle/beneficence/gifts/favours except what is mentioned to you so SHUN THE ABOMINATION OF IDOLS AND SPEECH LYING.

Another example

51,O ye who believe! fulfil (all) obligations. Lawful unto you (for food) are all four-footed animals, with the exceptions herein- animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb for Allah doth command according to His will and plan.

in this above AQllah has prohibited in the one and the same ayah - but in this case they are animals-i think , but in the previous they are not animals but something other ,and i checked according to the QD -they are idols and false speech.

Salaams.

mquran

Salaam brother MZ,

I agree the end of the verse is unusual. Perhaps you can use your dictionary and tell us what awthan and zuur means!

To me, the 'bahimah' mentioned in 22/28 is an indication that an'aam in 22/30 refers to cattle and not benefits. This is further reinforced by the word 'dhalika' in 22/30.

unknownuser

PBM I agree, in that, lahma khinzeer, means the "ill-seeming/that what is seen as bad", however, you still have not proven that lahma khinzeer means the animal pig. Ayat 4143 could apply to both translations, meaning, if lahma khinzeer means the animal pig it applies or if it means ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad, it applies. So, you haven't proved your claim that lahma khinzeerin means the animal pig. Ayat 4160 tells us that a people, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, were forbidden some good and wholesome things which were previously halal to them. Ayat 6146 tells us what those things were and the pig could not possibly be one of them, because pigs don't have claws. In addition, the following ayat and definitons also rule out the quadruped/pig, being haram

2228 That they may witness advantages for them and mention the name of Allah during stated days over what He has given them of the cattle quadrupeds, then eat of them and feed the distressed one, the needy.

Main Entry BAHIMATUN beast. any quadruped, even if in the water.

Main Entry QUADRUPED an animal having four feet.

Ok good. So you admit lahmul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haram. Now I will approach your questions.

I've admitted to nothing of the such as my above completed statement indicates. Your attempt to twist my words to mean other than what they clearly mean--that you have not proven lahma khinzeerin means the animal pig. Very disengenuous of you, but that is to be expected from you.

PBM You quote ayat 4143 to support your superstition that, the animal pig was always haram and I refuted that assertion. Now, tell us, according to Al-Quran, WHY was/is the pig haram.

I quoted 41/43 NOT to prove that lahmul khinzeer refers to the pig but instead to refute your initial statement about 'the jews at the time of the prophet' argument. I want to remove this historical 'jew', people of the book, torah stuff from the equation. Once we do this, I will approach your questions. It appears you've acknowledged this.

We are way past this. Why are you still carying this corpse? As I said to you at least three times now, we don't have to use the term Jew, however, "some people or another", prior to Al-Quran, were forbidden to eat certain things due to their transgressions. These same things prior to their transgression were halal to them. Frankly...you've accomplished nothing toward proving your case. You are simply stalling.

I will repeat Lahumul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haraam as per 2/213 and 41/43 and even 46/9.

I agree, the ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad is haram. You have not, however, proven that lahama khinzeerin means the animal pig. When will this simple reality dawn on you?

Let us continueAyat 4160 tells us that a people, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, were forbidden some good and wholesome things which were previously halal to them
4/160. Fabizulmin Mina Al-Ladhina Hadu So for the zulm of alladhina haadu Harramna Alayhim Tayyibatin 'Uhillat Lahum We restrict on them the wholesome Wa Bisaddihim An Sabili Allahi Kathiraan And for thier preventing many from the path of Allah. The phrase 'SOME good and wholesome things' isnt there. Haramna alahim tayyibaatin means 'we restrict/forbade on them wholesome things'. There's no 'min' there. Don't forget you said
This is my understanding, because Allah chooses His Words and means what He says
Therefore, 'some' cannot be in there without 'min' or 'fareeqan min'.

No problem, delete wholesome. Here is another translation

4160 Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them and for their hindering many (people) from Allah's way.

The ayat hasn't changed at all relative to my argument. Food, comes under the rubic--"good things". Next trick!

Once again, this isn't a refutation to the pig argument but merely to show that 4/160 cannot apply in your argument because it talks about wholesome things (tayyibaatin) and not 'some wholesome things'
Moving on...

Exactly, so what did you little digression prove relative to your argument?...nothing.

PBM Ayat 6146 tells us what those things were and the pig could not possibly be one of them, because pigs don't have claws.

I agree that the pig isn't one of those mentioned in 6/146 but I need to ask you, where's your QURANIC evidence to show that zhufrin means 'claws' ?

Lisaanun arabiyoon mubiin gives both 'claws' and 'hooves'. Please give your reason for choosing one over the other. Sorry but the mu'jam's not going to be of help today )

I have three dictionaries and neither of them define thufr as hoof. Look, the ayat cannot mean hoof anyway, because sheep and oxen have hooves. In addition, it wasn't the meat meat of the sheep and oxen which were forbidden to the people spoken of in ayat 6146, but their fat except that which adhered to their bones. So, if thufr=hoof, then the entire sheep and ox would have been haram and not just their fat.

2228...2230 That they may witness advantages for them and mention the name of Allah during stated days over what He has given them of the cattle quadrupeds, then eat of them and feed the distressed one, the needy....That (shall be so); and whoever respects the sacred ordinances of Allah, it is better for him with his Lord; and the cattle are made lawful for you, except that which is recited to you, therefore avoid the uncleanness of the idols and avoid false words,

Wow, I can sense your elation coming through the screen! Yes, sadly you've 'won' the argument...So funnily enough, there are exceptions, namely what is recited on you from the cattle. Would you care to tell me what that exception is? Is 'ill-seeming' a type of cattle?

Ayat 2228, clearly, designates quadrupeds as halal, because Allah says to eat them. Further, Allah does not mention some parts of the quadruped as being halal and others being haram, hence, the entire quadruped is halal ( remember now, you cannot make haram what Allah has not). Pigs are quadrupeds, hence, are halal--in their entirety. Btw, there is no mention of quadruped in ayat 2230. To support your superstition, is to bring ayats 2228 and 2230 into contradiction with each other.

22/30 above is definitive proof of this now. Thanks for pointing out 22/28. Word 'backfire' sort of comes to mind now, doesn't it?

LOL!! proof of what? If a certain cattle quadruped, as you are claiming, is haram, then that entire cattle i.e pig, is haram and not just part of it. Lahma=flesh, which means the hooves, the bones, and the fat would be halal. Backfire?! man, you just love to believe your own baloney. The more you struggle the faster and deeper you sink.

PBM 1. Why did Allah, make the pig haram.

Because it is not tayyib. All tayyib food is halal.

You haven't answered the question. Why isn't the pig, according to your interpretation of Al-Quran, haram/not tayyib? What is Allah's reason for this...if you are truthful?

PBM 2. Provide the evidence where, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, Allah, to some peoples or another, made the pig haram and why

Lahumul khizeer's always been haraam.

Agreed, but you haven't proven, via Al-Quran anyway, that it means the animal pig. Ayats 4160, 55, and 6146 rejects your conclusion.

PBM 3. Do pigs have claws?

No.

PBM 4. Is the pig a quadruped?

Yes.

Thank you. Well, given that pigs do not have claws and are quadrupeds, the people who preceded the advent Al-Quran, could not have, per ayats 4160, 6146, and 2228, been forbidden the meat of pigs.

All your questions have been answered directly. Awaiting your response to 22/30. Thanks.

While I answered yours, but you must still haven't answer the following

Why isn't the pig, according to your interpretation of Al-Quran, haram/not tayyib? What is Allah's reason for this...if you are truthful? Allah, made haram the consumption of certain things as a result of man transgressing or because it rijsun. You've already stated that the pig is not rijsun and Allah doesn't mention khinzeerin/pig being made haram due to man's transgressing, so why, according to your interpretation of Al-Quran, is the pig haram? Please, no more lame, "because Allah says so", responses.

mquran

I've admitted to nothing of the such as my above completed statement indicates. Your attempt to twist my words to mean other than what they clearly mean--that you have not proven lahma khinzeerin means the animal pig. Very disengenuous of you, but that is to be expected from you.

No? But in this very post from which I quoting, you have just said

Quote
I will repeat Lahumul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haraam as per 2/213 and 41/43 and even 46/9.

I agree, the ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad is haram. You have not, however, proven that lahama khinzeerin means the animal pig. When will this simple reality dawn on you?

This particular section is simply to refute your previous 'jew, people of the book, at the time of the prophet' and all that nonsense. Instead of admitting you were wrong there (which I dont expect a person with an ego like yours to do), you just dismissed it. Not nice.

No problem, delete wholesome. Here is another translation

4160 Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them and for their hindering many (people) from Allah's way.

The ayat hasn't changed at all relative to my argument. Food, comes under the rubic--"good things". Next trick!

So its a 'trick' to try to get the most accurate understanding possible? Al-quraan isn't there for tricks. You've been spending too much time with sunnis.

Exactly, so what did you little digression prove relative to your argument?...nothing.

It proves how careless you are when employing the book of Allah in your discourse. Hence my suggestion, stick to sunni-bashing. Your rude, brash and obnoxious ways are fit for only that.

I have three dictionaries and neither of them define thufr as hoof. Look, the ayat cannot mean hoof anyway, because sheep and oxen have hooves. In addition, it wasn't the meat meat of the sheep and oxen which were forbidden to the people spoken of in ayat 6146, but their fat except that which adhered to their bones. So, if thufr=hoof, then the entire sheep and ox would have been haram and not just their fat.

Well, both my sources say 'hoof'. So you're saying 'hoof' + 'fat' = sheep/oxen ? What about its actual meat?

Ayat 2228, clearly, designates quadrupeds as halal, because Allah says to eat them. Further, Allah does not mention some parts of the quadruped as being halal and others being haram, hence, the entire quadruped is halal ( remember now, you cannot make haram what Allah has not). Pigs are quadrupeds, hence, are halal--in their entirety. Btw, there is no mention of quadruped in ayat 2230. To support your superstition, is to bring ayats 2228 and 2230 into contradiction with each other.

This is what happens when you read half a Quran. I suppose the ayat below contradicts itself then

O ye who believe! fulfil obligations. Lawful unto you are all BAHIMATUL AN'AAM , EXCEPT WHAT IS RECITED ON YOU But animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb for Allah doth command according to His will and plan.
(5/1)

Questions

Does bahimatul an'aam mean 'quadruped cattle' still or will you want to change the meaning now?
What is 'recited on you'?
What is the exception named ? A new species called 'ill-seeming'?

Every single word is there on purpose, right Priesty ? So now you need to show us what this species is FROM THE BOOK. Thank you.

unknownuser

Salaams Mquran,

O ye who believe! fulfil obligations. Lawful unto you are all BAHIMATUL AN'AAM , EXCEPT WHAT IS (being) RECITED ON YOU ?.. animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb for Allah doth command according to His will and plan.
(5 /1)

But ? I don?t honestly think there is a But! IN THE ABOVE SENTENCE STRUCTURE.

And what is being forbidden is the animals of the chase,and nothing more in this case.

For your info(regarding 2230) although even dictioneries can be wrong!

According to Page 238 Qd and Page 601 QD.

Zur = Falshood/False speech/False , and Wathana = To remain in one condition/raise for honouring/idols/e.g cross of gold which people wear.

God Bless.

unknownuser

PBM I've admitted to nothing of the such as my above completed statement indicates. Your attempt to twist my words to mean other than what they clearly mean--that you have not proven lahma khinzeerin means the animal pig. Very disengenuous of you, but that is to be expected from you.

No? But in this very post from which I quoting, you have just said

MQURAN I will repeat Lahumul khinzeer (untranslated) has always been haraam as per 2/213 and 41/43 and even 46/9.

PBM I agree, the ill-seeming/that which is seen as bad is haram. You have not, however, proven that lahama khinzeerin means the animal pig. When will this simple reality dawn on you?

This particular section is simply to refute your previous 'jew, people of the book, at the time of the prophet' and all that nonsense. Instead of admitting you were wrong there (which I dont expect a person with an ego like yours to do), you just dismissed it. Not nice.

I don't know if it means Jew or not and that is why I have not argued this point with it. What you can't seem to grasp is, it doesn't matter whether they are Jews or not. Bottomline, the ayat is stating that people, prior to the advent of Al-Quran, were forbidden to eat certain animals in their entirety ( those with claws) and a certain part (the fat) of two other animals (oxen and sheep). Further, these people, wohever they were were, were forbidden these items due to their transgressions and those same items were halal prior to the transgression. If you want to debate if "Jew" is actually in that ayat, well, start a thread on it and debate it.

PBM No problem, delete wholesome. Here is another translation

4160 Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them and for their hindering many (people) from Allah's way.

The ayat hasn't changed at all relative to my argument. Food, comes under the rubic--"good things". Next trick!

So its a 'trick' to try to get the most accurate understanding possible? Al-quraan isn't there for tricks. You've been spending too much time with sunnis.

LOL! Man, who are kidding?? You aren't trying to gain "understanding", you are trying with all of your might to simply trip me up so that you can continue in your anti-pork superstition and gain some ego satisfaction, please. You are as transparent as a clean window pane. Btw, I am not a sunni. Please do not project your character defects on to me, thanks again.

Exactly, so what did you little digression prove relative to your argument?...nothing.

It proves how careless you are when employing the book of Allah in your discourse. Hence my suggestion, stick to sunni-bashing. Your rude, brash and obnoxious ways are fit for only that.

Why is it that simply because I have certitude and proof of my assertion that, I get labelled as "rude, brash and obnoxious"?? Once again, I ask you to, STOP PROJECTIING YOUR CHARACTER DEFECTS ON TO ME. It is you is rude, brash and obnoxious. Go back and read your posts and see how you've addressed me from day one. My God, man, don't you have any integrity at all?!

PBM I have three dictionaries and neither of them define thufr as hoof. Look, the ayat cannot mean hoof anyway, because sheep and oxen have hooves. In addition, it wasn't the meat meat of the sheep and oxen which were forbidden to the people spoken of in ayat 6146, but their fat except that which adhered to their bones. So, if thufr=hoof, then the entire sheep and ox would have been haram and not just their fat.

Well, both my sources say 'hoof'. So you're saying 'hoof' + 'fat' = sheep/oxen ? What about its actual meat?

Allah is saying that, thufr means claws and cannot mean hoof ( see my above explanation as to why not). Allah, did not make the meat of sheep and oxen haram to those people mentioned in 6146, just their fat, except, that which adhered to their backs and bones.

Ayat 2228, clearly, designates quadrupeds as halal, because Allah says to eat them. Further, Allah does not mention some parts of the quadruped as being halal and others being haram, hence, the entire quadruped is halal ( remember now, you cannot make haram what Allah has not). Pigs are quadrupeds, hence, are halal--in their entirety. Btw, there is no mention of quadruped in ayat 2230. To support your superstition, is to bring ayats 2228 and 2230 into contradiction with each other.

This is what happens when you read half a Quran. I suppose the ayat below contradicts itself then

O ye who believe! fulfil obligations. Lawful unto you are all BAHIMATUL AN'AAM , EXCEPT WHAT IS RECITED ON YOU But animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb for Allah doth command according to His will and plan.

Does bahimatul an'aam mean 'quadruped cattle' still or will you want to change the meaning now?

"Quadruped cattle" sounds redundant to me. Again, ayat 2230 does not mention cattle.

What is 'recited on you'?
What is the exception named ? A new species called 'ill-seeming'?

What quadrupedS (plural), in their entirety, are haram? You are claiming that the pig, singular, is haram. The ayat is stating that--more than one quadruped is haram, so, what are they? The ayat, based on my understanding, is stating that the animalS of the chase, under a certain condition/for a specific period of time, are haram. What is your explanation? How do you make what is plural into a meaning only one?

Every single word is there on purpose, right Priesty ? So now you need to show us what this species is FROM THE BOOK. Thank you.

Well then, if a certain quadruped, as you are claiming it is, is haram, then that entire qiuadruped i.e pig, is haram and not just part of it. Lahma=flesh, which means the hooves, the bones, and the fat would be halal. What now?

YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED THIS QUESTION

WHY DID ALLAH, ACCORDING TO YOU, MAKE THE PIG HARAM/NOT TAYYIB? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEFEND THIS MOST IMPORTANT ASSERTION OF YOURS; IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERTINENT TO YOUR CASE. STOP EVADING THE QUESTION, THANKS.

mquran

Ok Priest, I'll make it nice and simple for you now.

O ye who believe! fulfil obligations. Lawful unto you are all BAHIMATUL AN'AAM , EXCEPT WHAT IS RECITED ON YOU But animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the sacred precincts or in pilgrim garb for Allah doth command according to His will and plan. (5/1)

Quadruped cattle" sounds redundant to me. Again, ayat 2230 does not mention cattle

Yes but it mentions 'dhalika'. Dhalika relates the verse to the previous exposition. No matter, lets focus on 5/1 above. This is one single verse mentioning bahimatul an'aam.

What quadrupedS (plural), in their entirety, are haram? You are claiming that the pig, singular, is haram. The ayat is stating that--more than one quadruped is haram, so, what are they? The ayat, based on my understanding, is stating that the animalS of the chase, under a certain condition/for a specific period of time, are haram. What is your explanation? How do you make what is plural into a meaning only one?

Read the verse carefully. Bahimaatul an'aam is in plural, yes but NOWHERE DOES 'maa yutlaa alaikum' indicate singleness or plurality. So now, show us where a BAHIMATUL AN'AAM is haraam. Its a very simple question even you should grasp.

If 'maa yutlaa alaikum' refers to 'as-saidu' why was it mentioned after BAHIMATUL AN'AAM and not as-saidu. Furthermore, why is 'wa antum hurumun' after as-said' if what as-said is haraam is 'maa yutlaa alaikum'?

You need to drop your pathetic loser tricks Priesty, but you know, I have to thank you for this discourse. It's a good example of how al-quraan protects its meaning. Khaanz-ara INDEED D

unknownuser

YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED THIS QUESTION

WHY DID ALLAH, ACCORDING TO YOU, MAKE THE PIG HARAM/NOT TAYYIB? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEFEND THIS MOST IMPORTANT ASSERTION OF YOURS; IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERTINENT TO YOUR CASE. STOP EVADING THE QUESTION, THANKS.

Yes but it mentions 'dhalika'. Dhalika relates the verse to the previous exposition. No matter, lets focus on 5/1 above. This is one single verse mentioning bahimatul an'aam.

What previous exposition are you talking about?

What quadrupedS (plural), in their entirety, are haram? You are claiming that the pig, singular, is haram. The ayat is stating that--more than one quadruped is haram, so, what are they? The ayat, based on my understanding, is stating that the animalS of the chase, under a certain condition/for a specific period of time, are haram. What is your explanation? How do you make what is plural into a meaning only one?

Read the verse carefully. Bahimaatul an'aam is in plural, yes but NOWHERE DOES 'maa yutlaa alaikum' indicate singleness or plurality.

You read the ayat carefully. LOL!! the quadrupeds is plural bit it's not LOL!! what a hoot. The ayat states quadrupedS, plural, period, end of story. Ayat 2228 is not an example of the..."royal we". My God, must you deny and attempt to twist everything in an attempt to defend your superstitious anti-Quranic notions? Give us a break already, damn. So, I ask you again...what quadrupeds did Allah make haram and why? It is you, who is claiming the pig, a quadruped, is haram so you must prove what quadrupeds did Allah make haram and why?

So now, show us where a BAHIMATUL AN'AAM is haraam. Its a very simple question even you should grasp.

I'm not rying to prove this, this is your argument, so YOU show us. I'm not here to prove your silly silly superstitious notions. You talk alot so now prove alot, got it?..is that simple enough for ya?

You need to drop your pathetic loser tricks Priesty, but you know, I have to thank you for this discourse. It's a good example of how al-quraan protects its meaning. Khaanz-ara INDEED D

LOL! hysterically!!! You have yet to answer the most pertinent question to your superstitious notion (see the above question in bold which you continue to ignore) and you want to call me a loser! LOL!!x10. Man, you are so out of touch with what is real. Look, as far as..."pathetic loser tricks" goes, for that last time...stop projecting YOUR character defects on to me.

You feel that awful weight on your chest?, well, that weight is...ayats 4160, 55, and 6146 lol If I heap to many more on you, they will squash you like a bug lol

YOU STILL HAVE NOT ANSWERED THIS QUESTION

WHY DID ALLAH, ACCORDING TO YOU, MAKE THE PIG HARAM/NOT TAYYIB? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEFEND THIS MOST IMPORTANT ASSERTION OF YOURS; IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERTINENT TO YOUR CASE. STOP EVADING THE QUESTION, THANKS.

Are you going to keep on dodging and ducking? What's going to be your excuse this time, Roy? lol

unknownuser

Peace all,

Everything that the Quran mentions pertaining to our lives, whether grammatically correct or simply the Quran states so, has a REASON, such as gambling, alcoholism, fornication, lying, theft, conjecture, etc., etc. Each of these categories has grave concerns, one way or the other, and PROVEN detrimental.

What is the reason for pig?s meat/flesh to become forbidden? If its rijsun, then WHY is it rijsun? What consequences, if at all, has pig?s meat/flesh bought about on humanity? Has anyone noticed/witnessed any grave concerns for consuming pig?s meat/flesh to be deemed medically, scientifically or logically inedible in our lives and thereby forbidden in the Quran and eaten by millions without a cause?

WHY DID ALLAH, ACCORDING TO YOU, MAKE THE PIG HARAM/NOT TAYYIB? WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO DEFEND THIS MOST IMPORTANT ASSERTION OF YOURS; IT IS ABSOLUTELY PERTINENT TO YOUR CASE. STOP EVADING THE QUESTION, THANKS.

Certainly, this pertinent question has raised eyebrows and caused diarrhea on those who simply cannot either justify or defend their GOD given intellectual capabilites, but simply throw tantrums on grammar and GOD's Words to justify what is NOT NATURAL/REAL. roll shock