RULES:
-
Peace,
First you go completely off-topic by accusing me saying something that i havent said. Then when ur embaressed, you tell me you asked the question first so you deseve to be answered first.
I used one incident of yours to bring to the fore the importance of the punishment for thieves. Not to have you or me bicker about whether you said it or not. Remember you relayed some stories about your past and I wanted to understand how you can say that the punishment should not be implemented when that's what it is . Then I compared it to you endorsing the killing of those who say people may leave islam even when the quran in this instance does not. It was not to focus on that, but on the punishment for thieves. So if we can stay focused on the topic of punishment for theft instead of this emotional trip of yours let's have a go at it.
Joe
-
hi zenje,
thats an interesting statement. what would u mean by guidance?Perhaps you meant final scripture/revelation, I'm not sure, because I'm still confused on the guidance thing.
-
Peace,
would Quran(the final guidance for mankind) contain different rules if it was sent in this age?
If it is the final guidance I do not think there need to be a thought of new rules for this age. I'm not sure if the rules would change. There were different ages with different rusul/envoys, but they basically recieved the same rules unless otherwise stated. The basic call of these rusul was "O my people, serve God, you have no other god but him and do not exceed bounds or make mischief in the land". In my opinion the greatest fault of the people was at the heart of each admonition.
Joe
-
Salaamun alaikum Peaceful Muslim,
Many thanks for this stimulating question. Im smiling this morning as something occurs to me.
Hi all,
If Allah sent his final guidance to mankind through His prophet Mohammed(instead of back then) at this age, would the rules in Quran be any different, or do u think they would still be the same?This concept of 'progressive revelation' is not Quranic. From the beginning , all nabiyeen recieved 'al-kitaab bil-haqq' or the same teachings about God's system. Al-quraan is simply the latest manifestation of al-kitaab bil-haqq and tasfseelul kitaab (10/3
Just a thought.
To think about it, i think Allah wouldnt have mentioned slaves, or even the polygamy rule etc.. i dont know.
what do u guys think?
would Quran(the final guidance for mankind) contain different rules if it was sent in this age?To me, why this question even pops up is due to 'modernosis' , a syndrome in that makes us believe that the post-modern world which we live in has transcended elements which they considered to be medieval. But has it really? I will demonstrate
Do you work for a living? Do you pay your taxes? Do you WANT to pay your taxes? We all live under a body of laws which govern us in the modern nation state. This is the Quranic definition of what a 'slave' is.
if Yes, then are we to think those rules were specific for the people of that era and have a message for the people thereafter?
if No, are we to think God would have implied the same rules at the present era, and mankind, inspite of all the growth and changes, need to be bound by the same rules like that of our very primitive ancestors who lived ages before us.Well, my answer is certainly 'no' and I resent the word 'primitve' in your discourse. To me, 'primitiveness' is a moral decadence and if history is to be believed, we are just as decadent as they were.
and, did the previous sriptures that came before Quran have rules as well? and if yes, are they the same as mentioned in Quran?
if No, does that mean the rules were made appropriate for the period (and the state of affairs), when it was being given?There's no such thing as a 'previous scripture' (alkitaab min qabli) in quranic thought.
anybody who has knowledge/ideas/views are welcome to share.
like i said, its just a thought/ question i dont have answer to.No worries. Its all about stimulus and growth, much like resistance training.
-
Salaamun alaikum KGB,
I am not saying anything. This is the punishment given in Qur'an for steeling. The question what would be the law can't be answered because none of us know the answer.
I only commented on what we have in Qur'an. You are free to call these punishments prescribed by Creator Lord The Most Wise - All Knowing - Most Merciful as cruel. I will accept them and please read carefully what I said about implementing these laws again.
Well, after using al-quraan to explain al-quraan, i take the words to mean 'cutting off thier capabilities' (as ayd can also mean capabilities, powers). This makes sense to me because Yusuf implied the same punishment on his 'thieving' brothers. Further, al-quraan enjoins the 'qisas' equivalency law implying that only when u chop off a hand, can we chop off yours.
Having said all that, IF its clear that its to chop off the hands, who are we to question it? Al-quraan very clearly gives the death penalty to murderers . Is that cruel ? I for one trust the book wholly. After doing all my research, if it comes to that, it comes to that. I will not apologise for my deen just because the majority thinks its cruel. My god isnt humanity, its Allah.
-
Peace mquran
Do you work for a living? Do you pay your taxes? Do you WANT to pay your taxes? We all live under a body of laws which govern us in the modern nation state. This is the Quranic definition of what a 'slave' is.
this seems to me another excuse to not pay taxes ) more imaginative than the rest of excuses I have heard, yes
Do you equate living under a body of laws with being slaves?
-
this seems to me another excuse to not pay taxes ) more imaginative than the rest of excuses I have heard, yes
Yes, everyone hates paying taxes! -)
But human beings always needs a set of rules (either divinely imposed) or created by the ourselves to manage the way we live our lives in a society...
Regards,
-
peace mquran
Having said all that, IF its clear that its to chop off the hands, who are we to question it? Al-quraan very clearly gives the death penalty to murderers . Is that cruel ? I for one trust the book wholly. After doing all my research, if it comes to that, it comes to that. I will not apologise for my deen just because the majority thinks its cruel. My god isnt humanity, its Allah.
but, what does your research consist on? I mean, you said in "The progress" thread
I think that's a necessary part of the journey, to verify that al-quraan is indeed al-haqq/the truth at the ultimate level. However, 41/53 has a time-bounded phase which is 'until its clear to them that this is al-haqq'. After that clarity, one should focus on the application of the book.
have you already finished the verification part of the study? It seems you did since you say "if it comes to that, it comes to that" When that happened? I thought it was being parallel with the study of the book in terms of Arabic, grammar, verification from inside the book taken the way the words are used in it, etc
-
hi mquran,
Do you work for a living? Do you pay your taxes? Do you WANT to pay your taxes? We all live under a body of laws which govern us in the modern nation state. This is the Quranic definition of what a 'slave' is.
taxes that one pays benefits them only. do u imply we should live in complete isolation without a society? and if its an yes, to society, u need taxes to pay for comforts that u have no time to create for urself, such as water, electricity, safety, cleaniness etc..
slavery is nothing like what we are today. Thanks to Allah, we are in better conditions.
and, did the previous sriptures that came before Quran have rules as well? and if yes, are they the same as mentioned in Quran?
if No, does that mean the rules were made appropriate for the period (and the state of affairs), when it was being given?There's no such thing as a 'previous scripture' (alkitaab min qabli) in quranic thought.
arent the torah, gospel etc previous scriptures?
-
hi nabi,
If it is the final guidance I do not think there need to be a thought of new rules for this age. I'm not sure if the rules would change. There were different ages with different rusul/envoys, but they basically recieved the same rules unless otherwise stated. The basic call of these rusul was "O my people, serve God, you have no other god but him and do not exceed bounds or make mischief in the land". In my opinion the greatest fault of the people was at the heart of each admonition.
i agree with u on the basic principles of Quran and the previous scriptures. all of them i suppose had these- one God, righteousness, goodness etc.infact i think most of it stands good for all times like salaat, fasting, pilgrimage etc
my question is the specific rules, such as
chopping hand vs imprisonment for stealing? both are punishments for the crime and we are thus not propagating the wrong.
again, poly gamy? wasnt it specific?
and should the punishment for adultery be242 The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.
mind u, am not saying adultery is right. all i am asking is, is this punishment not more suitable for that era than now?
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Elenathis seems to me another excuse to not pay taxes more imaginative than the rest of excuses I have heard, yes
I pay my taxes because believers are enjoined to fulfil thier contracts and the social contract in this polity obligates me to pay them. But I dont have to like it D
Do you equate living under a body of laws with being slaves?
I intuit that you have an attached preconception to this word slave. I will use the quranic word 'abd'. In al-quraan, an 'abd' is one who follows the laws of his rabb/lord. That therefore becomes his 'deen'. So while my deen is currently islam, its islam + western secularism. I have not achieved the status of ibrahim whose deen was purely to Allah.
Lote But human beings always needs a set of rules (either divinely imposed) or created by the ourselves to manage the way we live our lives in a society...
Agreed.
Elena but, what does your research consist on? I mean, you said in "The progress" thread
It consists of checking the contents of the texts, relevant words and the linguistics.
have you already finished the verification part of the study?
41/53, if you read it, talks about the truthfulness of al-quraan. That being the case, yes I have finished with the verification. I'm satisfied that the book is from Allah. This in no way ends my study of its APPLICATION. I hope you see the distinction between the 2. One is verify its truthfulness and the other to verify its application
It seems you did since you say "if it comes to that, it comes to that" When that happened? I thought it was being parallel with the study of the book in terms of Arabic, grammar, verification from inside the book taken the way the words are used in it, etc
Yes, that's exactly what I did. However, the book is a finite text. My information at this time tells me that yes, it means that. Of course if someone else comes up and says 'what about that verse', I will have to rethink. So far, that's not been the case.
PM taxes that one pays benefits them only. do u imply we should live in complete isolation without a society? and if its an yes, to society, u need taxes to pay for comforts that u have no time to create for urself, such as water, electricity, safety, cleaniness etc..
Sorry but you're missing my point here. My point is, the quranic definition of a slave is one who obeys the laws of thier lord. I am a slave to the system while also being a slave to Allah (provided I fulfil those conditions). Im not questioning if the present taxation system is good or otherwise. Thats besides the point. However, for you to say it 'benefits them only' is false. I was paying the money for the protection of the mad mullas which I would never do on my own volition.
slavery is nothing like what we are today. Thanks to Allah, we are in better conditions.
Better in whose perspective ? We need to get the Quranic perspective here. We may be better materialistically but morally ? The system uses our taxation money to wage wars abroad. Is this beyond our concern just because we have broadband and cable tv? It shouldn't be because we would then be judging by other than what Allah has revealed. A good butt kicking from Allah happens for people who do that. Thats natural law.
arent the torah, gospel etc previous scriptures?
Not if you use al-quraan to set the criteria. Unfortunately, many people are afraid to do this because it then shakes thier foundation of the 'tri-religious' myth.
-
Peace mquran,
I intuit that you have an attached preconception to this word slave. I will use the quranic word 'abd'. In al-quraan, an 'abd' is one who follows the laws of his rabb/lord.
that is unfair because peacefulmuslim was talking --I think, about 'slave' as the person who is owned by another person, like in 492 ..."And whoever kills a believer by accident, then he shall set free a believing slave?? not as 'slave' with the meaning of servant of God.
-
Peace Elena,
that is unfair because peacefulmuslim was talking --I think, about 'slave' as the person who is owned by another person, like in 492 ..."And whoever kills a believer by accident, then he shall set free a believing slave?? not as 'slave' with the meaning of servant of God.
Sorry, I dont understand why its 'unfair' ? All im saying is, slavery in a quranic sense will always exist. 4/92 doesn't use the word 'abd', by the way.
-
Hi mquran,
can u explain what u think Allah meant by slaves in that verse?
-
hi mquran,
Better in whose perspective ? We need to get the Quranic perspective here. We may be better materialistically but morally ? The system uses our taxation money to wage wars abroad. Is this beyond our concern just because we have broadband and cable tv? It shouldn't be because we would then be judging by other than what Allah has revealed. A good butt kicking from Allah happens for people who do that. Thats natural law.
its quite surprising to know that someone believes that our living conditions are no better than people of 570 AD. and that we are equal to the slaves of that period .
Not if you use al-quraan to set the criteria. Unfortunately, many people are afraid to do this because it then shakes thier foundation of the 'tri-religious' myth.
o.k. do u believe the torah, gospel etc were guidance/messages from God?
-
Peace mquran
Sorry, I dont understand why its 'unfair' ?
it is unfair that you say I have attached preconception about the word when the meaning from the beginning was slave = a person who is owned by another person.
4/92 doesn't use the word 'abd', by the way.
good to know that the reading uses two different words for those two different meanings. Then, why did you start talking about abd-servant when the topic was slave person who is owned by another person?All im saying is, slavery in a quranic sense will always exist.
what slavery? person who is owned by another person or servant of God?
-
hi mquran,
Can you please define what you mean by 'suitable'. What makes something more 'suitable'?
by suitable, i mean appropriate to the present state of affairs and living conditions.
for eg, the punishment for stealing- i would think imprisionment is appropriate rather than chopping the hand.
propably people of that period needed such rules as they did not have much concepts of right and wrong. would the same severity be required now? -
Peace,
i think most of it stands good for all times
I'm not sure why the punishments and rules of society should not stand for all time.
chopping hand vs imprisonment for stealing?
Which standard are you talking about? Is this the standard of the society in which you live, imprisonment for stealing? As MQ said, the punishment is not the physical chopping off of one's hands rather cutting their power or means. The punishment should fit the crime.
again, poly gamy? wasnt it specific?
Yes alquran does have specific instances under which polygamy may come into play. You may not like it, I do not necessarily like the idea . Monagomy is what is basically promoted.
and should the punishment for adultery be
100 lashes. You must not let pity detain you from obedience to Allah.
mind u, am not saying adultery is right. all i am asking is, is this punishment not more suitable for that era than now?
Could you explain why this punishment may be less suitable?
Joe
-
Peace,
propably people of that period needed such rules as they did not have much concepts of right and wrong.
Are you saying the moral conceptions of men a few milennia ago were not on par with our own today? That our morals have evolved from a more primitive morality?
Joe