22:36

born_again

I've had some doubts whether animal sacrifice is allowed in islam or not (because of 2236) but after studying it carefully I've realized that traditional translations (and even free-minds translation) are wrong. Here's how I translate it

Waalbudna jaAAalnaha lakum min shaAAa-iri Allahi
And we made cattle for you (as a) symbol of Allah

lakum feeha khayrun
In it is goodness for you

faothkuroo isma Allahi AAalayha sawaffa
THEN WHEN YOU'RE ON IT (TRAVELING) ARRANGED IN A ROW REMEMBER GOD'S NAME

fa-itha wajabat junoobuha
IF/WHEN IT DIES

fakuloo minha waatAAimoo alqaniAAa waalmuAAtarra
Eat from it and feed the poor and the needy

kathalika sakhkharnaha lakum laAAallakum tashkuroona
It was thus that We have made them in service to you, that you may be thankful

It's not the animals for sacrifice that are arranged in line like tradionalist suggest it's MEN ON THEM.

Any feedback appreciated.

Salam.

nadeem

Hi dear born_again,

fa-itha wajabat junoobuha
IF/WHEN IT DIES

fakuloo minha waatAAimoo alqaniAAa waalmuAAtarra
Eat from it and feed the poor and the needy

I find such a notion hard to swallow. Is there not a verse in quran that forbids meat that has died of its own?

2173 He only prohibits for you the eating of animals that die of themselves (without human interference),.....

Nadeem

born_again

Salam nadeem

imho maytata (dead) in 2173 refers to human corpse. I mean every animal has to be dead for us to eat.

?

nadeem

Hi born_again,

imho maytata (dead) in 2173 refers to human corpse.

Can you provide grounds for your claim?
I do not reject it, nor do I accept i, both for one and the same reason I hold no proof.

Can you provide this proof?

It can be anything from dictionaries to logical deductions.

Nadeem

Wakas

http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1457

born_again

Salam Nadeem

Actually only proof is my reasoning, I don't believe God can order us to sacrifice animals in His name in a row (and that would be a contradiction with 6136). maybe other members can come up with proof though? ?

born_again

Sorry btw brother Wakas, I didn't see that topic.

Wakas

peace,

No need to apologise ba, I was just referncing it for your research.

I do not agree with your interpretations of 2173 or 6136. Please clarify your reasoning.

Wakas

born_again

Imo "maytatu" refers ONLY to human corpse because the ayah just says "dead and the blood blah blah is made haram for you". We can't play fill-in-the-blanks with God's words like "without human interference". And in 6136 those who sacrifice what Allah Himself created for them are criticized. So logically dead in 2137 can only be dead people.

That's my reasoning. ?

nadeem

Hi born_again,

Do you say that the word 'meat' is not to be found next to 'dead'?

Nadeem.

born_again

nope it just says "the dead."

salam.

nadeem

Dear Born_again,

Thanks for clarifying. However, "The dead" does not dismiss "dead meat", on the contrary, it includes it aswell as enlarges the matter to "dead plants" (rotten?) and things that are "dead" in generel.

However this I cannot accept. "The Dead" refers to "Any dead thing" which could be...medicine for example?

I believe, that "the dead" must be confined withing the theme. And the theme seems to be about prohibitions, animals and meat.

Nadeem.

born_again

salam nadeem

but you can't eat an animal while it's alive ) I mean then we can't eat what we hunted for sport too. "The dead" MUST refer to humans. That's the only explanation to this dilemma.

nadeem

ah... I see your point. I'll wonder some more and come back to you-)